(first posted 7/11/2015) I had spotted this ’75 Olds Starfire SX from my southbound, morning Red Line train on the way to work in the Chicago Loop. I actually considered deboarding at the next stop to catch a northbound train in the hope of photographing this really rare GM H-body that morning before it disappeared. I didn’t, as doing so probably would have made me late for work. However, on my evening northbound train, I was ecstatic, as this car was still there.
Let’s look at this car. First of all, it is as banana-shaped as a regular production car ever got, especially in profile. Then there’s the color scheme: a yellow peel over soft, white, vinyl insides. Tropical!
I’m usually on a mental crusade against the use of stereotypes, but let’s just be honest – this specific car looks as dainty as a “chick car” ever got. Before you label me a hypocrite, let’s look at the historical context in which this car was manufactured and sold – the mid-1970s. Leaving it bone-stock, and short of adding a set of raised, white-letter tires or aftermarket louvers to the rear hatch, I don’t see any possible way to butch up this car. You wouldn’t have to be as manly as Burt Reynolds spitting tobacco juice into an empty Coke bottle to make a few people do a double-take if you were a guy behind the wheel of this car. That said, I like this Starfire. A lot.
Imagine a scenario in, say, spring of ’75 when this car was sitting in the new car lot. How particular (brand-loyal?) would one have to have been to say, “Oh, no. A Chevy Monza just won’t do. I’ve got to have an Oldsmobile.” Apparently, just over 28,000 people said something like that, at prices starting at $4,144 (about $18,700 in 2015). This is versus around 136,000 Monzas (including notchback Town Coupe variants) which base-stickered at $3,570 ($16,200 / adjusted). The only really notable differences in the two base cars was that the Monza came standard with the Vega’s 2.3L 4-cylinder, and the Starfire had only the corporate, Buick-built 3.8L V6. Actually, the more I think about it, the Starfire’s extra premium was probably worth it if you didn’t want to spring for the Monza’s optional 4.3L V8, given the Vega 2.3’s dismal durability record by that point.
I think the overall design holds up well, forty years on. Having been born in the mid-’70s and growing up with rectangular sealed-beam headlights, I have little personal frame of reference to understand just how revolutionary they looked on this car when new. Those ice cubes remind me a little bit of Ray Ban Aviators on the “face” of this car. They work well with the dual grille slots set into that body-colored, rubber-ducky front nose section. I also like the look of the “Olds rocket”-logo hubcaps on steelies.
The Ferrari 365 GTC/4 is commonly cited as the H-Body hatchback’s greenhouse design inspiration, and I do see it. But the greenhouse is just one (albeit important) styling element and for me, the visual similarities end there. I seriously doubt that many American consumers made that connection any more than they connected the rooflines of the Porsche 928 and the AMC Pacer. (Google that last comparison.) I see an Opel Manta B notchback with a slightly faster roofline when looking at this Starfire. A very pleasing if not breathtaking shape.
“UNLEADED FUEL ONLY.” Well, doyyy. Honestly, I am old enough to remember seeing gas pumps that dispensed leaded fuel. The most fascinating thing about this particular car is that it appeared to be a daily driver. It has been, as they say, gently used. I literally couldn’t remember the last time I had seen an original ’75 Starfire in the wild, even going back to my high school years some twenty years prior. I would have loved to have waited for the driver to come back so I could get some backstory on this car, but after a long, mentally draining workday, I just didn’t feel like waiting around. Plus, it was cold, and PM rush hour trains can get packed, both of which can only improve your mood.
I’ve never seen this car again. Maybe, like the ’79 Triumph TR7 convertible I had spotted and recently written about, this Starfire was in for a quick jaunt from the suburbs. I hope this “banana” hasn’t since spoiled and been tossed out, as it brought a ray of sunshine to an otherwise subpar workday.
All photos as taken by the author in Lakeview, Chicago, Illinois.
Near Sheffield & Fletcher.
Thursday, November 1, 2012.
Related reading:
Cohort Car Show Sighting: 1975 Oldsmobile Starfire – Who Would Have Guessed That In 1990?
I had a ’76 Monza 2+2, four cylinder/five speed, and I don’t remember getting the Vega aluminum engine in it. Despite having loved my Vega GT in the three years I owned and raced it (yes, it was still running reliably after three seasons of autocross and sprints, although it was starting to use oil), I was under no illusions that a fourth year of keeping that car would have been a bad mistake due to engine durability. And I seriously doubt I would have gone to the Monza if it meant having to take the Vega engine.
I think I had that Iron Duke 2.5 in mine, as did my father in the ’77 Vega he picked up cheaply in ’78. Both ran very well, although dad had gotten over one of his periodic ‘gas mileage’ obsessions within a year and had gone back to a full sized car. Bottom line, he was an Impala/Caprice guy, and wasn’t happy in anything smaller, gas mileage be damned.
My 2+2 was a very nice blue collar GT – it was definitely heavier than the Vega and not as tossible, so I didn’t autocross it, but it was still a lot of fun on the back roads. Definitely one of GM’s better cars during a very bad decade, and a very underrated car.
Vega’s never had iron dukes from the factory. The last year 77 Pontiac Astre did. Near the end Chevy was advertising the 140 as improved and Dura built. I wonder if to some extent this was true.
It’s possible, so far the only finds in the Great Surviving Original-Engine Vega Search have been from the last couple, “Dura-Built” years.
What type of LSD would be needed to acquaint a 928 and a Pacer?
I reckon a Quaife would do it.
The iron Duke did not appear in the Chevy Monza until 1978. For 1975-1977, the standard Monza four was the “Vega” 2.3, which by 1975 had been substantially improved.
I had a 77 Olds Starfire and I am happy they are now rare. Hate to be reminded of that POS.
I remember being told at the time that the Chev was available with the four that was in the 230 six family. I have no way of proving that but the Olds svcman told me as he was once again trying to figure why my 231 was again having death rattles. He was fairly impressed with the chevy four.
My Olds caught on fire at a busy Virginia Beach Boulevard intersection. Bought a 78 AMC Concord and was tickled pink at the difference. The Olds is just another example of a car that I liked that didn’t like me. The only other with such an extreme was the 2002 Saturn Vue. Concidence that they were both GM. I think not…….
Good article on an almost forgotten H Body version of the Monza. Considering its age,its a miracle that its still around.Most of these went to the big scrapyard in the sky ages ago. Nice looking car that was probably a decent,upscale ride back in the disco daze of the mid 70s.Cool color too.Wonder if its owner called it “Mellow Yellow”.
It’s especially miraculous that it survived this long in Chicago, given the horrific climate and road salt. I wonder if it was sold new in the area, or relocated from a balmier, drier climate… Either way, it’s one of those incredibly rare cars that none of us are ever likely to see anywhere, ever. It’s no Oldsmobile (badge engineering at its worst), but the basic car (Chevy really) is certainly a triumph of design from the late Bill Mitchell era.
From the clean fender and rocker panel, it’s either from some other states, or not driven in the winter. ( I know it’s hard to imagine, but I do see someone reserving a tempo coupe for summer only, and drive a rusty blazer in the winter)
Mark me down as a fan of these. Imagine if GM offered such a clean sleek sporty shape today for a young feminine buyer’s $18700. An equivalent Ecotec 2.4 makes 180hp and the manual would be up to six speeds. If the weight could stay near the 2800 pounds of these, it would be a nice little package. I know this buyer today has no money and her older sisters only want CUVs, but why not show them what they are missing.
The Vega is generally put down has a failure for the risks taken in the innovative design. If you count these H bodies, and dare I say the gen 3 F body, which owed a lot to it, GM got their money’s worth out of them. GM also left the world with some of the best styled cars in their class.
Thanks Joseph for capturing this car for us. When they were still common, no one would have thought anyone would be jumping off a train to get a look. I am glad you did.
The Monza is essentially a restyled Vega… same platform, of course. I pulled more than a few Monza parts to retrofit on my ’71 Vega back in the day (including a set of factory Recaro look-alike seats I found in one junkyard donor).
Wiki says the Vega 2.3l engine was only offered in the Starfire in the 1977 MY, with the Iron Duke coming along for 1978.
What a stellar find. These weren’t all that common even when they were new. I remember one of the 4th grade teachers in my elementary school drove one. That’s the only one I consciously remember.
I’ve still got my 77 Monza sitting in my parents’ garage. The young man I bought it from was actually using it as a daily driver a couple of years prior to parking it. He was working as an orderly at the senior care facility that his mother managed. He had purchased it from the family of a resident who had passed away.
Mine has the factory 305 small block. I plan on doing the S10 5-lug brake / axle swap, and I’ve already scored a set of the small 14X6 inch 5 slot rally wheels off of a junked G-body. Months later I found a badly rusted ’76 Monza at that same yard and stripped everything usable off of it. The inside of mine is filled to the roof with all my spare and upgrade parts.
I think these GM H-bodies were some the best looking cars of that otherwise dreadful era of American car design. Compared to its cross-town contemporary rival Mustang II, well, there’s no comparison. The Ferrari 365 GTC design influence is clearly there, and it works. Mitchell, who was on his way out by the time these H-bodies hit the market, had a penchant for aping Italian carrozzerria design elements and did so with an adept hand. In another example the Gen 2 Camaro’s styling was largely inspired by Guigiaro’s DeTomaso Mangusta, one of which Mitchell actually owned.
I largely agree, but they came out a bit too narrow, due to sharing the Vega’s platform. It was a pleasant surprise when these appeared in 1975.
Unfortunately, they never got a really worthy/ideal engine. They needed something like the Chevy 2.8/3.1 V6, in an HO version.
I believe these were built with a 350 small block at least one year. they were rare but they did exist. There was also a 2door sedan version. If I had my choice, I would go for the 2door sedan with 350 small block and a stick shift.
IIRC, the 350 was available from the factory only in 1975, and only in California.
The 262 cubic inch V8 that was offered in the first few years of Monza production wouldn’t pass California emissions, so in 1975 the 350 2bbl was offered there so that a V8 would be available (with the 307 having been dropped after 1973, the 350 was the smallest V8 Chevrolet was building at that point other than the 262). This changed to the new 305 2bbl for ’76. For 1977 the 262 was dropped and the 305 offered everywhere, eliminating the need to have a separate option for Canada.
The last word of the previous post should be “California”, not “Canada”.
The only Monza from Chevy I recall was a V8 racecar specially imported for that purpose but it was claimed at the time it was a factory car it didnt stay that way long major modifications were made and it was quite successful on circuits here.
Did you forget the Sunbird? Now that was a handsome little Vega. And with the 3.8, it was a QUICK handsome little Vega.
You do realize this is one of the all-time stellar CC finds?
I’ve been looking for a running Monza, which outsold the Starfire by a huge margin, with no luck. I can’t remember when I last saw a Starfire.
And in such excellent original condition too. This car belongs in a museum!
There must be some sort of CC algorithm that explains how certain models of car survive, while other, virtually identical models that were built in much greater numbers, don’t.
In the case of the Vega-based Starfire, I suspect it has to do with the rather more upscale market and price when they were new. People who bought Starfires and Skyhawks might have been more inclined to keep them in good shape, as opposed to those who purchased Monzas and Sunbirds in much greater numbers (but at lower prices).
Hence, although still rare, it’s much more feasible to see a Starfire or Skyhawk out in the wild, while all of the Monzas and Sunbrids have long since returned to the earth from which they sprang (or at least a junkyard).
It’s sort of like the much vaunted Hemi-Cuda where most of them are still around. Those cars were outrageously expensive when new, and the few people that did buy them, didn’t take them out much because they were such a beast to drive, and then the engines let go rather quickly, too. That meant the cars tended to end up in garages for decades, and explains why so many survived.
I have one small correction: actually, more Hemi Cudas survive than were produced originally:)
Paul, thank you so much. This was one instance where it was worth it to deal with post workday fatigue to get my shots.
And Rudiger, your algorithm makes total sense to me. If one was going to pay the extra premium for the Olds version, he/she likely also had the funds to maintain it a little better.
I agree. I only saw a Chevy Monza once in Hazel Park, Mi on Chrysler freeway, even though in recent years I still see many Dodge Aspen/Plymouth Volares around, many Fairmonts, quite few citations, and several more Chevette. All those cars are not so common elsewhere nationwide, and those H-Bodies are pretty rare among them.
it’s been years since I’d seen a STOCK H-body here in Michigan.. last one I saw was back in January 2012. and it was a towné coupe.. I’d love to have a Starfire or Skyhawk…
Yes its in excellent daily driven condition.
This car is rare indeed. I think the steelies with the little chrome center caps are rare on this too. When these were new I don’t recall seeing many with that wheel setup. A car like this makes you wonder about its history – how it was cared for over the last four decades, where it traveled to, who owned it. Probably garaged, owned by the same person for all those years, driven to church, the supermarket and such. You then wonder about its service history – what was done to it, how many times the oil was changed, etc. etc. etc. To see one of these today in this condition is remarkable.
One of the Moms in my carpool in high school had one of these. It was orange with tan vinyl bucket seats. I remember her commenting on the steering wheel on that car. She said the rim was too thick and that she liked the steering wheel in her ’73 Delta 88 better. This also makes me think about the person that would buy one of these cars. An avid loyal Oldsmobile buyer would think that the Oldsmobile name meant “quality”. If they didn’t know that GM made this car for its many brands across the board (and I’m sure most people didn’t realize that) they would buy one with the preconceived notion that it is a true Oldsmobile and therefore a great car. I guess in 1975 28,000 customers may have thought this.
In thinking about the kind of people who bought these, I seem to remember a lot of the old timers back then as having not only brand loyalties but also dealership loyalties. When it was time for a new car they would go down to Joe Blow Olds and buy whatever he might have on the lot. By only buying there they could brag that they’ve been buying from Joe since 1951. Different world back then.
Those dealerships still exist, but usually they have strong association with the factory and people have more or less association too, like the Chrysler dealer in Highland Park on Woodward, or Varsity Lincoln in Wixom, Village Ford in Dearborn. Sometimes they put badge as nice as factory ones too.
True, pbr. Folks were different back then. There was a thing called “loyalty” that I feel hardly exists today.
Loyalty is all well and good, but it becomes foolish when better products and services become available. Why continue buying the same product/buying from the same company if you can get something better with your money? And if somebody is offering an inferior product/service, competition will encourage them to improve it. It’s basically Capitalism 101.
Well, the thing is, most people don’t approach buying a product by doing a huge amount of research and testing, particularly if it’s not their first product of that kind.
If someone has a product already that’s been reasonably satisfactory and it dies for some reason (wears out, breaks, gets lost or stolen), most people’s natural impulse would be to just go out and get another of the same kind. The point where people start looking for something better is when the product they had was actually unsatisfactory for whatever reason or if when it’s time for another, the version they had is no longer available or has been updated in some way they don’t like.
A case in point: For quite a few years, I kept getting the same brand of cheap black sneakers. They were not great shoes or especially stylish, but they were cheap and I knew they fit; I hate buying shoes because finding ones that fit properly is usually a bear. When they wore out, I could just go back to the store and buy another pair in the same size and be confident they would fit and function about as well.
I went through maybe five pairs of these shoes and only stopped because it became apparent that the maker of the shoes kept noticeably cheapening the product. Originally, a pair would last me maybe 18 months, which wasn’t a bad deal for $20. Subsequent pairs wore out faster and faster. With the last pair I bought, the price had gone up 25% and the shoes wore out in less than three months, at which point I finally decided it wasn’t worth it and went looking for something else.
I would hazard to say this is how a lot of people approach car-buying decisions.
I liked these cars, nice clean lines. From what I heard the V8 versions were kind of a nightmare for maintenance. Probably would have been ideal with the I4 from the Cosworth Vega.
The Monzas had a respectable motorsports pedigree, giving Porsche (935 if I recall correctly) a decent run for their money in IMSA.
There were rumblings beforehand with the Nova clones and such, but Alfred Sloan’s hierarchy basically fell apart the moment these cars were released. The Monza/Sunbird/Starfire/Skyhawk looked attractive, and would have been very distinctive if they had been one line of cars. Unfortunately, the Monza, Sunbird, Starfire, and Skyhawk all existed simultaneously, and they all looked completely identical to each other from more than a yard away. Good thing some of them had distinctive engine choices, since otherwise there would have been no reason to choose one of these whatsitsname cars over the other.
As far as names go, however, I can’t find any fault with this one. I’ve always thought that “Starfire” was a really cool name for a car.
To me, Starfire sounds like some failed comic book aimed at young girls, a la Gem.
I really loved the name Jetfire though, and it’s a shame Olds ditched it but kept some really stodgy names around.
In fact, “Starfire” was later used as the name of a female comic book character who appeared in DC’s New Teen Titans book and later in the Teen Titans cartoon show. She wasn’t created until five or six years after the car, though.
(Geek moment)
Starfire is my favorite character in the Animated series.
Still no good reason for that name to go from the top (top down for the first cars) to a “sporty” Economy car.
Well, it may have been just a matter of somebody saying, “Hey, we haven’t used the Starfire name since 1966 — we need to slap it on something or we’re going to risk losing the trademark.” On the other hand, “Starfire” connotes something flashy and out-of-this-world, and this shape combined with the originally intended rotary engine would certainly have been the most whizzy and futuristic Oldsmobile since the original Toronado.
Also, the old Starfire hadn’t really done much in the market. It was a good name on a pretty ordinary product.
These cars came along for the same reason why the first compacts from GM came along. The various GM dealers wanted to cover all of the field, leaving no niche alone.
With these cars, the Olds dealer didn’t want a lose a sale to the Chevy dealer, etc., etc. so GM went the cheap route and issued almost generic cars to all the divisions. I mean there was some of the old divisional items, like engines and packages, but by the mid 70’s this was nothing new.
Every generation had less and less distinction up until the mid 90’s, but by then the cat was out of the bag.
Don’t forget that these cars were released in the fall of 1974, or less than one year after the Arab Oil Embargo had ended.
Given the lack of differentiation between the Monza, Skyhawk and Starfire, I wouldn’t be surprised if only Chevrolet was originally scheduled to receive a version of this car. Oldsmobile and Buick dealers were probably screaming for something, anything, with decent gas mileage in late 1973 and early 1974. Rebadging a Monza for both divisions was the quickest way to quiet them.
It’s worth noting that, when Pontiac got around to releasing its version of this car – the Sunfire – there were more noticeable changes to the front and rear clips.
Ooops…the Pontiac version of this car was the Sunbird, not the Sunfire.
My Mother bought one of these, slighted used, in 1978, to replaced her beloved ’71 Opel Manta/1900 that Dad deemed too old and high mileage for his beloved wife to safely drive.
I recall the Buick V6 being quite torquey and quiet and the interior being tiny and cramped for my 6-1, 210 pound 19 year old self. It did fit my petite Mother quite comfortably.
The biggest flaw for this stiff shifting 4 speed model was the “gas mileage” tall final gearing. Third gear was great for around town, 4th not needed until safely merged onto Interstate 10.
This particular car had manual steering, no power assist. I couldn’t believe that a car that small could take SO much effort to crank the steering wheel! Mom go to know her car so well she could tell when the front tires needed air added.
It was a quite attractive and “sporty” looking car for the time period.
More than once she asked my Father to find her another high seat, easy steering, smooth shifting, peppy Opel.
Opel by Isuzu? might have checked your boxes
NO, John C. the German Opel 1900/Manta, imported by Buick.
Mom, Dad and I drove the Isuzu “Opel”, nicknamed the “Japel” by my friends at the Buick dealer, we all three were not impressed.
Although not a terribly bad car; it was of no competition for a German Opel.
I think John means to say the Opel by Isuzu may have been a better choice than the Starfire.
Well yes and no. I was referring to the Buick/Opel by Isuzu that might have checked Mr. Reimer’s boxes as a Manta replacement. I was not saying that T car was a better choice than a Starfire.
Look at what this car offered. 4, 6, or 8 power. good styling, 3sp. 4sp, or 5sp. or a good automatic. Manual steering that was probably light enough with an aluminum four or power steering with bigger engines. An Olds upgraded interior with good seats and more sound deadening. A great shot at an upscale Olds dealer experience not unlike today’s near lux imports. Upgraded dash, hd suspension, fancy wheels stereos and stripe packages just an order form away. All for $18700 in today’s money.
I agree with Paul that the later Citation 135hp 2.8 V6 would have been great for this car. Or maybe the Cosworth DOHC 16 Valve Cylinder Head, FI, and perhaps balance shafts had been grafted on to the 140 four. Even has built though this car was an underappreciated choice
Well, opinions, like your gas mileage, may vary.
After enjoying the German Opel Manta for so many miles and years, regarded by many as “A Poor Man’s BMW 2002”, my parents and I regarded the Isuzu “Japel” name badged Opel as derivative, mediocre and blahhhhhh.
Mom bought her cars as much as how they looked on her as how they performed.
(No personal attack on John C. was intended.)
none taken
What Mark said ~
In 1982 or so , an old man came into my shop to ask if I’d take a look at a ’75 Buick Skyhawk in a parking garage a couple blocks away , he wanted to make it run so he could sell it .
A very cramped car indeed , you felt like you were sitting on the floor because the center tunnel / console was nearly at elbow height .
It also had those overly long GM doors making getting in or out in a City parking lot , difficult .
The four speed gearing was way to high although the V-6 pushed it along O.K. .
Any old VW Beetle or Japanese car could easily outhandle it because it weighted so much .
O.K. looking I guess and certainly better build quality than most GM products at that time , I tried using it but didn’t like it much , lucky there’s always a market for cheap used cars , I got $350 fit it less than ten years old .
-Nate
Heck, even my naturally-aspirated Volvo 850 (which is not a light car by any means) could easily outhandle any GM H-body, especially a V6-equipped Starfire or Skyhawk!
Thats kinda scary when the poor roadholding of old Beetles and Japanese cars of the era no wonder that racecar that came here needed extensive suspension mods
@Brice :
I drove old (1940’s & 1950’s) VW Beetles pretty much as fast as they’d go and the road holding wasn’t bad in the canyons and twisty bits as long as it had decent tires (tyres for you) and good shocks .
Up hill slow,
Down Hill fast,
Mileage first,
Safety _last_ =8-) .
-Nate
Wasn’t the Chevy Monza originally designed to accommodate a rotary engine and when the GM couldn’t overcome the reliability/emissions problems a small block V-8 engine was shoehorned in? Also recall it was a tight fit and had to access the sparkplug via an access port in the front wheel well.
Unless it was already discussed, the GM Wankel engine debacle would be an interesting CC History read.
I also recall the car magazines of that time period, epically “Motor Trend”, having cover stories and feature articles about GM’s new rotary engine “sports car” that was supposed to be the Monza/Starfire/Skyhawk.
The high transmission tunnel would had been needed for the rotary engine.
As a side note, My Mother replaced her Starfire with a Mazda RX7. A much more delightful and enjoyable car, even hampered with (her model’s) automatic transmission. An adjustable vacuum modulator for the automatic transmission allowed the rotary to scream up to the red line when she/me/Dad “stomped it”.
Yep. It was intended for the 1974 Vega: GM Wankel
If I’m not mistaken, AMC designed the Pacer around this same engine that was to be bought from GM. At the last minute in-house engines were substituted.
After the first US oil crisis panic, everyone was grasping for some sort of new engine panacea that would save the world’s energy problems, and GM dumped a boatload of money into rotary development. Unfortunately, they couldn’t overcome the Wankel’s inherent problems, and it all was for naught.
In fact, considering the amount of money GM spent on it and how cars were actually built specifically to accommodate the engine (Pacer, Monza), yet it never made it to production, seems like the GM rotary engine program should qualify as a ‘Deadly Sin’.
You’ve got it backwards. GM was interested in the Wankel because of its small size and power output. It was precisely the arrival of the energy crisis in late 1973 that killed it, since the rotary has worse fuel efficiency than a piston engine.
GM’s interest in the rotary was driven by emissions regulations rather than fuel economy. At the point they signed the license agreement with NSU, the industry was running scared because of the pending NOx emissions rules, which looked like they would be very tough to meet with existing engines. Contemporary rotary engines had inherently lower NOx emissions and their higher HC emissions were easier to clean up, so it seemed like a good solution.
Specific fuel consumption is not a rotary strong point, but I think the assumption was that it wouldn’t be any worse than an emissions-controlled big six or smaller V-8, which would be good enough. Before the embargo, that might have been true, but afterward, obviously everybody started getting panicky about fuel economy.
My read of the GMRCE program was that GM ended up wasting a lot of time and money because they weren’t willing to take a lesson from other rotary users — there were problems that Mazda and NSU had already resolved where GM basically said, “Well, we’re not going to do it that way.” Whether that was because of corporate pride and stubbornness or because it would have involved additional patent licensing (or maybe a combination of the two), I’m not sure, but they spent an enormous amount of money on the whole affair and ended up with very little show for it.
As a former rotary owner,87 RX7, the low torque and high fuel consumption would have meant it was not a good fit for these cars. The low weight, compact dimensions and especially smooth operation would have looked good to GM but it is a saving grace rather than a deadly sin that they did not inflict it on customers. If an early Monza customer wanted small block V8 economy with 110hp, the 267V8 was there on the order form.
American models, even four cylinder models, were going to need to pull automatics, AC, and power steering without overheating. To get this done, the four cylinders designed for the new subcompacts had to be larger than 2.0 liters to provide torque. Without balance shafts to cancel out the shakeing, these were simply unpleasant powerplants.
The same was true at Datsun and Toyota when they let their Corona/Celica/Hilux engine go from 1.9 to 2.4 liters and the 510/200SX engine get up to 2.2 liters to cope with American conditions. These were not the sewing machines motors that Japanese car fans wax eloquently about.
This to me was a real deadly sin of the seventies-early eighties. The too big 4s and 90 degree V6s that seemed at war with itself even when functioning correctly. GM and everybody else investigated rotarys and elaborate engine mounts to solve it, but neither was the answer.
John: The GM RCE had a significantly bigger displacement than the Mazda 12A and 13B. It was generally described as 206 cu. in. (about 3.4 liters), although I think that was based on the idea that a rotary engine was the functional equivalent of a reciprocating engine twice its displacement, which would imply a geometric displacement of 103 cu. in. or about 1.7 liters. So, it would have had more torque than the Mazda engines. GM claimed performance comparable to the smog-controlled 305/307 V-8s, although how much of that was wishful thinking I don’t know.
Yes they did! What was AMC thinking, designing a car around an “experimental” engine that was not in regular production, and from another mfg to boot? More than anything else, I think the loss of the rotary engine was the greatest cause for the Pacer’s ultimate market failure.
They were probably thinking they could trust GM to deliver the goods. I know, I know…..
I liked these when they were new, and I still like them. I had a landlord with a green Starfire and I thought it looked sharp. This featured car is a real gem, I can’t remember when I last saw any of this body style even here in the Bay Area. I’m sure Chip Foose, et all, are circling right now, salivating at the notion of turning this into another overstyled, forgettable hot rod.
I don’t think Foose and his like are really interested in cars like this. If they are it’s likely because there’s a customer out there that’s willing to hand over suitcases full of cash to have it done.
For sale today in Northern California @ $2800
They really were great looking cars for the time period.
I always thought these were very handsome as fastbacks, although the coupes were horrible, particularly when vinyl roofed. I was out of the country from about 1977 to 1988 and by the time I got back these were already scarce on the ground. My impression at the time was that these cars were another failed execution by GM of a pretty, good idea. They fell into beater-car status very quickly.
They rusted like the very devil himself had taken a personal interest in destroying them and they ALL suffered from GM heavy-door® sag. Somehow the interiors seemed to age very quickly too. Finally, the design of the body had lovely big fender flares, perfect for large wheels and tires but GM naturally put tiny 14’s on them which looked like trunk casters.You could get a V-8 in them which I thought was an excellent idea, but I don’t ever remember seeing one outside a magazine. As for the last time I saw any Starfire/Monza/Skyhawk/Sunbird(?) I have no idea. If they were to survive anywhere, you would think rust-free Dallas would be a good bet, but Craigslist only has two (under any of the monikers) – a Monza coupe abandoned in a barn, and a fastback Starfire with 350 V-8 which is being ‘race-carred’.
All the rest are gone, gone, gone.
Attached is a picture of one in coupe form, NOT enhanced by its vinyl roofing
Actually- they’re not all completely gone. Many of the ones that have vanished from the streets have embarked on a second life as dedicated race cars.
A roadgoing Monza is a rare sight, but go to any drag racing event and they’re ALL OVER the place.
LMAO, Lokki!! My wife had that EXACT Monza Town Coupe – color, vinyl top and all! She paid $500 bucks for it, and made sure she had extra oil in the trunk at all times. She loved it as it was her very first car. One can never forget the freedom a car provides a 16 year old, so an old Monza was like gold to her back then. Unlike today, the kids are so spoiled – they are mad if they don’t have the latest model Lexus to drive. Boy have times changed!
Try 13’s
I had a ’78 Skyhawk that carried me from 16 though the end of high school. It was my Mom’s “sporty car” and ended up mine when she got a Cutlass Cruiser wagon as part of the divorce settlement.
Mine was white, a little easier to butch up with IMSA looking spoilers than the yellow Starfire. Only issue was pretty major – ball joint let loose on the way to school one day. Car got driven hard (ok, abused?) so not sure I can blame it.
Was replaced by an ’83 5speed V6 S10, and I did think that drivetrain would be perfect in an H body.
GM name debasement at it’s finest.
I have to admit, I like the 74-77 Camaro taillights on these more than I like them on the Camaro.
I agree about the taillights; they look too small on the Camaro, but fit this car just fine.
Putting aside the quality issues of many products from this era, it’s a decent looking car except for the bulbous front end (somehow, it reminds me of the Dimorphodon from the new Jurassic World).
Y’know, thinking about this, I wonder if this car looking kind of Camaro/Firebird-like reflects Oldsmobile’s periodic unsuccessful desire to get their own F-body. I don’t know specifically if Oldsmobile asked for one in the ’70s (John Beltz had pushed for it in the late ’60s), but it wouldn’t surprise me, particularly once Camaro and Firebird/Trans Am sales started to pick up again. The H-body hatchbacks were sort of 3/4ths of a pony car — maybe a consolation prize for the divisions that didn’t have one as well as a way for Chevrolet and Pontiac to bolster the heavyweight F-bodies against stuff like the Mustang II.
With the H body and especially the Vega/Pinto there was a great deal of criticism for not offering a sensible four door style. At the time Detroit wanted to keep their import fighters kids cars and leave the families to their larger more profitable lines.
By the time the Mustang II arrived in 1974, I think the F bodies were on borrowed time, like the B and C bodies in the eighties. Great sales kept the production line open, but slow development and no new models.
That said, a F body with a nicer than Espirit interior with a Olds 350 is thought provoking. What to call it? Jetstar?
Wow! I cannot recall, at least consciously, EVER seeing one of these, and my memory of picking out and identifying cars go back to the 80s. My grandmother’s neighbors in the late 80s still had a green Monza similar to these, but an Olds? This is like the Loch Ness monster. Agree with Paul N’s sentiments above. Helluva find.
This one’s mine. Since this picture was taken it’s been buried under two feet of boxes, thanks to my dad’s compulsive mail-order shopping habit.
That’s a nice clean example there! It even has the Polycast wheels!
No polycast, unfortunately. Just cheap plastic factory hubcaps over the stock steel wheels. When I do the 5 lug conversion I have a set of classic 5 slot rallys for it.
Did the V8 version still come with 13 inch wheels?
Yeah it did. Lame. I remember reading about the early V8 version ( pre-1977 ) being recalled for burning up their front wheel bearings.
Excellent, Christopher – I can’t wait to picture of the finished product. I had a slot-car IMSA Monza with that same front end that had light-up headlights. It was red and orange, and one of the coolest things I ever inherited from my older brother.
The original 305 engine. This picture was taken right after I replaced most of the emission and vacuum hoses, and installed a set of aftermarket chrome valve covers that I stole off of my ’66 Biscayne’s non-original 350 engine.
Is there room underneath and under the hood for a four barrel, dual exhaust and a radiator to keep it all cool in tight quarters?
I ‘ve never understood the idea from the late seventies of the new smaller disp. small blocks being in such a mild state of tune. A smaller disp. makes sense on the new smaller, lighter cars. For the few who still wanted V8 performance, a quadrajet would have added so much to these. The HO 305 in the later Monte Carlo SS managed 180hp meeting emissions without any technology not available in 75. A 267 then should have managed 155-160 with a similar state of tune and been a much better package. Remember the excitement when Ford started adding their on the shelf performance parts to the Mustang 302 in 1982.
When car and driver tested the Monza Spyder, they openly suggested pulling the new V8 in favor of a junkyard 283, only to reinstall the stock still new engine at trade time.
Nice project you have.
Unfortunately, in order to comply with California smog regs I’m pretty much stuck with the smog-spec Rochester 2GC it came with 🙁 . Even so, not all is lost.
I plan on sending the carb to Sean Murphy Induction and having it opened up from its wimpy 350 CFM to 500 CFM. For a stock, low compression, 305 CID small block that should be ideal. Anything more would just be overkill. I’m also replacing the wimpy stock air cleaner with a big mouth 2 bbl. air cleaner I grabbed off of a junked 350 2bbl. Nova. I’m plumbing that air cleaner into a homemade cold air system that funnels air from under the front bumper, through the passenger side fenderwell, and into the air cleaner. I plan on using the deeper truck air cleaner lid instead of flat stock one, and installing a fiberglass 2″ cowl hood for both clearance and weight reduction.
For exhaust I have two options- get a generic set of Vega V8 headers and install the bungs for the AIR, or a set of aftermarket 2nd-gen F-body headers fit with slight modifications.
On a small 305, the ideal size for dual exhaust would be 2 1/4″. A single 2.5″ provides equal flow, plus in various magazine tests, a large single has been shown to produce more midrange torque than a set of smaller duals. Not to mention less weight penalty.
With the addition of a heavy-duty four row radiator, I’ll have no choice but to ditch the stock fan for an electric pusher setup. The factory solid hub fan barely fits between the stock recessed two-row radiator and the engine. With a fatter three or four-row radiator, it won’t fit at all.
Optima battery, moved to the right rear spare tire well. With the factory collapsible compact spare gone and the plastic cover removed, a stock sized full size spare will neatly lie flat in that corner, both improving traction and hiding the battery. The factory latch striker for the spare tire cover works great as a hold-down hook for the now full-sized spare.
The battery tray I use for my trunk mount conversions is a reproduction of the stock battery tray for 67 / 68 Mustangs / Cougars / Falcons, with the vertical leg portion deliberately broken off.
I think an injected 60 degree v6 engine would be right at home in one of these, mated to a t5 borg/warner, you’d have a fun car.
The thing I liked about the chevy over the others is that they came standard with a handling package & a full set of gauges. That’s they way my 75 was built, it was the most basic H body(manual everything, no a/c, 2.3L, 4spd) you could get. I remember the astro vent were pretty effective once you got up to speed. The one thing it needed was a shorter axle ratio, 2.56s really suck.
I don’t usually do this, but I totally sneaked a peek of your article before it was published. After all, the odds of finding a Starfire nowadays are extremely slim! Hell, any GM H-Body is going to be a rare find nowadays. Cheap cars may sell extremely well but there’s little motivation for most people to hold onto them, and if they are sporty they tend to get used up even quicker. What are the odds you would find many elderly grandmothers with a low-mileage Starfire? If anything, they probably would have preferred a Monza Towne Coupe.
In 1975, around 31k units were produced, dipping to 28k in 1976. In 1977, there were around 19k, then 17k for 1978, 20k for 1979 and a paltry 8k for 1980. Oldsmobile dealers must have been very good at up-selling! In most years, the Skyhawk actually outsold it and it was V6 only. However, the Starfire was available with a four and (very briefly) a V8!
One wonders if perhaps Oldsmobile should have received the notchback body. The most conservative body went to the Chevy and Pontiac for some inexplicable reason! GM did this with the ’78 A-Bodies too… Although, that being said, I doubt the Aeroback body would have been better received as a Malibu or LeMans.
Excellent photos as always and I’m glad you went back! A wonderful find!
William, you know I don’t mind at all! And thanks, RE: the photos. (The respect is mutual, brother.) I completely agree with you that Olds should have received the notchback body…a complete headscratcher. I seem to remember reading that the notchback bodystyle (Monza Town Coupe) was introduced mid-year, so if Olds needed an immediate subcompact stopgap, the hatch was the only game in town…from the beginning.
I actually got the 28K production figure for ’75 from the online Classic Car Database, though I’m not sure where they got their info. http://www.classiccardatabase.com/postwar-models/Oldsmobile.php If a credible source, this may be a regular go-to stop when completing posts with info I can’t find from a more definitive source.
here’s a chart from an H-body enthusiast site..
(I love these cars enough that I’ve bookmarked this site – there’s A LOT of great pics of these cars!)
http://monza.homestead.com/files/StarfireOptionsStudy.htm
That Starfire is particularly rare with the cheapo wheels and the dog dishes. But that makes it all the more delicious. Most of the ones I remember had the 4 spoke rally style wheels or wheel covers, rarely the dog dishes.
A friend of mine had a 1975 like this, with the 3.8 V6 and a 5 speed (IIRC). It was a quick car and pretty decent on fuel consumption. But the car was slowly falling apart, which he found irritating. I thought it wasn’t bad for a 9 year old car at the time, but it was traded for a 1976 Buick Century.
I would rock one of these. Someone further up the string mentioned about putting a 60 degree V6 in one of these and that’s a great idea. Even one of them out of a bone yard had more HP than the 305 did back then. But if I ran across a survivor like this, I wouldn’t change it at all.
GM badge engineering at its finest; the Chevy Monza, Buick Skyhawk and Olds Starfire were virtually identical save for a few details. A friend I worked with years ago had the Buick version, and despite the fact Buick was supposedly the #2 division at GM the interior was absolutely cheap. The old GM dictum of “put the money where the customer can see it” obviously applied with these vehicles.
The Oldsmobile’s design did ring a bell. And then I remembered why: this Opel Manta B CC, also mentioned in the article.
I actually got to drive one of these back in the day. And it was a yellow one with a V-8. Belonged to a female co-worker. I think the year was 1978 and it was only a couple of years old. Like many on here, I liked the looks of these cars. However, driving it left me feeling it was just OK. Nothing too horrible about it yet nothing that impressed me that much, either. Definitely sat you very low. I thought the V-8 was a letdown as it didn’t feel very responsive compared to the V-8 Mopars I was more familiar with. Then again, could have had more to do with the transmission or the rear end gears. Once again, as so many others have said, I can’t remember how many years it’s been since I’ve seen one; certainly many years ago.
The two H-bodies I most remember from my youth were both somewhat rare or unusual examples. The first was a ’77 Skyhawk Nighthawk that some friends of my parents bought for their son as a high school graduation gift. Black with gold decals, black interior and pretty well loaded up.
The other belonged to the wife of the pharmaceutical rep who lived across the street from us. It was a ’78 Sunbird hatchback with a V-6 and a 5-speed. They special ordered it with nearly every option in the book. Pontiac honeycomb wheels, “Trans Am” steering wheel, rear spoiler, sunroof, handling package, 8-track player, the works. Some sort of darker bronze color IIRC.
After they divorced she traded the Sunbird for a generic A-body sedan (think it was a Ciera), which was in turn traded for an XJ6 after she received a sizable medical malpractice settlement.
The first and only time i’ve ever seen one of these where when I moved to Trondheim, Norway around 2005 to take a few years at the university there. No less than 3 examples where roaming the streets, and used as race cars in the “street legal” racing class they had there, arranged through “ACCN”, Amercan Car Club of Norway.
1 Buick Skyhawk, 1 Oldsmobile Starfire, and one Chevy Monza, all with hopup small blocks with headers, 4bbl”s, worked trannies and rearends. Displacements was 350, 383, and one 400, afr cylinderheads and more. These were certainly fast on the track, im assuming mostly because of the low weight of the vehicle. Stock looks and stock interiors, stereos, wipers, full glass and everything you’d expect on a street vehicle.
The Monza in particular was very hot, bought for the paltry sum of the equivalent of $500, then welded up all rust, acceptable black home done paintjob, then $20 000 in parts, 500 hp 400 smallblock, street/strip tranny, big rearend, nitto performance tires, slicks for raceday. All into a dual outlet single monza style muffler, which made it sound as badass as it moved. Ive been salivating over these ever since. Hopped up, it much more of a sportscar than the f body i had, but im thinking a LS3 would have been anazibg in one of these.
I just wanted to share overall production figures of all four H-body models
http://monza.homestead.com/files/HBodyProductionNumbersWP.htm
one day I hope to have one of these cars!
Hello,
Somebody can tell me if The spare Wheel must be Has dish in the trunk?
A person in France has tell me it is not his place.
It’s a 1975 Buick Skyhawk
Thanks
I’m not sure I understand. That spare looks to be a “Space Saver”, which collapses until inflated. And I assume it is stored in a well under the rear floor panel where it is now sitting. The tire needs to be deflated in order to fit there.
I hope this helps.
Thanks very much
This car’s been parked in Bucktown for the past week. Bored at work, I image-searched the model for funsies, and saw this. Looks like it’s still kickin.
I saw it too! Just today. Parked in Bucktown, just east of Western Ave.
This is the sales brochure and my car looked exactly like this one.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/1975-Oldsmobile-Starfire-Sales-Brochure-Folder-Excellent-Original-75/283433386340?hash=item41fdf24164:g:cpkAAOSwIxZZhnu-
I bought it new in March 1975. Red hot 4 speed first off of red lights. I loved this car. Kept it for 9.5 years and it had over 91,000 miles when I parted with it because the AC went out and cost $1,000 to fix. I ordered the car with limited slip differential. That V6 could fly.
I bought my Starfire in 1975, factory new and I still have it. Glasier blue with black interior. Thinking of selling. Anyone interested?
My first car was a 79 Monza, so when i seen this one up for sale i didnt hesitate. I’m now the proud owner of this 1977 Oldsmobile Starfire, 231V6 with the bourg-warner 5speed.
My female step-cousin had a Monza with the 305 in HS. I believe it was yellow, too. She didn’t take it to college–I think her dad wanted it, and he’d paid for it.
In ’77, my dad began his last Navy tour: 3 years with a 90 mi/day commute to Laurel MD. He thought of trading the ’68 Electra for a Skyhawk, but the net $ savings weren’t that great even with that many miles, and the back seat was useless. A year later, the Electra was on 7 cylinders, so he got an aeroback Century 4 dr, though he really wanted a Regal.
My brother bought an orange used first year Monza for his Wife. Even with the four it had the heaviest steering I’ve ever experienced in a small car. The car couldn’t have been more than five years old and it had sagging doors. With a/c it was definitely underpowered.
Later on I bought a ’76 Pontiac Astre coupe w/ 5 speed for myself. It was only a year old at the time. It was silver with a red interior, a real stripper but I liked the way it looked.
A friend of mine had one in college, and my first ride was a couple of hours mostly on the highway. I didn’don’t really have a list of what I’d ridden in at that point but I remember feeling like I was sitting on the floor–and I’m tallish, which the 5’2″ owner was not.
I think it was V8 minus power steering–it seemed very front-heavy for a small car then but i don’t have the numbers at hand.
Does anyone know if “Christopher O. ( Formerly CougarXR7 )” ever got his Monza back on the road?
After all is said & done …..
*This* is a Starfire:
One of my fifth-grade teachers at the nervous school I was sent away to drove a maroon late ’70s copy of the Starfire. I remember admiring the overall shape of the car, and I can see a little of it inherited in cars such as the 10th gen Honda Accord.
It is a very aerodyamicaly proper shape.
That was in 1981 when she started teaching there. In 1982, she and her husband bought a brand new Nissan Stanza hatchback. Chunky shaped compared to their outgoing Starfire, but they treated me and another student to dinner for being good students, and we got to ride in it. Very futuristic interior for its day, and my teacher’s husband made a point of showing off the ‘door ajar’ diagram on the dash. We all took turns in the parking lot opening and shutting the doors, and watching the corresponding ‘door’ light up on the diagram.