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.

The Cam has a lower lift in the Phase 3 to the Phase 2.

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.

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.

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

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.

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

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.