When my friend sent me the link to this eBay listing during an online chat, I knew I had to share it with everyone. Naturally, it’s been found in Oregon and if one is in the market for a well preserved rear-drive H-body, they would have to look pretty hard to find any in better condition. There can’t be many left around with this car’s two-year-only twin sealed beam nose.
These were still common on the road back when I was young enough to believe cars–and other objects–had living spirits, and when I saw a Monza hatchback knock into a Rabbit while parking (I remember the moment during a pre-K field trip quite well), I decided they were evil. I’m reminded of that moment whenever I see these cars, though I’ll confess to never having seen a Buick version. They must have been rare and if I had the option to buy a small “Buick” in 1979, it would’ve been the even less common Opel by Isuzu. Today, though, this looks like the better car.
For one thing, it’s pretty well trimmed, as befits a corporate platform in spiffy Buick garb. The seller’s taken good pictures of the color-keyed interior, nicely showing off the fake wood, chrome plated crotch vent and immaculate moquette seating surfaces. A full console and three-spoke wheel add nicely to the mini pony car theme of this old-guard domestic compact.
Being so inefficient in terms of passenger space, having to scrap the rotary engine planned for the platform was no sweat, as a wide variety of more traditional powertrains, including small-block V8s, could easily fit in the engine bay. This car, as you see here, got the then-gutless 231 Buick V6, making 110 horsepower. You could’ve done worse in 1979, but what’s much more interesting is the potential this block provides for a restomod. Would a turbocharged unit from the GNX or the ’89 Firebird fit?
Would any psychotic person sacrifice their classic car’s powertrain to find to stuffed in this forgotten corporate compact? Or would swapping in the reciprocating parts and engine management out of a Supercharged variant from the front-drive H-body work with a proper fuel delivery system? Our bigger GM powertrain nerds can probably tell us.
A lot of us here at CC don’t care for restomods and would prefer that this car, whose current bid is set at $5,600, remain untouched. The auction is ending at about the same time this goes to print today, and for this much money, I’d be surprised if someone were to plan to simply drive this into the ground. I hope that if the buyer does, in fact, have a desire to somehow alter this powder blue hatchback, he or she keep it looking stock. Given how some GM efforts from this era are discussed, this serves as a nice reminder of what buyers saw when the products were new. As always, the last versions of their famously-botched platforms often turned out quite nicely and I’m actually surprised by how much I like this car. Would a Fox Mustang with a 3.3 six or an Accord with a two-speed Hondamatic have been that much nicer?
Curbside Classic: 1979 Chevrolet Monza Coupe – Vega II or Mustang Too?
Cohort Sighting: 1976 Buick Skyhawk – Wouldn’t You Really Rather Have A Chevy Monza-Clone Baby Buick?
Oh boy! Weird H-Body love kicking in here……….
It looks like someone added an earlier Buick Sport steering wheel to it…it looks nice! I’d keep it as is. What a great cruiser you don’t see every day.
The rear window slats would have to go, and I think I prefer the full quarter-window of the Monza, but this is going to be fun for someone.
Actually, that style sport wheel was an option on these all the way until 1980, the Oldsmobile Starfire H-body had the option of the same 4 spoke steering wheel that was available in a 442 in the early 70’s.
Wow…I guess it’s kind of like the Buick rally wheel…once they find something they like, they stick with it!
My ’75 Starfire had that wheel, and it was the nicest-sized diameter, and the grippiest, until I drove my Alfa 164.
Mine had the still-unbalanced Jeep version of the 3.8 with a 4 speed. Good thing I was young (but with the rear seat folded down I could sleep in it!)…
I once had a ’79 Corvette with the exact same steering wheel…
I’d keep the slats, they help with the sunlight coming in through that back window. Much cooler feeling in summer.
Looks like the ebay auction ends tomorrow morning.
It was a option you could order the Sport wheel.
I’m good at remembering faces, but I don’t recognize this front clip at all! Nice find, particularly with the highly desirable crotch vent.
Same here. I remember the Skyhawk, though I’ve not seen one in eons, but I had totally forgotten that nose. Only rembmered the earlier quad-lamp variant.
Seven or eight years ago, someone at the university where I worked had the Oldsmobile Starfire version of this car. It was well cared-for and reminded me that these were actually good-looking cars, in a very 70’s way.
Wow was the transmission tunnel that high in those cars? It looks like it sits level with the bottoms of the rear seats. In fact it kinda looks like the same type of set up as in my 1999 Pontiac Firebird.
The 3rd gen F-body used essentially the same floor pan as this, and the 4th gen has a slightly modified version. You have some good eyes my man.
To add a little more info, the F-body used essentially the same rear suspension as this too. Torque arm, panhard bar, coils.
I highly doubt that the 3G RWD F-Bodies Camaro/Firebird would even used an archaic subcompact chassis and floor pan from the RWD H-Body Vega/Monza especially since on average the Monza at 179.3″ was about 8.5″ shorter than the Camaro’s 187.8″. If anything, some chassis components were actually similar to the FWD X-Body Citation and FWD A-Body Celebrity. Having a Camaro with Vega floor pan would only serve to cheapen the Camaro’s image due to the Vega’s bad reputation of being a rust bucket.
Read the sharing of basic floor pan (not chassis) in John Gunnell’s Firebird Buyer’s guides.
Also have seen posts on using a 3rd gen F-body rear end in the Monzas as a direct swap as long as you have fender flares.
The X and F didn’t share any suspension or chassis parts.
The Monza’s width at 65.4″ and the 3G RWD F-Bodies width at 72.8″. That’s a significant width difference of almost 7″ between a 1975-80 RWD H-Bodies and the 1982-92 RWD F-Bodies so it might make some sense using RWD F-Body Chassis components into the RWD H-Body Chassis only if there are fender flares on both sides of the Monza and those rear chassis components and floor pans were pared down to fit the Monza body otherwise its much wider to fit.
I think the tunnel looks even taller than it is because, unlike most cars, the rear seats in the Monza/Skyhawk are no higher than the front seats. And the front seats were already quite low. As a 6′ tall teen, I sat in the back of one of these often, my head pressed into the fastback roofline and my knees tucked into my armpits. I thought it was a good looking car at the time, but it sure was miserable to be inside it.
God, those back seats were so horrible and skim-PEE that I left the back seat permanently folded down in my Monza HB. Looked cooler, too, channeling it’s inner sports car, with the same louver kit.
My folks got a ’75 Hawk, with a 4 speed manual, as a second car in 1977. It moved well with the manual, but was stiff as heck. It wore out by ’79, but then city driving does that.
The look was ‘dumbed down’ here, to get mature buyers. But the ‘small Buick’ that sold well was the the X body Skylark, both RWD and FWD. [Yes we all know the story of the latter X].
Also, the Hawk at least did have some character compared to the Monza, since it had an actual Buick motor. Just that it was raw and unrefined.
My dad has a LaCrosse with 3800 and I told him, “it’s the V6 like in our old Hawk”. He was amazed.
I can’t imagine any reason to keep this car stock under the hood unless you were starting a car museum for misfit toys. If I somehow inherited this car, I would carefully remove engine and all the other underhood parts and put in a stout 3.8 with single or dual turbos backed by a turbo 350 and a 10 bolt rear. This could be done with no cutting so that someday, in the unlikely event that this were to appreciate to a value that made it worthwhile, you could put it back to stock.
You could but there goes your mileage that you would get from the “gutless” 110 hp 231……..plus every single vehicle on the face of the earth does not need to be some sort of hotrod. Period
I think the earlier 4 head light look is much better than the latter 2 light front end, I imagine that they were cribbing this look from the new X-body Skylark to enhance some sort of family resemblance between the small Buicks, though the Skyhawk went back to a 4 light front when it became a J-car in 1982.
The Skyhawk also had a unique “SkyRoof” option that gave you a glass skylight over the driver and passenger, similar to a 50’s Skyliner/Sun Valley Ford, it was a pretty rare option with bright silver band around the “targa” area of the roof.
A dressed-up Vega. GM managed to amortize the Vega’s development costs pretty effectively.
That was my thought as well, too much Vega underneath to suit me. As someone says downthread, who bought these when they were new? Hard to imagine a typical Buick owner being willing to collapse him/herself into this.
My Dad had 2 of these, a 76 and a 78 both bought new (the even fire V6 upgrade was the reason he traded in the 76 for the 78). My Mother drove a 77 Regal at the time.
I don’t think the “typical” Buick buyer was the same as it is seen now.
They were both in their late 20’s/early 30’s at the time.
I can think of at least 6 extended family members and friends of my parents who also drove Century’s, Specials and Skylarks during this time period who were also in their late 20’s early 30’s.
I remember these seemed to be always pitched at young women, they always seemed to appear in the ads and brochure shots, remember that most of these H-Specials were sort of a catch-all for the divisions that were crying for a “small car” after the oil embargos.
My mother bought an ’80 Skyhawk. The story goes that she really wanted a Camaro, but her parents convinced her that the lack of cargo space would be a major hindrance.
Despite still to this day complaining that she bought the Skyhawk over the Camaro, she chose to replace the ’80 Skyhawk with an ’85 Skyhawk- I guess the 3rd gen f-body didn’t appeal to her.
So a Vega without the aluminum 2.3 and barren interior trim; redeemable in your eyes, Paul?
I actually prefer the ’71-’73 Vega because of its looks, minus the engine. I sort of liked the Monza when it first came out, but that didn’t last long. And the B-O-P versions certainly didn’t improve on it.
They all had one redeeming quality: decent handling. And the 305-powered Monza had some scoot. But otherwise, it was all lipstick on a pig. The even-fire 3.8 helped a fair amount, although it still lacked any real beans,but by the time it came along, this platform was well past its sell-by date.
Knew about the handling; your write-ups have actually cultivated some intrigue for the Vega. I wonder if the Buick version was softened.
The Buick ‘version’ was just a Chevy Monza with V6. The Monza was a reworked H body, not just ‘new sheetmetal’.
Wow, that is in amazing shape. I’m tempted, but I’d really prefer a bigger Buick of that vintage.
You wouldn’t be the only one, then, or now.
In the everything is relative department, driving this compared to the typical ’71 Vega (4 cyl, stick, no air, one speaker AM radio, simple hard plastic interior), this would have been a relative plush mobile.
Packing almost 4 liters under the hood and a decent number of features, you have to wonder what the price point and gas mileage of this car was compared to a similarly equipped base Regal coupe for the same year. This car has a pretty cramped interior, and a seating position only a teen or twenty something could love, and a name that the average teen or twenty wouldn’t buy. I was always slightly amazed by the existence of GM cars like this. It would seem difficult to make money on it even with the amount shared on this platform.
1979 Skyhawk hatchback coupe – $4,778
1979 Regal coupe – $5,407
The Skyhawk had the 3.8 standard, while the Regal had a 3.2. What’s more curious is that the base Skyhawk was more than $300 above the highest trim Skylark that year, the Custom coupe at $4.462.
Cars DO have living spirits! Except GM cars (if you can call them that). They have horns and a pitchfork.
Sales of these were up and down over their six years, but never broke 30,000 units and the first-year ’75 was tops at 29,448. The Starfire always sold a bit better. Interestingly, while the Monza (169,000+/-) and Sunbird ( 188,000 +/-) racked up big sales numbers in their extended 1980 model year (they were built until December ’80 and sold well into 1981), both the Skyhawk and Starfire dropped to just over 8,000 units each.
With the Ponitac/Buick – Chev/Olds dealer structure and the Sunbird not available until 1976, I believe the Skyhawk was offered in Canada, but not the Starfire, however I am open to correction on that.
The Vega was available as the Astra in Canada before it made it over here in 1975.
vega came to canada in 1971,pontiac astre a year later
IIRC, the Skyhawk and Starfire were both dropped early in the 1980 model year, probably ceasing production by the end of calendar year 1979. So they never saw the extended 1980 model year that their Chevy and Pontiac counterparts did; to the contrary, they had a very short 1980 model year. Maybe GM decided that the Skyhawk and Starfire just weren’t selling well enough to keep around (even with Oil Crisis II driving up sales of small cars), or it was felt that Olds and Buick no longer needed them, with the new FWD X-bodies able to satisfy the demand from Olds’ or Buick’s customer base for a “small car”.
From what I understand, the Monza and Sunbird were kept in production as 1980 models until the end of calendar year 1980 — months after the rest of GM’s lineup had switched over to the 1981 model year — for the following reasons:
–their J-body replacements weren’t ready yet;
–they were selling too well (at a time when sales of much of GM’s lineup had plumetted) to just drop them without an immediately available replacement for Chevrolet and Pontiac dealers;
–as a very old design that was scheduled to soon be replaced, GM didn’t want to bring them into compliance with new regulatory requirements for the 1981 model year.
Cars built through the end of calendar year 1980 could legally be titled as 1980 model year vehicles, so GM continued building 1980 Monzas and Sunbirds until that point, then stopped. That minimized the gap until the J-bodies would be available, without needing to upgrade the old design.
Seems sensible, the J-cars were out Spring 1981 or so, I know someone that purchased a brand new J2000 hatch in April 81.
Even my cousin’s 2012 Volvo C30 has more interior room than this penalty box.
Having owned a Monza, it wasn’t a penalty box. Actually it was a pretty good car, definitely more comfortable and better than the Vega I had before it, although it was noticeably heavier. While I autocrossed my Vega, the Monza never did anything more strenuous than rallies.
For it’s day, the Monza/Sunbird/Skyhawk/Starfire were very nice low buck GT cars. Having GM’s first five speed was a definite plus, and the odd shift pattern was easy enough to get used to.
And don’t let that 110 hp fool you…I know for a fact that the Sunbird variant would flat scoot. Until my girlfriend made a left turn in front of a speeding motorcycle, a Honda DOHC 450 as it were. What a shame to take out two nice vehicles in one fell swoop. (I actually liked her Sunbird.) The motorcycle rider somehow lived, but was slightly disfigured after that. He was doing about 60 upon impact and ended up under the car. He hit her at an angle that peeled the inner and outer shells of the passenger door apart and the door jamb cut deeply into his neck. There was door glass 200 feet down the road. My girlfriend’s leg bent the floor shifter to the right and she had a large bruise there, that being her only injury. The strange angle of impact left no glass on or in her; it mostly ended up in the package shelf, with some making it way down the road as stated above. What a way to go. It was a 1980 model and it was s light gold color with a matching, very attractive (if thrown together) interior. That car was totaled, and she replaced it with…drumroll, please, a 1982 Cavalier in April of 1981. From the frying pan into the fire. What a POS from the very beginning. Another story for another day.
Jesus, that poor biker. Now I want to hide under a blanket.
But yes, I wanted to comment on the upcoming J bodies. And also, not experiencing these cars, i had to default to the common tale that the 3.8 was gutless, but if the figures are to be believed, it’d make sense that they had SOME slight oomph to them.
As a biker, the sight of young folk making lefts in front of me is fearsome…
FOR IT’S TIME, my ’75 4sp Starfire 3.8 could push itself to it’s handling limits and tires. Your comments above re ‘Fox Mustang with a 3.3 six or an Accord with a two-speed Hondamatic’ be any nicer ring true; nothing but more expensive Euro stuff or a ponycar were much better performers…
The 3.8-equipped Skyhawk at least wasn’t tremendously heavy — it was at least 120 lb lighter than the V-8 cars — and had lots of torque. (I can’t find the ratings for 1979, but the 1978 cars had 115 hp and 190 lb-ft.) In a B-body or even an A-body, that was probably pretty anemic, but in a 2,800-pound H-body, I imagine it was respectable enough for the time. That would put it in the same realm as the U.S.-spec Capri II.
As many here already know, I have a ’77 Monza 2+2 languishing in the garage over at my parents’ house, awaiting a half-ass restoration. It’s going to be a driver, not a garage queen.
This past weekend was one of my best scores at Pick-A-Part yet. I found a rusty but complete ’76 2+2 Monza and stripped everything useful off of it. The taillights, headlight trim, window trim, as well as all the side and rear glass. I also took both window regulators, as the driver’s side one on mine is damaged.
The engine, complete with new smog pump hoses and fittings. The chrome valve covers I stole off of the ailing small block that was in my ’66 Biscayne:
Nope. The el cheapo, self-destructo Turbo 200. If I have my way, a built 200R4 is going into that bad boy, along with an Eaton limited slip with 3.23 gears for the 7.5″ rear end.
Always liked the looks of these cars. I thought of them as a Vega without all of the mistakes, sort of like the way they should have been from the start. Looks like your going to have a good runner. Hope it gets a paint job.
Interior room wasn’t too bad. I’m 6’4″, and quickly learned the drill for slipping in and out of my 1980 Monza. Dynamically, they were better than expected too, especially after I put some KYB gas shocks on the front. With a set of Dunlop radials replacing the banana peel Goodyear crossplies, my Monza was a nice little handler.
The Vega platform was a good handler right out of the box. A girl I knew in high school had a ’76 Vega hatch that I drove quite often, and the cornering was impressive for the time, particularly considering the skinny 13 inch tires it wore (likely bias-ply as well).
Vega’s were damned good handlers. The only thing that kept them from being competitive in SCCA B-Sedan autocross (BMW 2002, 1600, Alfa GTV, Pinto, etc.) was the engine. Drop a 2002 engine in one of those and they could have given a genuine 2002 one hell of a hard time.
Finally, the relocation of the battery to the ( former ) spare tire well. Since I’m doing the 5-lug S10 brake and axle upgrade on this car, I’ve found that a 185/60R14 tire laid flat over the well ( with the cover left off ) fits perfectly. Just enough room for a full-size spare, plus it hides the battery from view.
The original intent of the H-Special was to be a Camaro/Firebird II, its interesting that the basic 3 door sporty coupe with the availability of everything from a 4 banger to a V8 was basically copied for the 3rd gen F-bodies.
The H-bodies share a great deal of ancillary parts from the 2nd gen f-body as well. The front marker lamps are the same as the non-RS 70-73 Camaro, the armrest / inner door handle is esentially the same as later 2nd gen Camaros, and I believe the glovebox door and rear hatch lock assembly are the same as well.
To each his own I guess.
It went to $6000, but the reserve wasn’t met. I wonder what the heck the reserve was…?
That’s crazy. I know its old, but a turd is a turd is a turd. Vegas at least looked good, that thing is uggggggly.
Drive one before you call it a turd.
Based on his comment about the high mileage one in Vancouver for $16k, I think he believes he has a $20,000 car here. He should have taken the $6,000 and smiled the whole time – that’s $1,000-2,000 more than it’s worth.
Based on the auction, Stumack, it is obviously worth at least $6,000! Not to you, but it appears that it is to a few people. You never know, to someone it may be worth $20,000. Not likely but you see where I am going. With a anything that is relatively rare and not a commodity, value is set by what the market dictates. The old adage of something only being worth what someone is willing to pay applies. I suspect that $7-8000 would be an achievable range. There are a lot of cars that once were considered POS in their time but because only a few survived, are quite valuable. Collectors are a funny lot.
I believe that the Chevrolet Monza was Motor Trend’s “Car of the Year” for 1975.
These were quite handsome when new, although the badge engineering of the Buick and Oldsmobile versions was far too obvious. These cars made a decent splash at first, and faded quite quickly – even more so than their main competitor, the Ford Mustang II.
I remember the now-defunct magazine, Road Test, tested an Oldsmobile Starfire in either 1975 or 1976. They were quite critical of it, noting the subpar quality, particularly the wrinkled contact paper that was supposed to suggest chrome trim. Their parting shot – “This is an Oldsmobile? How times change.”
Ahhh, the dreaded GM chrome tape! I remember the chrome ‘trim’ flaking off those various bit and pieces of every GM product I’ve ever had. As long as it got the car off the lot, right?
Wow, I’d forgotten about that stuff. Showed up on the door panel trim on the ’79 Malibu and the ’86 Parisienne. Thankfully I can’t think of many other places it was used. The compacts may have applied it more liberally!
Man! I always hated those smaller 1970’s cars with the gigantic uncomfortable and space stealing driveshaft hump. I always got stuck in the middle of that and made the car ride very miserable!
But they had “right wheel drive”! lol
ABB, but if you are riding in the grown-up seats, it was like sitting in a cockpit and flying at 4.6 inches of the tarmac! An awesome experience for a teenager in the ’70s:) As an added bonus the back seat folded down for a mobile motel room . . .
3800 V6s were supercharged in RWD downunder no biggie to just import a Commodore powertrain and transplant it, they didn’t have too much get up n go but not bad for the era.
Buddy had one very similar to this back in the day. Pretty certain it was still the odd-fire 3.8L, but my friend’s car had a 5 speed in it. While it was a bit rough around the edges in refinement, the car was a very good performer for its day. The Monza and its derivatives were probably better overall than the Mustang II, their closest competitor.
After admiring that crotch vent I was curious if any car still sold today has that feature. If not, what is the last car made that still featured it? I know that you can get cooled seats nowadays but it’s not the same.
My ’95 Celica had one, and thought it was kind if an odd feature. Those 6th gen Celicas lasted thru 1999.
Wow is that transmission tunnel W-I-D-E. Before 10 people tell me it’s because of the rotary engine that never was I know that 🙂
Interesting old cars at around this price and in this condition represent a sweet spot for value. Choose right and you can have a very reliable daily driver despite what some folks will tell you. Sure the price is at a premium compared to the more typical worn-out heaps you find on CL. It’s those cars that should never be considered for DD duty, even with repairs.
The top bid is now $6,000 with an hour to go. Tons of interest, you rarely see so much Q&A on an eBay car.
This one didn’t sell yet . . . at $6,000, no less. But that is a bargain for such a rarity. Check out this “comparable” ‘hawk for sale – White on White, 1976 Buick Sky Hawk. A one owner car, $16,000, but with 150,000 miles! Now this ebay listing doesn’t look so far off the mark.
That does like a SkyRoof car, which is a probably the most collectible of these if there ever was one, the price is still a bit out there, I’m thinking that 150,000 is a misprint and that its a 15,000 mile car, it does look like it, it even has all the “Free Spirit” decals on it.
The Buick 3.8 was not the only v6 that went into these cars Buick made a smaller displacement v6, I took a v6 out of the Buick version and installed in place of the vega 4 cylinder in my mothers 77 Monza, the Monza was a decent car for once after that swap, as I remember, the Buick had bolt in engine mounts and the vega engine had welded in mounts, a cold chisel and hammer to remove them, was not fun!
The 3.8L Buick was the only one that was available in the Skyhawks. In 78 & 79 you could get a 3.2L / 196ci V6 in the Monzas.
A law school roommate had an 80 Monza. The car always felt so much heavier than it probably was, but that was GM’s way.
Also, there is only ONE Sky Hawk. 🙂
When I read this article I really could not remember this series of GM car. Either they didn’t sell well in my area I grew up in or that recollection has been wiped from my memory banks. Really cool style. I love hatch back cars, I’ve had Omnis and Golfs and a couple of 200sx nissans. I did some more research on this model, and always wondered why GM would build a Buick,Olds,Pontiac and Chevy versions of the same car. Baffleing to me. They’re fighting their self.
These cars debuted in the fall of 1974, just after the Arab Oil Embargo, which decimated sales of big cars during the 1974 model year. I’m guessing that Buick and Oldsmobile dealers were screaming for a subcompact to sell, and this one was available.
The minimal changes to the initial Buick and Oldsmobile versions, as compared to the Chevrolet Monza, suggest that this was a last-minute decision.
The ’76 Pontiac Sunbird was a hit, since it had the notchback only for its first year. Also the front end was more ‘unique’, considering. Chevy had the notchback first as ‘Monza Towne Coupe’ in spring ’75, with standard landau roof.
Since Chicago was a huge Pontiac market, lots of Sunbirds were sold to city drivers. Which is why the Sunfire lasted so long, too.
Didn’t the Pontiac version have that weird small V8 in ’78-79? It seems it was 262 or some unusual displacement.
I know the Pontiac version had the 305 available in it, the Monza could have been equipped with either the smaller 262 4.3 litre V8 or the 305, the standard engine was the 2.5 litre Pontiac engine, the Oldsmobile Starfire came with the Buick V6 standard and had the small Oldsmobile 260 V8 optional, the Buick Skyhawk was V6 only from what I recall.
Carmine is pretty close. Depending on the year, Chevy, Olds and Pontiac did offer optional V8s. Buick never did. If I remember correctly, even the V6s were an option with the 4s being standard. Here is a link that charts it out – GM H-Body Engines
I looked up some ’79 Buick brochures and it appears the 3.8 was the only Skyhawk engine, at least in 1979.
That is what I understand as well . . . are the brochures that you found online or in your collection, Ate Up With Motor?
Online — I have piles of car magazines, but not a lot in the way of brochures. (I don’t even have the brochure for my car, which in retrospect I sort of regret.)
The Skyhawk never offered anything except the 3.8 V6. The others had a mix of Vega 4, Iron Duke, 3.8 and V8s. In 1975-76 the Monza was available with the short-lived 262 small block, as well as a strangled 125 hp 350 in ’75, which I believe was California only.
Can you post the online web page address? Thank you in advance!
The Chevy “economy” V8 was the 267 (4.4L), not 262. I have one in my Malibu. The 267 also was avaliable in the Monza, the Monte Carlo, and the Camaro, and I *think* the Impala/Caprice but I’m not entirely sure of it. It was only available from ’78 to ’81 IIRC. Very little top end (only rated at 125 HP) but the torque was acceptable.
The only year that a V8 was available in the Pontiac Sunbird was ’79 and it was the 5.0L / 305ci.
Bought a 77 Olds Starfire. 231/auto. Pulled a trailer from Kansas to Norfolk Va with it. Was impressed even though the dealer had replaced the engine shortly after we bought it. Then the thing kept on breaking. I was on my third engine according to Olds and at least my second transmission when the thing backfired and caught on fire on Virgina Beach Blvd at rush hour. I say according to Olds because I couldn’t say whether they actually changed it out or bolted on some new stuff. When you are at sea and the wife is doing the repairs you assume the mushroom mode.
By then I was ready for the tried and true AMC concord (1978) with 258 and auto. My GM purchases after that were either trucks or made under duress to keep a wife happy. I think I would probably have done as badly with Ford or Mopar. Seems changes were made too fast to keep the Govt. and energy conscious consumers happy. Trucks changed much slower.
I dated a young lady back in the late 70’s who had one of the Roadhawk Skyhawks, it was a really neat car. A good friend of mine had the V6 Starfire with the funny pattern 5 speed, it was not a bad car at the time. In his case, it replaced a finicky Scirocco that had starting and running issues. He drove the Starfire for 8 years or so, something of a record in rusty North East Ohio…
Of all of the RWD H-bodies, I’d like to get my hands on either a Formula Sunbird or a Monza Spyder. Either one would suit me fine. Or the Roadhawk from the aforementioned former girlfriend. We had a lot of fun in that car…
This is a pix of the car she owned…
For Sale very close to me.
Just as shown here, the 1982-89 FWD J-Bodied Buick Skyhawk and 23 years later the 2012-current Chevrolet Cruze based Buick Verano (picked up where the Skyhawk left off) were the spiritual niche’ successors to the RWD H-Bodied Chevrolet Vega/Monza based 1975-80 Buick Skyhawk.
From the 1980s through the 1990s, many Buicks produced during those eras as shown on this photo montage compilations were only slightly shorter or at least a little more than several inches longer than the Vega based RWD H-Bodied Buick Skyhawk.
I am looking for a 1978 to 1980 Astro roof glass for my 79 buick Skyhawk or 75 to 80 Buick Skyhawk or a Buick Roadhawk in B.C. Canada.