Re: history on how the g bosy came about? ended?
As already mentioned, heavy government regulations and the oil crisis is what led to dark times in the automotive market. The oil crisis had led to high gas prices and government regulated standards for manufacturers. With the theory of global warming coming about, a-bodies and g-bodies were the test bed for emission systems. This really hurt the performance of any vehicle during this time as emission systems were in their infancy. Of course there were the insurance companies that stepped in in 71' as a result of so many accidents from the high power muscle cars of the late 60's and up until 1971.
The g-bodies, IMO, were the first ever mass produced set of "disposable cars". During the late 70's and mid 80's, it was all about the cost. The economy at the time was in very poor shape and was in an economic decline until Ronald Reagan came into office. You see in almost all g-bodies that parts are interchangeable except for body panels. This made it cheaper and easier for gm to mass produce cars for all it's automotive branches without having to make a lot of specific parts meant for each type of car. At the same time, the metal used was very poor grade and not as thick as the A-bodies. This meant lighter weight to try and help with gas mileage, but it also led to rust issues which is evident on most of our cars.
Now in the mid 80's is when manufacturers started to go back to the performance roots. The Monte Carlo SS and el camino ss were the first to come back as there was almost no "affordable" performance in the market next to the price of a corvette. Then buick decided to capitalize with the release of the
Grand National. As for why it was only a single turbo, the car could break 11's and 10's out of the factory. There was no need for a second turbo and the cost of using a second turbo would have put the GN out of the average "joe blow's" price range.
In general though, the g-bodies were not meant to last. They were cheaply made, mass produced, and were manufactured in a way so that they cost next to nothing and were affordable. They were built around heavy regulations from insurance companies and the government. You can't simply look at just the Monte SS and turbo cars as a representation of g-bodies. If you look at the g-body cars as a whole, they were meant to satisfy insurance companies, the Fed, and society as a whole who wanted a cheap car. Hence why front wheel drive cars came about in the late 80's.
I don't even look at the monte carlo SS as a high performance car because it had the same 305, slightly larger cam, that my 80' malibu had. Only thing it had going for it was a later overdrive trans and larger posi gears. The turbo cars are such a small niche and limited production GM brand in comparison to how many base line malibus, regals, monte carlos, el caminos, station wagons, and other g-bodies.
As for the whole "its what we want" speech in referance to the newer chargers, that's bullsh**. Yeah we really wanted to see an iconic name like "Charger" on a 4 door. We wanted to see a newer version of the charger that retained its retro body styling from the late 60's. The new Challenger is proof of what the public really wanted.
last night and him and i have always wondered how the g body came about, how/why all the companies (chevy/buick/olds/pontiac) were competing with basically the same car, why the gn went to efi and why it was the only one turbo charged/had a good motor.... why the monte "super sport" disgraced the ss badge with a low power motor when stuff like a 350 tpi was available? and rear disk brakes? the technology was right there and bolted on with ease.... and why on earth did gm give up on the line if 87 and go to mostly front wheel drives??? they were just at the point that they were sweet cars! does anyone have articles or history of any sort on this? links?
