PDA

View Full Version : pros & cons of Monte's



hrdchrgin13
08-31-2010, 05:05 PM
I have been browsing around for a new car and I have found some Monte Carlo's, one big body and one Metric I'm not that familiar with them but I know that the front end geometry is better on the Big bodies. Any more particulars I need to know before I make my decision.

hogracer3d
08-31-2010, 07:08 PM
We are very pleased with the big GM chassis, tougher, more forgiving set-up, better geometry, and only slightly heavier.

The 73-77 Monte's actually had more engine offset, than some rules allow.

Personally, it's the full-size chassis, all the way

matchbox
09-01-2010, 12:03 PM
what would happen if you shortened the wheelbase on the chevelle

cautrell05
09-01-2010, 01:21 PM
Big montes had the #1 plug almost even with the upper ball joint depending on caster settings.

Nick

dirty white boy
09-01-2010, 08:09 PM
you can shorten the big monty how ever much ya like an get the benifit of the set back....but to get the metric to drive you gotta move a-arm mounts,..chang lowers to the right year nova lowers an switch them round back wards ,..some run ford uppers or tube ones.....an gotta know witch ball joints to use with idk witch spindles or it'll push like a dump truck.....not to mention what gotta be changed to get the rearend to work half right...

hogracer3d
09-01-2010, 10:53 PM
Ours is a 105" 79 Coupe D' Ville, on a 3-link

Metric's bend the frame much easier at the front coil spring area (espicially if you notch it there for spring clearance)

Hillbilly Deluxe
09-02-2010, 04:46 PM
Stock CAR Driver has the right idea.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Monte_Carlo

Basically they lengthened the front end - past the tires to make the hood longer to mimic the Cadillac Elderado..

The front end geometry was very good, most pieces were shared with the Camaro.

There was more of a benefit moving the rear end forward then there was moving the engine back.

Billy Teegarden once said - you damm near needed to have the left rear tire rubbing your shoulders to make the car handle.

The suspension in the older Monte Carlo's were much better and much heavier then the Metric's and they were more forgiving then the Metric's which were known to be fussy - to get to handle.

Most of the people i know who raced them, raked back the windshield and lowered the roof and put wings on the interior of the car and they were Damm near bullet proof once you put a 9 inch rear end into them.

hrdchrgin13
09-02-2010, 11:16 PM
I appreciate all the feedback guys, It kind of looks like you really can't go wrong with either.

iceman91009
10-20-2010, 09:39 PM
you can shorten the big monty how ever much ya like an get the benifit of the set back....but to get the metric to drive you gotta move a-arm mounts,..chang lowers to the right year nova lowers an switch them round back wards ,..some run ford uppers or tube ones.....an gotta know witch ball joints to use with idk witch spindles or it'll push like a dump truck.....not to mention what gotta be changed to get the rearend to work half right... i have ran a metris monte at Lawrenceburg speedway for 3 years now all the front susp. is stock and in stock location and really have had no problems with driving the car its reallly been just a learning how to set it up and so far we have gotten better every year best finish so far was 3rd and got thst this year the only con for any monte for tht matter is body parts if someone a has a body part for a monte 81 to 86 they think they have gold and want just that to buy them

Dirtrace54
10-23-2010, 11:21 PM
As someone that has driven both, its a mixed bag and the difference is what your rules will allow and driving style. My first car was the big monte, and for my first year of racing it was a breeze to drive. Had 7 feature wins in the one year I drove it and won the track championship. The metric monte I had for 3 nights the next year and drove the complete year the 3rd year. Had a total of 9 feature wins with it, and if I hadnt sat out 2 races do to family vacation, would have won the championship in that car also (the guy that won the championship ran every night, and just one 10th place finish on the other 2 nights would have made the difference since I lost by a 1 1/2 points).

The big monte was much stronger and much easier to get close on setup, and EXTREMELY forgiving.

The metric on the other hand was much more responsive. The metric when the setup was right and you could hit your marks was faster.

NOW with all that said, both of my cars had to have factory frames. I have had a friend that ran an outlaw style of street stock with a shortened big monte frame under a metric body. The key to the rollover problem is that they dont need lowered like the metric to get the roll center right (they also do not need taller balljoints on the big montes), and where most like a combo of 2 and 3 inch offset rims on the metric monte, the big montes like 3 and 4 in offsets. The shortened big monte seemed to have the best of both worlds and would be the best bet in money allows.

Just my 2 cents

Steve_Voisinet
11-14-2012, 10:37 PM
stock car driver - what offset rims do you recommend with the metric car?