New to g-bodys/ this

[mrapii]

By lightweight engines I mean that only the 1979 and 1980 El Caminos had a 350cid option, no big blocks; all other G-Bodys had 301, 305 or 307 V8s or V6s. The Buick GN and GNX with the turbo V6s were exceptions. The drivetrain was also lightweight, especially the 7.5" 10-bolt rear axle assembly. Again the GNs and GNXs were exceptions as they had 8.5" rear axles along with Olds 442s and Hursts. The brakes are somewhat anemic 10.5" single piston front discs and 9.5"X2" rear drum brakes. The front and rear suspensions are basically OK but need upgrades and beefing up to work with larger doses of horsepower. The G-Bodys are great platforms to work with and if you spend the effort and money they can be transformed into awesome street machines.

 

[87MonteSS]

It is worth mentioning that the Monte Carlo SS has the high output 305 with a carb (yes, even in the 88 model year), the Camaro F41 suspension package, 4 speed auto trans (84 and up IIRC) and a 3.73 rear gear ratio on a 7.625 ring gear which is a little tougher than the 7.5.

All of that makes the car a better starter than the non-HO equipped cars even if you're going to replace the engine there's a very decent suspension and gearing to start off with.

 

[DrRansom442]

transmissions were typically
Th350 - 3 speeds
Th200-4r - 4 speed ovedrives (universal Chevy and B-O-P bellhousings)
I believe 80 was the last year for a manual trans, but I've seen few and far in between 78-80 4 speed manual transmission cars, but they did exist.
rears
most cars had 7.5" 10 bolts (and pissy highway gears 2.29:1, 2.41:1 2.56:1, 2.93:1, 3.08:1, 3.23:1 )
84 (only) Hurst Olds, 442 and GN had 8.5" ten bolts (3.42:1. 3.73:1)
either rear was availible open or with RPO G80 limited slip (aka posi-trac)
Buick GNX had a totally unique rear suspension setup using a "watts bar" setup....complex, expensive to duplicate, marginal straight line improvements seen. upgraded front sway bars with rear sway bars were included in "sportier" models and F41 (firm handling - sorry this had nothing to do with using Camaro parts) was optional, this primarly consisted of stiffer springs and heavier shocks. Numberous interior and creature comfort options availible and a few "performance versions" (most little more than decals / non-functional fiberglass add-ons) - truth be said. But these cars are THE standard for interchangiblity, you can stuff almost anything short of a Allison V-16 underhood and the aftermarket is starting to recognise this.

 

[87MonteSS]

The Monte Carlo SS got the F41 suspension package from the early 80's Z28. This package included the sway bars, springs, shocks and frame bracing and beginning in '86 also included the early 80's Camaro aluminum wheel design. The wheels are not interchangable between the Camaro and Monte Carlo SS however. The reason that people state that the F41 came from the Camaro is because many of the parts are directly swappable between the two cars.

The rear is 7.625 ring gear 10 bolt with 3.73 gearing.

The L69 305 H.O was more than just a name, it's a completely redesigned 305 with Camaro crossfire heads, aluminum intake, computer controlled carb and Corvette L81 camshaft. Certainly not a street screamer, but far superior to the LG4 305 in other G-Body models.

The front clip on the Monte Carlo SS as well as the front air dam and rear spoiler are fully functional.

SS optioned interiors are considerably different than the LS version in color choices and trim.

Instrumentation is complete. Even the GN doesn't have the full compliment of gauges that the Monte Carlo SS has.

 

[DrRansom442]

ummm I am 99% sure nothing from the subframed rear leaf sprung F-body fits the full frame, rear coil A/G bodies. the RPO F41 is used throughout various GM models doesn't mean parts are common amoungst those cars, as for the wheels, I'll have to take your word but I'd have thought the early 80s F-body and the Monte SS would have the same 5 on 4.75" bolt circle and a BS of 4" to 4.5" difference ofcourse between the two would be SAE and Metric studs and lugs. I know the 14" ralley wheels on my neighbor's 78 malibu came off of early 70s Camaro, I'd assume they'd fit my Cutlass too since both are A-bodies.

 

[87MonteSS]

The F-Body cars went to rear coils in 1982.

As for the wheels, the Camaro had a different offset for front and rear. You can get away with four Camaro rear wheels all the way around a Monte SS.

 

[Renthorin]

Same for the Trans Am. Those honycomb wheels fit a regal nicely, as long as you get 4 rears.

 

[DrRansom442]

The F-Body cars went to rear coils in 1982.

As for the wheels, the Camaro had a different offset for front and rear. You can get away with four Camaro rear wheels all the way around a Monte SS.

yes but Monte SS wheels were a 2nd gen Camaro (friend of mine had a 80 Z28 had a set of them in black) item not 3rd gen and yes 3rd gen Camaros did have coils, but the rear end setup was still VERY different from the 78 up A/G body.....F,K,X bodies shared simular architecture and component interchange....A, B and G bodies had simularities and limited interchangiblity (i.e. 3rd gen Camaro 1LE rotors would fit a G-body if you used taller B-body spindles). Yes the 3rd Camaros did have 2 different wheel sizes/offsets and yes it was common for 4 IROC Camaro fronts to be installed on G-bodies

 

[DrRansom442]

Same for the Trans Am. Those honycomb wheels fit a regal nicely, as long as you get 4 rears.

4 rears or 4 fronts, I don't think the rears would fit

 

[Renthorin]

Did I say rears? I think I meant front. This gets hashed a lot on turbobuick.com as the GNX wheels are/were very similar to the GTA t/a wheels.

Fronts.....I meant fronts.......