I was just thinking what was the price gap in the 1972 falcons and holdens as to the imported 350ci and GT 351 engines.
Now back in 1972 like, ford aus built 302 Cleveland here and only imported the engine blocks.

So it's safe to say a XA Fairmont 302 vs 2v 351 XA Fairmont price difference could maybe be worked out even thou the 351 gets the 9 inch diff but they both have the same C4 auto.

Then how could we work out how much more the imported GT 4V 351 was over both.
Maybe the first of the XB GT with the 4V could answer that to the price of the aussie built 351 XB GT.

The looking at the Holden HQ GTS 350 cost I have an extra $ 775 more than the 308 GTS but then again we have the M21 and trimatic as were the 350 got the Muncie and T400.

$ 775 works out to something around $ 8000 in todays money roundabout I would think.
So forking out for a HQ GTS 350 must of been out of reach for many wanting one and going for the 350 you did not get value as the 308 could keep up with the 350 any day especially the auto with that slug T400 not to mention the later 350 smog engine.

This smog 350 must be the problem with why it was rejected in the HJ as what would be the point as the HJ 308 would of killed the 350 on offer from the USA at the time with the 350 adapted to unleaded.
So Holden had no option in keeping the 350 and gave way for the 308 power house to take the lead, and could a XB 351 GT hose off the HJ GTS 308 ? I don't think so.

HJ was never to be a 350. A 400ci engine was to be standard in Caprice and optional in the same places a 350 was optional in a HQ (LS, GTS and Statesman (Deville in HJ)). I guess you are correct though that if the 400 was to be a SBC then it would have been slower than a HJ 308 as the 400 SBC of those days was a low comp weak as p!ss engine. That is assuming it was a 400 SBC as fitted to the 350Z and a few other cars. According to those around at the time they had other engines too like the Olds 6.6 as used in the Transams of the day, however the 400 makes more sense as all the Engineering was done from the 350 SBC in HQ.
The HJ 308 performance revision was noted in the HJ features manual in May 1974. The 400 was noted as dropped in a letter dated 10/12/73.

The imported bits weren't cheap. 10 bolt and especially 12 bolt in HK-HG were far more expensive that the locally made Borg Warner 2.78 banjo (later GMH made), particularly for the 12 bolt as when you ordered one of these you apparently paid for the 10 bolt in the car and the 12 bolt to come later. Same for the Chevrolet engines and Saginaw/Powerglide transmissions over the local stuff. As you say the Muncie and TH400 contributed to the HQ 350 extra cost but it was still dear.

Terry, where was the Powerglide standard (other than Brougham) in HK? I thought the M21 4spd was the standard box that came when you optioned a V8 in HK (after the 4spd was available that is)?

I do get what you mean though, say a HK Kingwood or Premier optioned with a V8 was cheaper with a Powerglide than a Saginaw. Part of that reason will have been the fact the M21 came standard with a 3.36:1 LSD Salisbury whereas for the exception of GTS the 307 auto came with a 2.78 or 3.08 banjo (unclear if these were LSD or not soon after Monaro release). Was a manual V8 GTS still dearer than an auto one? The only major difference other than the box was the radius rods?

Hi all .. i'm going way back in the memory bank, but i think the early HK 307 cars were Powerglide automatic only because of the problem of having the aircon option... which i think had the requirement of a having a bench or bench/bucket with column shift seat arrangement ?? (dealer fit aircon ??)...

...i'm pretty sure the manual floor shift cars with buckets precluded having aircon as an option, so the four speed floor shift cars were a very strict order, and mainly i guess for those specific, early 327's..

...please correct me if i'm wrong ...cheers fellas

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dr Terry
I forget the exact $$ figure, but I remember that the Saginaw 4-speed was an extra cost option over the standard Powerglide in HK 307 V8s.

This was one of the few occasions when the manual was more expensive than its automatic equivalent.

Now I'm 60+ years of age many younger than me, often ask why I didn't purchase a new GTS 350 HQ (or whatever) because they were 'only' $4,000 to $5,000, it would've been a good 'investment'.

In those days, earning around $40 per week as a trainee & going to university, that amount of money was akin to buying a new house.

Dr Terry

---

cars were very expensive back then, and not very good product either. 350 monaro was a power of money back then, as was a 351 falcon or fairlane, i have a k code ZD and have the purchase receipt from dec 1971, and its just shy of $5900 with air that is rubbish and tbar, and as terry says, at a wage of $40 a week, thats alot of dough for a car that leaked oil, rusted in no time, threw rods, didnt stop and had no really exciting features, same as a holden or valiant, difference being with then and today, there was work, plenty of it, and not much choice in cars, and realy, without the japanese influence, we would still be driving drum braked, vac operated wiper, vinyl seated rust buckets that whined in the rear and leaked oil from the rear main
to have a car back in the 60's early 70's was a luxury, to have a V8 or a high performance car, was a real luxury

Edited by user Thursday, 11 December 2014 6:29:30 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

According to ABS the average Australian wage in 74 was $6300. So not a lot different to buying a car now. The difference might be its easier to borrow money today.

quote:

---

Originally posted by wbute
According to ABS the average Australian wage in 74 was $6300. So not a lot different to buying a car now. The difference might be its easier to borrow money today.

---

The early 70s was a time of heavy inflation.

The price of a new HK Kingswood sedan was $2359, HQ was $2920, HJ was $3854 & by HX was $5322. The base specs of all these cars was quite similar (bench seat, 3-sp man, no radio etc. etc.). I'm not sure how wages followed those figures. Credit is much easier to obtain nowadays though.

It's a very different story today. Car prices haven't altered significantly in the last 20 years while wages have doubled & the cars themselves have vastly improved in both equipment levels & quality.

Dr Terry

I honestly don't think things were dearer in the 70's. if you use this RBA calculator it gives an idea. HQ car works out at about $30000 in 2013.
http://www.rba.gov.au/ca...ator/annualDecimal.html
Cars have improved that were built in Australia. No doubt. The Button plan caused that in the 80's. We also now no longer have a car manufactured in Australia in two years time because of it. For better or for worse we will have high quality cars built in Thailand.

Edited by user Thursday, 11 December 2014 6:58:53 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

quote:

---

Originally posted by wbute
I honestly don't think things were dearer in the 70's. if you use this RBA calculator it gives an idea. HQ car works out at about $30000 in 2013.
http://www.rba.gov.au/ca...ator/annualDecimal.html
Cars have improved that were built in Australia. No doubt. The Button plan caused that in the 80's. We also now no longer have a car manufactured in Australia in two years time because of it. For better or for worse we will have high quality cars built in Thailand.

---

Those are 2 very generalised statements which don't really hold up under scrutiny.

Cars increased in price during the 70s like no other decade before or since. Take a quick look at the prices in my post above. I don't think that wages kept up with prices during that time either. I believe that where the average Joe could afford an HK/HT in 1969, he found it a lot harder to purchase the equivalent HZ in 1979.

I don't believe that the Button plan had a lot to do with the demise of Australian car manufacturing in the current era. In fact it probably made the locals slightly more efficient & last longer than they would have otherwise. Their problems are many & complex, but suffice to say it is not viable to build cars in Australia with no tariff protection, our high wage structure & ridiculous Government imposed on-costs. Many ask how can we compete with many Asian country's very low wage & cost structure, but to put it perspective, look at the Toyota Camry.

None of us here know of the future plans of our 3 (remaining) local manufacturers. The Falcon & Territory are uniquely Australian & where the Falcon probably won't have a direct replacement, we will receive an SUV of some type to replace the Territory. The Cruze replacement (or update) will probably come from South Korea or Thailand, but I don't believe that there will be a direct replacement for the Commodore. We will get the new FWD Insignia or whatever, but it will be more expensive & not as good as the Commodore.

Toyota is a bit different, The Camry/Aurion will continue on (updated or new model) just sourced from a different factory. Toyota build these things all over the planet. From what I hear we will probably get them from the Kentucky plant in the good old USA. Even when sea freight is factored in, the cars will still be markedly cheaper than those built here. OK, we can't genuinely compete with the low rent Asian countries, but there really is something wrong in we can't compete with the USA (plus freight).

Dr Terry

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dr Terry

quote:

---

Originally posted by we wreck 81837s only
and realy, without the japanese influence, we would still be driving drum braked, vac operated wiper, vinyl seated rust buckets that whined in the rear and leaked oil from the rear main

---

It wasn't only the Japanese influence, they still had vinyl seats, drum brakes & rust, very rusty well into the early 80s actually. The whiney diff was a uniquely English thing, Austins & Morrises in the 50s whined from new.

Before the Japanese we had competition between GM,Ford & Chrysler as well as the Poms & VW.

The introduction of the Falcon on 1960 made GM-H get out bed & have a look round. Holdens & Falcons had electric wipers & disc brakes (albeit optional) before the first Jap cars arrived.

Dr Terry

---

granted, yes, like you said, holden really was not an innovator and i dont care who says what, the product was far from good, and it was very expensive.
early jap was shocking for rust, for sure, leaky rear main if defo our symbol on car manufacturing