Yeah sales dropped because alot of people losing their jobs and not having the money, i don't think people lost interest in the Monte, i see them everywhere, newer models and older models!

 

u also see em everywhere cuz of thier very low resale value.

 

I don't think that's the case at all. Sales fell for every car manufacturer during the "recession" but they old killed off cars and whole lines that just stopped selling due to lack of interest (ie. poor sales).

 

Assuming you own the car in your name; why did you buy it then? There were plenty of RWD options out, especially used.

That's one thing I don't get- so many people complain about how they hate FWD, etc etc- where were all these people when the Camaro and Firebird weren't selling in the early 00's? Everybody says they want to see all these RWD muscle cars come back; but the fact is- most of these same people go out and buy a Cobalt, or a Camry or something.

I disagree- would everybody love a brand new V8 camaro, mustang, challenger, vette, etc? Sure, I imagine most would- however the truth is, when it boils down to it- how many of those same people can A) even afford to finance the thing and B) would the car even be practical for?

Think about this for a second- obviously no teenage kid is going to buy one of these cars, so lets pick an average guy- 40 years old with a wife, one younger kid, one older kid, and a dog. He walks into the dealership, and sure he'd love a 425hp Camaro because he loves RWD muscle. To even get into a stripped down base V8, you're talking a base price of $31k. I went on Chevy's site, picked a 2SS and a handful of options- and it spit out $38k (that's not including any of the $5k wheel options)- so that's probably more representative of something you'd find on the average lot- a middle of the line optioned version. Its rated at 16/24 MPG.

Lets look at some of the other options on the lot:
-Aveo; starts at $12k gets 27/35 MPG; cheap basic 4 door driver
-HHR; starts at $19k gets 22/32 MPG; tons of storage area, plus could bring the dog
-Malibu; starts at $21k gets 22/33 MPG; large interior room and a nice entry level car

Even with mid level upgrades; you could buy 2 stripped down base Aveos for the price of even a base V8 Camaro; or 3 for a moderately upgraded Camaro. Even with a few add on's, you could easily save $10k off the purchase price with a Malibu. Or if you don't mind a stripped down model, you could get a fairly base HHR and Aveo for the cost of a mildly upgraded Camaro.

That's just talking sticker- think how much haggle room you have. I don't know how fast Camaro's are selling now, but I still imagine they're a fairly hot and desirable item. Now if the dealership has 15 Malibus on the lot, and 3 Camaros- which are they going to be more likely to deal on? My bet is on the Malibu. That's not even getting into insurance costs, fuel costs, or maintenance costs- which will all be higher with the Camaro (Imagine buying tires for 20" wheels compared to 14-17" wheels depending which car you went with above).

Then consider inside space, how practical is a Camaro going to be compared to the other cars- sure the front seat has plenty of room; but how about the back? Say you and your buddys go golfing- are you really going to squeeze 4 full grown men inside, with a trunk full of clubs?

So I really do believe that your logic is flawed here- what people 'want' and what they actually buy when it comes time to bite the bullet are two different things. The market for performance oriented RWD cars is small, and market research as well as actual sales have more than confirmed that.

I totally agree- most any 5th gen sells for $2500 or less unless its stupid low mileage; and even the 6th gens are getting pretty cheap.

 

Honestly, I really have never heard the Camaro being a replacement to the Monte Carlo...other then being coupes they don't really share much if anything in common...The monte sales dropped and ended in 2007, the Camaro wasn't on show room floors till 2010 so I don't know where that comparison/replacement comes in...

Also, ya know I love the Monte Carlo nameplate but if Chevy was going to do a BIG RWD Coupe I think I'd like to see a Chevelle name used...but done "right" paying homage to it's name, and not done like the recent GTO...

And heck if ya want a rwd monte build one:







I know I know a lil crazy, but I did see a video of a completely stock looking monte converted to RWD with an LS1 doing donuts after a car show in Michigan, totally sick, but lotsa $

Joe

 

I think I just wet myself. I want one!!!!

 

I guess everyone is really diff., if i want something i save up the money and buy it, didn't mean to get crap stirred up just wanted to know if Chevy would bring it back or not, and no matter what anyone says they should bring it back faster, sweet suspension, and runs 11 sec. in the quarter mile LOL i would buy it if i had to sell my house, i would live in it LMAO but seriously bring it back Chevy!

 

I don't think anyone was trying to say the Camaro was the Monte's replacement (unless I missed the post). The point we were trying to make is if the Monte were brought back on a RWD platform- where would it fall? It would likely have to end up sharing the platform with the Camaro- and then how would it be a different enough car to sell without cutting into the Camaro numbers? I mean how mnay coupe-only models can a single brand carry (especially since Chevy already has 2)?

I also wanted to comment some more on that statement.

I don't really see how they destroyed the monte's name by downgrading it to a FWD V6. Lets look at past models:

4th gens:
-Base model had a 125 HP 3.8 V6; later upgraded to a 130 HP 4.3 V6
-Optional 165 HP 305 V8
-88 SS's came with a 180 HP V8
-Only available with a 3 or 4 speed automatic

3rd gens:
-3 of the 5 engines through the years were V6's
-94 HP 231 CID V6 was the standard engine
-Optional 267 CID V8 made 140 HP
-Optional 305 V8 up to 155 HP

2nd gens:
-Only V8 engines (ended in '77; 33 years ago!)
-700 to 800 pounds heavier than the 3rd gen
-Standard V8 was a 145 HP 350 V8 (dropped to 140 HP by the end)
-Largest optional engine was a 245 HP 454 V8 (dropped to 215 HP by the end)

1st gens (engine options):
-2 barrel 350: 165 net HP
-4 barrel 350: 175 net HP
-402: 240 net HP
-454: 270 net HP (and was only 285 net HP at its peak)
-Available transmissions: 2 or 3 speed autos; 3 or 4 speed manuals (4 speed dropped towards the end)

Lets look at the pathetic FWD V6's that replaced them:

5th gens:
-Base 3.1L V6: 160 HP
-Optional 3.4L DOHC V6: 215 HP
-Optional 3.8L V6: 200 HP

6th/7th gens (a few selected engines):
-new base engine, 3.5L V6: 211 SAE HP
-new upgrade engine, 3.9L V6: 240 SAE HP
-old upgrade engine, 3.8L SC V6: 240 HP
-new upgrade engine, 5.3L V8: 303 SAE HP

Lets just take one of the engines out of a 6th gen- the 240 HP 3.8L SC (or use the 3.9, either way). It makes more HP than ANY stock 3rd or 4th gen engine. The only engine which made more power in a 1st or 2nd gen was the largest option- the 454 (which only had it by 5 hp in the 2nd gens, and even fell below the L67's output by the end). So really the only engine option that ever beat it in HP output by a decent margin was the 1st gen 454; which needed almost double the displacement to accomplish that.

That's not even considering the 303 HP LS4 V8 in the last monte SS's; no other engine in any monte ever came within 15 net HP of it.

So I fail to see how making it a FWD V6 made it so sickly, even though it was making the same or more power than all the previous V8's. Would you really call a 94 HP RWD V6 Monte a legend? I dunno about that....

(No offense to those who own old montes, just stating my opinion that the new montes aren't really as sub-par as the RWD fanatics seem to like to make them seem)

 

im not saying my fwd monte doesnt move but what im tryna get at is that rwd got better chances of being modded wit LS and LT motors and stuff like that. btw i still have my 1986 monte ss and i still love my 04 intimidator ss. not really complaining, just voicing out. thnx for the input btw bumpin96