Chevrolet downsized its full-size cars in 1977 as a move toward less weight and better fuel economy. Its mid-sized machines followed in 1978, including Chevy’s successful personal luxury car, the Monte Carlo. The irony was that the bigger ’77 Monte Carlo sold like hotcakes, so whatever followed it would have a high bar to attain. This ’78 fancier Landau edition has been in the same family since the 1980s and was parked under a shed in 1985. No longer running, it’s a project waiting for someone with time (and money) on their hands. Located in Cary, North Carolina, this Chevy is available here on craigslist for $9,250.
The 1978 Monte Carlo was 15 inches shorter and upwards of 800 lbs. lighter than its predecessor, so the cars could use a V6 or a small V8 to reduce fuel consumption. The designers were able to accomplish this and give passengers more interior and trunk space than before, so you would assume the design engineering was far better. In 1977, Chevy sold a record 411,000 Monte Carlos, yet the showing for the all-new cars was quite respectable at 358,000 copies (a drop of just 12%).
We assume the seller’s car has a 305 cubic inch V8, but no mention is made of its displacement or is a photo provided. Hardly a barn burner, but the ’77 with a 350 wasn’t a rubber smoker, either. It should be paired with a TH-350 automatic transmission, though you could get a manual shifted tranny again in the ’78 Monte. Since the car was left to sit 38 years ago, it no longer runs and the usual stuff like tuning it up and draining the fuel system will likely be needed to get it going again.
The seller says it’s in excellent non-running shape, but we find it hard to talk about the body or paint as no attempt has been made to clean the car up. The seller is trying to maintain its “barn find” appearance and we appreciate that. It’s the top-line Landau model, so the Chevy has factory A/C, a fancy vinyl top, and loads of power accessories. The front seat bottom at a minimum will need to be recovered, but the rest of the auto may be presentable once you can get it to move around on its own. Two questions: are late 1970s Monte Carlos prime restoration targets, and do the golf clubs go with the deal?
My first car in 93 … weak as a cat but dependable as all get out
Why not assume it’s a 267??? I have owned 2.
I had a 267 in a 1979 Malibu Classic and got 165,000 miles on it before the frame rusted in half. Solid, dependable engine with little power but a/c was cold and heater was hot. 19 mpg. Great daily driver.
The 267 wasn’t available in the 78, it was a new option for 79. The standard engine in the 78 was the Buick 231 V6 with the 305 as an option. I’d bet this one came with the V6.
Couldn’t have said it better myself!
Way optimistic on the price….IMHO, $2500. and that’s taking a hell of a gamble.
I say less than than 1500 tops with this Monte sight unseen. No pics of the engine or undercarriage. Just not worth the risk.
With the multiple hues of the GM “Light Camel” interior surfaces, I would say this Monte was exposed to the sun daily before hibernation. Trim around the A/C vents, the door panels, and the steering wheel signal a hot life. They all matched when new ) or, as close as possible for a new model). Even the headliner ‘gave it up’. The condition of the seat does not surprise me. Owner probably put a pad or towell on the seat, as not to burn the back of the legs after golfing. Oh, are the clubs in the trunk included?
That engine is the 305 2bbl, the only V8 offered in the Monte Carlo in 1978. The 267 2bbl was new on the option list for 1979.
Odometer reads 90K. Many a Chevrolet 305 from this era had a phenomenon known as, “Yer cam went flat! Metal’s too soft!” – Thanks, Cousin Eddie…
Basically, the grade of motor oil was not up to par with the new material used in the camshafts, and premature wear insued. Even a few 350 cid engines fell victim to needing a ‘top end’ rebuild. A compression test is one of the first items to add to the checklist on this ‘Dirty Monte’.
The 77-80 era interiors had that “multifade” problem, the red interior pieces would turn hot pink. These looked like this with 90K on them.
Old MacDonald’s 🚜 🐖 Monte.
This is a $1500 car. Give me a break
Haha when I saw the asking price I almost fell over. It wasn’t worth $9.5k new.
Those 70s GM seats didn’t hold up very well. My grandfather had a 1977 Oldsmobile Cutlass and the seat looked like that after about year 7. It will most likely not have a TH 350 transmission. Those usually has the TH 200. The 200 trans was really very bad. GM got sued over those. I’ll bet the trans is the problem.
More likely a THM-200 transmission rather than a THM-350. The THM-200 was a 60,000 mile transmission at best, so if it hasn’t been rebuilt, plan on it.
Amen to that! My dad had an ’81 Cutlass Cruiser wagon with a TH200 lockup transmission. Went through three of ’em before he finally threw in the towel & sold the car. The new owner planned on driving it to his new job in Ohio (from Texas). I wonder how that worked out for him.
I’ve commented before about my 1st car – 1979 Cutlass and my current resto-mod 79 Cutlass, so I do like these A/G bodies. When I was in high school, one of my close friends got a 79 or 80 Monte Carlo. Essentially the same car as my Cutlass, but side by side, the Cutlass was a far better built car. Chevy went to the plastic fantastic bumpers in 78, while the Olds version kept chrome bumpers from 78-80. My Cutlass had polished stainless trim, the MC mostly chromed plastic. Dash lay out and appearance of the dash inlays was better on the Olds as well. Also agree that the likely drivetrain on the featured car here would’ve been a V6 or 267 V8 and likely a 200 THM weakling transmission. My original 79 Cutlass Calais had a 305 V8 with buckets and console, but a THM200 tranny.
They are certainly dreaming on this one. I just sold a 1980 in June thst I had owned since 1995. I had replaced things along the way as needed and had it repainted, new vinyl top, new dash pad, tires, exhaust and tuneup. It was garaged for all the years I owned it. I struggled to get the 7k I got for it because it was a 229 v6. The guy that bought it was thrilled that all he will have to do is one day swap a v8 in. But like I never did, he’s waiting until the engine gives him problems. It wasn’t a powerhouse but it was reliable, which is why I never changed the engine.
VIN shows it having a 305 engine. Seller should clean it up so it will present itself better. Price is very high for the amount of wear, both inside and outside.
At best there’s probably a family of raccoons living in it
That’s in my neck of the woods. Definitely not “white trash” neighborhood
but a semi-rural part of town. Judging by the golf clubs in the back it probably was Grandpa’s car and whomever inheritied it may have intended ito pass it on to the grandchild. I agree with the $1500, especially given the amount of decay in the interior.
He’s drinking too much moonshine!!! Couldn’t even hose it off before taking pictures, and no mention if it’s the crappy 200 V6 or the 305 V8, with no engine pictures. More like $92.50, and straight to the junkyard, because no one wants these years, especially in that condition. Keep drinking that moonshine!!!
Got to agree the price is unrealistic. The 78-80 Cutlass, Regal, Grand Prix and Malibu have a pretty solid fan base, and were all better made cars. Why the Malibu would have chrome bumpers but the Monte had poorly made plastic covers with plastic chrome strips is inexplicable. The 80s Monte SS really stole all the attention from non-SS A (78-80) and G (81-88) body Monte Carlos. This car has none of the features that could make it more desirable to most buyers- bucket seats, floor shift, T-tops, burgundy or black interior (the tan interior is just, blah), non-vinyl top, 5 spoke wheels – none of them. It apparently does have the 305 V8, but that is simply “better than the other alternatives, but not great.” The 78-88 A/G bodies, except for the turbo Buicks, are all prime drivetrain swap candidates, because back then, all engine options were weak. In early 2021 – the height of COVID craziness – I paid $6,850 for my 79 Olds Cutlass Calais with 39,000 miles and all of the above desirable options – burgundy on burgundy, almost new interior, minor dents and dings, no rust. It was a nice looking, functional running vehicle – which I ripped the drivetrain out of anyway. A guy would have to REALLY want a 78 Monte with vinyl top, (rotted out) bench seat, hubcaps, etc. to pay $9,000 + for this one
Had one of these. Drove it from S.L.C. Utah to Bullfrog lake Powell and back every weekend.(about 500 miles round trip) for over a year at no less than 80 miles an hour and never had an issue one. Also very comfortable ride. You wouldn’t expect it from this car but rode and drove like a dream. I agree the price is way to high on this one. For that money I would expect to fly in and drive it home
Gonna make an offer and see what happens.
I’ve seen a lot better offerings on here for around the same price.
My dad bought a brand new 78 MC when I was a little kid, he actually ordered it from the dealer and what was funny was he basically ordered a bone stock car. The only option he got was AC, it was red with a red interior. I remember us driving down the back country roads of Michigan in the summer evenings with the windows down listening to the Tigers game on the crackling AM radio.
That is definitely a treasured childhood memory! 👍👍
These were plug ugly cars. Bug eyed and squatty. A friend bought one, but the neighborhood bachelorettes paid it no mind when my 72 Monte Carlo was around.
Another vote ✋😐 for the $1500.00 reality check. Truth is that history proves correct anything GM and RWD that harnesses a V8 will always be a sound investment. Period. BUT.. Are we reaching a point where an unknown quality barn find is approaching $10k? Perhaps a ’70 Chevelle, a 69 GTO or Nova. Are A/G bodies really there yet? Maybe one day, but it never ceases to amaze me how some people think just because it’s an old car (or anything else) that it’s worth a fortune.
You know… Like Rich Rawlins is gonna just show up with a film crew, and briefcase full of money, snort a shot of whiskey up his nose, wave a magic wand, take it to Barrett Jackson and reel in $6 Million dollars for some bucket they just drug out of the woods. Yeah RIGHT. Okay. 🙄
I owned a 1976(350) Monte and a 1983(6 banger). Both cars got high mileage(160k, 120k) before I sold them and were dependable and lasted for many years. The 1976 was used for a daily 100 mile round trip after I sold it. Who knows it may still be running.
Even the stock 305 smogger V8 was kind of a slug. I bought a ‘77 Nova with a 305 back in the late 80s. I was a young kid and thought that the V8 would make it fun. Nope—I was wrong. It was better than the 3.8L V6 in my ‘79 Pontiac LeMans, though. That was the world’s slowest car. They didn’t call it the malaise era for nothing.
9k?????? C’mon, enough already with the ridiculous prices.
Just bout a 78 Mc for 3500 and drove it home try again.
Biggest piece of crap GM made. V6 231 blew valve cover gaskets and blocked PVC valve constantly. Didn’t have the power to get out of its own way. Would give you $1 to use it as a lawn ornament. 70-76 we’re the years for the Monte Carlo.
I don’t know, maybe. Drop a 350 crate motor and a 4 speed. Some wide tires on rims, some bucket seats from a junkyard, fuzzy dice on the mirror. Bam, the 80s again.