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

Notification

Icon
Error

Login


Take the time to read our Privacy Policy.

5 Pages<12345>
wbute Offline
#41 Posted : Wednesday, 5 July 2017 10:15:12 AM(UTC)
wbute

Rank: Member

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 25/01/2010(UTC)
Posts: 948

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 13 time(s) in 12 post(s)
Yeah the A9X could really have been a world class car with the L34 motor. It was brilliant anyway from what I have read. I doubt I will ever actually get to drive one.
This HZ sounds like a great car! Certainly not run of the mill. Would love to see some pictures of it!!
Leary360 Offline
#42 Posted : Wednesday, 5 July 2017 11:29:57 AM(UTC)
Leary360

Rank: Member

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 29/06/2017(UTC)
Posts: 11
Australia
Location: Sale

Have just sent some pictures to Griffo, So hopefully see them up shortly
Cars currently in storage with doors off for some rust repairs, Hopefully get some time before the weekend to get over and do some more investigating.
Just picked up my master-cylinder from being refurbished

Oh and the engine number I previously stated was the QT802610, this is what I can decipher from what is under the pen scribble.

I'll keep this updated with my findings.
Cam

P.S. Updated first page with photos

Hidden clutch pedal in the background

Edited by user Wednesday, 5 July 2017 2:06:58 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

griffo Offline
#43 Posted : Wednesday, 5 July 2017 3:24:23 PM(UTC)
griffo

Rank: Member

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 6/05/2016(UTC)
Posts: 151
Australia
Location: SEQld

Thanks: 11 times
Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 3 post(s)
Here we go...Leary360 HZ Pics...









Sorry mate...You up dated previous posts...My bad.

Mods delete this post please...cheers.

Edited by user Wednesday, 5 July 2017 9:02:24 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

HK1837 Offline
#44 Posted : Wednesday, 5 July 2017 4:24:42 PM(UTC)
HK1837

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Moderator, Registered, Veteran
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 13,396

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 226 time(s) in 217 post(s)
I don't think it is QT802610, a 0 doesn't have a flat bottom - when you look close at the VID Certificate look where the 0 would be. Don't know what character it is though. This car was completed on 31/10/77 and sold on the 9/11/77 so I doubt it went through an engine swap that quickly. Unless it had an engine problem after leaving the plant, and a team from Fisherman's Bend had to change it out (this was how it was done).

You can also see where the X has been overstamped by a Z on the VID certificate - obviously a typo. Same with the 6 in the body number.

I reckon it has been written down wrongly and fixed, however it could be something else.

If you can find out who CARS PTY LTD was it might give you a clue as to the car's original purpose. I Googled the address and it is a new building now swallowed by next door.

QT901953 is 100% the engine number the dealer reported it to GMH as being in it when it was sold new.
_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords?
HK1837 Offline
#45 Posted : Wednesday, 5 July 2017 5:18:24 PM(UTC)
HK1837

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Moderator, Registered, Veteran
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 13,396

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 226 time(s) in 217 post(s)
I just looked a bit harder. I think it might be QT882610. This is a valid number for this timeframe. From Elizabeth I can see:

QT882601, 04, 09 and 12. All 308 TH400. It is most likely this is a batch of 308 engines out of Fisherman's bend. Vehicles completed between 25-27/10/77 and PSN's beginning with L395-L396. There are others with no engine number recorded. I reckon Pattersons had a few cars there and wrote the numbers down wrong. UNLESS it has QT882610 in it now! I have all the Dandenong HZ's recorded from this timeframe and I don't have a 308 number anywhere near to it, although like Elizabeth not all have engine numbers recorded. The reason this car came from Elizabeth is Dandenong were only building utes and vans at this time.

You can also go to the AOMC with both engine numbers and see what chassis numbers they were originally associated with. Plus as Geoff says go to VicRoads with your rego number and see what it was registered with.

Also, what engine number is in it now?

Edited by user Wednesday, 5 July 2017 7:04:12 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords?
Leary360 Offline
#46 Posted : Wednesday, 5 July 2017 8:21:39 PM(UTC)
Leary360

Rank: Member

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 29/06/2017(UTC)
Posts: 11
Australia
Location: Sale

Ok so I couldn't help myself, so I decided to go for a drive tonight and give things another look over.
Firstly, QT901953 is the engine number in the car now, However (and this is why I was originally suspect on it not being original) Its a 74 cast date block.
So its been re-stamped with original number.

Secondly, It's not even a TH400.
After checking the top bolts, I found that they were right up near the inlet manifold and not further down like they should be for a TH400.
So i put it on axle stands only to confirm its a trimatic.





While it was on stands I also confirmed the second exhaust hanger on driver side



HK1837 Offline
#47 Posted : Wednesday, 5 July 2017 8:33:30 PM(UTC)
HK1837

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Moderator, Registered, Veteran
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 13,396

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 226 time(s) in 217 post(s)
If you want to get it close to correct, you can put a 4spd behind that engine. I can give you a list of what you need and where to find it. Just leave that engine and accept what it is. Is the whole engine HQ-J or just the block?
_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords?
Leary360 Offline
#48 Posted : Wednesday, 5 July 2017 9:14:01 PM(UTC)
Leary360

Rank: Member

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 29/06/2017(UTC)
Posts: 11
Australia
Location: Sale

Pretty sure its just the block as its still got an EGR inlet manifold and pollution carb.

So to cut a very long story short, My plans are now to install an M21 and as much original parts as possible, Paint it and get it on the road.
Once registered I have plans for a 383, 9" and auto (unknown now) and keep an original driveline for rainy day.

Value wise, Would my car be worth any more than a standard HZ premier???

Some interior pics







Edited by user Wednesday, 5 July 2017 9:17:29 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

justgm Offline
#49 Posted : Thursday, 6 July 2017 6:34:33 AM(UTC)
justgm

Rank: Member

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 30/04/2005(UTC)
Posts: 388
Man
New Zealand

Was thanked: 11 time(s) in 11 post(s)
Hi, Very nice car , I see the 'FX' Trimatic is from a WB 4.2 with 4.44 axle .... don't think there would be may WBs with that spec? Thanks Mark.
life is good in "Wine & Holden Marlborough "
HK1837 Offline
#50 Posted : Thursday, 6 July 2017 8:17:26 AM(UTC)
HK1837

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Moderator, Registered, Veteran
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 13,396

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 226 time(s) in 217 post(s)
I'm still somewhat sceptical about the FX code meaning WB V8 4.44. I've heard that before but there really should be no such thing, 4,44 was introduced during early HJ IIRC - it was a result of 6cyl tonners having so many clutches changed under warranty. There was even a National competition to see who could change a 6cyl tonner clutch on the fastest time. There is zero evidence in any Engineering docs of 4.44 being allowed behind V8. Having said that I haven't seen the WB docs in full as yet, so it is possible there was a special order application for it - and this does ring true a little bit as remember there was no V8 3spd in WB, and a V8 3spd has a far more useable reverse gear than a V8 M20.
_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords?
wbute Offline
#51 Posted : Thursday, 6 July 2017 1:05:15 PM(UTC)
wbute

Rank: Member

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 25/01/2010(UTC)
Posts: 948

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 13 time(s) in 12 post(s)
Would 4:44 go 100 km/h??
HK1837 Offline
#52 Posted : Thursday, 6 July 2017 1:55:09 PM(UTC)
HK1837

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Moderator, Registered, Veteran
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 13,396

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 226 time(s) in 217 post(s)
Originally Posted by: wbute Go to Quoted Post
Would 4:44 go 100 km/h??


HJ Features manual shows that 6cyl in top gear with 4.44:1 rear axle and F78-14LT tyres does 28.1kmh/1000rpm. So at 100kmh the engine (manual) would be doing 3559rpm, auto somewhat higher due to converter slip. So yes it'd do it but I doubt it'd be real happy. A HJ's 202 peak rated gross power is 110hp@4000rpm so you'd be below peak power, but peak torque is 190lbft@1600rpm and you are way past that.
_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords?
wbute Offline
#53 Posted : Thursday, 6 July 2017 6:40:46 PM(UTC)
wbute

Rank: Member

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 25/01/2010(UTC)
Posts: 948

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 13 time(s) in 12 post(s)
Imagine if they offered a commercial vehicle today that wouldn't happily do 100.
Dr Terry Offline
#54 Posted : Thursday, 6 July 2017 7:22:43 PM(UTC)
Dr Terry

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Moderator, Registered
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 5,632

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 100 time(s) in 92 post(s)
My records show that an 'FX' Trimatic is for a WB 4.2 V8 column shift. No mention of the 4.44 rear axle.

Dr Terry
If at first you don't succeed, just call it Version 1.0
castellan Offline
#55 Posted : Friday, 7 July 2017 8:13:50 AM(UTC)
castellan

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 26/02/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,453

Thanks: 13 times
Was thanked: 21 time(s) in 19 post(s)
Originally Posted by: wbute Go to Quoted Post
Curious why 3.08 diff with an M21 and 308 would be a bad option? As far as a highway cruiser goes, it would be 100% better than the lower diff. It might be a bit harder starting off in traffic all day, but no one is going to use a 40 year old premier like that these days.


3.08 diff ratio is the best ratio for a good 308 manual or auto, I would not want a 3.36 and no way would I put a 3.50 ratio behind a stock 308.

HK1837 is on about gutless 308's I would think and I know there were a lot of gutless ADR27A ones around. but my pre ADR27A would go through a brick wall I am sure just on idle with a 3.08 diff. the 5.7L GEN 3 have nothing on a good 308's torque from idle down low to 3700RPM.

If I bought a New HZ Premier that's want I would demand 5.0L M21 and 3.08 diff for sure, twin exhaust was std in 5.0L HZ sedan I thought.

The auto with the T400 auto sucked way too much power out of the car and that's why 3.36 diff ratio was seen as the popular way to go with 5.0L HJ-X-Z WB VB-C with city driving and I agree with that as well and a 3.36 M21 was a good city thing as well with the ADR27A slugs.
castellan Offline
#56 Posted : Friday, 7 July 2017 9:51:15 AM(UTC)
castellan

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 26/02/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,453

Thanks: 13 times
Was thanked: 21 time(s) in 19 post(s)
Originally Posted by: wbute Go to Quoted Post
Yeah the A9X could really have been a world class car with the L34 motor. It was brilliant anyway from what I have read. I doubt I will ever actually get to drive one.
This HZ sounds like a great car! Certainly not run of the mill. Would love to see some pictures of it!!


World class car what does that really mean ? but I hear it a lot nowadays.

All the Torana's were not that good, sure they had one good thing and that was they were light, as a high speed highway car over 180KM/H on they were crap they floated about and the wind noise was shocking no matter what you did with the window frames they would suck out.

VB Commodore were a much better car in every way.

Even the Holden HK on were a better car to drive flat out on the highway than any Torana for say a trip of 100KM or more, yes I liked my SL/R 5000 but I knew that even my 5.0L Sandman van was a much better car to drive at 200KM/H on a trip of 400 to 500km like so it's the van any day that's the pick. at 180KM/H a 308 is just cruising along taking it easy very relaxed and good on fuel in the big Holden's but the Torana's it's not and when you go to 200KM/H it's just not fun to do over a long trip because it wears you out because it's skipping about all the time and light in the arse. drive one from Camoonweal to the 3ways and you will know they are no world class high speed highway touring car.

Yes I liked the SL/R5000 and A9X but they are not as great as most think they are the same can be said for the XY GT-HO they are way over rated to what they really are nowadays.
Hell by the year 2000 you could drive a stock Commodore gen 3 VT SS at 250KM/H set on cruise control and sit like a rock on the road with air-con on thinking yep this is makes all them old cars look like crap.
Warren Turnbull Offline
#57 Posted : Friday, 7 July 2017 9:59:50 AM(UTC)
Warren Turnbull

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Registered, Veteran
Joined: 10/02/2009(UTC)
Posts: 2,316

Thanks: 2 times
Was thanked: 19 time(s) in 18 post(s)
I was cruising at 180km/h in a 94 6 cylinder Falcon between Normanton and the Three ways, just loping along not a care in the world and was much easier than my old LH. But the brakes and steering control were what saved us when a cow decided to stand in the middle of the road. That Falcon pulled up in a straight line without lock up. On a single lane road that is what you need.

Good to see someone else has driven that stretch of road.

Warren
wbute Offline
#58 Posted : Friday, 7 July 2017 10:42:23 AM(UTC)
wbute

Rank: Member

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 25/01/2010(UTC)
Posts: 948

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 13 time(s) in 12 post(s)
Not much point comparing a 70's car with a 21st century car.
The A9X had something that a VB Commodore will never have. It looked good. It was reported at the time that it was an excellent handling car with the improved RTS update. Plus the bigger Salisbury diff. It has an awesome body kit from the factory. If it had just had the L34 engine it would have blown all the other Australian available cars into the weeds. That puts it on a playing field with whatever else was comparable from Europe and North America. That's what a world class car is. A VB Commodore comparable with a A9XHatchback? To some maybe. Not to me.
As for high speed antics, I definitely do not rate a WB ute at over 200. I guess a van would be not much better. They float all over the joint and if they had wings they would take off.
HK1837 Offline
#59 Posted : Friday, 7 July 2017 10:45:46 AM(UTC)
HK1837

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Moderator, Registered, Veteran
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 13,396

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 226 time(s) in 217 post(s)
There is absolutely NO WAY that an M21 with a 3.08 rear axle and 14" tyres is the best combination in a Holden. It simply is not or GMH would have done it. In US performance vehicles and followed suit by GMH with the GTS327 and GTS350 the M21 car got 3.36 with 14" tyres and 3.73 with 15" tyres (approx. same effective ratio). 3.08 is WAY too tall for an effective 1st gear with an M21 and 14" tyres, and would never be seen as a performance vehicle. Once the XU1 took over than mantle, they did change the GTS350 manuals back to 3.08. There is no way you could idle any of the Holden 308's off the mark with an M21 and 3.08 rear axle with original ER70H14 tyres, not even the highest power late 1974 to mid-1976 version would do that without stalling.. Whack 5 people in a sedan or stick 500-700kg in the back of a ute and you'd not even be able to reverse up a driveway without destroying clutch - it is hard enough with a 3.36 rear axle!. I had a HZ Kingswood L31 M21 sedan that had been changed to a 3.08 rear axle and it was a pig to drive, you had to burn clutch to take off. Even with the engine rebuilt to similar power and torque figures as a HJ engine it was still not an easy car to drive around town. As far as autos are concerned I always liked Trimatic with 3.08 and 14" tyres, even on a 6cyl tonner. My HJ Premier with L31, TH400 and 2.78 rear axle with 14" tyres is a nice combination as a cruiser, but it is never going to be a performance vehicle with that diff ratio.

IIRC dual exhaust was not standard on a HZ L31 unless it was a GTS, even then only clearly available on V8 Kingswood sedan and Premier sedan (there is some confusion regarding N10 on wagon and Statesman as documentation is contradictory).
_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords?
HK1837 Offline
#60 Posted : Friday, 7 July 2017 11:34:31 AM(UTC)
HK1837

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Moderator, Registered, Veteran
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 13,396

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 226 time(s) in 217 post(s)
Originally Posted by: wbute Go to Quoted Post
Not much point comparing a 70's car with a 21st century car.
The A9X had something that a VB Commodore will never have. It looked good. It was reported at the time that it was an excellent handling car with the improved RTS update. Plus the bigger Salisbury diff. It has an awesome body kit from the factory. If it had just had the L34 engine it would have blown all the other Australian available cars into the weeds. That puts it on a playing field with whatever else was comparable from Europe and North America. That's what a world class car is. A VB Commodore comparable with a A9XHatchback? To some maybe. Not to me.
As for high speed antics, I definitely do not rate a WB ute at over 200. I guess a van would be not much better. They float all over the joint and if they had wings they would take off.


You have to remember that a standard A9X drives pretty much the same as a UC Sunbird or any other UC. Sure the A9X had better brakes, more power and more rubber (E sized tyres rather than B sized) but that is what the car was. If GMH had continued with a 5.0L and manual in UC no-one would even speak about LX A9X today, it would have had one run at Bathurst and lost. 1978 and 1979 would have been UC A9X and it would be the car to have. Every person wanting a "replica" would be paying stupid $ for UC hatchbacks and building UC A9X replicas. It is also pretty harsh comparing a VB to an A9X, you really have to compare a VB with a standard LX, say a stock LX SS which isn't a very nice looking car at all as a standard car- the ugly stripes, 13" wheels with those plastic hubcaps and that ugly dash. Compare to a nice VB SL/E. If you compare an A9X to anything it really has to be to the HDT Commodores - a VC or VH HDT is a nice looking car, certainly not ugly compared to an A9X. I agree A9X's are good looking cars, but they are not and were never designed to be performance cars. Basically the SLR5000 finished and so did 5.0L on SS. From that time they were almost all A9X if they were 5.0L, and they had bits added for homologation purposes only, that was their sole purpose. The cars were never intended to race, in fact many of the 1977 and 1978 race cars were L34's with A9X homologations added. The rest were special build LX race shells, with afaik the odd few road cars by privateers. The real hidden muscle car in all of that era is an early LX SS manual hatchback. From what I've been researching some of those early cars got a bigger exhaust than the standard Torana twin peashooter, we think they fitted them with the same pipe size as the Holden twin system. Combine that with the 250hp pre ADR27A 5.0L and the cars were rockets. Road testers of the day were stunned with how quick the cars were, they were expecting them to be the same as the original SLR5000's with the HQ engines. Articles even comment about having to go back and compare to the acceleration times they recorded with the GTS350's and GT Falcons.
A9X with an L34 engine wouldn't be that much different to a HJ engine - either would be far better though than the stock ADR27A engine it got. But A9X was never intended to be anything other than a homologation mule and the L34 engine was already homologated. The L34 engine as standard wasn't all that much better as installed than a HJ engine was. It is effectively the same engine as a V5H VH-VH 308 engine - the L34 had higher compression and had better exhaust "manifolds", but the V5H had the better cam but with around 1/2 point lower compression. Both had hogged out inlets, both had a better spark system. The V5H got a better breathing air cleaner. The V5H in Commodores got a better exhaust system from the manifolds back than the L34. When you look at stock rear wheel kW they are about the same give or take a few kW. Sure the L34 engine had the advantage once you put a bigger cam in and changed the exhaust from the "manifolds" back but HDT did the same thing with their engines and got similar power upgrades.

Edited by user Friday, 7 July 2017 11:44:11 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords?
Users browsing this topic
Guest
5 Pages<12345>
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 © 2003-2020, Yet Another Forum.NET
This page was generated in 0.366 seconds.