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

Notification

Icon
Error

Login


Take the time to read our Privacy Policy.

5 Pages«<2345>
commodorenut Offline
#61 Posted : Friday, 7 July 2017 6:47:17 PM(UTC)
commodorenut

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Moderator, Registered, Veteran
Joined: 2/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 3,135

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 33 time(s) in 32 post(s)
Originally Posted by: castellan Go to Quoted Post
World class car what does that really mean ? but I hear it a lot nowadays.

Holden gave it to us 33 years ago:



Cheers,

Mick
_______________________________________________________________

Judge a successful man not on how he treats his peers, but on how he treats those less fortunate.
Cocko750 Offline
#62 Posted : Friday, 7 July 2017 7:02:04 PM(UTC)
Cocko750

Rank: Member

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 7/05/2013(UTC)
Posts: 48

My Hz sl parts car has GV4 does this indicate3:36 ?all parts appear to be original so she might get rust repairs and reassembled what needs to be sent to Holden historical to get the printout? Will it show if it had a/c and sports dash/wheel etc? Has a/c but not sure original and the dash was removed by previous owner
HK1837 Offline
#63 Posted : Friday, 7 July 2017 7:19:51 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: Cocko750 Go to Quoted Post
My Hz sl parts car has GV4 does this indicate3:36 ?all parts appear to be original so she might get rust repairs and reassembled what needs to be sent to Holden historical to get the printout? Will it show if it had a/c and sports dash/wheel etc? Has a/c but not sure original and the dash was removed by previous owner


GV4 is 3.36 and that is the standard rear axle for an L31 M21 Holden. My guess is the reason the Premier subject of this thread got a 3.08 is it is the standard rear axle for L31 M41. The M41 is a no charge delete option (they skimmed the TH400 extra cost as profit!), and the M21 was substituted for M41 but they neglected to also change to 3.36.

PM me for what you want to do. The report only shows mechanical options, won't show sports dash or wheel as the raw data is a Service/Warranty report, not a vehicle production report which would show all included vehicle options (standard or optional).

_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords?
Cocko750 Offline
#64 Posted : Friday, 7 July 2017 8:01:28 PM(UTC)
Cocko750

Rank: Member

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 7/05/2013(UTC)
Posts: 48

No worries sent a pm hk thanks
castellan Offline
#65 Posted : Saturday, 8 July 2017 8:57:17 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: HK1837 Go to Quoted Post
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.

I totally agree with all that.
castellan Offline
#66 Posted : Saturday, 8 July 2017 10:28:14 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: HK1837 Go to Quoted Post
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).


The standard V8 valve bounce at 5000RPM in top gear you can get 5500RPM out of them in other gears but I must be because of the time spent at such revs the springs go wonky.
So that was 5000RPM at 200KM/H I found with my Sandman and SL/R 5000 that I had to back off because the stock engine would valve bounce, both had 3.08 diff and 14in wheels.

185KM/H would be top speed with a 3.36 and 165KM/H with a 3.50 ratio, a mate had a stock 202 but for twin carbys LH G Pack Torana 3.50 ratio 14in wheels and it valve bounced at 165KM/H.

Both my stock 308's had extractors and good free twin exhaust and free air filter and this makes a big difference to how they come from the dealer floor, and I am sure off idle they will take off if you dropped the clutch out directly.
I put a 2.78 ratio in the SL/R5000 when I snapped an axle and yep 1st gear was a bit to high and it would of stalled I am sure by dropping the clutch out then, but she had that much torque it was not a problem to drive anywhere.

I have reversed enough trailers on shitty job sites and stupid drive ways in 43 working years and yes the M21 reverse is bloody high but their is a trick to working the clutch the right way to make it much better, you never rev it up high, I use the lowest rev I can to get it rolling off the mark and if it stalls near the top of the drive way that's it, I just start shovelling out the sand of the trailer from their, it maybe a fast reverse but if you
have confidence in you trailer it can be done, with a bad trailer that jack knifes like a bastard no way.

But that VY SS ute I had, 1st and reverse were bloody high and I would fill it with sand and bags of cement once a week and never buggered the clutch up because of it, it did bugger up at 100,000KM but that was a fault they had fixed in the VZ but I did put a heavy duty AEC ? stage 3 In it then but the peddle was heavy due to that and that had did 130,000KM when I sold it. did a lot of city work in traffic and just would idle and let the clutch out a bit and she would move along, I remember doing about 6KM of that due to a smash, when I got to it 3 dills have just had a slight nose to tail shunt but just sat on the bloody road, I was pissed off and got up them to move ya f ing cars of the f ing highway for f sake you pack off c---soShhh
RollEyes

Yep your HJ Premier would be a good cruiser with 2.78 ratio for sure.
I like the 5.8L ZH Fairlanes for long trips they had the 2.75 ratio a mate had one and sitting in the back drinking was a pleasure to eat up the km as was his WB Statesman Caprice.
I remember tossing my cookies in the marquis OhMyGod once, bloody electric power window did not work.
castellan Offline
#67 Posted : Saturday, 8 July 2017 10:46:11 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: commodorenut Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: castellan Go to Quoted Post
World class car what does that really mean ? but I hear it a lot nowadays.

Holden gave it to us 33 years ago:





I will bring that up with a stupid mate who keeps rattling on about his 375KW VF SSV ute being the best car in the world and that it's a world class car, he is to scared to drive it on a dirt road now Sad RollEyes it's only a bloody car, that's what they are made for to be used put through their pacers, not be just looked at, hell even my wife knows that's what things are about and going for it is the real deal.Laugh
wbute Offline
#68 Posted : Saturday, 8 July 2017 12:32:54 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)
I think you might have missed the bit where I said the A9 X was "almost" a world class car.
Talking about valve bounce, there is no doubt that over about 3500 rpm you get next to no benefit. That's where the taller diff helps spread the meat of the power band out. The shorter 3:36 just lets it get out of the band quicker. That's my experience at least.
Holden didn't offer it as standard because 98% of people would have buggered clutches. They did however offer it as an option. That's the difference. They built cars for the masses.
HK1837 Offline
#69 Posted : Saturday, 8 July 2017 2:19:11 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: castellan Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: HK1837 Go to Quoted Post
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).


The standard V8 valve bounce at 5000RPM in top gear you can get 5500RPM out of them in other gears but I must be because of the time spent at such revs the springs go wonky.
So that was 5000RPM at 200KM/H I found with my Sandman and SL/R 5000 that I had to back off because the stock engine would valve bounce, both had 3.08 diff and 14in wheels.

185KM/H would be top speed with a 3.36 and 165KM/H with a 3.50 ratio, a mate had a stock 202 but for twin carbys LH G Pack Torana 3.50 ratio 14in wheels and it valve bounced at 165KM/H.

Both my stock 308's had extractors and good free twin exhaust and free air filter and this makes a big difference to how they come from the dealer floor, and I am sure off idle they will take off if you dropped the clutch out directly.
I put a 2.78 ratio in the SL/R5000 when I snapped an axle and yep 1st gear was a bit to high and it would of stalled I am sure by dropping the clutch out then, but she had that much torque it was not a problem to drive anywhere.

I have reversed enough trailers on shitty job sites and stupid drive ways in 43 working years and yes the M21 reverse is bloody high but their is a trick to working the clutch the right way to make it much better, you never rev it up high, I use the lowest rev I can to get it rolling off the mark and if it stalls near the top of the drive way that's it, I just start shovelling out the sand of the trailer from their, it maybe a fast reverse but if you
have confidence in you trailer it can be done, with a bad trailer that jack knifes like a bastard no way.

But that VY SS ute I had, 1st and reverse were bloody high and I would fill it with sand and bags of cement once a week and never buggered the clutch up because of it, it did bugger up at 100,000KM but that was a fault they had fixed in the VZ but I did put a heavy duty AEC ? stage 3 In it then but the peddle was heavy due to that and that had did 130,000KM when I sold it. did a lot of city work in traffic and just would idle and let the clutch out a bit and she would move along, I remember doing about 6KM of that due to a smash, when I got to it 3 dills have just had a slight nose to tail shunt but just sat on the bloody road, I was pissed off and got up them to move ya f ing cars of the f ing highway for f sake you pack off c---soShhh
RollEyes

Yep your HJ Premier would be a good cruiser with 2.78 ratio for sure.
I like the 5.8L ZH Fairlanes for long trips they had the 2.75 ratio a mate had one and sitting in the back drinking was a pleasure to eat up the km as was his WB Statesman Caprice.
I remember tossing my cookies in the marquis OhMyGod once, bloody electric power window did not work.


You'd be lucky to get any standard 6cyl Holden or Torana to 100mph/160km/h! Not many outside XU1 managed it on road tests of the day. They always quoted 0-100mph but rarely did a 6cyl GMH product have it quoted as they rarely got there, top speed was normally in the 90's. A 6cyl HK GTS just got there at 102mph.

Edited by user Saturday, 8 July 2017 2:19:50 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords?
HK1837 Offline
#70 Posted : Saturday, 8 July 2017 2:27:47 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
I think you might have missed the bit where I said the A9 X was "almost" a world class car.
Talking about valve bounce, there is no doubt that over about 3500 rpm you get next to no benefit. That's where the taller diff helps spread the meat of the power band out. The shorter 3:36 just lets it get out of the band quicker. That's my experience at least.
Holden didn't offer it as standard because 98% of people would have buggered clutches. They did however offer it as an option. That's the difference. They built cars for the masses.


It is not that they didn't offer it as standard. They offered the best combination to suit the engine standard:

L20 M20 3.55
L32 M20 3.08
L31 M21 3.36.

3.08 was offered as the economy option with L31 M21 and 3.55 the performance option. Either could be ordered but are very rare. In probably 500 L31 M21 HQ-HZ utes and vans I have recorded, maybe a handful are not 3.36 and are 3.08 or 3.55. Passenger vehicles are no different stats wise.

The REALLY rare one is L32 M20 3.36 in a cab-chassis, the only reason this would have happened is V8, 3.55 and A/C was outside Engineering guidelines.

_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords?
wbute Offline
#71 Posted : Saturday, 8 July 2017 6:26:20 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)
How many salespeople even told a customer that they could have a different diff? Let alone customers that even knew what a diff ratio was. That's why you never see a different option to standard.
HK1837 Offline
#72 Posted : Saturday, 8 July 2017 7:24:01 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
How many salespeople even told a customer that they could have a different diff? Let alone customers that even knew what a diff ratio was. That's why you never see a different option to standard.


No it ain't. Salesmen were trained to sell from either stock (as in vehicles in plant stock) or off the schedule. GMH didn't want orders, they wanted to sell what was made or what was on the schedule and those cars were almost always the standard diff ratio. Retail orders were probably less than 5-10% of sales, and often only because what was wanted was not in stock or on the schedule.

_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords?
wbute Offline
#73 Posted : Saturday, 8 July 2017 7:28:54 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)
That's exactly what I said.
castellan Offline
#74 Posted : Tuesday, 11 July 2017 7:05:43 PM(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
I think you might have missed the bit where I said the A9 X was "almost" a world class car.
Talking about valve bounce, there is no doubt that over about 3500 rpm you get next to no benefit. That's where the taller diff helps spread the meat of the power band out. The shorter 3:36 just lets it get out of the band quicker. That's my experience at least.
Holden didn't offer it as standard because 98% of people would have buggered clutches. They did however offer it as an option. That's the difference. They built cars for the masses.


4500RPM in a stock Holden red 6 or V8 is about the best to change gear at to get the most out of them back in the day.
I have not had a red motor in 25 years now.
But I had a 173 HQ and I think it did 100mph my brothers 173 did I know that for sure and I had a 202 that did 100mph and a 253 auto with 2.78 diff that did 112mph and two 308's 4sp 3.08 diff that did 200KM/H all stock engines.

That HQ 202 liked to sit on 100mph and it was as smooth as, it did 98000miles when I sold it and I had the dude who bought it come up to me saying it was a freak motor, well I had drags with other 202's that went just as well, and I have driven gutless ones.
My mum had a HJ 202 auto it was gutless, but I think it could do 150KM/H.
My HR 186 auto did 97mph
My brothers HR reco 161 with twin carbys and extractors, I took it to 115mph and gave up, she was good for more but she was starting to float all over the road.Scared drum brakes all round too.
HK1837 Offline
#75 Posted : Tuesday, 11 July 2017 7:51:24 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 seriously doubt you'll get many standard red 6's outside of XU1, GTR and 186S to 100mph. If they do they just get there.

Let's say HQ-HJ 202 manual Kingswood ute. Standard has 3.55 rear axle and F78L14 tyres. These do (according to GMH Engineering data) 34.2km/h per 1000rpm. So at 160km/h the poor old red 6 is screaming at just under 4700rpm. Given the frontal area of the car it simply can't do it, not standard anyway. Go looking for road tests of the day and you will struggle to find any normal red 6 manual with a top speed over 100mph/160km/h. Here are a few:

Motor Manual, 2/72. HQ Monaro 202 4spd. Top speed 94mph. This will be 3.55.
Motor manual, 10/68. Monaro 186S 3spd. Top speed 102mph. Just makes it, also 3.55.
LC GTR respectively 106, 106, 105, 107, 107mph in Modern Motor 1/70, Motor Manual 1/70, Wheels 2/70, AMS 2/70, Motor Manual 5/70. These are all 2600S with M20, 3.08 rear axle and 13" tyres.
Modern Motor 3/70. LC sedan 2250 Trimatic. Top speed 88.6mph. This will be 2.78 rear axle. 13" tyres.
Wheels 10/72 LJ S 2250 and SL 2850, both 4spd. Top speeds respectively 95mph and 97mph. Both 3.08 rear axle. 13" tyres.
Modern Motor 1/73. LJ SL 2850 trimatic. Top speed 100mph. 2.78 rear axle. 13" tyres.
Sports Car World 9/73. LJ SL 3300 4spd. Top speed 101mph. 3.08 rear axle. 13" tyres.
Wheels 11/70 LC XU1. Top speed 125mph. These had 3.36 rear axle. Best recorded in the day was 130mph for an LJ XU1.
Sports Car World 9/74. LH SL/R 4spd. Top speed 96mph. Standard SL/R (300 4spd) had 3.08 rear axle and 13" tyres.
Wheels 5/74 LH S sedan. 2850 3spd manual. Top speed 90mph. These had 3.36 rear axle and 13" tyres.
Motor Manual 5/76 LX SL hatch. 3300 trimatic. Top speed 155km/h. 2.78 rear axle with 13" tyres.
_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords?
Dr Terry Offline
#76 Posted : Tuesday, 11 July 2017 9:20:14 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)
Originally Posted by: HK1837 Go to Quoted Post
I seriously doubt you'll get many standard red 6's outside of XU1, GTR and 186S to 100mph. If they do they just get there.


You forget about the 'best' Red 179 of all, the EH S4. I believe that the Brian Muir car did 106 MPH down Conrod straight in the 1963 Bathurst with a 'stock' 179 & a 3.55 diff.

Just say'n.

Dr Terry
If at first you don't succeed, just call it Version 1.0
HK1837 Offline
#77 Posted : Tuesday, 11 July 2017 9:31:48 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)
True Terry, small frontal area helps. Plus to be fair Conrod is downhill! Must have been revving it's freckle off for a stock 179 to pull 106mph with 3.55 rear axle and 13" tyres! Stock blueprinted?
HD-HR X2 would probably get there too with 3.36 rear axle, not just the 186S HR.
_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords?
castellan Offline
#78 Posted : Wednesday, 12 July 2017 9:42:43 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)
It takes a good stretch to get to that 100mph the testing is mainly done on a track that we see top speeds of.
My 3.3L manual XC p van only did 150KM/H with extractors and twin exhaust. I remember trying to drag the cops off in it, but they had a 4.1L XD and it was catching up real fast.

I wonder why my brothers 161 was so fast, it would of been bored to a 167ci and she had heavy duty shocks and sports wheels and tyres, but took up the whole width of the highway, back then you had to get one side off in the dirt when another car came the other way, but you could make it at times with two and about a 10mm between each car.
The main bridges back in the days you past cars on but nowadays such type bridges have a give way now on them and two trucks once pass on them year in and out.
No where near the cars on the roads back then but people were better drivers I am sure.
HK1837 Offline
#79 Posted : Wednesday, 12 July 2017 10:07:47 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)
Yes you'd need lots of road, but the testers of the day had that. They had enough road to see 130mph out of GTS350's and GT-HO's. The answer is the cars simply didn't have the power or torque at near to 5000rpm to push the cars through the air. The older cars had less frontal area so you'd get a better top speed out of them, and this is why the little Toranas have decent top speeds too.

You didn't need to do much to them to get a better top speed though. Make them breathe better and have decent exhaust. My bog stock 2/76 LX 3300 auto hatchback, only mods extractors/exhaust and air cleaner plus 14" wheels and electronic ignition used to easily do 170kmh, in the list above the identical car a 5/76 did 155kmh for Motor manual. So a combination of a bit more power/torque and taller gearing (due to 14" tyres) and it'd do it. My guess is your Brother's HR had more power and torque where it counted, and possibly the tyres were taller too. Remember a HR is a lot smaller in frontal area than a HQ, and lighter to boot. When you compare top speeds of a HT-HG and a HQ with identical driveline the HT-HG is normally a few mph faster as the frontal area is smaller, even though in many cases the HQ is a few kg lighter. A HR is significantly smaller again than a HT-HG.

Here are a few number I just found, these are figures for a 1990's Corvette so they use that car's CD for air resistance. Table is how many hp the car needs on a straight road to overcome air friction and rolling resistance:

MPH 030 0055 065 0090 120 150 200
_hp 1.16 7.14 11.8 31.3 74.2 145 344

You can see, 100mph needs in a low CD Corvette needs probably 50hp to overcome resistance of air and tyres on the road. Change the CD factor to match a slab fronted Holden or Torana and you'll be looking at around 75hp, which is more than most red 6's had available at the back wheels.
Note, I had to put leading 0's in the mph figures to get the characters to align.

Here is the info link if interested. http://phors.locost7.info/phors06.htm

Edited by user Wednesday, 12 July 2017 10:27:43 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords?
castellan Offline
#80 Posted : Thursday, 13 July 2017 2:09:22 PM(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)
Funny you should say that, but a mates mums VB commodore 3.3L auto did 185KM/H no joke, In 1984 I was following behind him in my 308, one day I had a good look at and it was as stock as a rock, head gasket rocker cover gasket had never been touched, I do not know the diff ratio but 3.08 or 2.78 it must of been, another mates mum had a VB 3.3L auto but 3.36 diff or 3.50 maybe but 160KM/H was max that mate could get out of it.
Between them two the higher geared one was not a quick off the line, but once it got going it could hose off the lower geared one.

Another mate had a UC Torana 3.3L 4speed and he claims 185KM/H I can't prove that it did, only his say so, if it did it must of had a 3.08 diff I would think.

I know that the 3.3L blue motors could do 185KM/H back in 1983 as I was in a new 3.3L auto WB Kingswood ute and that old builder was sitting on 185KM/H to get to the job in the next Town.

A mate with a stock VC 3.3L 4speed did 185KM/H and I was behind him in my 308 to prove it was true.

A 3.08 diff ratio would work out to around 4600RPM at 185KM/H.

A mates stock alloy head 4.1L 4speed 2.92 diff XD did 185KM/H flat out and his VB commodore 4.2L V8 4speed only did 185KM/H as well with a 3.08 diff.
Users browsing this topic
Guest (2)
5 Pages«<2345>
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 0.503 seconds.