Ramble and a question-Chevy Monza?

I love everything there is to like on a monza and have done just about all you can think of to a couple(h-body.org), the only thing I really HATE is the Bolt togeather front sub-frame. I even drew up plans to replace it with a one piece crossbar,today a couple folks make a part like that for Late modle F body's ( not current cars but the ones before todays design) they look like one can be fabbed up from that design.All in all just do it,Save LOTS of money and stay with SBC not an LS engine.That limited parts availability is very real.

I owned a number of these back in the day, and also did several V-8 Vega swaps. They are great cars, really. Light, nimble, can handle decent amounts of power and can be made to handle pretty well. The main problems I had were weight distribution and cooling. The front spring saddles aren't big enough in stock form to handle a lot of weight, and by that I mean an iron small block - not if you want it to handle well. A V-8 is a tight fit, and doesn't leave a lot of room for a large radiator or electric fans, so getting it to run cool can be a challenge. They already have a pretty decent torque arm rear suspension that just needs tweaking to provide good handling, but the rear end is weak. IIRC, a Ford 8" out of a Maverick is the right width, and just needs bracketry changes to work. Forget about people saying the 8" is weak. If properly built they can handle 500hp in a non-drag car. I run one in my Mustang because it's a good 75lbs lighter than a 9".
That said, nowadays there are options that didn't exist back then. You could put an LS in it and pretty much solve the weight distribution and spring saddle problems. I don't know if the LS allows for more room for the cooling package. Personally, I would go with a different engine, maybe a turbo ecotec, or a V-6. Then you would have a lot more room for a good cooling package.
One of my cars was an Olds Starefire that came with the Buick 231 V-6. It had a 4speed, and was a blast to drive, especially after I modded the engine, and improved the chassis.
Like others have said, finding a solid one is probably the biggest challenge, but I fully support your idea.

TheV8Kid wrote:

JimS wrote: In reply to BrokenYugo: If I remember correctly reading that the car was originally designed for the rotary engine. Then GM decided not to use the rotary.

Correct. They could not get the rotary to be fuel efficent enough, among other things, so they sold it to Mazda, and hastly modified the Monza to accept a V8 so that it would sell. In order to do so, they had to mill off the corner of the engine blocks and make the bellhousing with one less bolt hole to clear the firewall. They are very neat cars. They have a really cool look to them and have decent aerodynamics. But if your are looking for a V8 car that is easy to work on and modify, you will probably have better luck elsewhere.

One correction.

Gm did not sell the rotary to mazda. GM bought an exclusive licence from nsu to use the rotary engine. The exclusive part of the license meant they did not share any development of the engine with any of the numerous licensees.

Mazda was one of the first to buy a license from nsu. They shared some development with the other licensed companies.

AMC, ford, mercedes, curtiss wright, etc all had licenses.

Gm wouldn't share their tech and nobody shared with gm. I like to think that if gm had shared some info or worked with everybody else, we may have more efficient rotarys today.

I bought a V6 Buick Skyhawk new in '76. Essentially the same car as the Monza. Traded my beloved '68 P-1800 for it because I was young and foolish. The "Skyhook" was fun for the first couple years, front engine, rear drive, somewhat sporty. It actually performed better than the Volvo. But then the shoddy GM quality of the era kicked in and it became a nightmare. Here in the Northeast I haven't seen a Monza/Skyhawk/Starfire (think that's what Olds called their version) in thirty years. Wish I'd kept the P-1800.

Given that these cars are used extensively in drag racing, I think a fiberglass valence, fenders, and hood plus an aluminum rad and an all aluminum motor should take a couple hundred pounds off the front. Now I'm really curious as to how to go about doing one. The XJS may have to wait.

Streetwiseguy wrote: Whenever I read about difficult spark plugs on older vehicles, I wonder how they actually compare to your average modern minivan. I can think of many new cars way worse than the worst of the seventies.

I'd much rather do the modern car. You at least get the option of removing the wiper cowl and/or intake manifold. You can't remove the heater box or inner fender.

TheV8Kid wrote: Correct. They could not get the rotary to be fuel efficent enough, among other things,so they sold it to Mazda, and hastly modified the Monza to accept a V8 so that it would sell.

GM stopped rotary development in the 70s. Mazda had their first production rotary powered car in 1968.

(seems-legit.jpg)

The reason Chevy stopped Wankel development (only Mazda calls them "rotaries") is because the catalytic converter was invented, so there was no need to continue development. Wankels are naturally low in NOx production and HC/CO are easy to clean up post-engine, so they were seen as the go-to method for reduced exhaust emissions. Before catalysts, there was no good way to have both engine longevity and low emissions, some engineers figured that to make a piston engine meet late 70s emissions specs would result in a 3000 mile engine life!

Sounds like the Monza would be a good home for a 302 Ford based power plant, since they're pretty tiny.

Sounds more like turbo 4 cylinder or 3800 territory.

I stand corrected. If you guys get a chance, read the Wikipedia article on the General Motors Rotary Combustion Engine. It is fascinating. It is crazy to think what the car world would be like if gm had actually released the wankel engine.

AMC was playing with Wankels at the same time. So was Mercedes. In the world where all these engines got finished and released, the RX7 would have a factory V8 I assume.

A 13b powered Monza would be something to behold.

I had couple of them. One with a V6 and the other a base 4 banger. They were both good cars. I really liked them. I wouldn't mind having another if I could find one that wasn't a rust bucket.

justthatguy wrote: In reply to wheels777: What's the result like, was the handling worth the effort? It's cool to find people knowledgeable about H bodies, I thought everyone hated them.

I just realized my dad (wheels777) never answered you question. These cars can handle. Both of our H bodys had their tour in the autocrossing world before we purchased them. The Sunbird still has the SCCA sticker on the dash. Both cars are primarily straight line racers now. Our Monza is a future land speed car, and our Sunbird is a former challenge car and is now a local drag race car. A comment that we got from Alan McCrispin is that with a set of sway bars, our Sunbird could have been something.

Here are build threads for both of them if you are interested.

Monza: Here

Sunbird: Here

It takes a little while for the Sunbird thread to get going. Bottom of page 5 is when it starts to pick up.

Chadeux wrote: Sounds more like turbo 4 cylinder or 3800 territory.

RWD 3800 out of a Camaro might actually bolt into a 231 car.

Chadeux wrote: AMC was playing with Wankels at the same time. So was Mercedes. In the world where all these engines got finished and released, the RX7 would have a factory V8 I assume.

AMC was planning to buy the GM Wankel for the Pacer (the car was designed around it) and then when GM walked AMC had to stuff the 258 ci 6 cyl. into the Pacer

Anyone know if you can get sway bars for these pieces? I found that addco makes a rear sway but not a front.

BrokenYugo wrote:

Chadeux wrote: Sounds more like turbo 4 cylinder or 3800 territory.

RWD 3800 out of a Camaro might actually bolt into a 231 car.

Probably not. If GM put the engine mounts in the same place, I'd be surprised. Bellhousing is different, too, all 3800s had the front drive bolt pattern complete with starter on driver's side.

The Series II/III do have the advantage of being a lot smaller than a 231, so there's that.

Chadeux wrote: AMC was playing with Wankels at the same time. So was Mercedes. In the world where all these engines got finished and released, the RX7 would have a factory V8 I assume.

AMC was actually not doing any major development of their own rotary engines, although they did drop $1.5 million on licensing and did some minor tinkering. They designed the Pacer to accept a rotary engine but their plan all along was to buy rotary engines off of GM. When GM's rotary development program became uncertain, AMC approached NSu, Toyo Kogyo and Comotor to buy their rotary engines but AMC didn't find any of them suitable. So then AMC simply jammed their stalwart 258 I-6 in their, which resulted in front suspension and steering issues as it was not designed for the big heavy six.

Knurled wrote:

BrokenYugo wrote:

Chadeux wrote: Sounds more like turbo 4 cylinder or 3800 territory.

RWD 3800 out of a Camaro might actually bolt into a 231 car.

Probably not. If GM put the engine mounts in the same place, I'd be surprised. Bellhousing is different, too, all 3800s had the front drive bolt pattern complete with starter on driver's side. The Series II/III do have the advantage of being a lot smaller than a 231, so there's that.

For some reason I had it in my head that the RWD 3800 was different from the FWD model. I know the bell is different but a 4th gen Camaro donor would give you a trans, and the metric pattern is smaller so it would most likely fit in the tunnel.

In reply to BrokenYugo:

The 3.1/3.4 are different from the front drive 3100/3400 (old RWD block, old 80's-era cast iron heads) but as far as I've ever been able to tell the F-body 3800s were the same as the front drive units except for the necessary accessory/manifolding changes for north-south arrangement.

Could be wrong, of course. Been a while since I've had to mess with one.

I always wondered what could have been if they'd have put the 3400 in there. Supposedly it made 170hp only because of deliberate exhaust manifold restriction, so it wouldn't make as much/more power than the 3800. Lighter engine with lower CG? Yes please.

These cars look cool but I feel like if I wanted a car like this why not get a Ford-Germany "Mercury" Capri?

On top of it those cars have WAY more support, of course all of it is in the UK though. Drop a 302 in, give it supporting mods, euro bumper swap, and you have a very light and amazing ride.

kanaric wrote: These cars look cool but I feel like if I wanted a car like this why not get a Ford-Germany "Mercury" Capri? On top of it those cars have WAY more support, of course all of it is in the UK though. Drop a 302 in, give it supporting mods, euro bumper swap, and you have a very light and amazing ride.

Because, at least in my experience, those Capris are much rarer. I have never seen one of those in person. Ever. The Monza was produced alongside it's near identical Pontiac Sunbird, Buick Skyhawk and Oldsmobile Starfire. And the Monza alone sold over 200,000 more examples than the Capri despite only being sold 6 years to the Capri's 8 years. Add another 125,000 for the Skyhawk, another 125,000 for the Starfire, 480,000 for the Sunbird, 150,000 for the Pontiac Astre and 2,000,000 for the Vega and the H-body has strength in numbers.

NickD wrote:

kanaric wrote: These cars look cool but I feel like if I wanted a car like this why not get a Ford-Germany "Mercury" Capri? On top of it those cars have WAY more support, of course all of it is in the UK though. Drop a 302 in, give it supporting mods, euro bumper swap, and you have a very light and amazing ride.

Because, at least in my experience, those Capris are much rarer. I have never seen one of those in person. Ever. The Monza was produced alongside it's near identical Pontiac Sunbird, Buick Skyhawk and Oldsmobile Starfire. And the Monza alone sold over 200,000 more examples than the Capri despite only being sold 6 years to the Capri's 8 years. Add another 125,000 for the Skyhawk, another 125,000 for the Starfire, 480,000 for the Sunbird, 150,000 for the Pontiac Astre and 2,000,000 for the Vega and the H-body has strength in numbers.

Well I didn't think the Monza was all that common on it's own. Only reason why I think if you can buy a Capri that it would be any better is because you would at least have an enthusiast following, though a EUROPEON enthusiast you can still get parts and things that might be otherwise hard to find and i'm sure they have replica or remanufactured parts on top of it. I doubt the Monza has that level of support but I could be wrong.

The drag racing crowd has done a lot for the Monza, mostly drivetrain but they've essentially made the whole thing better. Fiberglass parts, control arms, diffs, the works. I had thought about a Capri but everyone's done that. Plus, I stand a much better chance of finding a Monza than I do a Capri. The Suspension design is better, the aero is better, and I've got more options for modern power and parts replacement in a GM than a Ford. I mean, a Coyote would look pretty odd in a Capri, plus it's a higher CG and a bigger engine than the V6 or even the 302.

An LS is smaller, lighter(than a new gen Ford), I can fit it lower in the chassis, keep it GM powered, and I have much better reliability and parts availability as far as that goes than the iron block 302. Not saying it's bad, but a 302 block isn't as strong as the LS or is it still around in enough numbers to justify the headache of putting a Ford engine in a Chevy and all the bits that go with it. Besides, fuel injection is pretty sweet vs trying to get a carb setup to work when it's cold out.

And Moznas look cooler.

My mother and her sister's first car rivalry was Capri vs H body. I've never asked how it turned out, interestingly enough.