Regular readers of this website will be familiar with the monthly (or, bi-monthly) “CCs from Israel” series in which I upload all my findings from the holy-land. But every now and then, I come across a vehicle with rights to a post of its own. As you (may) have guessed it from yesterday’s CC Clue, this is one such vehicle.
Friday morning two weeks ago I was driving to this local bakery to pick up some pastries, and into the parking area… well, you couldn’t miss that, could you?
Evan the glare on the lens cannot hide the original Monza/Starfire/Skyhawk styling that was, in my view, quite handsome.
But it seems the owner has almost managed to eradicate whatever GM’s original stylists achieved. I mean, the internet probably has more photos of ill-fitting body-kits, but I have yet to see in my own two eyes one less suited to the car it’s attached to.
Hence why you get so many pictures with views of the rear. Sorry, I’m drawn to this wing like moths to a flame. This last photo deserves a close-up of some important details:
The exhausts’ “tips” go without saying, US readers will appreciate the US flag (lest you conclude this was a Japanese or European car), the bumper protector manifests itself, and I bet you didn’t notice the black (or painted black) gaffer tape on the bumper. All this was “produced”, as you can see.
Not easy to see inside, but it seems to fit the outside, so the saying “when you drive it you can’t see it” doesn’t hold here. Me thinks we’d better head towards the front:
Well, a more frontal view does diminish the wing, but then (with the sun’s aid), you get a full effect of the wheel covers. Yes, I promise you those are wheel-covers attached atop some real alloys (note the cable ties). You know what? I have yet to decide which is more ill-fitting, the wing or these “wheels”. Also visible are some “air-outlet” emblems ahead of the side-door, and above them there’s another “V6” emblem.
Head on view not only announces the full name but also that it’s an SX trim level- very handy. New York plate? I doubt it’s real, and anyway, the Israeli plate suggests this Oldsmobile was imported when new, which was extremely uncommon back in 1975. These were too far and few between to be even remotely considered as regular imports, so having this car survived despite (or because) of its add-ons is remarkable. By the way, this particular Starfire is a driving example, as I’ve seen it twice more since these photos were taken and it has definitively changed parking spots. Also, at least one good thing can be said about it and that it’s clean- certainly cared for by its owner in that department.
Now, I know everyone is entitled to their own styling preferences, but it’s a shame this Starfire looks like it has been driven through an Aliexpress branch, especially since it didn’t look like this when I first encountered it. Yes, in my archives I found an earlier photo:
Obviously by the time this photo was taken, the car has lost its original factory look, someone painted the roof black to possibly imitate vinyl and there’s a small lip-spoiler at the back. But still, it’s a much saner appearance. And you can see the alloy wheels, which you could even call tasteful- they certainly fit the 1970s shape. Go on, discuss what you make of CCs with too much makeup- my personal feeling is that it’s stupid, but maybe the CC community thinks differently. Just to remind you what an original Starfire looks like, here’s an Oldsmobile advert, albeit from 1979:
I’ll leave you with the dash-cam’s impression of the Starfire, including same era music that was playing at the time- I’ve left it in for your enjoyment (see if you can make it out, it’s actually a song about US cars):
The “beep-beep” sound is the dash-cam’s response to pressing the Save button
I always thought the hatchback Monza/Starfire was a handsome car and a not altogether bad evolution of the ill-fated Vega (especially since one could order a Monza with a SBC V8). But, like this particular vehicle, many owners added their own “touches” to the detriment, IMO, of the car’s appearance.
I figured it would be one of the Monza-twins when you said it was “close” or however it was worded.
I held up my 1/64 Matador coupe to the picture at the right angle and the angles (of what was shown) really fit spot-on. I never realized the resemblance of the back window and trunk before.
Curses! Foiled again.
This is what the wing is for !!!
Reminds me of the old, IMSA-inspired Monza Mirage, essentially a body kit that could be had on any 1977 Chevy Monza, regardless of engine.
Love the car, hate the “customization”. But it’s none of my business. Looks like a lot of these would have looked circa 1988ish, sitting on lawns being “detailed” by their enthusiastic 17 year old owners.
There is only one good body kit for a Monza. While the fastbacks are attractive they are still a Vega underneath with some nasty Malaise Era “engineering”. The race car is spared this since these mid 70s IMSA GT racers were more like Group 5 silhouette cars with a roll cage verging on a tube frame and a built 350 V8
I guess I’m the counterpoint again – I never liked the looks of these cars. The front is not bad, but the saggy Matador coupe-esque beltline offends my sense of order, and the nondescript tail does it no favors either. This is one of the 70’s styling concepts that most people love but I do not at all.
I think the two worst parts about them is indeed the front end, which has the same frog eye effect as the Ford EXP, and the indistinguishable differences between divisions, GM is notorious for lazy badge engineering but these take the cake, they all look like Monzas and they all lack identity because of it. I think the rear half of the design itself is superb though, better than the later iterations of the second Gen Camaro IMO
To be fair, these cars have only one visual design flaw – it’s contained within the area bordered by the bumpers. Other than that, they are fine.
FWIW, if I were to choose between a Monza 2+2 (or one of its divsional clones) and a Mustang II, I’d sure as hell take the former over the latter.
OTOH, I knew a guy who ordered and bought one of the early Monza ‘Spyders’. The first thing he noticed when it rolled off the transporter was that one front fender had a ‘Spyder’ emblem and the other said, “Sunbird”. It went downhill from there and he very quickly traded it for a Celica, and never bought another domestic car, again.
I too feel this was a pretty damn good looking car for its time, and even now if done clean.
Also, I like the “best wheel” , “best taillight” “best shifter” polls that come out. How a bout a best steering wheel? The olds 4 metal spoke design tops my list!
What irony! These once-ubiquitous cars are old enough, and rare enough on US roads, that a bunch of us who are old enough to know better thought it might be a Porsche. Or even a Tesla (who, me?). A little overdone, but still a good find. In fact, a car I have driven (in V8 Chevy Monza Spyder form, new at a dealer in 1977).
These came out just when I was a teen and starting to drive about a year later. To my young eyes, I thought they looked great and were desirable, for an American small sporty car.
At the time, my parents shopped the Capri at the Mercury dealer and Opels at Buick. Teen me was hoping they’d get the Capri with the six cylinder, but they went with an Opel Manta, and a year later added an Opel 1900 2 door sedan. I really loved those quite a bit, but later was smitten by the refreshed 1977 Capri.
They had a nice European/Germanic feel, with more supportive and upright seating, and the Opels were rev-happy and were tossable and lots of fun on back roads.Great visibility all around and over the hood to the road.
I drove many Buick Skyhawks as an after-school porter at the dealer we had bought the Opels from, all of which were in V-6 spec, auto or stick. The seats felt FAR lower to the floor, and the cowl/dash top felt much higher up, resulting in much less forward visibility.
With an automatic acceleration felt adequate, with the stick shift versions felt pretty lively. Probably faster than the Opels. Drive quality seemed more isolated in terms of decibels and ride motions, but felt heavy and with none of the liveliness and bright dynamic sensibilities of the Opels. No joy.
But these were stylin’ all the same. Buick had dropped the Opel line by then, and if given the choice between these or the refreshed Capri, I would have gone with the Capri myself.
There’s something Wagon Queen Family Truckster about it, especially in that front end shot. Maybe “Sports” also penned a wagon version.
Definitely needs more headlights.
Yuk. The lines on these were a refreshing break from the formal rooflines and Broughams of the era. I’ve always found them attractive.
Rare in Australia too.
The black roof was a mistake (and a confusion), but I wonder what it would look like if they’d blackened the A pillars, too. The greenhouse didn’t seem so tall at the time these were new.
The one thing that always bugs me about these cars is the tiny wheels. They look like they’re rolling around on four temporary spares. I’m guessing they’re 13s. The styling really needs 15s.
It definitely looked better before – except for that strange double-decker mirror on the passenger door.
I was wondering when someone else would comment about that. It seems comical, considering the big wing.
In the 70’s, they needed a lot of room in the wheel wells for slush to build up.
“Produced by Sports”. Uh…okeh, real good, then!
The before shot shows how far thing has devolved the silly wing rubbish plastic hubcaps, it must be a rough area of town its parked in, its theft proof.
This obviously belongs to someone who decided to replicate the Israeli street scene of the early 90s when that sort of thing was fairly common (well not really, more a case of a full taste bypass). Nowadays something like this would be (rightfully) laughed at if appearing at any old car meeting, so that such visions are becoming very rare. My guess is that at some point the next owner will get it properly restored or even modded.