Talk:Holden Monaro

Specification

I think the body type convertible should be removed - the convertible (and wasn't it gorgeous) was a one off show car.

Also, in the specifications for pre 1971 cars there is no mention of the 253 cubic inch or 4.2 Litre V8 (HT onwards), 308 ci (5.0 litre) V8 (HT onwards, replaces 307 ci), 327 ci V8 (HK only), or 350 ci V8 (HT and HG models). All were readily available and now highly sort after - particularly the 327 and 350 ci versions. 220.240.235.14 04:38, 3 January 2007 (UTC)Steve 04:32, 3 January 2007 (UTC) 220.240.235.14 04:35, 3 January 2007(UTC)

saloon? Do you mean sedan? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.218.66.139 (talk) 14:35, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Vauxhall Monaro?

I searched for Vauxhall Monaro, but came here. OK, so the Vauxhall Monaro is just a rebadged Holden Monaro. Possibly a few minor differences due to different legislations, and there are a couple of styling tweaks, but other than that they are the same. However, it is only the LATEST Monaro that has been sold as a Vauxhall Monaro. The earlier versions weren't available in the UK. Therefore, I propose a separate article entitled "Vauxhall Monaro" that details just the British part of the Monaro legacy.

The "British part of the Monaro legacy" currently adds up to about to two paragraphs. If the Vauxhall Monaro section grows a bit it may warrant being moved to its own article, but for now I think it's fine where it is. I've restructured the article a bit and added subheadings so it should read a bit better now. I've updated the Vauxhall Monaro redirect to point to the new section --Richmeister_talk 01:24, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Alleged "blandness" of new GTO

Many people dislike the 2004 Monaro/GTO design. However, I personally find the newer look to be more exciting and stylish compared to the originals. Can we please refrain from sneaking opinion words into the GTO section when documenting its lack of success? The article can reference how people have found it "bland", but shouldn't itself insist the notion onto the reader--it's a subjective matter, after all. 71.139.178.45 20:01, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

OK, so wording long the lines of "potental buyers described the styling as excessively plain or bland, and did not resemble their idea of a modern GTO" would be OK? By the way NPOV does not say that no opinions should be expressed, it says that all significant opinions should be represented. BTW2, if you don't think that is a significant POV then if it wasn't the car's looks that caused its failure in the US market, to what would /you/ attribute its failure? I don't think anyone has said it is bad mechanically, and it is better built than most US made GMs. Greglocock 20:27, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Actually, the main article for the Pontiac GTO does exactly what you are suggesting. This article has and only needs a small section dedicated to the Monaro's export to the US, so discreetness is probably the best option; your cited reference and the GTO article already cover the car's initial reception in the US in depth, so there really isn't any need to drive in such a point further than what is currently stated. My main concern, however, is the underhanded use of the word "bland" as if to say it is fact and not the opinion that it is. An actual fact is that people complained about the looks of the car and that had led to poor sales (something which I never denied), and there's nothing wrong with this article mentioning that for a bit. But it seems as if you're trying really hard to have the article itself insist that the car looked bland, which, as I've stated, is a matter of opinion, and it may be possible weasel wording (which is what I meant by sneaking opinion words into the GTO section). Wikipedia:Neutral point of view covers assertions of popular views and readers forming their own opinions in its explanation section. 71.139.178.45 00:11, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Actually the current wording is fine. However, this phrase earlier in the article seems to be excessively subjective "it was somehow seen as not as sporty looking compared to the earlier HK-HT-HG series, but is often now considered one of the best looking body designs to come from an Australian producer. " given that it is uncited, and sounds like OR and fails NPOV by your incorrect definition. Greglocock 03:36, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

The Third Gen Picture

The 3'rd gen infobox picture is a Pontiac GTO, surely it would be better to have a picture of a Holden Monaro than a Badge engineered version which has its own article? An article about an Australian car should really have the version sold in Australia as its info box picture and at the very least have a car with the steering wheel on the right side for the country.(Morcus (talk) 00:18, 29 July 2008 (UTC))

Chevrolet Opala

• 
  Chevrolet Opala
• Holden Monaro
  Holden Monaro
• 
  Opel Commodore

If the two are similar then why not include a little information about it? Thanks. --200.103.115.210 (talk) 20:48, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

From that photo they aren't. --Falcadore (talk) 21:30, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

They are not related. The glasshouse outline is similar, but the side panel lines are very different. OSX (talk • contributions) 03:10, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Added one more image in the gallery. It is the Opel Commodore and this is what it looks like the Brazilian Opala. HyperBroad (talk) 17:18, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Local 308ci and Imported Chev 307ci Engine Bay Image

I've got images of the local 308ci and imported Chev 307ci. Would it be worthy of putting these on? —Preceding unsigned comment added by KillaMonaro471 (talk • contribs) 23:30, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Sure, but the best place for a photo of the Holden 308 might be here. --Falcadore (talk) 01:32, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

HK Monaro Image

It would be a much betetr idea to inclue an image of the HK Monaro somewhere in the article as there are none on there. In the HK section, there is a green base model HG which many users may mistake for a HK. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KillaMonaro471 (talk • contribs) 23:16, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

If you've got one, add it in! --Falcadore (talk) 23:20, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry I'm new to Wikipedia. Will put one up soon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KillaMonaro471 (talk • contribs) 23:27, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

And if you have ANY other images of anything else, feel free to upload those too. We are always looking for new images to add. OSX (talk • contributions) 00:55, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

I'll be putting an image of the HK Monaro. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KillaMonaro471 (talk • contribs) 05:46, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

You don't have to tell anyone you are doing it before hand, or ask permission (although drastic changes should probably be flagged). Be bold. Just do it. --Falcadore (talk) 06:43, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Well was going to replace the green Base-Model HG Monaro. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KillaMonaro471 (talk • contribs) 06:46, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

It should probably be pointed out that convention in car articles is that the first picture should be of the most recent model unless an earlier model has particular significance over other models. --Falcadore (talk) 06:30, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Not true:

"The image selected for an article's top (lead) infobox does not need to show any particular version or generation of the vehicle, such as the latest, the last, the first, the best-selling, or any other. Vehicle production date is not a factor when determining the quality of an image and its suitability to illustrate the lead infobox. Regardless of the ages of the vehicle shown, pick a clear, high-quality image according to the image quality guidelines; one that clearly shows a vehicle relevant to the article without photoflash glare or other photographic faults, against a simple and contrasting background. Such an image is always to be preferred over a lower-quality image, such as one that shows photoflash glare or a distracting background. Low-volume, unusual, or otherwise unrepresentative variants are generally not preferred for the lead infobox image." — Wikipedia:WikiProject Automobiles/Conventions#Images

However, because most people are more familiar with the VX-Commodore based Monaro as opposed to the 40 year-old HK/HT/HG generation, it would be more useful to our readers if the newer car is depicted first. Older readers accustomed to the older models will also (hopefully) recognize the newer cars as well. OSX (talk • contributions) 06:39, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Heres the solution: http://www.nextcar.com.au/h.i.holden.monaro.HK.GTS327.1968.V2.2001.CV8.jpg (KillaMonaro471 (talk) 07:50, 29 June 2009 (UTC))

Not a free-use (IE: it's a copyrighted image) image (See Wikipedia:Copyrights and Commons:Licensing) and can't be used. Bidgee (talk) 07:57, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Didn't say any copyright on the image. Can;t you give credit to the source? If neither, take a look on the Holden Torana article, on of of the tables there is two images (6 cyl. LC and 4cyl. LC) on top of each other, maybe we could do that to this article.(KillaMonaro471 (talk) 08:05, 29 June 2009 (UTC))

It doesn't have to have copyright on the image. http://www.nextcar.com.au/n.holden.monaro.VZ.cv8z.05jul.html has "Copyright © 2005. All rights reserved" meaning the content (photos and text) are copyrighted even if it's from a webpages without Copyright and/or © are still classed as copyrighted. Bidgee (talk) 08:20, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Separate HT/HG into individual sections

Allthough there were onyl minor differences seperating the two, wouldn't it be good to give them their own categories? I'm planning on adding a lot more to this article as I have a book containing many pages on each model. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KillaMonaro471 (talk • contribs) 07:18, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Sure. It would be much better if the HT and HG were separated. When you do add information, could you please do one thing? When using information from the book mentioned above, could your after each sentence/paragraph of information please include the book's title and page number in brackets.

For example: "The Monaro was named after the town of Monaro, New South Wales (Example Book About Holdens, page 123). The HT and HG models of the Monaro can be distinguished from the HK by the adoption of plastic grilles (Example Book About Holdens, page 125).

I will fix these up to be listed in the "References" section at the bottom of the page. OSX (talk • contributions) 03:28, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah sure no problems. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KillaMonaro471 (talk • contribs) 11:30, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

HX LE Wheels

Page says the wheels on the HX LE where steal with covers.. several other sites list them as polycast http://www.lemonaro.com.au/wordpress/?page_id=18 can any one describe polycast and update correctly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.253.15.253 (talk) 08:49, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

HG ORIGINAL BASE MODEL 186 MONARO?

hey does any one know if there are any ORIGINAL BASE MODEL 186 HG MONARO 'S. left in australia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fitzy12 (talk • contribs) 03:14, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Holden Monaro. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070521184041/http://www.greensvauxhall.co.uk/ to http://www.greensvauxhall.co.uk/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070521102008/http://www.wortec.co.uk/ to http://www.wortec.co.uk/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:27, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Holden Monaro. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140228013015/http://www.motoring.com.au/advice/2008/large-passenger/holden-special-vehicles/coupe/used-car-advice-hsv-v2-vz-coupe-gto-2002-06-7499 to http://www.motoring.com.au/advice/2008/large-passenger/holden-special-vehicles/coupe/used-car-advice-hsv-v2-vz-coupe-gto-2002-06-7499
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060821041728/http://www.quickstep.com.au/newsMedia/media/hsv1.pdf to http://www.quickstep.com.au/newsMedia/media/hsv1.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:54, 5 November 2017 (UTC)