Thanks Byron .. great info mate. They were only on a 225M ?...I would've the 215 would do the same job, only lighter.

I could be cheeky and say a few answers to that one:

None as a Ford won the first 1000.
A VL Group A SS in 1990 as this was the first "Holden" car to win as prior to that time the Company was not Holden, a Torana was not a Holden model and the VC-VL were HDT cars not Holden models....
Or you could use the run of the mill answer and say an LH Torana model VD69 with option L34 and whatever that brings with it.

Edited by user Wednesday, 26 October 2016 2:17:28 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Hence why I was being cheeky...

But a Holden did not win the first Bathurst 1000 which was the question!

And it says Holden model, and LH Torana isn't a Holden model, it might be marketed as a Holden Torana but it isn't a Holden model. Or it could be argued it is the first Torana to actually be seen as a Holden, as prior to that the Toranas were 82x model codes, and all Holdens (or Statesmans) wore 80x or 81x model codes.

I understand the argument but I'm still not a fan of the Holden Lion thing though, a HQ-HZ Deville has a Holden Lion in its badges (where the Caprice wears I think the Cadillac badges), although if you ordered a Caprice with factory fitted XW5 outback equipment package you'd get mudflaps factory fitted with a Holden Lion on them. The flip side of the coin Statesmans have a Lion on their BODY plate whereas the import/rebadges and exports don't get the Lion and to me a CKD Impala or Parisienne or even a Chevy or Bedford truck assembled locally has a lot more local content and a lot more GMH involvement that some of the other imported stuff sporting a Holden badge or a Holden Lion. You have to draw the line somewhere though!

I think you are right on the VC, it is purposely called a HOLDEN Commodore and if HDT wasn't recognised as a manufacturer at that stage then it is a Bathurst 1000 winning Holden. Not sure how 1986 VK and 1987 VL fit into the equation either, as from what I understand Holden had to market and sell the VL and VN Group A SS as a Holden car, not as a HSV in order to make them eligible for international Group A rules where a manufacturer had to build so many cars (5000 from memory) then another 500 evolutional cars (the Group A's). So not sure how that all worked for VK and VL for the 1986-1987 races.

Edited by user Wednesday, 26 October 2016 3:24:17 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Very good !!

Dr Terry

So that then means the VK Group A is to all intents and purposes a Holden, and if we count the VC as one then there are two cars that won Bathurst (not counting the V8 Supercars) that were effectively were based upon and homologated off a HDT product: The VH that won both 1982-3 and the VK from 1984? All swings and roundabouts though but again shows you have to be careful in the trivia question wording, like in which years did a HDT product win Bathurst, or words to that effect.

I get the jist of trying to determine what is a Holden and what isn't, and I get why it is particularly important to you to have that absolute definition. However I look at it from the angle of how GMH presented the vehicles on internal docs and things like colour charts and also ADR plates (although Dandenong seems to break the mould on ADR plates as they have HOLDEN on both Statesman and later Torana). So to me a "Holden" is a 48/215 to HZ, and throw also in the WB commercials but excluding Statesman. Those are the only traditional Holdens. To me the real changeover period is leading into Commodore where the UC Torana kept its own separate identity but the UC Sunbird is called the Holden Sunbird, and the VB Commodore gets called Holden Commodore. To me that is the tipping point where the Company essentially came out of the closet so to speak, prior to that it looks like a dog's breakfast of inconsistencies. Prior to that time it appears like marketing wanted the Torana to be seen as a Holden but Engineering, styling etc seems to be still referring to the Holden car as the Holden, sold alongside Gemini, Torana and Statesman, and in the early times when Torana first appeared, Chevrolet and Pontiac. A simple look at the back of mid 70's colour charts shows you for example A627: Holden (Belmont, Kingswood, Premier, Monaro GTS, Monaro LS, Light Commercial, Kingswood Ute, Holden Sandman, Kingswood Sandman Utility), Gemini (SL sedan, SL coupe and Sedan) and Torana (S sedan, SL sedan/hatchback, SLR sedan and SS hatchback). However they trip over themselves by calling it a HOLDEN COLOUR CHART, plus they show both the Lion with HOLDEN under it and the GMH logo - from what I can tell A626 and A627 that replaced it immediately (as they forgot to put Torana on A626) are the first colour charts to have GMH on them, prior to that it was just Holden. So in the end I guess it is very hard to draw a line, it is for me anyway as I know a Torana past 12/68 was sold as an essentially 100% locally built GMH vehicle, sold alongside Holdens out of GMH or Holden dealerships but it simply isn't a Holden car in my eyes! But to me anything fully imported with a Holden badge on it is not a Holden either, if they are so is a Vauxhall Viva, a Parisienne or any other GMH assembled vehicle just minus the Holden badge. But as I said you have to draw a line somewhere. Maybe we should have adopted the US terminology, where the Chevrolet became known as the "full size" Chevrolet, sold alongside Nova, Chevelle etc.? Maybe we should start calling them T, U, V, W size Holdens (like A, B, F etc. body in GM)? But then GMH screwed that up to by having the first T size car a Torana, then it was a Gemini. But the first V size car was a Torana then a Commodore but also included Statesman, Utility and Monaro etc in the V size...I think full size Holden, Torana, Gemini and Statesman is good enough for a broad brush approach and anything after VZ doesn't exist!

Don't forget the HQ cab-chassis was simply a Holden not just HJ commercials.

Agree. Every Holden 'Torana' that I've ever seen was manufactured by General Motors-Holden's.

The HB Torana even has a Holden nameplate on the Grille.

Worst Holden cars and why, VN V6 chaff cutter engine, it went ok but even the Grey and Red engines sounded better and after driving the VL 3.0L OMG ! and another one is the Moon Glow 4 gutless as !

I don't see it in of as built for the event, although that maybe true in one point.
I see the XR GT etc as it's just as a true drivers car, it's just something I would aspire to buy in the day and to me the reason I would buy a car in the day would have nothing to do with Bathurst at all, although Bathurst back in the day was a real big thing that most Aussies would watch and talk about and relate to some how and that the selling point was not in the GT but the average hack Falcon sales would be up due to a Falcon win, so old Joe Blow would be some how influenced to by his Falcon 500 with 200ci 6 CYL.

I don't see a LC-J XU-1 win having any influence on me at all, I would buy the GTS Monaro or GT any day over that bucket any day.

If the Bathurst race showed that the Fords or Holden's were blowing up gearboxes or engines etc well that may of influence me to buy the other make.

I don't see the HG as anything but the next model, sure you don't have the options of 12 bolt diff but so what if it's street driven, who drives with lower ratios than 3.55 anyway and with such a GTS350 would be lucky to push only 110MPH flat out.

The XW GT-HO Phase 2 and XY GT-HO Phase 3 were just a car for red blooded people to buy for the extra power for the highway to get past the old slug trucks that littered the highways back then, plodding along 50MPH at best and then down to 10MPH on the hills, that's a true story and that's what it was like, so you would come up to such a case and if you seen the opportunity you thought f this ! I am out of here and go for it and pass 10 or so cars and the truck, and that's what makes it a nice enjoyable trip, and that's the difference of having a boring trip plodding along with no hope of getting past all the slow shitty crap.

Edited by user Tuesday, 1 November 2016 9:53:26 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

The GT-HO was built to win the 500 primarily (without the 500 the GT-HO would never have been built), and although the HT GTS350 was an updated HK GTS327 image car, the HT was built with the 500 in mind. Harry Firth designed the GT-HO before Ford and him parted ways, but Ford didn't build the car to the spec he designed it as and he knew it. This is why he had Hooroo Superoo and Ho-Ho-Ho stickers on the rear bars of the GTS350's in 1969 as he knew the GT-HO he designed was a superior race car to the HDT GTS350's but not what Ford actually built. The whole concept of "win on Sunday, sell on Monday" is why the 500 was so important to Ford and why it became important to GMH as they saw the results that Ford achieved after 1967.

I essentially agree with the XU-1, it wouldn't make me want one either, at least not when there was a 350ci HQ GTS coupe and sedan available.

The HG is actually less than the next model in GTS350 terms. Nothing really changed with the HG GTS350M over the HT other than cosmetics, whereas the rest of the range had significant changes. All it was is HT GTS350 engines and transmissions that were meant to last until the end of HT, but HT got cut short as GMH didn't want the HT to run for as long as it had to especially as the HQ also blew out. They had to make a semi second facelift (the first of its kind for GMH). The key point is those last special build HG GTS350 manual engines from Canada, the predicted number of manual HT GTS350's to be built and last for the HT Series run would have lasted until GMH needed the Canadian engines in HG - that is the original series end for HT. The 12 bolts were made available through Nasco for HK-HT as you say, they weren't really optional as such, you had to buy the completed car and the 12-bolt was a Nasco order which had a 3-4 month lead time. To date I think there is only 3 proven cars known to get them, the Beechey HT and the two HK Rally cars. There would have been more but not many as the rear axle was a massive cost compared to the whole car.

The PhaseII was built after the GT-HO didn't win in 1969, and luckily for all of us I think, Ford won in 1970 as I doubt they would have continued pouring money into the sport if they'd been beaten by the little 6cyl LC. Another few laps in 1970 though and the LC probably would have won as McPhee had already slowed so that Moffat's failing car could win and then McPhee's car developed a miss (this is all reported as fact in motoring magazines of the day). Don Holland was about half a lap behind and catching up quickly. How good would it have been though if GMH stuck with the GTS350 for one more year, meaning an extra year of development on the GTS350 and better rubber available? 1970 would have then been a cracker of a race. The actual 1970 race time being slower and the fastest lap being slower than 1969 tells you the GTS350's should have won easily, but that is speculation only!

How can anyone say that the HG GTS350 was a less a car than the HT GTS350 off the showroom floor as no one as such got the 12 bolt diff and all is truly just really the same same but for the last McKinnon 350 and that was just luck as far as the owner would have a faster car, let alone the fastest GMH car they made for Joh Blow till the VK Groupe A.
So that made them lot of last HG GTS350 Holden Monaro's the best ever off the showroom floor to hit the highway on and that makes them the king of the road Holden and a person who owned one of such cars need not apologise to anyone, that this HG was the best ever.

In South Africa they must of got a lot of the fastest 350's in the SS350 Monaro's as they are being made up to 1972, or do they end up just get the HQ 350 8.5:1 type of slug.