My brother just picked up an 86' Monte the other day. Stock everything, from the crap 2 barrel 305 all the way back to the stock 3.73 posi and 4 link suspension. It seems like the way his car is setup, that it would handle a bit better, would it?

 

no thirdgens are far better

 

Could you please go into detail in why they handle better? I love the handling of my Camaro, I haven't driven his car yet to see how it differs.

 

look up the skidpad tests online. they handle better, that's it. bigger tires, better suspension, less weight.

 

A G-body is a full frame car. F-body is a unibody car.

"Handle better" needs a better classification. There are many G-body and F-body drag cars, stock cars and road course cars. How well they handle depends on how they're set up. Even in stock trim, one will perform differently that the other in different situations.

The third gen's torque arm suspension has advantages and disadvantages to the G-body's triangulated 4-link system and it doesn't take much to improve either system.

 

my friend has a 1988 monte' ss. driving his car is like driving a ship, it DOES NOT like to turn, the body roll is insane.

 

Stephen is right, both cars have plus's and minus's. It all depends on what you want to do with the car and how much you want to spend. In purely stock trim I do not think the Monte will handle as well. But, make a few changes and I believe they will handle better then most drivers would be capable of driving it.
I will say this much, my Monte flat out handles like a slot car, but I intentionally made it that way.

 

One big difference for turning is that the G bods dont have a panhard bar so the roll center is way higher in back.

 

With comparable setups (same types of parts, spring rates, shocks, bushings…) 3rd gens will tend to outhandle g-bodies mostly in that the G-bodies have more places to flex and mess up suspension geometry, even getting down to the full frame (which amazingly does not help rigidity).

Design wise, the g-body’s SLA front suspension is theoretically better, but in practice, it’s setup without the camber gain that it should have and something always seems to flex enough to cause issues. The other side of that is the 3rd gen’s modified Macpherson strut setup by design only has good suspension geometry in a fairly small range, but the typical lowered f-body doesn’t need that much suspension travel and the whole trick to making them work is to limit travel, which is fine most places that you’re going to be evaluating handling, would suck offroad.

OTOH, the rear sliding link TA setup on a 3rd gen is superior to the factory triangulated 4 link in the g-body, which is why TA conversions exist for mustangs which basically have a similar rear suspension to a g-body.

The fact is that 3rd gens ended up in a freak happy place where they can be made to work quite well with their fairly simple and even primitive suspension. Compare it to a 4th gen, which design wise has a superior front suspension design and the same rear suspension, it’s amazing how much easier it is to drive a 3rd gen hard as long as you’re willing to deal with the more aggressive feel of its front suspension.