Are Monte Carlo and Grand National similar cars?
- Thread starter M1Accord
- Start date
- Status
It would be more accurate to say the Monte Carlo and Regal are similar cars.
The Grand National is a high performance version of the Regal. Chevy didn't make an equivalent.
The Grand National is a high performance version of the Regal. Chevy didn't make an equivalent.
They're built on the same chassis (assuming you're referring to the '87 & earlier RWD), but they had different engines (the GN having the turbo Buick 3800, Montes usually a 305 or 350).
Originally Posted By: armos
It would be more accurate to say the Monte Carlo and Regal are similar cars.
The Grand National is a high performance version of the Regal. Chevy didn't make an equivalent.
Do you mean equivalent to the GN or they didn't make a performance version of the Monte Carlo?
In the early '80s, the Buick 231 turbo was an option for the Monte Carlo
note the turbo badge on the hood "blister"
Chevrolet then made a Monte Carlo SS and later an "Aerocoupe" variant of the SS (to compete against Ford's Thunderbird in NASCAR)
It would be more accurate to say the Monte Carlo and Regal are similar cars.
The Grand National is a high performance version of the Regal. Chevy didn't make an equivalent.
Do you mean equivalent to the GN or they didn't make a performance version of the Monte Carlo?
In the early '80s, the Buick 231 turbo was an option for the Monte Carlo
note the turbo badge on the hood "blister"
Chevrolet then made a Monte Carlo SS and later an "Aerocoupe" variant of the SS (to compete against Ford's Thunderbird in NASCAR)
Originally Posted By: Spazdog
Originally Posted By: armos
It would be more accurate to say the Monte Carlo and Regal are similar cars.
The Grand National is a high performance version of the Regal. Chevy didn't make an equivalent.
Do you mean equivalent to the GN or they didn't make a performance version of the Monte Carlo?
I just mean Chevy didn't make anything equivalent to the Grand National. They did have performance options but not what I'd call a Chevy version of the GN. I should have phrased it better.
I wasn't aware of the turbo 3.8 Monte Carlos until looking that up this morning though. Maybe those are similar to a basic GN, I don't know a whole lot about those cars.
I've always liked the Monte SS w/ black+red paint scheme.
The GN I think I'd be afraid to own. It looks like a thief magnet, I couldn't park it anywhere. Although I'm not sure a black Monte would be much safer, maybe it's just my imagination.
Quote:
later an "Aerocoupe" variant of the SS (to compete against Ford's Thunderbird in NASCAR)
Interesting, never heard of that one. Ah... the days when NASCAR still halfway pretended to race stock cars, and they at least had to conform to a stockish template. Too bad that's gone.
Originally Posted By: armos
It would be more accurate to say the Monte Carlo and Regal are similar cars.
The Grand National is a high performance version of the Regal. Chevy didn't make an equivalent.
Do you mean equivalent to the GN or they didn't make a performance version of the Monte Carlo?
I just mean Chevy didn't make anything equivalent to the Grand National. They did have performance options but not what I'd call a Chevy version of the GN. I should have phrased it better.
I wasn't aware of the turbo 3.8 Monte Carlos until looking that up this morning though. Maybe those are similar to a basic GN, I don't know a whole lot about those cars.
I've always liked the Monte SS w/ black+red paint scheme.
The GN I think I'd be afraid to own. It looks like a thief magnet, I couldn't park it anywhere. Although I'm not sure a black Monte would be much safer, maybe it's just my imagination.
Quote:
later an "Aerocoupe" variant of the SS (to compete against Ford's Thunderbird in NASCAR)
Interesting, never heard of that one. Ah... the days when NASCAR still halfway pretended to race stock cars, and they at least had to conform to a stockish template. Too bad that's gone.
As the owner of a mint 1987 Grand National I know these cars and the G-body twins - the Olds Cutlass and the Monte Carlo.
Basic answer to your question - they are all G-body cars and share MANY parts. The Buick GN had a nice interior than the Monte Carlo SS. Not to mention that the SS was a complete dog. The GN was the performance car of the bunch. True - the 3.8 turbo was offered in the Monte Carlo in the early 80's for 1 or 2 model years but it was the early incarnation of the turbo and was not very powerful. The GN had 200hp in 1985 and jumped to a conservatively rated 245 in 1986 with the addition of the intercooler and many other upgrades. The only thing the MOnte Carlo SS had over the Buick was that it has a full instrument cluster where the Buick only had a speedo, gas, turbo boost and tach. That's why so many GN owners upgrade with gauges. I added a coolant, fuel pressure, volt and oil pressure gauge, for instance.
The GN (and it's equivalent turbo powered T's) is the top dog G-body for 1986-1987 and maybe as far back as 1984. Even in 84/85 they had more hp than the measily 180hp 305 the Monte SS had. I bone stock GN on stock tires would turn low 14's to high 13's in the quarter. My car, way back then when I added a chip and ram air it ran a 13.2. With a bigger fuel pump and better exhaust I was running 12.7's and only had maybe $900 in upgrades...and this was in the emmissions and low power era 1980's! I know people making wicked power from these engines.
I just wouldn't buy an SS (or the Olds 442) over any GN.
Basic answer to your question - they are all G-body cars and share MANY parts. The Buick GN had a nice interior than the Monte Carlo SS. Not to mention that the SS was a complete dog. The GN was the performance car of the bunch. True - the 3.8 turbo was offered in the Monte Carlo in the early 80's for 1 or 2 model years but it was the early incarnation of the turbo and was not very powerful. The GN had 200hp in 1985 and jumped to a conservatively rated 245 in 1986 with the addition of the intercooler and many other upgrades. The only thing the MOnte Carlo SS had over the Buick was that it has a full instrument cluster where the Buick only had a speedo, gas, turbo boost and tach. That's why so many GN owners upgrade with gauges. I added a coolant, fuel pressure, volt and oil pressure gauge, for instance.
The GN (and it's equivalent turbo powered T's) is the top dog G-body for 1986-1987 and maybe as far back as 1984. Even in 84/85 they had more hp than the measily 180hp 305 the Monte SS had. I bone stock GN on stock tires would turn low 14's to high 13's in the quarter. My car, way back then when I added a chip and ram air it ran a 13.2. With a bigger fuel pump and better exhaust I was running 12.7's and only had maybe $900 in upgrades...and this was in the emmissions and low power era 1980's! I know people making wicked power from these engines.
I just wouldn't buy an SS (or the Olds 442) over any GN.
Last edited:
Another thing the SS lacked (and I don't know why) is the better 8.5" axle that the GN and 442 had. The SS made due with a 7.625" rear axle, which was essentially the same as the standard 7.5" axle that the rest of the G-body family shared.
My roommate in college had an '87 SS. It wasn't much faster than my '84 Cutlass. I generally didn't like the Chevy G-bodies because of the interior. The Oldsmobile and Buick versions were much nicer. I had an '84 Cutlass and an '87 Regal.
My roommate in college had an '87 SS. It wasn't much faster than my '84 Cutlass. I generally didn't like the Chevy G-bodies because of the interior. The Oldsmobile and Buick versions were much nicer. I had an '84 Cutlass and an '87 Regal.
Originally Posted By: armos
Quote:
later an "Aerocoupe" variant of the SS (to compete against Ford's Thunderbird in NASCAR)
Interesting, never heard of that one. Ah... the days when NASCAR still halfway pretended to race stock cars, and they at least had to conform to a stockish template. Too bad that's gone.
Yes, that was a VERY limited production run, just enough to meet NASCAR's homologation/minimum build rules.
I remember my local Chevy dealer had one in the showroom when it first became available.
Quote:
later an "Aerocoupe" variant of the SS (to compete against Ford's Thunderbird in NASCAR)
Interesting, never heard of that one. Ah... the days when NASCAR still halfway pretended to race stock cars, and they at least had to conform to a stockish template. Too bad that's gone.
Yes, that was a VERY limited production run, just enough to meet NASCAR's homologation/minimum build rules.
I remember my local Chevy dealer had one in the showroom when it first became available.
Originally Posted By: dailydriver
Originally Posted By: armos
Quote:
later an "Aerocoupe" variant of the SS (to compete against Ford's Thunderbird in NASCAR)
Interesting, never heard of that one. Ah... the days when NASCAR still halfway pretended to race stock cars, and they at least had to conform to a stockish template. Too bad that's gone.
Yes, that was a VERY limited production run, just enough to meet NASCAR's homologation/minimum build rules.
I remember my local Chevy dealer had one in the showroom when it first became available.
Did the Grand Prix too:
It was all for naught...restrictor plates went on and Bill Elliot's Thunderbird will probably always hold the 212+mph record now.
Originally Posted By: armos
Quote:
later an "Aerocoupe" variant of the SS (to compete against Ford's Thunderbird in NASCAR)
Interesting, never heard of that one. Ah... the days when NASCAR still halfway pretended to race stock cars, and they at least had to conform to a stockish template. Too bad that's gone.
Yes, that was a VERY limited production run, just enough to meet NASCAR's homologation/minimum build rules.
I remember my local Chevy dealer had one in the showroom when it first became available.
Did the Grand Prix too:
It was all for naught...restrictor plates went on and Bill Elliot's Thunderbird will probably always hold the 212+mph record now.
- Status
