Ditto here! I really like the Monte styling. And same as said above, I get lots of good looks, thumbs up, and compliments on the SS. One thing for sure, The Monte doesn't look like everything else on the road. The same can't be said for so many of the 4 door sedans on the road today. They all look like potato's with brand badges on them.

As for the Magazine writers, whatever. They have to be polarized to stand out and sell.

 

 

The front end of the 6th gen was horrific in every way imaginable, except for the modernized knight emblem. The rest of the car took bits from the previous four generations. Was it the most coherent design in the history of GM? Nope. Was it improved by the 7th gen? Hell, yeah. Was it the best-looking W-body? No, that would be the 97-03 Grand Prix (snif). Was it better-looking than the 00-05 Impala? So are many of my internal organs.

Expecting an American car to be fairly evaluated by the American automotive press is like expecting a coherent, professional tweet from President "Covfefe" Trump, and much for the same reasons--they have an agenda, and will not be deterred by such trivial things as "facts." (True story: I was at a local body shop two months ago for an estimate. I was told by the guy doing the estimate that the 7th gen SS is a great car, "except for the torque steer." As those of us who own them know, THERE IS NO TORQUE STEER unless you floor it in the middle of a turn. Had I let this guy drive the car, he still would've repeated the lie to the next person who would've listened. The automotive press were upset in 1999 that there was no V-8 option. Then, when their wish was granted in 2005, all of a sudden the sole issue was the FWD. Had GM recreated the 1986 Aerocoupe, they would've faulted the weight and the maroon interior.)

 

Opinions are just that, especially when coming from one journalist writing an article about something he or she just doesn't care for! it reminds me of when I was young, I went to a rock concert of a very, very popular band at the time, show was sold out and was an awesome show. the next day our local newspaper entertainment writer wrote a review of what a terrible show it was and that the singer "sounded like a rat sucking helium" and that they would never last! .... that band and concert was "Journey" my friends!!! haha!!!

 

Yeah, but the difference is, I'm sure Journey got some positive reviews before they became the most popular band on the planet. With the 6th gen, there was an obvious conspiracy; I only ever remember one positive review of the styling. Likewise with the "where's the V8 crowd"--I only think one person ever pointed out that the L36 has 15 more hp than the 80's SS.

 

As a person who owned a 6th generation SS for many years, I loved the 3.8 liter engine for being an old-school overhead valve engine that moved the car with ease. It was one of GM's most dependable engines, used in many different vehicles (Buick LeSabres, Chevy Camaros, etc.). But by the time the 6th Gen went on sale in 1999, to have that common (though excellent) 200 hp engine be the only choice in the Monte Carlo SS was a letdown. Pontiac was already using the 240 hp supercharged version in the top line Grand Prix, as was Buick in the Regal GS (a great sleeper!).
Chevy eventually demoted the 3.8 liter to the LT model in the Monte Carlo in 2005.
As for the 80s Monte Carlo SS having the 180 hp engine, it was a different time. At that time, 180 hp was pretty good compared with what other cars had. And it was a 5.0 liter V8 engine with a 4-barrel carb, and rear wheel drive! Lots of things could be done to make them even faster. And those cars looked awesome; very attractive cars for their time. Even now they still look good!

 

As the owner of a 98 GTP, I don't deny that the N/A L36 in the SS made little sense. What I do deny is that it somehow was less powerful than the V8. Because it wasn't. And that was the clear message of the contemperaneous reviews. "It's not a real SS because it doesn't have a V8." If the V6 is more powerful than the V8, there is literally no reason to prefer the V8. (Note that the reverse happened when the TrailBlazer came out--every review duly noted that the Atlas was more powerful than the available V8 in the Exploder. So why the abuse for the Monte?)

 

I don't think their intent was to compare it to the 80s cars, the hope was that the SS would be something special compared to the caliber of v8s available at release. Back in the 80s, a ~200 hp v8 would've been a higher end GM powertrain, especially with GM using a 130 hp v6 in the camaro and sub 100 hp 4 cylinders in the econoboxes.

But in 2000, 200 hp was pretty mediocre- both the LS1 and Northstar which had been around for years made 300+. I think even the L67 would've quieted some of the complaints from reviewers. Even if an 00 SS could beat a 86 SS stock for stock, that doesn't seem so important in an age where even the Hondas and Toyota's made about the same power.

I do get some of their frustration. That was the beginning of a stretch for GM where they would slap SS on everything just to try to move product. I get they aren't going to change all of their cars over to rwd V8's for the SS trim, but people expect something more special and sporty when buying an SS car. Overusing the mark diluted it's impact on the consumer IMO.

I'm not sure i totally agree with this. Between one of the late 2000s 300 hp v6s and a 300 hp LS4, id rather have the LS4. The v8 exhaust note sounds better and the engine feels stronger due to all of the low end torque. Not everything is about peak HP numbers only, especially since peak HP isn't where you drive most of the time.

​​​​​

 

I'm not sure i totally agree with this. Between one of the late 2000s 300 hp v6s and a 300 hp LS4, id rather have the LS4. The v8 exhaust note sounds better and the engine feels stronger due to all of the low end torque. Not everything is about peak HP numbers only, especially since peak HP isn't where you drive most of the time.

Exhaust note? What exhaust note? I'm sure one day when I delete my resonators, I'll know what you're talking about. I have never heard an exhaust note inside my car, and what I've heard while walking outside it doesn't set my heart on fire.

As far as the "low-end torque," 1) everyone here tells me it destroys the tranny, and 2) my GTP had more (the main impetus for my statement). It doesn't help that you have to literally stand on the pedal to get any low-end response from the engine. I'm sure this was designed as a safety thing to keep teenagers from wrapping them around trees, but I'm 52 and I haven't got enough time left on this Earth to wait for my car to decide it's fast. For God's sake, my wife's 2001 Tundra actually moves when put in reverse, and it has only 5 more hp than the GTP and weighs a lot more than the Monte.

 

I'm surprised you can't hear it inside the car at all. Even when my GXP was totally stock, you could hear it somewhat inside with moderate or heavy throttle. I'd definitely think about a muffler swap if youd like to hear it better.

My point is that, at least for me, I prefer the exhaust note of a v8 over a v6 - especially when comparing am LS V8 to a GM v6 (even more so when compared to a 3800). Admittedly, the LS4 doesn't sound as good as say an LS in a vette or something where it has true dual exhaust, but I still think it sounds decent and is part of the allure of having a performance oriented car like an SS.

I wouldn't worry about the torque destroying the transmission, especially totally stock. It's not going to break right away (unless youre actually abusing it) and will break down sooner or later anyways. At that point, you can throw a few upgrades at the rebuild to make it more robust in the long run. If you're too afraid to use the torque it makes for fear of breaking it, then you may as well sell it and get something that you can actually enjoy. I've got about 55k miles on my GXP, still on the stock trans with zero issues - knock on wood. But I've also got money earmarked for an upgrade/rebuild when it does go. My last Impala (a 3500) was having a lot of trans issues bone stock by 100k miles with absolutely zero abuse, so it's just part of the game with the 4t65 in general - some are just more lucky than others.

That really isn't my point though, I wasn't talking about WOT torque while beating on the car. I'm talking about the torque it's making at normal cruising RPM/throttle position. The problem with the L67 is that until you hit the gas hard enough to close the bypass valve, the thing is a low compression dog. I prefer the extra linear grunt down low with the LS4 for daily driving.

To your second point, if your gtp had more torque than your LS4, either the gtp was modded a good bit or the LS4 is broken. Stock for stock, the ls4 is up like 40 lb ft +, there should be no comparison. Of course if you're talking modded, that's a totally different ball game.

​​​​​
I remember you talking about this before in another thread, and I honestly still can't understand what you're talking about.

I honestly can't think of any car where I've ever been unhappy with how it reverses. Even a sub 100 hp econobox should be able to get going more than fast enough for anyone in reverse, much less in a 300 hp car. Just press the gas a little harder if it isn't reversing fast enough for you...

As I think I mentioned in a previous thread, if your LS4 monte really is as bad as you claim, either it has maintenance issues or your expectations are too high for what it is. If the car is working right, you shouldn't have to 'stand on think he pedal' to get going in a 300 hp car.