[gearheadslife]

Originally Posted by MARTINSR

The rest of the seventies produced CRAP (well at least after 72) and there was NOTHING we wanted from the offerings.

Now, heck yeah times have changed and those cars aren't "so bad" or so a lot of us think. I will find myself going over to look at a restored Pinto at a show. But it is a long time coming and most still think they are hideous junk and it will be many years before the general thought of those cars changes.

Brian

total b/s..
I'd take a monza and clones.. if they build that car today, with the 4cyl we now have..
I'd also take a 77 cutlass"s"
a 1977 t/a
a 1973-4 h/o t/a
a 1977-79 ranchero
the cars did have crap for power.. thats an easy fix..

I'd tell you this.. IF I could find a 1975-80 monza or sunbird/etc hatchback that wasn't a rotted mess, bonus would be a stick shift.. but thats spliti'n hairs..
and then for a wopping 2800.oo I'd buy a new g.m. .ls crate engine, and a tremic stick.. and raise hell.. and have a mighty fast car for under 8 grand .. cause all the aftermarket parts for 3rd and 4th gen f body are the same basic layout as these cars.. you'd just copy those parts that work in the f body.. as the monza parts are a little shorter.. but same layout..
if g.m. built that car today. reardrive 4banger with the power they have now... they'd sell everyone they built.. as the pony cars are bloated tanks now..

[farna]

With that Monza body you could put in a little EFI turbo four or small V-6 and have a scorcher too, don't even have to go with a V-8 any more. The shame is it would cost as much to put one of those in as the crate carbed LS V-8, but it would be fast AND relatively fuel efficient with the smaller motor.

[gearheadslife]

Originally Posted by farna

With that Monza body you could put in a little EFI turbo four or small V-6 and have a scorcher too, don't even have to go with a V-8 any more. The shame is it would cost as much to put one of those in as the crate carbed LS V-8, but it would be fast AND relatively fuel efficient with the smaller motor.

a echotec turbo 4 from the 2 seater pontiac.. would do nicely..

[lakeroadster]

Originally Posted by farna

With that Monza body you could put in a little EFI turbo four or small V-6 and have a scorcher too, don't even have to go with a V-8 any more. ....

Originally Posted by gearheadslife

a echotec turbo 4 from the 2 seater pontiac.. would do nicely..

Am I still on the Hotrodders website?

[farna]

Darn right you are! People were rodding model A bangers way before Ford ever made a cheap V-8! Nothing wrong with a car being hit AND economical!!

[lakeroadster]

Originally Posted by farna

Darn right you are! People were rodding model A bangers way before Ford ever made a cheap V-8! Nothing wrong with a car being hit AND economical!!

Exactly .... way before the "cheap V-8". I'm hoping ya'll don't get nostagic for one of those Chevette 4 bangers, seein' how the topic is under appreciated 70's cars.

[gearheadslife]

Originally Posted by lakeroadster

Exactly .... way before the "cheap V-8". I'm hoping ya'll don't get nostagic for one of those Chevette 4 bangers, seein' how the topic is under appreciated 70's cars.

tell ya what, when a normal person can afford a lat 20 to early 40's car and build it..
then the 70's cars will really be worthless..
but when a car listed above is a 30-55k commitment..
without building a ratrod,
I'd love nothing better than to get a 48 chevy, or a 30's coupe, but the buy in for rusted out junk is through the roof..
I looked at a mid fourty's chevy, needing everything, 15k..
for basicly a frame and sheetmetal.. forget getting a early 30's ford for under 10k+ for a mess..

if fuel goes to 5-7 bucks, you bet your life, hotrods will be back using 4 cyl,

[lakeroadster]

Originally Posted by gearheadslife

if fuel goes to 5-7 bucks, you bet your life, hotrods will be back using 4 cyl,

Maybe your Hot Rods....

[gearheadslife]

Ya I like driving mind. Not looking at them. .so ya if it keep me able to drive um. You bettcha

[dwwl]

When i bought my nova in 1977 i never though i'd have it longer than ten years. Had another nova 1970, and i drove it on bad days and left the 77 in the garage. So i got lucky. It never was driven in the rain, in the winter with all the salt problems. I reallized within a short period of time that i'd have it forever. Its never been raced or beaten on. My kids want it when i'm done with it (dead).They also think that there will be very few around because of trying to fix the rot problems the 70 cars had. Its one of the unusual ones that came with oldmobile and other X-body parts to give it the fancy interior and exterior decor packages. Its low mileage and now i only put 500 miles a year on it. I have to be real careful where i park it, for the average persone out here doesn't care about my car let alone their own. I really believe that the older cars were better taken care of then the new ones. How many cars have you seen with the hood open at your local gas station.

[farna]

Nah, a Chevette needs a nice little 60 degree V-6 (2.8/3.1/3.4)! Chevy actually made a test mule with one a couple years before they stopped making the Chevette. Hot Rod Magazine got a peek in the Chevy engineering test department and were allowed to view it burning rubber. Of course Chevy never released a 2.8L V-6 option for the little car, would have given it a little respect! They weren't bad cars, were just beat to death.

[bigblockragtop]

I really like the Monza I drove one with a 350 from the factory. It was fast as heck if you could get it to hook. Amc hornet was a small light fast car. Someone I knew had a Diesel Chevette and loved it, they got 55 mpg back then. My brother got a 75 Nova stripped down model he ordered with a 350 4 speed and posi rear with towing gears, that was a fun car.

[farna]

I had a 76 Chevette two door four speed car way back when, and bought a new 83 Chevette four door diesel (in January 84, it was a demo model). Loved the little diesel, though it was a bit cramped and had an auto trans. Even with the auto it got 42 mpg on a cross country trip (from Idaho to SC) both ways. The five speed would get better.

If anyone ever puts a small block or V-6 in one get the diesel front springs. That thing was stiff due to the weight of the Isuzu 1.8L diesel, but it sure handled good! They were great little cars for what they were meant to be -- basic, cheap transportation. A little cramped, but no more than any other car that size, and I'm 6', what could I expect?

[1971BB427]

Originally Posted by gearheadslife

tell ya what, when a normal person can afford a lat 20 to early 40's car and build it..
then the 70's cars will really be worthless..
but when a car listed above is a 30-55k commitment..
without building a ratrod,
I'd love nothing better than to get a 48 chevy, or a 30's coupe, but the buy in for rusted out junk is through the roof..
I looked at a mid fourty's chevy, needing everything, 15k..
for basicly a frame and sheetmetal.. forget getting a early 30's ford for under 10k+ for a mess..

if fuel goes to 5-7 bucks, you bet your life, hotrods will be back using 4 cyl,

Not sure where you live that cars are so high priced, but it sure isn't my neck of the woods! I see pretty solid post WWII 40's cars going under $3,000 for complete unrestored cars. I also see 30's sedans going in the same range, but coupes are the crazy ones here. Everyone seems to think a 30's coupe is rolled in gold.
And 70's cars are just not appreciated at all by most, and if they are they sure don't pay much! I just sold my 1971 Camaro SS with BBC engine, and basically complete rebuild of every part on it. Had it 40 years, and couldn't get the $12,500 I was asking.

[deadbodyman]

I had a 70 AMC javelin that I LOVED it kinda looked like a nova back and a chevelle front but I thought it looked better that either of them I couldnt sell the dang thing ,fresh paint and it ran ,new tires I think I got 1,500 for it, that ws back around 85 or so..I'd love to find another one...