Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

Login


Take the time to read our Privacy Policy.

9 Pages123>»
HK1837 Offline
#1 Posted : Wednesday, 25 November 2015 4:58:46 PM(UTC)
HK1837

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Moderator, Registered, Veteran
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 14,568

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 480 time(s) in 458 post(s)
All

I just noticed an anomaly with red 308's.

HT-HG are essentially the same engine with same basic components and 9.0:1 compression, although later HQ got the leaner idle 704 Quadrajet. Early LH are the same.

At HJ release a far superior 9.7:1 308 was released and also went into later LH and early LX.

HX-HZ seem to be quoted still at 9.7:1, however VB Commodore seems to be 9.4:1. It is that way in the VB Service manual, Scientific Publications and even Dr Terry has it at 9.4:1.

HX-HZ at 9.7:1 is in parts catalogues, Scientific Publications and also Features manuals.

The V8 engines did change to the new "blue" type block at VB release so maybe the 308 did drop in compression at that time but it was never documented in HZ anywhere that I can find. I have the service letters for the whole year where the block changed and there is no mention of a change in HZ's 308 specs.

Are there 2 x different 308's from VB release until 1980 or is the VB info simply wrong?

Unfortunately the late LX parts catalogues still have both 4.2 and 5.0 as 9.0:1.
_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords?
justgm Offline
#2 Posted : Wednesday, 25 November 2015 6:06:50 PM(UTC)
justgm

Rank: Member

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 30/04/2005(UTC)
Posts: 461
Man
New Zealand

Was thanked: 14 time(s) in 13 post(s)
Blue Engines are VC-VH .........VB are still Red . I think HZ engines changed spec at VB release , we had different door handles & trim @ VB . Mark
life is good in "Wine & Holden Marlborough "
HK1837 Offline
#3 Posted : Wednesday, 25 November 2015 7:20:31 PM(UTC)
HK1837

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Moderator, Registered, Veteran
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 14,568

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 480 time(s) in 458 post(s)
Blue engines started at VC release but the blocks changed to the new block used in blue engines at VB release for all 4.2 and 5.0L engines.
_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords?
justgm Offline
#4 Posted : Thursday, 26 November 2015 6:12:02 PM(UTC)
justgm

Rank: Member

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 30/04/2005(UTC)
Posts: 461
Man
New Zealand

Was thanked: 14 time(s) in 13 post(s)
Pretty sure VB engines all carryover ( apart from sump) from HZ .......VC Blue , new heads & intake manifold , short blocks on V8 still the same as Red motors , but they did look good in that nice blue .....I have had a VC Sl 4.2 , VH SLX 4.2 both nice driving cars in the day . Mark.
life is good in "Wine & Holden Marlborough "
HK1837 Offline
#5 Posted : Thursday, 26 November 2015 7:01:46 PM(UTC)
HK1837

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Moderator, Registered, Veteran
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 14,568

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 480 time(s) in 458 post(s)
No they aren't, blocks changed to new style at VB release. There is a service letter for it with engine number breakpoints. The rest of the engine is the same as HZ except for the quoted compression ratio difference between HZ and VB.
_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords?
HK1837 Offline
#6 Posted : Monday, 1 February 2016 6:22:58 PM(UTC)
HK1837

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Moderator, Registered, Veteran
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 14,568

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 480 time(s) in 458 post(s)
I just found the appropriate information. HZ features manual shows a revision for the 308's compression ratio in the Engine Technical Data in July 1978, where it shows 9.4:1. So it looks like for VB Commodore release GMH changed the 308's compression ratio from 9.7 to 9.4:1. It doesn't show any difference or change in the piston dish volume so the revised XT5 style block for VB release must have a slightly higher deck height along with the revised valley head bolt bosses, or thicker head gaskets are used. So it looks like the 308 goes:

HT-HQ 9.0:1.
HJ-mid 1978 9.7:1
mid 1978 until WB/VC 9.4:1.
WB/VC-VK 9.2:1.
_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords?
Shearer Offline
#7 Posted : Wednesday, 3 February 2016 8:50:20 AM(UTC)
Shearer

Rank: Member

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 8/11/2009(UTC)
Posts: 122
Man

Thanks: 1 times
Could the difference in compression be the change in head gasket material, ei from shim to composite?
HK1837 Offline
#8 Posted : Wednesday, 3 February 2016 9:08:06 AM(UTC)
HK1837

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Moderator, Registered, Veteran
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 14,568

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 480 time(s) in 458 post(s)
It could be, but I cannot find that info. Problem is though the 4.2L engine remains at 9.4:1, you'd think it'd drop by approx. 0.3:1 as well if the gasket material changed.

The 253/4.2 goes from memory:

HT-HJ and LH pre ADR27A: 9.0:1.
HX-HZ, VB and LX post ADR27A: 9.4:1.
VC to the end of WB: 9.2:1.

Edited by user Wednesday, 3 February 2016 9:14:26 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords?
castellan Offline
#9 Posted : Thursday, 4 February 2016 2:05:43 PM(UTC)
castellan

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 26/02/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,606

Thanks: 13 times
Was thanked: 27 time(s) in 25 post(s)
Originally Posted by: HK1837 Go to Quoted Post
All

I just noticed an anomaly with red 308's.

HT-HG are essentially the same engine with same basic components and 9.0:1 compression, although later HQ got the leaner idle 704 Quadrajet. Early LH are the same.

At HJ release a far superior 9.7:1 308 was released and also went into later LH and early LX.

HX-HZ seem to be quoted still at 9.7:1, however VB Commodore seems to be 9.4:1. It is that way in the VB Service manual, Scientific Publications and even Dr Terry has it at 9.4:1.

HX-HZ at 9.7:1 is in parts catalogues, Scientific Publications and also Features manuals.

The V8 engines did change to the new "blue" type block at VB release so maybe the 308 did drop in compression at that time but it was never documented in HZ anywhere that I can find. I have the service letters for the whole year where the block changed and there is no mention of a change in HZ's 308 specs.

Are there 2 x different 308's from VB release until 1980 or is the VB info simply wrong?

Unfortunately the late LX parts catalogues still have both 4.2 and 5.0 as 9.0:1.

Far superior HJ 308 come off it, it has a cam for pollution and a intake that is squared off.
And the HJ 253 has a smaller cam for pollution then the early ones did.
Sadly power was rated at nonsense figures.


I believe all blue engines all got improved strength pistons and this may of started before the blue engines came out.

What's different with the V8 blocks in the blue ?

I have seen original red block with 3.3L casting on the block of a late HZ ute and it had the blue motor exhaust valve rotators and the head was a little different casting near the in and ex manifolds to early HZ-X.

The HZ 6 CYL gets the better rods and bolts when the great starfire 4 comes out.
The Starfire 4 gets UN cast on the block and the VC on they get a 1.9 casting.

Funny they get the UN casting at the start of the starfire 4, just like the early 179 gets HP and the early 308 gets HP, and I have seen a NP cast on a 202 block.
Dr Terry Offline
#10 Posted : Thursday, 4 February 2016 2:38:16 PM(UTC)
Dr Terry

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Moderator, Registered
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 6,015

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 197 time(s) in 180 post(s)
Originally Posted by: castellan Go to Quoted Post

Far superior HJ 308 come off it, it has a cam for pollution and a intake that is squared off.
And the HJ 253 has a smaller cam for pollution then the early ones did.
Sadly power was rated at nonsense figures.


I don't agree. The HJ 308 had no "pollution gear" which effected power output & the Oct 74 onwards 308 had higher compression & a better cam than the earlier version. The HJ is really no different to the HQ's.

The "pollution gear" which effected power output was the HX ADR27A stuff. The ADR27 rules only changed idle mixture limitations & added the closed PCV set-up.

Dr Terry

Edited by user Thursday, 4 February 2016 3:43:56 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Fixed a typo (94 instead of 74)

If at first you don't succeed, just call it Version 1.0
HK1837 Offline
#11 Posted : Thursday, 4 February 2016 3:40:57 PM(UTC)
HK1837

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Moderator, Registered, Veteran
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 14,568

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 480 time(s) in 458 post(s)
Originally Posted by: castellan Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: HK1837 Go to Quoted Post
All

I just noticed an anomaly with red 308's.

HT-HG are essentially the same engine with same basic components and 9.0:1 compression, although later HQ got the leaner idle 704 Quadrajet. Early LH are the same.

At HJ release a far superior 9.7:1 308 was released and also went into later LH and early LX.

HX-HZ seem to be quoted still at 9.7:1, however VB Commodore seems to be 9.4:1. It is that way in the VB Service manual, Scientific Publications and even Dr Terry has it at 9.4:1.

HX-HZ at 9.7:1 is in parts catalogues, Scientific Publications and also Features manuals.

The V8 engines did change to the new "blue" type block at VB release so maybe the 308 did drop in compression at that time but it was never documented in HZ anywhere that I can find. I have the service letters for the whole year where the block changed and there is no mention of a change in HZ's 308 specs.

Are there 2 x different 308's from VB release until 1980 or is the VB info simply wrong?

Unfortunately the late LX parts catalogues still have both 4.2 and 5.0 as 9.0:1.

Far superior HJ 308 come off it, it has a cam for pollution and a intake that is squared off.
And the HJ 253 has a smaller cam for pollution then the early ones did.
Sadly power was rated at nonsense figures.


I believe all blue engines all got improved strength pistons and this may of started before the blue engines came out.

What's different with the V8 blocks in the blue ?

I have seen original red block with 3.3L casting on the block of a late HZ ute and it had the blue motor exhaust valve rotators and the head was a little different casting near the in and ex manifolds to early HZ-X.

The HZ 6 CYL gets the better rods and bolts when the great starfire 4 comes out.
The Starfire 4 gets UN cast on the block and the VC on they get a 1.9 casting.

Funny they get the UN casting at the start of the starfire 4, just like the early 179 gets HP and the early 308 gets HP, and I have seen a NP cast on a 202 block.


HJ 308 is superior in performance to a HQ 308, 100% fact. They jump from 9:1 to 9.7:1 with no other changes. That is a huge jump in compression, similar US engines see up around 25hp gain from similar compression hikes, however in the HQ-HJ case the heads didn't change so you'd expect something around 12-15hp gain. There was no cam changes. Power was definitely not nonsense figures, in fact gross hp figures are the only sensible figures as they are all conducted in the same fashion, same temperature, same humidity on an undressed engine so are easily comparable between engines. GMH didn't adjust their hp figures for the HJ engine unfortunately but the cars were significantly quicker, the best evidence if you can find it is in LH figures for the early cars with the HQ engine and the later cars (or early LX's) with the HJ engine.

V8 blocks from VB release have the longer valley head bolt bosses.

_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords?
castellan Offline
#12 Posted : Friday, 5 February 2016 4:06:37 PM(UTC)
castellan

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 26/02/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,606

Thanks: 13 times
Was thanked: 27 time(s) in 25 post(s)
Originally Posted by: HK1837 Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: castellan Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: HK1837 Go to Quoted Post
All

I just noticed an anomaly with red 308's.

HT-HG are essentially the same engine with same basic components and 9.0:1 compression, although later HQ got the leaner idle 704 Quadrajet. Early LH are the same.

At HJ release a far superior 9.7:1 308 was released and also went into later LH and early LX.

HX-HZ seem to be quoted still at 9.7:1, however VB Commodore seems to be 9.4:1. It is that way in the VB Service manual, Scientific Publications and even Dr Terry has it at 9.4:1.

HX-HZ at 9.7:1 is in parts catalogues, Scientific Publications and also Features manuals.

The V8 engines did change to the new "blue" type block at VB release so maybe the 308 did drop in compression at that time but it was never documented in HZ anywhere that I can find. I have the service letters for the whole year where the block changed and there is no mention of a change in HZ's 308 specs.

Are there 2 x different 308's from VB release until 1980 or is the VB info simply wrong?

Unfortunately the late LX parts catalogues still have both 4.2 and 5.0 as 9.0:1.

Far superior HJ 308 come off it, it has a cam for pollution and a intake that is squared off.
And the HJ 253 has a smaller cam for pollution then the early ones did.
Sadly power was rated at nonsense figures.


I believe all blue engines all got improved strength pistons and this may of started before the blue engines came out.

What's different with the V8 blocks in the blue ?

I have seen original red block with 3.3L casting on the block of a late HZ ute and it had the blue motor exhaust valve rotators and the head was a little different casting near the in and ex manifolds to early HZ-X.

The HZ 6 CYL gets the better rods and bolts when the great starfire 4 comes out.
The Starfire 4 gets UN cast on the block and the VC on they get a 1.9 casting.

Funny they get the UN casting at the start of the starfire 4, just like the early 179 gets HP and the early 308 gets HP, and I have seen a NP cast on a 202 block.


HJ 308 is superior in performance to a HQ 308, 100% fact. They jump from 9:1 to 9.7:1 with no other changes. That is a huge jump in compression, similar US engines see up around 25hp gain from similar compression hikes, however in the HQ-HJ case the heads didn't change so you'd expect something around 12-15hp gain. There was no cam changes. Power was definitely not nonsense figures, in fact gross hp figures are the only sensible figures as they are all conducted in the same fashion, same temperature, same humidity on an undressed engine so are easily comparable between engines. GMH didn't adjust their hp figures for the HJ engine unfortunately but the cars were significantly quicker, the best evidence if you can find it is in LH figures for the early cars with the HQ engine and the later cars (or early LX's) with the HJ engine.

V8 blocks from VB release have the longer valley head bolt bosses.



The HJ 308 cam is PN 2825882 it has one ring cast into the cam, this cam is the same cam up to the VL Commodore the spec may sound bigger than the HT to HQ V8 cam PN 7438871 but it does not perform as well because it's an emission cam just like the HJ to VH 253 cam PN 92000944 with 2 rings cast on it, the reason why they made a 253 and a 308 cam was due to emission standards even before ADR27A.

HT to HQ 253 and 308 had the same cam.

Holden spec on the cam is old backward rubbish spec done at 0.002 or so that makes it very hard to read in reality when 0.006 is a much better way or the modern day at 0.050 reading a cam spec not to mention all the other things one can look into with a cam.

I don't swallow that the 308 HJ went any better than a HQ, as for the car test back in the day they were mainly hopeless idiots that could not drive for jack and the idiots did not have well prepared tuned cars let alone inform use of the diff ratio of the car tested, so that all makes it bloody hard to work it all out in reality.

I remember a mate of my dads talking at the pub maybe in 1979 he had a yellow HJ 308 GTS auto and he said it did not go better than a GTS HQ 308 auto.

The old SAE gross HP ratings is a sad joke, it's just rubbish, The USA got rid of such out dated rubbish in 1972 and went to more of a reality figures, just look at the wild claims we had in the 70's a XY GT-HO is rated as the same HP as the GT ? and anyone knows that is not true at all, now don't they.

I will put it to you that a XB 250 falcon had 155 HP but in Net HP figures that's around 111 HP.

Look at the B/S we had put forward with the XB Falcon V8 302 stating 240HP and the 351 with 260HP now both have a 2BBL carby, now in reality the XB 302 is 159HP and the 351 is 183HP and the 351 4BBL rated at 290HP truly was only 214HP.
Now that's the facts.
Dr Terry Offline
#13 Posted : Friday, 5 February 2016 4:26:35 PM(UTC)
Dr Terry

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Moderator, Registered
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 6,015

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 197 time(s) in 180 post(s)
Originally Posted by: castellan Go to Quoted Post
I don't swallow that the 308 HJ went any better than a HQ, as for the car test back in the day they were mainly hopeless idiots that could not drive for jack and the idiots did not have well prepared tuned cars let alone inform use of the diff ratio of the car tested, so that all makes it bloody hard to work it all out in reality.

I remember a mate of my dads talking at the pub maybe in 1979 he had a yellow HJ 308 GTS auto and he said it did not go better than a GTS HQ 308 auto.


OK, so ALL motoring journalists are "hopeless idiots" but you rely on "mate of my dads talking at the pub". Hmm !!

I've tuned & driven far too many HQ, HJ & HX/HZ 308s in the mid to late 70s, to know which went better & why. I think the listening to guys "talking at the pub" is a bit like taking Wikipedia as being 100% fact.

Dr Terry

Edited by user Friday, 5 February 2016 4:27:31 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

If at first you don't succeed, just call it Version 1.0
castellan Offline
#14 Posted : Friday, 5 February 2016 4:54:57 PM(UTC)
castellan

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 26/02/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,606

Thanks: 13 times
Was thanked: 27 time(s) in 25 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Dr Terry Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: castellan Go to Quoted Post

Far superior HJ 308 come off it, it has a cam for pollution and a intake that is squared off.
And the HJ 253 has a smaller cam for pollution then the early ones did.
Sadly power was rated at nonsense figures.


I don't agree. The HJ 308 had no "pollution gear" which effected power output & the Oct 74 onwards 308 had higher compression & a better cam than the earlier version. The HJ is really no different to the HQ's.

The "pollution gear" which effected power output was the HX ADR27A stuff. The ADR27 rules only changed idle mixture limitations & added the closed PCV set-up.

Dr Terry


The HQ from around late Sep 1973 had all that HJ ADR27 on them, even the 253 got that Carter carby on it as well, well who truly knows if the cam was changed from Sep 1973 on ? because why should Oct 1974 be any different due to the ADR27, or was it was due to because a new model requires it to be so in law ? and the LH Torana gust gets the different mod because it makes sense to do so.

Is it a fact that the HT-G-Q 308 piston PN is different from the HJ 308 ? then if it's true then the PN on the 308 HX does go to 9.4:1 until to VB piston PN.
If Fords record on compression is anything to go by, it's figures don't make any sense at times at all with the early Cleveland V8's.

I agree that the ADR27 most likely would not affect power but we did not have DIN power ratings back then.

Look hear a HZ 3.3L with auto trans has 88KW, now a VB 3.3L auto has 69KW now the reason for this is because the VB Commodore is rated under the DIN figures.
HZ 253 = 130KW and the VB is 98KW.
HZ 308 = 161KW and the VB is 125KW both have twin exhaust.
castellan Offline
#15 Posted : Friday, 5 February 2016 5:23:48 PM(UTC)
castellan

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 26/02/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,606

Thanks: 13 times
Was thanked: 27 time(s) in 25 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Dr Terry Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: castellan Go to Quoted Post
I don't swallow that the 308 HJ went any better than a HQ, as for the car test back in the day they were mainly hopeless idiots that could not drive for jack and the idiots did not have well prepared tuned cars let alone inform use of the diff ratio of the car tested, so that all makes it bloody hard to work it all out in reality.

I remember a mate of my dads talking at the pub maybe in 1979 he had a yellow HJ 308 GTS auto and he said it did not go better than a GTS HQ 308 auto.


OK, so ALL motoring journalists are "hopeless idiots" but you rely on "mate of my dads talking at the pub". Hmm !!

I've tuned & driven far too many HQ, HJ & HX/HZ 308s in the mid to late 70s, to know which went better & why. I think the listening to guys "talking at the pub" is a bit like taking Wikipedia as being 100% fact.

Dr Terry


Most Australian motoring journalist were pretty hopeless in the day, well that is a proven fact many a time, they just did not have the ability to get good tuned cars to conduct a spot on test that could be relied on as a fact. or don't print the bloody thing until they did have it all sorted for f sake.

Another fact is most of the clowns don't know how to produce good 1/4 mile times the fools rev the V8 out all the way in 1st 2ed and 3rd idiots !! I can see it in the times that it's a wood duck behind the wheel.
Barry lake was a good diver.

But hey, how many test were not full on test, I wanted to know about the cars bloody full potential not a half arse piss-ant crap.

I use to get the German motoring test back in the day and think f me dead, we are so backward and half hearted hear in Australia, if only our people took their f ing job seriously for f sake !
I f ing hate half arse clowns.
castellan Offline
#16 Posted : Friday, 5 February 2016 5:41:52 PM(UTC)
castellan

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 26/02/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,606

Thanks: 13 times
Was thanked: 27 time(s) in 25 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Dr Terry Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: castellan Go to Quoted Post
I don't swallow that the 308 HJ went any better than a HQ, as for the car test back in the day they were mainly hopeless idiots that could not drive for jack and the idiots did not have well prepared tuned cars let alone inform use of the diff ratio of the car tested, so that all makes it bloody hard to work it all out in reality.

I remember a mate of my dads talking at the pub maybe in 1979 he had a yellow HJ 308 GTS auto and he said it did not go better than a GTS HQ 308 auto.


OK, so ALL motoring journalists are "hopeless idiots" but you rely on "mate of my dads talking at the pub". Hmm !!

I've tuned & driven far too many HQ, HJ & HX/HZ 308s in the mid to late 70s, to know which went better & why. I think the listening to guys "talking at the pub" is a bit like taking Wikipedia as being 100% fact.

Dr Terry


Here hang about I knew that blokes, daughter she was my friend of mine who's old man owned that GTS HJ and I had been driven about in it too and all, at the time I did not know that the HJ had that power robing T400 auto, but as sure a eggs a 308 HQ would of had it.
Maybe it was diff ratios.

When he got the HJ new it was using oil and Holden dealer pulled it down and found 3 or 4 rings in all that were put in upside down and the dealer put new rings in it and all was good.
HK1837 Offline
#17 Posted : Friday, 5 February 2016 6:33:31 PM(UTC)
HK1837

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Moderator, Registered, Veteran
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 14,568

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 480 time(s) in 458 post(s)
ADR27 stuff came in in September 1972 but Ford and Chrysler got an exemption until I think 1/73. Will confirm later.
ADR27 didn't affect performance, just idle mixture.
HJ 5.0L is more powerful, there is no argument, they simply are.
Gross hp figures are the ONLY reliable source of comparison, net is rubbish.
GMH had a habit of disguising the performance of their top spec manual cars. They did it for HK, HT, HG, HQ and even HJ. Some cars got reported correctly but most that were allowed out to the press were hobbled. Try and find a road test for an LH SLR5000 with a HJ engine, even an early LX. These were quicker over the 1/4 and higher trap speed than an L34. Rob Luck did a road test on a private GTS327, Mel Nichols got a properly tuned HT GTS350 and later Robbo did too. HQ GT350 manual was never properly tested in real tune, only the auto was, reporters even stated that they were scratching their heads why the auto was over 3 seconds faster 0-100mph. Even the press test HJ 5.0L manual HJ GTS was fiddled with. The only place you'll find the true performance figures on a manual HT-HG GTS350 was on the unopened HG in AMC a few years back - the car had never even had a clutch change until a few years after the article.
In the end you need to ignore the 1/4 mile tests but look at the trap speed at the end of the quarter. This will give you the true performance potential as it takes out wheelspin. If you can see if you can find Rob Luck's road test on the HK GTS327, compare its mph at the end of the 1/4 to what AMC got for the HG GTS350 and original tests of the Phase II and III. You can see the slight increases in mph between them. All interesting stuff.
_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords?
gm5735 Offline
#18 Posted : Friday, 5 February 2016 7:24:01 PM(UTC)
gm5735

Rank: Member

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 16/04/2014(UTC)
Posts: 768
Man
Location: Victoria

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 49 time(s) in 47 post(s)
Quote:
...as for the car test back in the day they were mainly hopeless idiots that could not drive for jack and the idiots did not have well prepared tuned cars let alone inform use of the diff ratio of the car tested, so that all makes it bloody hard to work it all out in reality.




Sure about that? For example, Bill Tuckey had several Bathurst starts, including co-driving with Allan Grice.

Both of which are tasks which, if I'm not mistaken, you have yet to accomplish.
Dr Terry Offline
#19 Posted : Saturday, 6 February 2016 9:14:58 AM(UTC)
Dr Terry

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Moderator, Registered
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 6,015

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 197 time(s) in 180 post(s)
On the topic of the abilities (or the lack of) of the various motoring journalists of the era, many of them were quite successful race drivers. I'm not saying that they were ALL good, what I'm saying is that they were not ALL "hopeless idiots".

Guys like Bill Tuckey, James Laing-Peach, Peter Wherrett, David McKay (Our 1st ATCC Champion), Max Stahl, Rob Luck, Mike Kable, Clyde Hodgins & Barry Lake were all pretty good steerers in their day.

Dr Terry
If at first you don't succeed, just call it Version 1.0
HK1837 Offline
#20 Posted : Saturday, 6 February 2016 9:27:20 AM(UTC)
HK1837

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Moderator, Registered, Veteran
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 14,568

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 480 time(s) in 458 post(s)
Some were even recognised as "responsible" or "competent". After the Surfers Paradise release of Monaro, GMH chose certain journalists to drive certain cars back to Melbourne. Chris DeFraga told me he was given a GTS327 to drive back part of the way.

Edited by user Saturday, 6 February 2016 11:53:31 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords?
Users browsing this topic
Guest
9 Pages123>»
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Powered by YAF | YAF © 2003-2024, Yet Another Forum.NET
This page was generated in 0.278 seconds.