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

Notification

Icon
Error

Login


Take the time to read our Privacy Policy.

6 Pages<1234>»
HK1837 Offline
#21 Posted : Monday, 24 December 2018 10:19:11 AM(UTC)
HK1837

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Moderator, Registered, Veteran
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 12,739

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 147 time(s) in 145 post(s)
Originally Posted by: castellan Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: HK1837 Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: 307chev Go to Quoted Post
And would have been 2x Victories if PB haddent run out of gas!
GTHO is overated !


I wouldn't exactly call a GT-HO over-rated. all three were built for a purpose with a brute of an engine. The magazine articles of the day were not complimentary of them as a road car. Sports Car World for example came to the conclusion about the XW GT-HO that they did not like the car and to them it was intended for one use purpose only - as a race car. They stated that you would be silly to buy one over a GT or a GTS350 unless you intended to race the car at Bathurst. I know that the PhaseIII had far better road manners than the previous two GT-HO's but it still was a brute of a car totally unsuited to the majority of Australian roads, drivers and available fuel. So in a comparison between what was available at the time and suited to Australian conditions the GT-HO's are today seen through rose coloured glasses. Compare the engine in one of those to the kittens in the GTS350's with their hydraulic cam (same cam as a 307 and the same distributor), road friendly Quadrajet and 10:1 compression ratio able to run on most Super fuels found across Australia and you have a winner. Same argument for the standard GT's. Sure if you had a choice today of a GT-HO or a GT you'd take the HO, but think about buying one to use as an everyday driver in 1969-71 and I bet most would choose the GT or walk over the road and buy a GTS350 for a lot less money.


I thought that Australia back in the days of the Phase 2 XW had fuel octane ratting's of Standard 89 and Super 97 I do not remember anything other at the Stations pumps.
Looking at the compression of 11:1 for the Cleveland powered GT, they ran on 97 octane no problems, I run a bike alloy engine with 13:1 that recommends 95 octane.

I do not have a real handle on Australian fuel octane ratings back in the days of the 1950's FX Holden and on but judging from the compression ratios of all the grey motors I think that the octane rating is getting better as time goes by, so we see the octane ratings must of gone way up over most of Australia with the EH red motors by 1963 and the 1967 XR 289GT is 10:1 and Sep 1969 HT GTS350 10.25:1

It takes a real man or maybe a loon a tick to drive a XW GT-HO P2 or XY GT-HO especially back in the day with them tyres and roads, but the Windsor powered XW GT-HO was not the same type of beast as the Phase 2 or 3.
One problem was with the XY GT auto that it has the 2.75 ration diff, a 3.0 would of been much better, but with the tyres of the day they thought that the crappy rear end would come out on ya when going into 2ed gear.
From what I have driven of them Falcons and Holdens is that the HK-T-G rear leaf setup was much better behaved.


Yes, but try and buy 97 in areas outside of major population centres. In the USA most of the cast iron headed engines over about 10.5-11:1 needed special fuel, the alloy headed big blocks could go to about 11.5 but not the super high comp 1969 L88 or ZL1.

Most road testers claimed the XW GT-HO was a pig on the road, and the XW GT-HO II engine was worse. They actually like the PhaseIII as it was more refined. Here is a quote from SCW 12/69 on the XW GT-HO:

"It is so firm in the suspension, it is quite unpleasant around town, although it will immediately compensate for this on fast, smooth open roadwork. This combination of conditions is still quite rare in Australia, and the typical Australian major highway, characterised by broken edges and blotchy main lines, won't suit this "Hairy One" at high speed."

After talking about how the GT-HO has its pants pulled down by a (hobbled by GMH) GTS350 up to 50mph, they say "we're just trying to illustrate that the engine has been tuned specifically to be fastest from Hell corner to Skyline at Panorama". They state all through it that it is obvious that this car was built in a quantity to qualify for the ARDC's minimum 200 build to be eligible to race at Bathurst, and that is too much of a handful as a road car. They achieved a 14.4s @ 90mph out of the car too, although quote an average of 14.8s. The car tested was a private car with 2000 miles on it, prepared for Bathurst 1969 but not used as the owner raced a Mini instead (Trevor Meehan). It was a dead stock car in good tune.

_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords?
commodorenut Offline
#22 Posted : Monday, 24 December 2018 8:48:18 PM(UTC)
commodorenut

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Moderator, Registered, Veteran
Joined: 2/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 3,101

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 29 time(s) in 28 post(s)
Originally Posted by: 307chev Go to Quoted Post
My daily is an ls2 clubsport, May as well use the remaining earths dwindling resources for something worthwhile!
Nailed it! Definitely the best post in this thread so far.

Rose coloured glasses are not just for the 60s & 70s nostalgics either. What we all remember as "good" things are often anything but when looked at with older & wiser eyes that have experienced 20, 30 or 40 years of vehicle evolution & development.

A mate of mine only ever had Brocks (VK & VK) with T5s in them. He bought an earlier one with an M21 and hated it, because in his words, it "drove like a truck" and was "hardly any better than a Torana" - but if you had the M21 first and were used to it, then you'd have a different view - the T5 would be seen as a vast improvement, and there wouldn't be the hatred for the M21. I ended up buying my VL after he'd experienced the latest & greatest GMH product, and after driving the VF around for a few weeks, found the VL slow, cumbersome, and a chore to drive. Even my 2011 LPi falcon is quicker than the Brocks from the era, but we loved them as kids & teenagers, and the rose coloured glasses still persist.

One of my mate's parents had a TE Cortina when he was a kid. He loved that car, and recently found a nice original one. He paid a handsome sum for it, shipped it interstate, spent a bit of time getting it rego'd, and then drove it for the first time - he quickly realised just how wrong he was about his positive memories of a car he'd once loved 30 years prior.
I was a bit the same with the H-series and WB Holdens - but my lesson was in the 90s after 5 years in VH Commodores, then stepping into a HZ. It quickly cured any desire to ever own a HQ-WB after it felt so crap to drive and steer compared to a rack & pinion Commodore.

If I look back at the early Commodores I owned, and how I got them to handle pretty well (often using a lot of later model factory gear), and also go a bit better, I have fond memories, but compared to cars even just 20 years on, the difference is chalk & cheese. 39 years on (October '78 to October '17) seems like light-years of change.
It's got to the point in modern society & vehicle dynamics where I probably couldn't own a 3.3L or 4.2L early Commodore anymore, but I would have happily had one 20 years ago.
Yet road testers in the day used to give pretty decent reviews to 4.2L Commodores.....

I could go on about mates who loved Geminis, and others who were into Cordia Turbos, and even the odd Scorpion. The Exa & Pulsar ET Turbo were also cars that were popular when I was going to Uni, yet how many of them survive today? Perhaps about as many as JE Camiras, that were arguably a better car to drive (and in manual 2.0L form, pretty nippy too).
Cheers,

Mick
_______________________________________________________________

Judge a successful man not on how he treats his peers, but on how he treats those less fortunate.
Premier 350 Offline
#23 Posted : Monday, 24 December 2018 10:00:56 PM(UTC)
Premier 350

Rank: Member

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 2/02/2009(UTC)
Posts: 516
Man
Australia
Location: On a build over WWII airfield. Got the .50 cal cases from my driveway to prove it

Thanks: 11 times
Was thanked: 5 time(s) in 5 post(s)
I'm amused by the fact that the Frod apologists still have to qualify their tarted up Fairmont with 'fastest 4 door'

Why not bill it as 'fastest 4dr* conditions apply, and actual results will vary' And as noted above it got handed it's arse at Bathurst '72, and should have gotten the same in '73.

End of rant, Merry Bah Humbug to all.

Attn camry drivers. The accelerator is the skinny pedal on the right.
castellan Offline
#24 Posted : Wednesday, 26 December 2018 9:56:04 AM(UTC)
castellan

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 26/02/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,263

Thanks: 12 times
Was thanked: 11 time(s) in 10 post(s)
Originally Posted by: commodorenut Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: 307chev Go to Quoted Post
My daily is an ls2 clubsport, May as well use the remaining earths dwindling resources for something worthwhile!
Nailed it! Definitely the best post in this thread so far.

Rose coloured glasses are not just for the 60s & 70s nostalgics either. What we all remember as "good" things are often anything but when looked at with older & wiser eyes that have experienced 20, 30 or 40 years of vehicle evolution & development.

A mate of mine only ever had Brocks (VK & VK) with T5s in them. He bought an earlier one with an M21 and hated it, because in his words, it "drove like a truck" and was "hardly any better than a Torana" - but if you had the M21 first and were used to it, then you'd have a different view - the T5 would be seen as a vast improvement, and there wouldn't be the hatred for the M21. I ended up buying my VL after he'd experienced the latest & greatest GMH product, and after driving the VF around for a few weeks, found the VL slow, cumbersome, and a chore to drive. Even my 2011 LPi falcon is quicker than the Brocks from the era, but we loved them as kids & teenagers, and the rose coloured glasses still persist.

One of my mate's parents had a TE Cortina when he was a kid. He loved that car, and recently found a nice original one. He paid a handsome sum for it, shipped it interstate, spent a bit of time getting it rego'd, and then drove it for the first time - he quickly realised just how wrong he was about his positive memories of a car he'd once loved 30 years prior.
I was a bit the same with the H-series and WB Holdens - but my lesson was in the 90s after 5 years in VH Commodores, then stepping into a HZ. It quickly cured any desire to ever own a HQ-WB after it felt so crap to drive and steer compared to a rack & pinion Commodore.

If I look back at the early Commodores I owned, and how I got them to handle pretty well (often using a lot of later model factory gear), and also go a bit better, I have fond memories, but compared to cars even just 20 years on, the difference is chalk & cheese. 39 years on (October '78 to October '17) seems like light-years of change.
It's got to the point in modern society & vehicle dynamics where I probably couldn't own a 3.3L or 4.2L early Commodore anymore, but I would have happily had one 20 years ago.
Yet road testers in the day used to give pretty decent reviews to 4.2L Commodores.....

I could go on about mates who loved Geminis, and others who were into Cordia Turbos, and even the odd Scorpion. The Exa & Pulsar ET Turbo were also cars that were popular when I was going to Uni, yet how many of them survive today? Perhaps about as many as JE Camiras, that were arguably a better car to drive (and in manual 2.0L form, pretty nippy too).


Yes but back in the day is what I mainly talk about with such cars as for what they were and what you had on offer.
Lets say one could go back in time, I would not really want to go back past 1970 as all cars started to become better than the 1960's crap, who wants to drive a non synch 1st gear car or have drum brakes really and it was not until the 1980's that Air-con came about really in any numbers, if it did not have air-con I would not own such a car nowadays.

I do not know why so many people complain about the good old Aussie box like the M21 box shifting, nice and light it felt to me, I never complained, but the Ford 351 4SP box in XB were heavy as to shift clunk clunk, I remember the pain and glad to get rid of the rubbish.

I found that you needed a 4.2 V8 Commodore at least to be able to make it handle, as the 3.3L 6 was to gutless to get the tail out and through it about on dirt roads in style.
A mate has a HZ 3.3L still and what happened was that the wheel alignment settings are tampered with now, so when one goes in to get the wheel alignment done nowadays you have wankers who have new settings that they call a fix and by doing this so called fix it turns the car into a HQ type handling with bags of understeer and they claim it's the best thing and insist on this fix unless you know better and demand, you have to yell at them ! where they are wrong, I want a car to handle, not a bucket of crap and that the original RTS settings were spot on and magic, when one knows how to drive and loves to drive a car with grace and not have to drive something that like a stick in the mud.

Nowadays we have all the idiot proof crap on all new cars and such can be dangerous ABS is insanely dangerous on loose dirt roads that it's total rubbish and I have had the stability control at times that it could kill someone, that crap can be dangerous when you are driving at 10 10ths I had it point me off line coming on to a concrete causeway once, lucky I could correct it just in time, the road was very tight turns and up and down and not smooth and the std shocks were just to soft to kick a sensor into action at the wrong time and on dirt roads it slows you down coming though corners upsetting the fun.

Where people are still stuck in the past driving old pre EFI cars and they get into even a modern 6 cyl they are totally impressed by the performance, even a new manual Lancer 2.4L GSR is just quick as a XD 5.8L was nowadays, from top gear from 120KM/H to 180KM/H it just coms into it's own and it loves to be driven as such all day long.
castellan Offline
#25 Posted : Wednesday, 26 December 2018 10:03:32 AM(UTC)
castellan

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 26/02/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,263

Thanks: 12 times
Was thanked: 11 time(s) in 10 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Premier 350 Go to Quoted Post
I'm amused by the fact that the Frod apologists still have to qualify their tarted up Fairmont with 'fastest 4 door'

Why not bill it as 'fastest 4dr* conditions apply, and actual results will vary' And as noted above it got handed it's arse at Bathurst '72, and should have gotten the same in '73.

End of rant, Merry Bah Humbug to all.



XY Fairmont had the 351 2v with FMX auto and 2.75, diff about 185KM/H max.
castellan Offline
#26 Posted : Wednesday, 26 December 2018 10:08:04 AM(UTC)
castellan

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 26/02/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,263

Thanks: 12 times
Was thanked: 11 time(s) in 10 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
Originally Posted by: 307chev Go to Quoted Post
And would have been 2x Victories if PB haddent run out of gas!
GTHO is overated !


I wouldn't exactly call a GT-HO over-rated. all three were built for a purpose with a brute of an engine. The magazine articles of the day were not complimentary of them as a road car. Sports Car World for example came to the conclusion about the XW GT-HO that they did not like the car and to them it was intended for one use purpose only - as a race car. They stated that you would be silly to buy one over a GT or a GTS350 unless you intended to race the car at Bathurst. I know that the PhaseIII had far better road manners than the previous two GT-HO's but it still was a brute of a car totally unsuited to the majority of Australian roads, drivers and available fuel. So in a comparison between what was available at the time and suited to Australian conditions the GT-HO's are today seen through rose coloured glasses. Compare the engine in one of those to the kittens in the GTS350's with their hydraulic cam (same cam as a 307 and the same distributor), road friendly Quadrajet and 10:1 compression ratio able to run on most Super fuels found across Australia and you have a winner. Same argument for the standard GT's. Sure if you had a choice today of a GT-HO or a GT you'd take the HO, but think about buying one to use as an everyday driver in 1969-71 and I bet most would choose the GT or walk over the road and buy a GTS350 for a lot less money.


I thought that Australia back in the days of the Phase 2 XW had fuel octane ratting's of Standard 89 and Super 97 I do not remember anything other at the Stations pumps.
Looking at the compression of 11:1 for the Cleveland powered GT, they ran on 97 octane no problems, I run a bike alloy engine with 13:1 that recommends 95 octane.

I do not have a real handle on Australian fuel octane ratings back in the days of the 1950's FX Holden and on but judging from the compression ratios of all the grey motors I think that the octane rating is getting better as time goes by, so we see the octane ratings must of gone way up over most of Australia with the EH red motors by 1963 and the 1967 XR 289GT is 10:1 and Sep 1969 HT GTS350 10.25:1

It takes a real man or maybe a loon a tick to drive a XW GT-HO P2 or XY GT-HO especially back in the day with them tyres and roads, but the Windsor powered XW GT-HO was not the same type of beast as the Phase 2 or 3.
One problem was with the XY GT auto that it has the 2.75 ration diff, a 3.0 would of been much better, but with the tyres of the day they thought that the crappy rear end would come out on ya when going into 2ed gear.
From what I have driven of them Falcons and Holdens is that the HK-T-G rear leaf setup was much better behaved.


Yes, but try and buy 97 in areas outside of major population centres. In the USA most of the cast iron headed engines over about 10.5-11:1 needed special fuel, the alloy headed big blocks could go to about 11.5 but not the super high comp 1969 L88 or ZL1.

Most road testers claimed the XW GT-HO was a pig on the road, and the XW GT-HO II engine was worse. They actually like the PhaseIII as it was more refined. Here is a quote from SCW 12/69 on the XW GT-HO:

"It is so firm in the suspension, it is quite unpleasant around town, although it will immediately compensate for this on fast, smooth open roadwork. This combination of conditions is still quite rare in Australia, and the typical Australian major highway, characterised by broken edges and blotchy main lines, won't suit this "Hairy One" at high speed."

After talking about how the GT-HO has its pants pulled down by a (hobbled by GMH) GTS350 up to 50mph, they say "we're just trying to illustrate that the engine has been tuned specifically to be fastest from Hell corner to Skyline at Panorama". They state all through it that it is obvious that this car was built in a quantity to qualify for the ARDC's minimum 200 build to be eligible to race at Bathurst, and that is too much of a handful as a road car. They achieved a 14.4s @ 90mph out of the car too, although quote an average of 14.8s. The car tested was a private car with 2000 miles on it, prepared for Bathurst 1969 but not used as the owner raced a Mini instead (Trevor Meehan). It was a dead stock car in good tune.



The Cam has a lower lift in the Phase 3 to the Phase 2.
HK1837 Offline
#27 Posted : Wednesday, 26 December 2018 10:16:17 AM(UTC)
HK1837

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Moderator, Registered, Veteran
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 12,739

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 147 time(s) in 145 post(s)
I do agree. I get into my HJ Premier which is as close to a Survivor as you will find. Apart from the HDT or L34 engines it is the most powerful 5.0L/308 of the day, has what was regarded by most as the smoothest box of the era (TH400), air, steer, power windows. Original owner fitted a Selby rear sway bar and GT130 shocks so it does drive good. The car feels odd to drive, skinny steering wheel, no leg room, no room between the seat and the steering wheel, strange seating position. Not a pleasant experience once used to a modern car. My 2001 SR5 Hilux has more power and torque at the back wheels than a PhaseIII, has a Recaro Ergomed driver's seat and does have improved brakes (TRD fronts) and Ultimate suspension. You can get into it and drive until you need fuel and get out feeling great. And it is just a cr@ppy dual cab ute with rear leafs and rear drums!

This is why I have decided to modernise the HK GTS I'm working on. Whist I'm keeping the rear drums, it is getting a full Rodtech front end with AUII onwards front rotors/calipers, VT stepped bore master cyl and a Territory power steering rack. Whilst it will have around 400-450hp, it will have a Holley Sniper EFI setup that gives auto choke, nice sensible idle and smooth power delivery, and it has full spark control and controls the electric fan. Plus it will have aircon and V2 CV8 electrically adjustable buckets meaning whilst the car will look old school it will drive like a modern car and be comfortable too. No it won't have tilt steering column and probably not retractable seat belts, but it will be good enough to get in and drive and not worry about being uncomfortable. The cam is a custom hydraulic roller which will give huge amounts of torque below 3000rpm and maximum power by 5000rpm but deliver a lot of vacuum for brakes and a Quadrajet if I choose to run that at any stage. Diff is probably going to be 3.25:1 but with 15" tyres, which are only 215/60/15 so the same size as original D70/14's.
_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords?
castellan Offline
#28 Posted : Wednesday, 26 December 2018 11:05:04 AM(UTC)
castellan

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 26/02/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,263

Thanks: 12 times
Was thanked: 11 time(s) in 10 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Warren Turnbull Go to Quoted Post
I agree Terry, racing a car on the track does not make the best car, but the whole thing comes back to specials built for racing.

But how many of those cars did they sell and how easy was it to buy one, i.e. availability and price.

Sales is what counts to a manufacturer, how many people want to buy them. It is amazing when you look at sales per month of both Ford and Holden product, there are a few surprises in there as to what people were prepared to put their hands in their pocket and buy. These are the cars that hit the market.

But race on Sunday sell on Monday BS has been going around for so long that everyone believes it. Race on Sunday was about the winning at any cost. If you think its about race on Sunday sell on Monday what the hell happened in 1972, XY racing yet XA out for 7 months. remember when someone says, "at least you could buy the cars that raced in the old days" remind them that you could not buy the Ford product in October 1972.

So many good cars have been made that get very little recognition.

The phase IV may not have been released but they did make one and it was faster than the phase III, it is a production car and has to be recognised in automotive history. (the three they call prototypes are built after the production car so are not prototypes but race prepared GTs).

If you look at a lot of the vision being put up on utuibe of this era, you se lots of small cars, VWs, Morris, Datsun, Toyota, Hillmans etc. It was an increasing market that Holden/Ford and Chrysler got heavily involved with, some successfully and others not. They were marketed at a variety of buyers, but mainly women at first, as the second car. Then at the youth with cars like the Cortina GT, it was a complicated and diverse market

There are some statistic of the day on how many of each model were registered in each state. I have recorded the Holden stuff but it has it all. If you get these books, there is a set in the national library, you can then get the real figures. They also break into commercial, sedan and wagon, different engine sizes including V8, etc.


Has this been proven that the XA GT-HO P4 would of been faster ? as far as I know this Phase 4 engine was not as hot with smaller cam, you would not run a Phase 3 engine with 3.0 diff ratio as it would be crap to drive, not to mention the hype about the top speed is just total BS hardtop or sedan.

When the ford fans seen the XY they just easy to convinced themselves that the XA was better and it was a better car.
My Aunty bought a light blue VH Charger new and it had the 215 hemi with auto, so go figure.

Yep it's interesting to me, the numbers of what cars were sold in models and years and all, I was just looking at the figures for Australian Fords all the Zephyr sedans utes wagons and Customline, Mainline, Fairlaine, Anglia, F100, F250 ETC.
How's this 1958 Customline sold 1842 and from June with automatics 1475, Mainline 1053, Zephyr 15156 and 4576 utes, Anglia 352 and one ute, F100 278 sold.
Warren Turnbull Offline
#29 Posted : Wednesday, 26 December 2018 12:21:11 PM(UTC)
Warren Turnbull

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Registered, Veteran
Joined: 10/02/2009(UTC)
Posts: 2,235

Was thanked: 11 time(s) in 11 post(s)
The phase IV being a "smoother" body should have had a slightly higher top speed. Although this is just conjecture as the car was never tested and the RPO83s would have also been detuned for testers, to ensure that there was not took much attention given to them.

My opinion is also from knowing a mechanic who worked for the original purchaser. The guy also had a phase III but preferred to drive the phase IV when he ended to get from A to B in a hurry. this could be just the fact that the XA was a better platform.

There is no doubt though cars like the XU1, L34, GT-HO, RT E## etc were great race cars and the different ways that the manufacturers went about winning Bathurst. Was this a flow on, probably. Did it develop brand loyalty, definitely.

Warren
Warren Turnbull Offline
#30 Posted : Wednesday, 26 December 2018 4:14:10 PM(UTC)
Warren Turnbull

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Registered, Veteran
Joined: 10/02/2009(UTC)
Posts: 2,235

Was thanked: 11 time(s) in 11 post(s)
I found my list of cars in order of sales per month for Holden and Ford over the life of the model. (I do not have Ford Cortina, Escort, Capri etc)

These are not 100% accurate as some models went over into the next and often production stopped before the next model was released, but it gives an indication. Also note that size of market changed so the HT would be more successful than VZ as VZ was in a larger market.

EH, HG, VZ, HT, HK, HQ, HD, HR, VY, EJ, FB, VX, EK, VS, FC, HJ, XF, VT, BA, EF, HX, FE, AU, XB, XA, VC, VR, XE, XH, ED, VN, XW, VP, VK, XD, VB, XY, XR, XT, FJ, HZ, VL, XC, VE, EB, VH, XL, BF, XP, XM, XK, JB, LH, LC, LX, VF, TE, TD, LJ, TF, 48/50, FG, TX, UC, WB, JD, TC, HB, TG, JE, TA, RB.
Warren Turnbull Offline
#31 Posted : Wednesday, 26 December 2018 4:18:21 PM(UTC)
Warren Turnbull

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Registered, Veteran
Joined: 10/02/2009(UTC)
Posts: 2,235

Was thanked: 11 time(s) in 11 post(s)
Registration figures for Holden in 1968:

______161 186 307 327 Australia total
Sedan 18719 55934 7980 666 310267
Wagon 8601 19090 1426 0 58569
Ute 8670 5631 153 0 34734
Van 4088 1732 31 0 16318

Warren

Edited by user Wednesday, 26 December 2018 4:20:45 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

castellan Offline
#32 Posted : Wednesday, 26 December 2018 9:56:52 PM(UTC)
castellan

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 26/02/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,263

Thanks: 12 times
Was thanked: 11 time(s) in 10 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Warren Turnbull Go to Quoted Post
I found my list of cars in order of sales per month for Holden and Ford over the life of the model. (I do not have Ford Cortina, Escort, Capri etc)

These are not 100% accurate as some models went over into the next and often production stopped before the next model was released, but it gives an indication. Also note that size of market changed so the HT would be more successful than VZ as VZ was in a larger market.

EH, HG, VZ, HT, HK, HQ, HD, HR, VY, EJ, FB, VX, EK, VS, FC, HJ, XF, VT, BA, EF, HX, FE, AU, XB, XA, VC, VR, XE, XH, ED, VN, XW, VP, VK, XD, VB, XY, XR, XT, FJ, HZ, VL, XC, VE, EB, VH, XL, BF, XP, XM, XK, JB, LH, LC, LX, VF, TE, TD, LJ, TF, 48/50, FG, TX, UC, WB, JD, TC, HB, TG, JE, TA, RB.


Australian Cortina sales
1962 = 1518
1963 = 7843
1964 = 9890
1965 = 15699
1966 = 7954
1967 = 16682
1968 = 16247
1969 = 16541
1970 = 11619

Capri
1969 = 3601
1970 = 5372


I thought that the HD Holden was the top selling car of all Holden's per month.
wbute Offline
#33 Posted : Wednesday, 26 December 2018 10:26:45 PM(UTC)
wbute

Rank: Member

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 25/01/2010(UTC)
Posts: 848

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 8 time(s) in 8 post(s)
Interesting to see HX had bigger sales per month than HZ and HJ.
Warren Turnbull Offline
#34 Posted : Thursday, 27 December 2018 6:44:50 AM(UTC)
Warren Turnbull

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Registered, Veteran
Joined: 10/02/2009(UTC)
Posts: 2,235

Was thanked: 11 time(s) in 11 post(s)
You are right the HD does hold the record for sales per month, but these dropped right off after the negative press about the front. These figures are average over the life of the model.

The other problem with them is left over stock is not accounted for.

But it gives you an idea.

Warren
commodorenut Offline
#35 Posted : Thursday, 27 December 2018 7:23:44 AM(UTC)
commodorenut

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Moderator, Registered, Veteran
Joined: 2/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 3,101

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 29 time(s) in 28 post(s)
A more telling tale would be to include the average monthly sales for the entire market for that year, so the model sales could be seen as a % of the total market.

Where a VZ may be high up the <total sales/months on the market> list because of a larger number of sales, it's market % would be significantly lower than the EH or even HG due to the explosion in competition in our local market as the Button plan unfolded through the decades.

Whilst some of these cars would have been the top of the tree back in the day - like Byron's comments on the 308/T400/air/steer Premier, sometimes it's best to leave our "dream cars" from our teenage & childhood years remain as that - dreams, so we don't see the reality of what they are when compared to our experiences with much more modern cars.

I enjoy driving my Brocks because of what they represent to me, and it's just plain fun. Fortunately the Scheel seats make them as comfortable (even more comfortable) than modern cars. They look faster than they are, and every idiot still wants to come up the left lane for a traffic light drag race, and then get disappointed when you don't.

A few months back a little Honda pulled up beside me at the lights when I was in the Group A. A young-ish fellow of Asian appearance, but with perfect Aussie English leant out the passenger window and said "I love your car, it sounds awesome, I thought these only come in turbo?" I told him it was a 5.0L, and technically, Brock actually won Bathurst in '87 in one of them. He was wide eyed. His next question - "where can I buy one?" There's still hope yet!

But one thing I see happening over time is the people who want these cars - for memories or whatever - are going to dwindle in numbers, and we won't get as many from younger generations wanting to replace them. It already happened with vintage cars - numbers, and values, plummeted, as people passed on (literally), and give it 10-20 years and there's going to be a similar thing happen to the 60s cars, albeit not as drastic.
Cheers,

Mick
_______________________________________________________________

Judge a successful man not on how he treats his peers, but on how he treats those less fortunate.
HK1837 Offline
#36 Posted : Thursday, 27 December 2018 7:44:15 AM(UTC)
HK1837

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Moderator, Registered, Veteran
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 12,739

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 147 time(s) in 145 post(s)
I agree Mick, the demand for most of these will dwindle. My guess is HK-HG coupes, HQ-HX coupes, LX hatchbacks, XA-XC coupes and Charger coupes will remain high because of what they look like. I reckon the others unless they are special (like XR-XB GT sedans, HQ-HZ GTS sedans, LC-LJ XU1 etc) will taper off eventually.
_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords?
Warren Turnbull Offline
#37 Posted : Thursday, 27 December 2018 8:01:04 AM(UTC)
Warren Turnbull

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Registered, Veteran
Joined: 10/02/2009(UTC)
Posts: 2,235

Was thanked: 11 time(s) in 11 post(s)
Highest Holden share was in 1959 with GMH holding over 50% market share with FC taking just under 50%.

Imagine working at the motor registry with almost every other new car registration being an FC Holden.

Warren
Dr Terry Offline
#38 Posted : Thursday, 27 December 2018 9:01:25 AM(UTC)
Dr Terry

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Moderator, Registered
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 5,442

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 69 time(s) in 65 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Warren Turnbull Go to Quoted Post
You are right the HD does hold the record for sales per month, but these dropped right off after the negative press about the front.


I don't agree Warren. The shape of the HD was very well received in 1965, buyers liked the curved side glass, its 6-seat capacity & its space-age looks. A few poked fun in the 'kidney slicer' shape but I don't believe it had a negative effect on sales.

I think HD was a victim of the huge increase in competition. By 1965 both the Falcon & Valiant were sorted & a lot of newer cars were just being released.

In April 65 Bill Bourke organised the 70,000 mile reliability test at You Yangs & Falcon now had disc brakes, a 3-speed auto plus the new Fairmont. This, along will Bill Bourke's brilliant marketing & re-organised dealer network gave Holden its first serious competition since 1948.

Even with all of this, the HD wasn't disgraced, it still had better sales per month, than HR, FC, FB & EK. Also I believe that the best month was May 65, a time when EH ute & van were in run-out & the HD ute & van were yet to come.

Dr Terry
If at first you don't succeed, just call it Version 1.0
wbute Offline
#39 Posted : Thursday, 27 December 2018 10:20:09 AM(UTC)
wbute

Rank: Member

Reputation:

Groups: Registered
Joined: 25/01/2010(UTC)
Posts: 848

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 8 time(s) in 8 post(s)
I have noticed a couple of well restored Sandmans for sale lately that haven’t attracted as much interest as they might have last year. Perhaps the market for niche 70’s cars is already reaching saturation point. Perhaps too many wheeler dealers trying to make a buck out of them have over inflated the market?
HK1837 Offline
#40 Posted : Thursday, 27 December 2018 10:35:06 AM(UTC)
HK1837

Rank: Veteran

Reputation:

Groups: Moderator, Registered, Veteran
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 12,739

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 147 time(s) in 145 post(s)
I think Sandmans have been over-priced for a while now, I have always been of the belief that unless it is a top spec car don't spend the earth on it. I wouldn't spend a cent on any Sandman unless it is either a very original car not needing much work, or it is a 308/5.0L car. Or of course if it happens to be an Overlander (which were normally 5.0L cars anyway if they were a Sandman).

I think most people realise and it has been something I have tried to convince people of since the early 90's - if you are to spend $ on a car, make sure it is one that has inherent value rather just making a low spec car look like something it isn't. I have always thought it was pointless spending however much it is restoring a base car to look like an SLR5000 or GTS or whatever. Far better to buy the real thing and spend the $ on it. I know that is a bit harder today given the prices people want for junk but even 5-8 years ago a rebuildable SLR5000 for example was a $5000 car, as was a nice 5.0L GTS sedan.
_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords?
Users browsing this topic
Guest
6 Pages<1234>»
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 © 2003-2019, Yet Another Forum.NET
This page was generated in 0.496 seconds.