Rank: Veteran
Groups: Moderator, Registered, Veteran
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 14,717
Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 512 time(s) in 488 post(s)
|
GMH would have just ordered what they wanted and they'd have come. 307's were Canadian, 327's other than the last were Tonnawanda (USA). GTS350 manuals we actually Tonnwanda, the last lot were Canadian.
I doubt GMH would have even known the Candaian 327's were different power wise to the early ones, nor would have cared. Just like the last lot of manual 350's being significantly more powerful than the early ones. They would probably have been more worried about the headache of little bits they had to change to make the later 327 fit.
I think it is well known the VH 340 engine was a ball tearere high comp engine, and the later one was far less powerful.
Nothing wrong with wanting to know how things were! Funny that Holden history is clouded in myth, but at least we can find the facts in English in plain print! Makes you wonder how people "know" exactly what happened in Jerusalem circa 2000 years ago! |
_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords? |
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran
Groups: Moderator, Registered, Veteran
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 14,717
Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 512 time(s) in 488 post(s)
|
Speaking of Aussie fitted SBC's, at Cessnock swap this morning I picked up a late HT (most likely also suits early HG) GTS350 manual carby and manifold. Guy pulled them off the car when it was a few years old and been sitting since. I keep finding damn HT carbs, as this is the second one so far - I picked up an early HT GTS350 manual carb at Morisset swap a year or so ago. Still looking for the earlier HK carbies which should be more common but not from my expereince so far. |
_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords? |
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran
Groups: Registered
Joined: 26/02/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,641
Thanks: 16 times
Was thanked: 27 time(s) in 25 post(s)
|
quote:
Originally posted by HK1837
GMH would have just ordered what they wanted and they'd have come. 307's were Canadian, 327's other than the last were Tonnawanda (USA). GTS350 manuals we actually Tonnwanda, the last lot were Canadian.
I doubt GMH would have even known the Candaian 327's were different power wise to the early ones, nor would have cared. Just like the last lot of manual 350's being significantly more powerful than the early ones. They would probably have been more worried about the headache of little bits they had to change to make the later 327 fit.
I think it is well known the VH 340 engine was a ball tearere high comp engine, and the later one was far less powerful.
Nothing wrong with wanting to know how things were! Funny that Holden history is clouded in myth, but at least we can find the facts in English in plain print! Makes you wonder how people "know" exactly what happened in Jerusalem circa 2000 years ago!
How do we know about the lower compression 327 GMH must of known the difference. With the HT-G 350 manuals I can't see that it would be the heads making anymore power in the last lot and can't find any cam difference to claim any more powerful engine. the difference in the different intake would be nothing. Unless we can come up with a different part number for the cam or work out the flow difference of the heads as being a factor we have nothing of true worth to work with. It would help if it was all written in Latin then we would have a clearer position to work with as English is just so easy to come to a misunderstanding. History can be absolute but how far in depth does one want to go. Many today come up with you are pedantic, but they do not understand what the word means, rules and detail should not be dismissed as just nothing to be bothered with, just because they have no interest, only points to there ignorance in the subject. We had the conversation on an other forum about the HX manual 5.0L ADR27A engine why it was so gutless to the HJ 5.0L, I say it has to be in the jetting as the only difference is a little bit of compression, or the EGR is pumping out to much heat under the carby ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran
Groups: Moderator, Registered, Veteran
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 14,717
Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 512 time(s) in 488 post(s)
|
They had to know the engine was different as they had to Engineer it to fit, my main point is I don't think they would have cared it had less power and may not have known about it until they got details for it. It appears that the engine was a current engine in the '69 Impala, except it had a 2 barrel carb.
I think it is just the heads in the McKinnon 350 manual engine, or possibly they had a slightly different profile cam. In the end it is known the last cars were significantly quicker, but that may only be 15-20hp in the end so even if there is no actual flow figures or specs for the cam it is a fact they were quicker.
As I said before, the poor inlet and the fact it was exhaust heated will be as much a factor as anything else with the early ADR27A 308's. Slightly lower compression will play a minor part probably, and the carb stup will probably play its part. The exhaust on one bank also had an extra restriction in it (spring loaded flap). Anyone who tested an early LX SLR5000 against an ADR27A one will attest to the big difference! |
_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords? |
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 16/04/2014(UTC) Posts: 768  Location: Victoria Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 49 time(s) in 47 post(s)
|
It might be a bit off topic, but I'm interested in these higher power engines apparently fitted to late HG 350 manuals. What were the block, heads and inlet manifold cast numbers? I've read somewhere else a quote from Wheels magazine regarding an "incredible" performance difference, which doesn't sound like a 15-20 hp difference.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran
Groups: Moderator, Registered, Veteran
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 14,717
Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 512 time(s) in 488 post(s)
|
It may be higher. There was a huge performance difference bewteen single and twin exhaust 308 too, difference was about 20rwhp or so from memory. 307 woke up as well with the 327's exhaust and inlet/carb.
HG McKinnon heads were 3973370. Manifold 3973469. 010 block. |
_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords? |
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran
Groups: Registered
Joined: 26/02/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,641
Thanks: 16 times
Was thanked: 27 time(s) in 25 post(s)
|
quote:
Originally posted by gm5735
It might be a bit off topic, but I'm interested in these higher power engines apparently fitted to late HG 350 manuals. What were the block, heads and inlet manifold cast numbers? I've read somewhere else a quote from Wheels magazine regarding an "incredible" performance difference, which doesn't sound like a 15-20 hp difference.
I don't believe it at all that they were any much more powerful with the last of the HG350. as the magazines at the time were totally hopeless they got a HT GTS350 that was running sick and I think they were maybe to scared to show just how fast they were in the day. If you look at all the test of the HK 327 that were back in the day it's all over the shop really it's just hopeless to work out the facts due to what diff ratio they were running to how hopeless the driver was and tune. Until I see the difference in the cam in the early and late GTS350 I will not believe it at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran
Groups: Registered
Joined: 26/02/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,641
Thanks: 16 times
Was thanked: 27 time(s) in 25 post(s)
|
quote:
Originally posted by HK1837
It may be higher. There was a huge performance difference bewteen single and twin exhaust 308 too, difference was about 20rwhp or so from memory. 307 woke up as well with the 327's exhaust and inlet/carb.
HG McKinnon heads were 3973370. Manifold 3973469. 010 block.
I was only pointing to twin exhaust as 5.0L HX get twin exhaust standard don't they on sedan and wagon and the statesman's not ute or p van ? or did twin start with all the HZ 5.0L I remember a mate had a single exhaust on his 5.0L HX sandman ute and a mates old man had twin on a HX statesman. Standard single exhaust just kills a 308 performance as it's not worth thinking about at all even with a HQ. I think the single exhaust drops about 60 HP. Now look at the figures of a VB commodore 5.0L Single exhaust 107 KW Twin exhaust 125 KW and that's in DIN so it true. I think the HT to HX 308 single exhaust is smaller than the VB single as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 16/04/2014(UTC) Posts: 768 Location: Victoria Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 49 time(s) in 47 post(s)
|
It's hard to explain the supposed performance increase with late HG350 based solely on those parts. They are the same as the Canadian "300hp" 350 fitted to Canadian Pontiacs.
Apparently those heads were never fitted in US production engines, only supplied as over the counter replacements. They were supplied to the Canadians, however.
They use 1.94/1.5" valves, as per the 041 heads fitted to the HT350 and don't flow any better.
I concede it could be down to some big radical stick in the camshaft hole, but how streetable would that be?
Is this performance increase actually reliably documented somewhere, or an urban myth?
The "supercar" beat up from the period is well known, pioneered by Bill Tuckey, and generally regarded as the reason for the death of the V8 LC and higher performance Fords so I'm a little sceptical of hysterical hyped up magazine articles of the period.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran
Groups: Moderator, Registered, Veteran
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 14,717
Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 512 time(s) in 488 post(s)
|
quote:
Originally posted by castellan
quote:
Originally posted by HK1837
It may be higher. There was a huge performance difference bewteen single and twin exhaust 308 too, difference was about 20rwhp or so from memory. 307 woke up as well with the 327's exhaust and inlet/carb.
HG McKinnon heads were 3973370. Manifold 3973469. 010 block.
I was only pointing to twin exhaust as 5.0L HX get twin exhaust standard don't they on sedan and wagon and the statesman's not ute or p van ? or did twin start with all the HZ 5.0L I remember a mate had a single exhaust on his 5.0L HX sandman ute and a mates old man had twin on a HX statesman.
Standard single exhaust just kills a 308 performance as it's not worth thinking about at all even with a HQ.
I think the single exhaust drops about 60 HP.
Now look at the figures of a VB commodore 5.0L
Single exhaust 107 KW
Twin exhaust 125 KW and that's in DIN so it true. I think the HT to HX 308 single exhaust is smaller than the VB single as well.
I'm pretty sure it is only sedans and coupes with twins. Utes and vans definitely not. I think dual exhaust wasn't standard on GTS until HX. Prior to that only 327/350 plus HQ SS got dual standard. |
_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords? |
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 2/02/2009(UTC) Posts: 564 ![Australia]( "Australia") Location: On a build over WWII airfield. Got the .50 cal cases from my driveway to prove it Thanks: 31 times
Was thanked: 8 time(s) in 8 post(s)
|
Just wanted to thanks all posters on this thread. An intelligent,
abuse & waffle free topic.
Should be more of it. |
Attn camry drivers. The accelerator is the skinny pedal on the right. |
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran
Groups: Registered
Joined: 26/02/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,641
Thanks: 16 times
Was thanked: 27 time(s) in 25 post(s)
|
quote:
Originally posted by HK1837
quote:
Originally posted by castellan
quote:
Originally posted by HK1837
It may be higher. There was a huge performance difference bewteen single and twin exhaust 308 too, difference was about 20rwhp or so from memory. 307 woke up as well with the 327's exhaust and inlet/carb.
HG McKinnon heads were 3973370. Manifold 3973469. 010 block.
I was only pointing to twin exhaust as 5.0L HX get twin exhaust standard don't they on sedan and wagon and the statesman's not ute or p van ? or did twin start with all the HZ 5.0L I remember a mate had a single exhaust on his 5.0L HX sandman ute and a mates old man had twin on a HX statesman.
Standard single exhaust just kills a 308 performance as it's not worth thinking about at all even with a HQ.
I think the single exhaust drops about 60 HP.
Now look at the figures of a VB commodore 5.0L
Single exhaust 107 KW
Twin exhaust 125 KW and that's in DIN so it true. I think the HT to HX 308 single exhaust is smaller than the VB single as well.
I'm pretty sure it is only sedans and coupes with twins. Utes and vans definitely not. I think dual exhaust wasn't standard on GTS until HX. Prior to that only 327/350 plus HQ SS got dual standard.
HQ 308 GTS were twin exhaust. HK 327 GTS and HT-G 350 GTS got twin. HQ 350 GTS got twin but LS 350 Monaro and 350 statesman got single standard only.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran
Groups: Moderator, Registered, Veteran
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 14,717
Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 512 time(s) in 488 post(s)
|
I'm near 100% certain HQ 253 or 308 GTS were single standard, dual was optional - same as HT-HG V8 GTS (except 307). Others are correct. I'm pretty sure the first 308/5.0L powered GMH product with dual exhaust standard was not a Holden but a Torana - the LH SL/R5000 (XU2). The first 253/4.2L with dual exhaust standard was the HQ SS (XV2). |
_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords? |
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran
Groups: Moderator, Registered, Veteran
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 14,717
Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 512 time(s) in 488 post(s)
|
quote:
Originally posted by gm5735
It's hard to explain the supposed performance increase with late HG350 based solely on those parts. They are the same as the Canadian "300hp" 350 fitted to Canadian Pontiacs.
Apparently those heads were never fitted in US production engines, only supplied as over the counter replacements. They were supplied to the Canadians, however.
They use 1.94/1.5" valves, as per the 041 heads fitted to the HT350 and don't flow any better.
I concede it could be down to some big radical stick in the camshaft hole, but how streetable would that be?
Is this performance increase actually reliably documented somewhere, or an urban myth?
The "supercar" beat up from the period is well known, pioneered by Bill Tuckey, and generally regarded as the reason for the death of the V8 LC and higher performance Fords so I'm a little sceptical of hysterical hyped up magazine articles of the period.
In addition to the road tests of the day AMC road tested and dynoed a true Survivor example of one of these HG's a few years back. They recorded near identical times to the original road tests, and the dyno figures are higher than similar examples of HT-HG earlier engines. There is a performance difference, it was enough for the reporters of the day to comment, I think Robbo was one of them. It could also be a different pistons, different dizzy setup etc. It was a different engine plant, in a different country. |
_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords? |
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran
Groups: Registered
Joined: 26/02/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,641
Thanks: 16 times
Was thanked: 27 time(s) in 25 post(s)
|
I have this 350 cam spec in my HQ Holden service manual vol 4
In 38/92
Ex 88/52
Includes ramps 10 deg on the start of opening and 20 on the close.
Is that = 28/72 for the intake and 78/32 exhaust, even this sounds to big even if it's at 0.002 or so.
It does not state the lift so I cant find out that way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran
Groups: Registered
Joined: 26/02/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,641
Thanks: 16 times
Was thanked: 27 time(s) in 25 post(s)
|
HQ 253 and 308 spec is
in 27/63 = 270
ex 71/19 = 270
And HQ 350 works out to be
in 28/72 = 280
ex 78/32 = 280
If that is right it maybe a ID 3863152 L-79 cam or a ID 3896964 L-46
and L-82 cam.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran
Groups: Moderator, Registered, Veteran
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 14,717
Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 512 time(s) in 488 post(s)
|
I'm almost certain the HT-HG manual engines are an L48, and so are the HQ 350 engines. The cam was a 28/72 78/30 excluding ramps. The US L48 was the same 4 bolt 300hp 380lb-ft 10.25:1 spec engine, but changed spec in 1971 to 8.5:1. People talk about GMH specified a lower performance engine for the HQ as it wasn't destined for racing, but I reckon it is simply how the basic spec 350 engine evolved and thus got used here. Here is the L79 327 cam, much bigger: http://www.compcams.com/...etails.aspx?csid=2&sb=2
Here is the cam specs for the 300hp HT-HG engine, and also the HT-HG 350 auto engine and the HQ 275hp engine, part number 3896929 (as found in the HT-HQ parts catalogue): http://www.compcams.com/...Details.aspx?csid=1&sb=2 |
_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords? |
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran
Groups: Moderator, Registered
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 6,058
Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 203 time(s) in 184 post(s)
|
quote:
Originally posted by HK1837
People talk about GMH specified a lower performance engine for the HQ as it wasn't destined for racing, but I reckon it is simply how the basic spec 350 engine evolved and thus got used here.
Also factor in the late HQ 350 V8 with the extra anti-pollution gear fitted. It is just what the Yanks had in production at the time. Dr Terry |
If at first you don't succeed, just call it Version 1.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran
Groups: Moderator, Registered, Veteran
Joined: 1/03/2005(UTC)
Posts: 14,717
Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 512 time(s) in 488 post(s)
|
quote:
Originally posted by gm5735
It's hard to explain the supposed performance increase with late HG350 based solely on those parts. They are the same as the Canadian "300hp" 350 fitted to Canadian Pontiacs.
Apparently those heads were never fitted in US production engines, only supplied as over the counter replacements. They were supplied to the Canadians, however.
They use 1.94/1.5" valves, as per the 041 heads fitted to the HT350 and don't flow any better.
I concede it could be down to some big radical stick in the camshaft hole, but how streetable would that be?
Is this performance increase actually reliably documented somewhere, or an urban myth?
The "supercar" beat up from the period is well known, pioneered by Bill Tuckey, and generally regarded as the reason for the death of the V8 LC and higher performance Fords so I'm a little sceptical of hysterical hyped up magazine articles of the period.
I just asked the guru, heads on the later HG had slightly bigger runners and that made a small difference to peak power. But the "big" difference was the HT 350 engines were hobbled for press tests as GMH wanted to hide the true performance of the car. Same as what happened with the HK. Someone mentioned this previously in this thread. |
_______________________________________________________
If we all had the same (good) taste, who would buy all the Fords? |
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 3/01/2013(UTC)
Posts: 307
Thanks: 7 times
Was thanked: 11 time(s) in 11 post(s)
|
i did read in an early HQ GTS350 road test/press release that the 275 bhp engine was deemed acceptable because of the more slippery styling of the HQ...
...also it would be better to look up the individual HT/G/Q camshaft part numbers when those manuals were released in their respective years. GMH were notorious for generalising a part/part number as previous ones became NLA or superseded....especially important when it comes to verifying heads, or cam grinds.
.....BTW mine has only 2 bolt main bearing caps
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
