Rank: Veteran
Groups: Moderator, Registered
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 6,064
Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 203 time(s) in 184 post(s)
|
I rather certain that the 1X Toyota 4-cyl ran the same water pump as the Starfire 4. It was the same as the Holden 6. There were 2 different lengths of Holden 6 pump at this time, but I think that the the UC & the Toyo had the earlier (short) pump & the Commodore 4 had the later (long) pump.
There are quite a few differences between the Starfire & the Commodore 4, different cam, head casting etc. etc. The VH version also had "Pulsar" air injection.
Dr Terry
|
If at first you don't succeed, just call it Version 1.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 11/09/2016(UTC) Posts: 209 ![Australia]( "Australia") Location: OZ Was thanked: 23 time(s) in 22 post(s)
|
Q a: When did GMH first propose manufacturing a 4cyl engine based on the Red 6cyl design? Q b: Which model series was it proposed to be released in? Q c: What was it's proposed CI capacity? Edited by user Saturday, 11 April 2020 10:55:41 AM(UTC)
| Reason: Not specified
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran
Groups: Registered
Joined: 26/02/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,647
Thanks: 16 times
Was thanked: 27 time(s) in 25 post(s)
|
How about them Nissan 3.0L 6cyl in the VL, I had a dude say that they were rubbish and had problems, I said the only problems were due to idiots not servicing them, many people could get away with abusing the old cast iron engines and that's why most engines bugger up, but alloy heads don't take kindly to just water in the radiator.
I like the 3.3L from VC on some were harsher than others as they were not balanced, the VL 6 lacked the torque of the 3.3L but loved to rev and the turbo can really go well with more boost and 3 inch exhaust, the Skyline 3.0L would be my pick over the V6 VN Commodore any day and the sporty one got a bigger cam and the series 2 a bigger cam and some head work with 140KW.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 30/04/2005(UTC) Posts: 470  ![New Zealand]( "New Zealand") Was thanked: 15 time(s) in 14 post(s)
|
4 cylinder Holden motor QA ?
QB Gemini
QC 2.2 |
life is good in "Wine & Holden Marlborough " |
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 2/03/2005(UTC) Posts: 489 ![Australia]( "Australia") Thanks: 3 times
Was thanked: 7 time(s) in 7 post(s)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 11/09/2016(UTC) Posts: 209 ![Australia]( "Australia") Location: OZ Was thanked: 23 time(s) in 22 post(s)
|
Originally Posted by: gmholdman  Maybe Diesel engine?? No it was to be a high compression petrol engine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran
Groups: Moderator, Registered
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 6,064
Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 203 time(s) in 184 post(s)
|
Originally Posted by: 8D11PCH2 Q a: When did GMH first propose manufacturing a 4cyl engine based on the Red 6cyl design?
Q b: Which model series was it proposed to be released in?
Q c: What was it's proposed CI capacity? I seem to remember rumours of a Holden 4 (based on the Red 6) during the 60s for the HB Torana replacement. This became either the HBII or HBIII, later to become LC. Many capacities were proposed, from 1.4 to 2.0 litres. Dr Terry |
If at first you don't succeed, just call it Version 1.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 11/09/2016(UTC) Posts: 209 ![Australia]( "Australia") Location: OZ Was thanked: 23 time(s) in 22 post(s)
|
Originally Posted by: Dr Terry Originally Posted by: 8D11PCH2 Q a: When did GMH first propose manufacturing a 4cyl engine based on the Red 6cyl design?
Q b: Which model series was it proposed to be released in?
Q c: What was it's proposed CI capacity? I seem to remember rumours of a Holden 4 (based on the Red 6) during the 60s for the HB Torana replacement. This became either the HBII or HBIII, later to become LC. Many capacities were proposed, from 1.4 to 2.0 litres. Dr Terry You have a good memory Terry. a: July 1966, Engineering Department proposed the new L4 VIVA engine (based on the current Holden 6cyl design) to meet the 95% local content Program by January 1970. b: June 1967, Engineering Department product proposal, Stage III Torana LH Series - local manual transmission, rear axle, suspension, brakes and steering, body sheetmetal, electrical, and new 4cyl engine based on 6cyl design, to comply with 95% local content by December 1971. c: June 1967 Engineering Department proposed the new 4cyl engine be available in 87, 92, 100, 107 & 124 cu in capacities. Edited by user Sunday, 12 April 2020 9:59:42 AM(UTC)
| Reason: Not specified
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran
Groups: Registered
Joined: 26/02/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,647
Thanks: 16 times
Was thanked: 27 time(s) in 25 post(s)
|
Originally Posted by: 8D11PCH2 Originally Posted by: Dr Terry Originally Posted by: 8D11PCH2 Q a: When did GMH first propose manufacturing a 4cyl engine based on the Red 6cyl design?
Q b: Which model series was it proposed to be released in?
Q c: What was it's proposed CI capacity? I seem to remember rumours of a Holden 4 (based on the Red 6) during the 60s for the HB Torana replacement. This became either the HBII or HBIII, later to become LC. Many capacities were proposed, from 1.4 to 2.0 litres. Dr Terry You have a good memory Terry. a: July 1966, Engineering Department proposed the new L4 VIVA engine (based on the current Holden 6cyl design) to meet the 95% local content Program by January 1970. b: June 1967, Engineering Department product proposal, Stage III Torana LH Series - local manual transmission, rear axle, suspension, brakes and steering, body sheetmetal, electrical, and new 4cyl engine based on 6cyl design, to comply with 95% local content by December 1971. c: June 1967 Engineering Department proposed the new 4cyl engine be available in 87, 92, 100, 107 & 124 cu in capacities. I remember that they claimed that the 124ci 2.0L was to harsh for the 4 cyl so they dropped it and went with the 115ci 1.9L. I remember my brothers 161 how smooth it was when winding it right out. Even with a fully balanced 202 you can feel the difference. One wonders why the old Jap Car engines 6cyl engines were so smooth to rev, well they were only 2.4L = 149, 2.6L = 161ci and 2.8L = 173ci people would claim how smooth they were over the 202 back in the days. Holden should of balance it's engines conrod's at least as the weights were a disgrace.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
