For most of us, 2020 has been an unprecedented year. The pandemic has caused dramatic changes to many people’s lives. It may also be a quieter Christmas for those of us that have restrictions in place to limit numbers at social gatherings. Nevertheless, with all the negative things that have happened over the last year, maybe now is the time to treat yourself to a Curbside Classic. After all the sacrifice over this last year, you deserve it, right? Cruising around in a classic is an easy way to have fun while socially distancing and allows you to get out of your house. I think I may have found the ideal car for that Curbside Classic Christmas gift – this Christmas tree green 1973 Monte Carlo.
As most of us know, the Chevrolet Monte Carlo was introduced for the 1970 model year using a modified A-body Chevelle platform to create the first low-priced personal luxury coupe. It was an interesting concept in that it had 4” more wheelbase and 9” more length than a Chevelle 2-door, and all of that added size added nothing to the car’s functionality. It all went into the massive long hood which gave that Monte Carlo that desired look of personal luxury. For what was basically a long hooded Chevelle with a formal roofline turned out to be highly profitable for Chevrolet and a sales success.
In the fall of 1972, General Motors released its redesigned 1973 intermediate line which included the Monte Carlo. Like the 1970-72 models, the 1973 Monte Carlo used a 116” wheelbase but it grew about 4” longer and 2” wider. Chevrolet took the opportunity to make the Monte Carlo more distinctive from the Chevelle and add many neo-classical styling touches. Compared to the relatively plain Chevelle, the Monte Carlo was quite baroque. Its curvy fenders, formal roofline with a “V” shaped backlite (like the Cadillac Eldorado) and the soon to become ubiquitous opera windows were all in step with the PLC styling trends, but made for love or hate styling. Interestingly enough, the opera windows were actually a Chevrolet idea conceived for the Monte Carlo, but Cadillac pulled rank and used them on the Eldorado first. The styling may have been polarizing, but more customers seemed to like it over the more conservative 1972 models.
The big news wasn’t the styling through, it was the engineering. With John Z DeLorean taking charge of the Chevrolet Division in 1969, he had direct influence on the 1973 Monte Carlo. DeLorean was a proponent of cars with good handling and his influence led to the major chassis engineering improvements. Although the 1973 A-bodies used a seemingly similar perimeter chassis design with the same short-long control arm front suspension and 4-link rear suspension as the 1972 models, there was more than what meets the eye.
DeLorean told Chevrolet’s engineers to put the feel of a Mercedes-Benz into the Monte Carlo and for it to have confident European-like road feel. Being at a Chevrolet price point meant that there would have to be significant compromises, such as using a live rear axle over Mercedes’ independent suspension, but the engineers final result was excellent. It was realized that radial tires were an important part of Mercedes ride and handling. So radial tires were included as part of the Monte Carlo suspension design. This required changes to the front suspension geometry as the radial tires of that time did not have the same self-aligning torque (tendency to drive in a straight line) as bias ply tires. Engineers increased the caster angle by 5 degrees to improve straight line tracking and increase steering effort. To improve the steering feel, a faster variable ratio steering box was used which had 3 turns lock to lock and improved on center feel. Unlike its lesser Chevelle A-body brethren, the Monte Carlo also used a steering dampener to help alleviate vibrations on rough roads.
This diagram shows some of the Monte Carlo’s front suspension geometry. Sorry for the poor quality, it was the best I could find.
The front suspension geometry was heavily revised. Its design was essentially the same as the excellent 1970 F-Body cars which were well known for their good handling. Detroit engineers of the time claimed that radial tires produced “low-speed harshness” so the suspension geometry was changed to overcome this problem. The side-view swing arm slope is the angle at which the upper and lower control arms are in relation to one another. By increasing this angle from 2 degrees to 6 degrees negative slope, this eliminated any harshness from the suspension without compromising the handling. Compared to the previous 1964-72 A-bodies, the 1973 models had improved bump steer curves and improved camber curves. Longer trailing arms in the rear suspension created less acute convergence angles. Suspension travel was also increased by approximately 1” to improve rough road ride characteristics and resistance to bottoming out.
Chevrolet had made improvements in its suspension execution and handling since the late 1960s. However, in most cases one was required to order an upgraded suspension package to get these handling benefits. More often than not, most Chevrolets left the factory with soft wallowing suspensions.
The concept for the 1973 Monte Carlo was for it to be pleasurable to drive due to its good handling. The radial tire suspension package would meet this goal. This suspension package included radial tires and front and rear sway bars to increase the roll stiffness (base suspension only had a front bar). But how could Chevrolet ensure that most Monte Carlos ended up with this excellent suspension over the base level suspension with bias ply tires? Most buyers were unwilling to purchase an upgraded suspension and dealers typically didn’t order cars with upgraded suspension. In addition, the corporate bean counters surely wouldn’t allow for such extravagant items as radial tires and rear sway bars on a base level car; they had to keep that base price low.
The rear stabilizer bar is clearly visible on the subject car.
Note that neither the automatic transmission or the radial tires were available on the base model.
So to make most Monte Carlos equipped with the good suspension, John Z was up to his old tricks again. As stated, base model Monte Carlos came with bias ply tires and a basic suspension as well as a three-speed column shift transmission. However, if one wanted to upgrade to an automatic transmission, well then you had to step up to the Z76 Monte Carlo S option package. And guess what the Monte Carlo S came with? That’s right, the radial suspension package. In fact, the Monte Carlo S model option wasn’t much more than that, as it consisted of extra sound insulation, GR70-15 radial tires and a rear stabilizer bar. In addition to the Monte Carlo S, there was also a Z03 Landau option package. This included all items in the Monte Carlo S package, along with a Landau vinyl roof, landau nameplates, fender accent striping, dual body coloured sport mirrors and 15 x7 Turbine wheels.
The 1973 Monte Carlo brochure hardly makes mention of the base model. Chevrolet limited the availability of many of the creature comfort options that were seen as desirable in the personal luxury cars. The ploy worked as both customers and dealers alike had little interest in the base model cars. Very few base models were produced, only 1.7% of Monte Carlo production to be exact.
The 1973 Monte Carlo proved to be quite successful. Despite its larger size and its more polarizing styling compared to the 1972 model, the personal luxury car buyers loved it. Sales shot up from 163,085 to 290,693. That’s a whopping 78% increase!
It was well received by the motoring press and in fact won the Motor Trend Car of the Year award. Motor Trend gushed over the ride and handling of the Monte Carlo, saying that they felt it was superior to both the Grand Am and the Cutlass Salon. They said “The point is that somehow the Monte Carlo seems just as ready as the Mercedes for a flat-out run to Zandvoort or Spa Francorchamps, or Nurburgring or Monza, and that kind of engineering superiority hasn’t happened in an American car since a Duesenberg won at LeMans in 1921. The Monte Carlo, you see, has what the Germans call “speed feel.” Maybe that statement is a bit over the top, but you get the idea, it was a revelation in ride and handling.
The Monte Carlo had round gauges as standard equipment unlike Chevelle. However, full instrumentation came at extra cost.
I recently came across this very green 1973 Chevrolet Monte Carlo that is the subject of this article. The combination of the green paint, brown vinyl top and the green interior is not only very period appropriate but it also looked quite festive to me at this time of year – reminding me of a Christmas tree on wheels.
This particular Monte Carlo is said to be an original unrestored car with only 41,000 miles. It has been owned by the same family for 43 years. All the paperwork and maintenance records are included with the car. It has some desirable options including air conditioning, swivel bucket seats, console and a floor shift. Other than the repaint and the addition of a new dual exhaust with Flowmaster 50 mufflers, it is said to be an original survivor car. It has a 350 under the hood, although it does not say if it is the 145-hp 2bbl variant or the 175 hp 4bbl variant. Either is perfectly adequate for modern traffic.
The car was original purchased in Grants Pass, Oregon and is still residing in the same state. So I am sure the ideal climate of the Pacific North West has help preserve this car. That said, despite its nice appearance up top, it does have a fair amount of rust on the undercarriage. Nothing appears critical, but it’s certainly more than I like to see.
Even though the Monte Carlo was a “personal luxury car”, GM was sure to remind you it was still a lowly Chevrolet with the black plastic on the dash and console rather than colour-keyed. At least the Monte Carlos received the colour-keyed steering wheel and steering column.
Regardless, this Monte Carlo would make a fine Christmas gift for a fellow Curbsider that wants to enjoy their classic. While it’s easy to assume this ’73 Monte Carlo is just another wallowing over-styled brougham era beast, now you know that the Monte Carlo is the gift that keeps on giving; a brougham that can handle.
I don’t think I ever even knew about the base-level Monte Carlo. That would be a real CC find – a base 73 Monte with its 3 speed stick.
I presume that the setup in the Monte was similar to what was in my mother’s 74 Luxury LeMans. We had the bias ply tires, but it definitely had the fast variable ratio steering and sway bars front and rear. It was lightly used as a drivers ed car and I don’t recall seeing a sticker and have never taken time to find out if it was standard or optional. I just know that it was an entirely different level of roadability from the 67 Galaxie 500 I owned at the same time.
That color was very popular on 1973 GM cars, but it was most often seen with a parchment/beige vinyl roof and interior. I don’t think I have ever seen one like this, with the brown roof and green interior. This will make someone a nice car.
Great car from the era, but keep in mind that past Motor Trend Car of the Year winners are the whose who of bad product.
The 1957 Chrysler products
1960 Corvair
1971 Vega
1975 Monza
1980 Citation
1983 Renault Alliance
The base Monte Carlos seem to be real unicorns. MT claimed the Monte Carlo was better than the Grand Am, which was the best of the Pontiac suspensions. Each division did their own suspension tuning, so the setup on your mom’s LeMans would have been different from the Monte Carlo. It’s strange that it had the bias ply tires but the rear sway bar. I wonder if it had the tires swapped after its service as a driver’s ed car? From the Pontiac literature it seems the Radial Tuned Suspension had the rear bar, but it is somewhat unclear if the base suspension had one. There were quite a variation on the suspensions offered on the Colonnade platform, not all were good handling.
From looking at the sales literature, I don’t think that vinyl roof was offered with this green from the factory. I wonder if the roof was recovered when the car was painted.
Well, I never knew about the suspension upgrades for the ’73. Interesting! The front end of the ’73 looks better to me than the later stacked headlight models, although they were likely just as popular (if not more so). Being a blue and green guy, the color is all right with me, as well. Nice find!
Speaking of John Z., I recently watched “Framing John DeLorean.” It wasn’t bad – I’ve long known most of the basics about how the DMC deal went down – but it examined his personal life in a little more detail. His kids played a big part in the film, especially his son, and you’re reminded that DeLorean’s actions didn’t just affect himself. Sad story all around, especially when you consider how good a car guy he was for most of his career.
I’ve just finished reading John D’s “On A Clear Day You Can See General Motors” and
although it is from his viewpoint only, a lot of the good thing s that happened with GM seem to be because of his “maverick” attitude. I prefer the first generation Monte Carlo, but did com to appreciate the later version of this generation. 🙂
That book makes me wonder how GM might have turned out differently if he would have stuck around, but it probably would never have worked. He just couldn’t go with the flow, which was one of his strengths, but it was a strength that worked better when he was a general manager, distanced somewhat from the upper executives. Of course, his ego didn’t help him either. “On a Clear Day,” if you can believe his narrative, does prove that DeLorean saw what was coming a lot more clearly than anyone else in the organization seemed to.
“how GM might have turned out differently if he would have stuck around”
Or how it might have looked had he been approached by Chrysler in the spring-summer of 1973. There is the real missed opportunity.
In another Delorean biography, it was stated that he was offered the CEO of AMC and the chairman was going to let him do whatever he wanted, including building his sportscar. But Delorean wanted more and the offer was withdrawn. Delorean then tried to accept but it was too late.
My first new car was a 1974 Monte Carlo. I wanted a Cutlass, but after driving it, I was not impressed. Loved the way it looked, but it was noisy and rode like a truck. My Dad had a friend that was a salesman at the Chevy dealer, so we stopped there to see what they had. I didn’t like the way it looked, but after driving it, I decided to buy it. Build quality and MPG was poor, but the NVH, ride & handling was great.
My dad’s only Chevy – it was a new 1973 Landau w/ 4bbl 350 and dual exhaust
great car, and handled so well
only weird thing, the 350 used to blow a little blue puff from the exhausts from the time it was new but he changed the oil every 3k so he never added any betw/ changes
My uncle had a 73 Chevelle Laguna coupe nicely optioned with the swivel seats etc. In my mind it was much better looking, especially based on the front end styling, than either the Chevelle coupe or the Monte Carlo. The MC I considered to be the worst styled American car of the era only to be equalled by the 74 AMC Matador X the following year. Oh my!
Agree on the styling.
At a time when the Europeans and Japanese were simplifying bodyside sheetmetal, GM seemingly did a 180 from that beautiful clean simple Camaro look and came out with this.
Suddenly it’s 1950?
I bought myself a classic for xmas but a different brand almost a trade in situation like people did back in the day, I may have to write about it as its a car rarely seen in its home country and getting quite rare here too now
You tease! Tell us more.
Yeah Bryce, we gotta know, I bet its a Hillman Avenger !!!
Thank you for an excellent write up. I learnt a lot about the Monte Carlo that I did not know before. No wonder that, despite their excessive exterior to interior size, cramped back seats, and weight, the Colonnades dominated the 70’s.
DeLorean had some good ideas at Pontiac and Chevrolet. I wonder if he would in fact have been successful had he been tapped to head Chrysler in the early 70’s. One thing that Iacocca had was a keen sense of politics and how to build a loyal team. DeLorean didn’t have that and neither did Bunkie Knudsen so when Iacocca got fired, he had a team ready to go to revamp Chrysler. Some of them like Hal Sperlich were already at Chrysler. Most of the projects that Iacocca is credited with were already well underway; The omnirizon was there, the K was well on its way, the minivan was on the drawing boards. Iacocca made sure that the Omnirizon and K cars didn’t turn into quality fiascos like the Volare/Aspen or the X and marketed them effectively. Iacocca also had the political ability to wring loan guarantees out of Congress. Could DeLorean have done so? What projects would DeLorean have come up with in 1973 at Chrysler?
I don’t know if this is really true or not, but DeLorean’s taste in cars seems to me a little Bob Lutz like, let’s make 2 seater European style roadsters and premium toys. Obviously with his own car he wouldn’t have been able to produce something mass market efficiently and economically and was forced to go premium. Even then, the car itself wound up being overpriced, underpowered, poor quality, and more laden with gimmicks than actual performance. Were it not for those movies, it would be a Bricklinesque footnote in automotive history.
I had a ‘74 blue with white landau top exactly as shown in the brochure. 350 4 barrel dual exhaust. Being a suspension guy in my day job I always felt them to be the best handling cars of the time, but build quality, as stated earlier here was terrible. You had to body slam those massive doors just to close them. Body gaps were, well cavernous to say the least. But it did handle well till about35,000 miles and the springs were completely sagged. No big deal I just installed a set of Moog’s, cargo coils in the rear.
Drive train was lame. The engine was week due to high under-hood temps.
My 78 T-bird after that Was a much much better car in every way except the handling did not have quite the road feel of the MC.
I was a senior in high school when these came out and remember them well. As a rabid car buff who read every car magazine and took anything written in Road & Track as gospel, I recall them raving about the ride and handling of the “radial-tuned” A Bodies, even though they preferred the more discreetly styled Cutlass Salon and Grand Am. My perception of the previous generation Monte Carlo was that it was a pale imitation of the over-styled TBird of the time, but gained a little credibility in my book from its NASCAR successes. The new Monte, with its upright beaky face and swivel seats just seemed like a parody of Detroit excess. My favorite of the new A Bodies was the Malibu, and I even remember writing a short story for my high school creative writing class that featured a ‘73 Malibu … and a Porsche 911.
I remember well reading about the suspension tweaks for these. Ironic, though, to have the best handling American car also be so baroque and so profoundly lacking in space efficiency. But that’s what the market was gobbling up at the time.
A couple of decades ago, a friend let me wring out his colonnade Chevelle. Compared to the ’71-’72 Chevelles I was familiar with, the thing handled really well, with better turn in, and it was more stable at speed, all around. I quizzed him rather heavily on what he had “done” to the car, looked carefully at the tire choices, etc. I suspect the ’73 MC suspension improvements were either shared with the ’73 Chevelle, or they were “engineered” at home, into that particular example.
BTW, the extended Monte wheelbase was likely “borrowed” by using the frame of the 4 door/wagon iteration of the Chevelle, which had the longer 116″ wheelbase as well.
Yes, the Monte Carlo and Chevelle had the same suspension. The difference was the Chevelle got the basic version – no rear sway bar, softer springs and shocks and bias ply tires. Chevelle also did not have the high degree of caster that the Monte Carlo got. Of course, a Chevelle could be upgraded to be like the Monte Carlo, but you had to know what options to select. The Monte Carlo frame had the same wheelbase as the 4-door but it was different proportions (passenger compartment length and hood length) so they were not shared.
Yes, I agree that it was ironic about the Monte Carlo being such a good handler. The Chevelle could have been setup pretty close to the same as a Monte Carlo, but you’d have to know which boxes to check. I much preferred the Chevelle to the Monte Carlo.
ANY Colonnade with a manual transmission is a rare beast, and the 4-speed floor shift is like finding a hen’s tooth in the mouth of an alligator. As my 1st car was the ’74 Malibu Classic I COAL’d, I was a bit of an A-body geek as a young man. And even *I* never knew that the base ’73 Monte was stick only!
In fact, the only 4-speed Colonnade A-body I’ve ever seen was a ’73 454 El Camino.
Excellent write up!
Me likely the Monte! 🙂
My first new car was a ‘73 Cougar XR-7, which I cross shopped with the Monte S. About the same price. I went with the Cougar because of the great dash and interior, but everything else about it was mediocre. Should have gone with the Monte. A friend had a ‘74 and although larger, it handled far better than the Cougar and was better built.
What I really wanted at the time was a Firebird, but a big GM strike made them and the Camaro unavailable, and there was serious talk at the time of GM cancelling both.
That is a great find for a Monte lover. I’m not one, but the ’73 is the best looking of this generation to my eye, particularly the really clean rear treatment and the simpler approach to the grille (versus later years). It would be fascinating to see what the designers had originally planned for the front before the fed bumpers were foisted on them.
All those options and no power windows 😠
Ironically it was probably the various Monte Carlo imitators that would make one expect this to be a wallowing over-styled brougham. Credit where due GM seemed to really try placating the loss of acceleration performance with superb handling characteristics in many of their cars during this period compared to Ford or Chrysler who seemed to instead be obsessed with numbing isolation at all costs. I was never much of a fan of the styling of the 73 MC, it has many attractive and interesting elements sprinkled through it(the original taillights and the bent rear window being my favorite), but many details don’t all jive that well together to my eye, and many seem to be 60s era holdovers applied to the new trend of neoclassical design. The front end especially bothers me, with its big round classical single headlights, but between them an uninspired blocky low mounted grille(I have the same grievance with the Collonade Buicks). I hate the stacked headlights that came with it but the 76 grille fit the theme a lot better.
Rallys wheels sure look good on this one, I like the color as well. PLCs universally look better with meaty tires and sportier styled steel wheels or mags over the common wheel cover variations the vast majority came with.
The Rallye wheels are cool but they are everywhere. I’d prefer stock wheel covers.
On a Chevelle or Camaro I agree, but I love how they defy expectations on a neoclassical PLC. It’s like wearing a top hat and frock coat with air jordans
An excellent review of the suspension improvements introduced with the Colonnades. I can remember when radial tires were first introduced as original equipment on domestic cars in the early ‘70s what a big deal a “radial-tuned” suspension setup was. Now I know what that actually meant in engineering terms.
While I admire the good condition of this ‘73 Monte Carlo, I must confess I always found them a bit tacky and this one, in its pitch-perfect period green glory is no exception. A Gran Prix of the same generation, on the other hand, I loved, especially the high-spot versions with African crossfire mahogany trim and the leather buckets.
It did mean a lot. The cars with “Radial Tuned Suspension” drive hugely better. Part was better geometry but the biggest part was the radial tires themselves.
All ’73-4 (but none in ’75+) Grand Prix and Grand Ams had real wood trim, but those years had available Morrokide! vinyl seats, not leather until the ’76 GP. Win some, lose some. Oddly, the ’74 brochure says wood on the console and doors but doesn’t mention the dash itself like it did in ’73. Maybe all those holes proved difficult to cut. I can’t think of another GM car that had any real wood in the 70s, to Cadillac’s shame.
This is my kind of car! I was working at GM and we built these cars in Fremont, where Teslas are built today. What was interesting was the variety of the option packages. The standard plain bench seat models, with the plain door panels, manual windows, No instrument dash were common. But so were the heavily optioned cars with the deluxe bucket seats, consoles, full instrumentation, a/c, tilt wheel, full power assist, AM/FM radio with 8 track, vinyl top and sunroof. I prefer the ’73 with the twin round headlights, and the smaller tail lamps with the ribbed die cast bezels. Most were 350 cid. with two barrels, but some had the four barrel with dual exhaust. I know that I mention this often, but having the front wheels further forward helps the proportions and is a subtle cue of Classic styling. Yes, it is just wasted space, but it looks good to me.
Vince, your articles are the best.
Most likely, it is a 2bbl 350 as most of them were.
For $2000, you can get:
-Vortec heads.
-Hi performance intake.
-750 cfm Holley
-Tube headers.
Voila, your 145 hp 350 becomes a 250 hp 350.
How many extra horses would you get if you don’t junked all that smog control gear and a tune up?.
In reality, not a lot. The gross figures of 1971 would put the 350 2V at 200+ hp.
Ditching the “smog control” would simply mean disconnecting the EGR and the air pump if so equipped.
The real obstacle to power on these motors was breathing. The Vortec heads, intake, cam, tube headers are what is really necessary to make power. Heck 300 hp is easy from a 350.
If one really was willing to spend some $$, a 383 stroker is the way to go at C$6000:
https://www.chevroletperformancestore.ca/product-page/ht383e
I forgot to add HEI and a recurved distributor.
Thanks Len! As for the 350-2bbl, the 1971 version was rated at 165 hp net and 245 hp gross. GM published both net and gross numbers in 1971.
I agree that it wouldn’t take much to wake up this engine, since I own the same basic one in my Malibu. The terrible heads, low compression and super mild cam make for no top end power. They are torquey enough to get by fine cruising, just don’t expect any power when you put your foot into it. However, even basic hot rodding tricks can help. A 4-bbl carb that isn’t super lean, a distributor with a decent timing curve and true dual exhaust will make a significant difference in throttle response and drivability.
External smog control equipment really isn’t worth ditching unless it’s faulty and replacement is unobtainable, gearheads way over exaggerate the performance loss attributed to them. EGR for example basically does nothing detrimental, it’s recirculating inert gas under cruise conditions to bring combustion temps down and it actually has a net effect of increasing gas mileage, it operates via vacuum. Even AIR pumps only hurt performance from the accessory load, which isn’t as much as a power steering pump.
The perfect storm of unleaded gas, energy crisis and environmental concern brought some hasty engineering, the quest to get big lazy torque out of small(er) displacements was where you got the much maligned heads with tiny ports and valves
And it’ll probably be cleaner that the original setup! Certainly more efficient.
What a coincidence…I DID get a 1973 Monte Carlo for Christmas! Going through some things at my Mom’s house…she is now in assisted living, at age 100…I found this yellow one. I also found a red 1973 Pontiac Grand Prix, a yellow Pontiac Grand Am and acted Buick Century. All three are 1/32 scale Lindberg snap-together plastic.
Oops. Upside down. D*** phone! But you get the idea.
No, nothing wrong with your smartphone. The images created in iOS devices do not contain EXIF metadata that Word Press and other platforms need to determine the correct orientation.
I’ve mentioned in the past a simple fix of installing the image rotation plug-in for the Word Press. It’s up to Paul and others to proceed with this step…
After working hard on fixing the enormous meltdown with the CC website a few years ago and keeping it from crashing again, I doubt Paul and others would want to deal with minor inconvenience for now.
Okay, thanks! The image does go right side up when you click on it. But the Spellcheck changed “a red” Buick Century to “acted” and I didn’t notice.
This story brings back a lot of fond memories. My brother and I convinced our mother to buy one of these 73 Monte Carlos when she was thinking of replacing her ’67 Bel Air with another full-sizer in the summer of 1972. From looking at the brochures, we learned that the big Chevys were now too long to fit in our 1935-era garage, so it was time to downsize.
Now a Malibu 4-door would have been the logical choice, but our mother had always purchased 2-door cars, so why not spurge for once? We pored over the MC brochures when the 73s came out and had her car special-ordered.
It was a blue S model just like the one on the pictured brochure cover, except with no vinyl roof. It had matching blue “panty cloth” seats. Options were carefully considered, with only a/c, AM radio, body side molding, bumper guards, auxiliary lighting, and a few other odds and ends chosen. So there were no swivel bucket seats, power windows, cruise control, tilt wheel, or 4-barrel carb. The tires were blackwall with the standard wheelcovers as shown.
We loved the car, but it did have some initial quality issues, such as having to be towed back to the dealer twice due to carb issues. These were “fixed” somehow, and the car proved to be reliable over the long haul. Those doors were heavy though and gas mileage couldn’t crack the 20 mpg mark even at 55 mph.
A friend of mine bought his first new car in 1975, a maroon Monte Carlo Landau. I thought it was hideous back then and still do. I didn’t like the 1st generation MC much, but IMHO it was light years ahead of the 2nd gen. We would ask him, “So you claim to be 19, but how old are you really? Like, 59?”. He had the Monte for over 10 years, selling it before he moved out West in 1987.
It did drive very well with the upgraded suspension, but other than that? Nope.
If only the door hinges didn’t sound like a dying water buffalo when you closed them while the doors rattled like one of those ball bearing desk toys when you slammed them to get them closed properly. By 1980, all of them sounded like that along with cracking plastics. These cars are beautiful, but Chevy needed to step up it’s quality game to match the styling and luxury.
Sales shot up from 163,085 to 290,693. That’s a whopping 178% increase!
No, it’s a 78% increase. The higher total is 178% of the smaller.
Fixed now.
We have a 73 base model with upgrades to AC, tinted glass, body side molding, vinyl roof, remote control rear view, turbo V-8, am/fm radio, deluxe bumper, bumper guards. It’s a 3 on the tree. I can’t find values for this anywhere. This article is telling me it’s rather rare. Can anyone point me to a value price for insurance purposes? (65k miles and never driven in rain or snow.) Gold with white top. We have the original sell sheet with the factory upgrades itemized which I listed above and 2nd owner for a prized family car.
You can’t get an insurance value out of a book or off the internet. The way to do this is to get a local auto appraiser to assess your car. You might check with a classic car insurance outfit (Hagerty is a reputable one) and see if they can point you to an appraiser near you.
Thank you, that is helpful!