Holden HD Holds Australian record for monthly sales

[superyob]

Is this a bad time time to mention my genuine, one of, factory ZD Fairlane GTHO?

[HK1837]

Sounds cool.

[KW XRT]

Originally Posted by HK1837

It is simple

GMH did hobble the press test HK and HT GTS327/350. THESE CARS WERE BUILT FOR RACE DUTY. Simple. These were built to race cars, same as HO's were built for one purpose. I don't know how they were hobbled but I have been told it was most likely to do with the operation of the secondaries on the Quadrajet, a simple and effective mod and easily reversed..

.

My feelings are still under engineered not hobbled.Knowing holden like I do they couldn't even manage to plonk a crate motor in and get it right.If it was the secondary;s that held the car back it would have been because something was over looked.It does not take much to go wrong to have the secondary's fail to open.Like I said it would more likely be a lack of engineering.There's way to much speculation with cloak and mirrors here and all to do with selling books.

As for ford having to come up with the phase 2 and phase 3 to combat the 327 and the 350 Manaro my theory is it was the six pack utes banging around Mullala Raceway under the lap record and timed by a farmer who reported to ford that forced fords hand with the phase 2 and 3.

Perhaps when the six pack ute story is told this will come to light.

[HK1837]

Originally Posted by KW XRT

My feelings are still under engineered not hobbled.Knowing holden like I do they couldn't even manage to plonk a crate motor in and get it right.If it was the secondary;s that held the car back it would have been because something was over looked.It does not take much to go wrong to have the secondary's fail to open.Like I said it would more likely be a lack of engineering.There's way to much speculation with cloak and mirrors here and all to do with selling books.

As for ford having to come up with the phase 2 and phase 3 to combat the 327 and the 350 Manaro my theory is it was the six pack utes banging around Mullala Raceway under the lap record and timed by a farmer who reported to ford that forced fords hand with the phase 2 and 3.

Perhaps when the six pack ute story is told this will come to light.

Even if that were the case, it still means the same thing in the end. Cars were significantly quicker than originally reported and tested. And that is all the AMC article on the HG is doing, ie presenting the cars as they really were.
Nothing I have typed is speculation. Nothing to do with selling books either, the "proof" being sought has been researched/found not by me and hence I can't/won't present it. But it is mostly public knowledge and can be found in old editions of newspapers and magazines. The stuff not publicly available is interviews with people from both GMH and Ford from the day, some of who are no longer with us.
The basic origins of the Monaros and Fords of the day are told in AMC issue 71 as I said, what it doesn't say for some of it is where the info comes from. Again not my story to tell.
There is heaps of documentation out there that totally disproves many myths that have been around for years. An example is everyone believed GMH destroyed the 3 x V8 GTR's built as prototypes for the 1972 V8 XU1, which is what most people within GMH were told, even Harry Firth. No-one would believe they were never destroyed but sold. Guess what? The proof they not only were sold does exist (I have a copy of the dealer tender for the orange one, and there is another tender document for the pink one) but at least one survives today. A newspaper for sale ad for the white one from 1973 has been found as well, and the car still had its V8 in it (pink and orange cars had 6cyl's fitted back in before sale). So long held myths really don't mean much in the end. I'm sure the Ford world is also full of such folklore that turns out to be BS.

[GREGL]

Originally Posted by castellan

Race cars ! you have to be joking ! most people bought them because they performed well and never raced them, maybe the odd drag or two and a good fang now and then.

A HT GTS LT1 Monaro now that's the one I would pick to buy for the street back in the day.

A HK GTS 327 is on par with a XT GT 302
A HT-G GTS 350 is on par with a only the XW-Y-A GT 351
A HQ GTS 350 is on par with a XB GT 351

Bathurst does not mean jack to me as it's only a race track.

Look at the Torana XU-1 it's not a race car, only the so called Bathurst were the big guns and not many could even buy one from new as well as the LH L34 or even the best of the XA GT RPO.

Even the GT-HO P2 and P3 did not have the higher lift cam that some used at Bathurst.

I have the 1986 book 'muscle cars' and she has all the old cars times and all and but as for the HG GTS 350 they say she fell off song and they claim because of faulty timing equipment they recorded only one 0 to 100 mph in 16.3 sec now I do believe the HG is using a 3.08 diff ( the idiots don't say the ratio ) and the HT is using a 3.36 diff ratio.

They have a XA GT with 0 to 100 mph in 18.7 sec & 1/4 in 15.6 with a 3.0 ratio diff, now that close to the HT GTS 350 and what about the XY GT-HO it did 0 to 100 mph = 15.2 / 110 mph in 18.5 sec / 120 mph in 22.5 sec

Your assessment is about right . Only the Ph 3 and e38 could crack 15's factory in that day , the rest were mid 15 s . Don't forget we're talking aquajets and the like for tyres here , and trolley tyres at that .
A.M.C is very liberal with the facts , I have come across so many "typos" on the occasions I have read it . The only good thing about it is that when someone uses it as a guide to build a " genuine" replica and tries to flog as such on E bay !
Example - Genuine L34 1974 torana . mostly original , Rebodied 20 years ago stoked 308 , t/loader and 9 inch . What ??? . He even had the paint scheme wrong . It had the tags though but for 40g ?

[GREGL]

Originally Posted by HK1837

Even if that were the case, it still means the same thing in the end. Cars were significantly quicker than originally reported and tested. And that is all the AMC article on the HG is doing, ie presenting the cars as they really were.
Nothing I have typed is speculation. Nothing to do with selling books either, the "proof" being sought has been researched/found not by me and hence I can't/won't present it. But it is mostly public knowledge and can be found in old editions of newspapers and magazines. The stuff not publicly available is interviews with people from both GMH and Ford from the day, some of who are no longer with us.
The basic origins of the Monaros and Fords of the day are told in AMC issue 71 as I said, what it doesn't say for some of it is where the info comes from. Again not my story to tell.
There is heaps of documentation out there that totally disproves many myths that have been around for years. An example is everyone believed GMH destroyed the 3 x V8 GTR's built as prototypes for the 1972 V8 XU1, which is what most people within GMH were told, even Harry Firth. No-one would believe they were never destroyed but sold. Guess what? The proof they not only were sold does exist (I have a copy of the dealer tender for the orange one, and there is another tender document for the pink one) but at least one survives today. A newspaper for sale ad for the white one from 1973 has been found as well, and the car still had its V8 in it (pink and orange cars had 6cyl's fitted back in before sale). So long held myths really don't mean much in the end. I'm sure the Ford world is also full of such folklore that turns out to be BS.

A tender document only implies that someone made a bid to obtain it , it is no proof that it was actually sold . Purchase/delivery paperwork is what would hold water otherwise . ho hum it's all open to the old santa clause . You know the fella he drops by once a year and gives you storybooks like AMC magazine .

[HK1837]

Originally Posted by GREGL

A tender document only implies that someone made a bid to obtain it , it is no proof that it was actually sold . Purchase/delivery paperwork is what would hold water otherwise . ho hum it's all open to the old santa clause . You know the fella he drops by once a year and gives you storybooks like AMC magazine .

Garbage. All 3 x cars left, we have AOMC documentation of the orange and pink cars as both were registered in Victoria. The white car is in a for sale ad in a 1974 newspaper, spelling out quite clearly what it was - this person got hold of it somehow, they've just got the number of cars built wrong, there was only 3 actual cars built plus Firth's 2 x development cars. I've attached the ad, the tender document showing the orange one was in the last AMC. And at least one of the cars still exists today (pink one), the white one does too as far as I know but I do not know its condition. The Ewe't which was in the same tender as the orange car also lived a life post GMH. The gold HQ GTS350 on the same tender still exists and drives today. The 350Z is the elusive car off that tender.

I guess some people will never accept facts no matter what! But that doesn't bother me, I know what I know and if others choose to not accept factual information then so be it.

[Kingsley]

Originally Posted by HK1837

It is simple.

GMH did hobble the press test HK and HT GTS327/350. THESE CARS WERE BUILT FOR RACE DUTY. Simple. These were built to race cars, same as HO's were built for one purpose. I don't know how they were hobbled but I have been told it was most likely to do with the operation of the secondaries on the Quadrajet, a simple and effective mod and easily reversed.

Mel Nichols tested a HG GTS350 (early car, same identical mechanical specs as HT GTS350) in wheels in 1970. Article is titled "Wheels on Fire". He was getting 0-100mph times of 16sec, 3 seconds faster than the press fleet HT GTS350's. Not hobbled my butt!
Robbo then tested the McKinnon spec HG GTS350 and reported in July 1971 Wheels and apologised to Mel as he had scoffed at Mel's article on the HG. Sound familiar??

The low mile HG was tested to prove that Mel and Robbo were correct, simple.

It is all there in black and white in AMC issue 51. Enough said. No conspiracy, no smoke and mirrors. All facts presented in a clear and logical fashion. If that isn't understandable to blue eyed Ford fans then nothing will be.

There is a lot more info from the day that I won't make public, as a friend is actually doing a book on these cars and will reveal it all in time. I'm not going to jump the gun on this.

A HT/HG GTS350 being slower than an XW GT-HO. Hmmm. Both of these cars were purposebuilt race cars, so the track is where it matters most I guess. What won not just Bathurst 1969 but a lot of other races against the XW GT-HO in the same period? What car had the fastest lap times at Bathurst in 1969 (very famous driver)?
I have no doubt the PhaseII and III are and have always been the benchmark of Aussie production vehicles of their day, and are undoubtedly faster than any standard GMH product of their day on the road, and more than likely still would have beaten even an LT1 fitted HG GTS350 on the race track primarily due to brakes as a race prepped LT1 would have been a match for either of these cars in power. Maybe the E49 was quicker, but maybe the car tested to give the low 14sec time was fiddled with? I'm no Chrysler nut so I don't know. But history shows Ford built the PhaseII as the GT-HO wasn't good enough to beat the HT GTS350 where it mattered, ie at Bathurst. The GT-HO was built because of the HK GTS327. Al Turner's directive to win at any cost created these fantastic PhaseII and III HO's that Ford fans cherish. This is all well spelled out in AMC issue 71 if you are interested.

Again with AMCM...... Do you have some sort of special financial interest in this magazine? There is other research material available.

Issue 51 AMC. Black and white huh??? Try the 1/4 mile times quoted on page 53 and 63. Which one is it?

Hobbled cars? My father worked for a Holden dealer between 1968 and 1978. He recalls the only way any Holden was hobbled back then was due to poor assembly at the factory. The secondary carby issue was a known problem which was checked for and fixed during pre delivery. It wasn't unusual or something done specifically to GTS Monaro's. This why you have pre delivery at dealerships. Sorry, but in this case I'm going to believe him over you or AMC.

AMCM's claim in issue 51 and 72 (and subsequently yours) here is the HG GTS 350 'McKinnon' recorded (depending what page you read) a best of 14.78. This is only marginally slower over the quarter mile than a XW GTHO PH II, XY GTHO PHIII and a R/T Charger E49. Key word here 'slower'. Even when the Munro was dyno tuned and tested 40 years later. King it isn't.

Now we have somehow arrived at Bathurst '69 where the HG GTS 350 never raced, ever. WTF has Bathurst 1969 got to do with the HG GTS 350 McKinnon? Truth be told what does any of this have to do with a HD Holden???

Fastest lap times at Bathurst 1969. HT GTS 350 raced against the Windsor powered XW GTHO PH1 at Bathurst in 1969...Pole went to the Geoghegan's with a 2:48.9. Digby Cooke was the fastest of the Monaro's that weekend with a 2:51.1. F/L of the race was shared between the Moffat/Hamilton and Gibson/Seton Falcons with a 2:52.1. So Brock was faster than the official lap record how??? Brock's co driver Dest West wrote in his biography they were an average of 3 seconds a lap slower than the Falcons all weekend. I'm only to assume that by evidence you've provided on hobbled Monaro's that the West/Brock car was deliberately hobbled at the factory to hide Brock's potential?? Did Brock work it out, pull over where no-one could see him, fix the issue and go on to set a non recorded fastest lap that only a few Brock fanboys know about??
Harry Firth who developed both the GT HO PH I and HT GTS 350 knew they'd be down on power compared to the Fords. Harry made the difference up in other area's. Yet they were still slower per lap than the Falcons. .

Firth did propose a run of lightweight HG GTS 308's but it was knocked back by GM management. Yes that's right, 308's. None were built. But since Harry is no longer with us no doubt AMC will 'find' one, claim 20 were built and tout it as another HO beater.....Should sell a sit load of issues.

Fact. Even with the benefit of a thorough dyno tune and being tested 40 years later, the HG GTS 350 McKinnon is STILL slower than an R/T Charger or XW GTHO PH II and XY GTHO PHIII with their times recorded back in the day. Even in issue 51 of AMC the times published for the HG GTS 350 was a 14.78 against a 14.70 for a XY GTHO PH III. Yet for some reason at the end of the article (page 63) the times recorded for the HG GTS 350 McKinnon featured were a 15.8..... were they hoping we wouldn't read that far???

Fact. The HG GTS 350 never ran at Bathurst. So I guess we'll never know by how far it would've beat the R/T and GTHO unless we go and find a bunch of stock GTHO's, R/T Chargers and 350 Monaro's and run them for a 130 laps around Bathurst. (now that would be cool!!!)

Maybe you and AMC could do the proper thing and put the issue to bed once and for all. Go and find a non molested low mileage XW GTHO PH II, XY GTHO PH III and R/T Charger E49, dyno tune them, and re-test them.

As for your friends book, I look forward to it, particularly since I have all the others published on the Monaro, it'll be interesting to see what 'new' facts are unearthed.

As for seeing things through blue eyes. Well no choice there I was born with eyes that colour. Thank you for noticing. But there isn't a tint of red to those glasses??

[KW XRT]

Originally Posted by HK1837

Even if that were the case, it still means the same thing in the end. Cars were significantly quicker than originally reported and tested. And that is all the AMC article on the HG is doing, ie presenting the cars as they really were.
Nothing I have typed is speculation. Nothing to do with selling books either, the "proof" being sought has been researched/found not by me and hence I can't/won't present it. But it is mostly public knowledge and can be found in old editions of newspapers and magazines. The stuff not publicly available is interviews with people from both GMH and Ford from the day, some of who are no longer with us.
The basic origins of the Monaros and Fords of the day are told in AMC issue 71 as I said, what it doesn't say for some of it is where the info comes from. Again not my story to tell.
There is heaps of documentation out there that totally disproves many myths that have been around for years. An example is everyone believed GMH destroyed the 3 x V8 GTR's built as prototypes for the 1972 V8 XU1, which is what most people within GMH were told, even Harry Firth. No-one would believe they were never destroyed but sold. Guess what? The proof they not only were sold does exist (I have a copy of the dealer tender for the orange one, and there is another tender document for the pink one) but at least one survives today. A newspaper for sale ad for the white one from 1973 has been found as well, and the car still had its V8 in it (pink and orange cars had 6cyl's fitted back in before sale). So long held myths really don't mean much in the end. I'm sure the Ford world is also full of such folklore that turns out to be BS.

Those two stories are completely unrelated.

What I'm saying in my opinion is there was no bobbling of manaro's.Holden never went out an purposefully changed the mechanics of the car to make it slower.I'm not saying there wasn't a car around that went a little better than the rest.Every single model had those.The tolerances for engine assembly in those days was extraordinary.So they put one together right.I'd say bout time.

I don't know where you got lost with the six pack utes but it is a well known fact repeated numerous times that the six pack utes were testing under the lap record.The farmer story,who knows but one day when the six pack ute story is told.

Actually I know the guy that has both those utes.

[buickman]

Wow you blokes have done a lot of research on Holden’s and Fords of yesteryear. I posted about how the HD was a record holder for monthly sales. Then all this information of special cars of that time, I’ve never heard of a McKinnon HG GTS and only read in old magazines about factory LJ’s fitted with 308cu V8’s. I found a picture back in the 80’s of my old HT GTS 308 2 speed I ended up selling it for $1,500 because of rust issues. How the tide has turned with values of these cars.
Attachment 84425

[johnydep]

Originally Posted by buickman

Wow you blokes have done a lot of research on Holden’s and Fords of yesteryear. I posted about how the HD was a record holder for monthly sales. Then all this information of special cars of that time, I’ve never heard of a McKinnon HG GTS and only read in old magazines about factory LJ’s fitted with 308cu V8’s. I found a picture back in the 80’s of my old HT GTS 308 2 speed I ended up selling it for $1,500 because of rust issues. How the tide has turned with values of these cars.
Attachment 84425

Nice HT. Shame that rust loved the old Holden's so much

[HK1837]

Originally Posted by BluFGXR6

Again with AMCM...... Do you have some sort of special financial interest in this magazine? There is other research material available.

Issue 51 AMC. Black and white huh??? Try the 1/4 mile times quoted on page 53 and 63. Which one is it?

Hobbled cars? My father worked for a Holden dealer between 1968 and 1978. He recalls the only way any Holden was hobbled back then was due to poor assembly at the factory. The secondary carby issue was a known problem which was checked for and fixed during pre delivery. It wasn't unusual or something done specifically to GTS Monaro's. This why you have pre delivery at dealerships. Sorry, but in this case I'm going to believe him over you or AMC.

AMCM's claim in issue 51 and 72 (and subsequently yours) here is the HG GTS 350 'McKinnon' recorded (depending what page you read) a best of 14.78. This is only marginally slower over the quarter mile than a XW GTHO PH II, XY GTHO PHIII and a R/T Charger E49. Key word here 'slower'. Even when the Munro was dyno tuned and tested 40 years later. King it isn't.

Now we have somehow arrived at Bathurst '69 where the HG GTS 350 never raced, ever. WTF has Bathurst 1969 got to do with the HG GTS 350 McKinnon? Truth be told what does any of this have to do with a HD Holden???

Fastest lap times at Bathurst 1969. HT GTS 350 raced against the Windsor powered XW GTHO PH1 at Bathurst in 1969...Pole went to the Geoghegan's with a 2:48.9. Digby Cooke was the fastest of the Monaro's that weekend with a 2:51.1. F/L of the race was shared between the Moffat/Hamilton and Gibson/Seton Falcons with a 2:52.1. So Brock was faster than the official lap record how??? Brock's co driver Dest West wrote in his biography they were an average of 3 seconds a lap slower than the Falcons all weekend. I'm only to assume that by evidence you've provided on hobbled Monaro's that the West/Brock car was deliberately hobbled at the factory to hide Brock's potential?? Did Brock work it out, pull over where no-one could see him, fix the issue and go on to set a non recorded fastest lap that only a few Brock fanboys know about??
Harry Firth who developed both the GT HO PH I and HT GTS 350 knew they'd be down on power compared to the Fords. Harry made the difference up in other area's. Yet they were still slower per lap than the Falcons. .

Firth did propose a run of lightweight HG GTS 308's but it was knocked back by GM management. Yes that's right, 308's. None were built. But since Harry is no longer with us no doubt AMC will 'find' one, claim 20 were built and tout it as another HO beater.....Should sell a sit load of issues.

Fact. Even with the benefit of a thorough dyno tune and being tested 40 years later, the HG GTS 350 McKinnon is STILL slower than an R/T Charger or XW GTHO PH II and XY GTHO PHIII with their times recorded back in the day. Even in issue 51 of AMC the times published for the HG GTS 350 was a 14.78 against a 14.70 for a XY GTHO PH III. Yet for some reason at the end of the article (page 63) the times recorded for the HG GTS 350 McKinnon featured were a 15.8..... were they hoping we wouldn't read that far???

Fact. The HG GTS 350 never ran at Bathurst. So I guess we'll never know by how far it would've beat the R/T and GTHO unless we go and find a bunch of stock GTHO's, R/T Chargers and 350 Monaro's and run them for a 130 laps around Bathurst. (now that would be cool!!!)

Maybe you and AMC could do the proper thing and put the issue to bed once and for all. Go and find a non molested low mileage XW GTHO PH II, XY GTHO PH III and R/T Charger E49, dyno tune them, and re-test them.

As for your friends book, I look forward to it, particularly since I have all the others published on the Monaro, it'll be interesting to see what 'new' facts are unearthed.

As for seeing things through blue eyes. Well no choice there I was born with eyes that colour. Thank you for noticing. But there isn't a tint of red to those glasses??

Apologise for the delay, I had to check a few things before I replied.

I understand most people here will see things with blue eyes, I get that. My preference as stated many posts ago is with GM or GMH product, but I have not and do not bag out or disbelieve anything anyone tells me about Ford stuff as it is all pretty well documented and I don't have much knowledge of them outside what is directly related to Holdens or Toranas. The reason I came here in the first place was to ask a question about XA Falcon commercial rear drum backing plates. I'll try to answer the above in order.


No I have no affiliation with AMC, nor have in the past. Other than to write a letter blasting Joe Kenwright for a HT article he did once that was full of inaccuracies. Yes there is other material, but most other recent and easily obtained material on Monaros is inaccurate, or to be fairer contains a large amount of innacuracies. The person you want to read or ask about Monaros particularly HK-HG is the supplier of the info for the HG article (and isn't Joe Kenwright). Outside of AMC stuff written by this person the only other publications that have very good accuracy are the Monaro Story/Facts and the second edition of Norm Darwin's Monaro book. My referral to the AMC material is because it is readily available to those here and it is accurate.

The figures Joe Kenwright used on page 63 are the only published tabular figures ever of a new HG GTS350, these are from the Mel Nichols Wheels magazine article from December 1970. Joe has even reproduced the "(see text)" from the original table that was intended to point to the Wheels article text which is where the poor figures obtained are explained. Only some of that article has been reproduced in AMC (parts of it also appear in the Sports Car World publication in 1975 with the title "Top Aussie Supercars" or something of that fashion - I no longer have a copy). The whole purpose of the AMC article was to correct historically incorrect information on the HT-HG GTS350 for the HG's 40th anniversary, but it does fall down in the area of making it totally clear what they were intending to say, however the information is in there. The original Mel Nichols Wheels article had to test the car at 2 x diffferent time periods due to GMH road test commitments, one when the car was new and this is when they recorded the 0-100mph times in the low 16's. This was a highway and dirt road evaluation. The didn't get the car back until a month and 4000 miles later for track and time testing and (their words) "the Monaro by this time was off song and the performance times suffered". They only recorded 0-90mph in 16.5s and a 1/4 mile of just under 16s. It is this test's results that are on page 63. This car was the earlier spec HG GTS350 (mechanically identical to the HT GTS350). Robbo never gave tabular results for the later HG GTS350 (McKinnon engined car) he tested in mis 1971, other than to say a car in good condition will indeed achieve 0-100mph in just over 16s. The purpose of testing Paul Kelly's Survivor HG GTS350 in AMC was because is had an unopened, totally original engine with less than 40,000 miles on it. The figures obtained are consistent with Mel Nichol's original tests and Robbo's later tests. Averaging 3 x runs AMC achieved 0-100mph in essentially 16s using the same test techniques as perfromed in the early 70's. The idea here was to confirm what both Mel and Robbo achieved, which it does. I cannot see how this can not be anything but good work. The information does nothing to discredit the road and track tests of standard PhaseII's of the day or Phase III's from later. They will always be the benchmark of carburetted Aussie performance cars. Just the GTS350's weren't as far behind than has long been believed.

The cars were hobbled. I'm not going to say much more on this as no matter what I say you guys aren't going to believe me. The HT cars were not dealer supplied, they were test cars straight from GMH. As far as I am aware no other cars were tested until Mel's article in Wheel on the HG GTS350. Journailists/testers were not even allowed to test the HT GTS350's without a GMH rep being in the passenger seat. They weren't allowed to rev them past the 5500rpm (6cyl GTS) rev limit on the tacho. The same thing happened in later HK and then in HG when un-hobbled cars were tested and the journos were astounded, compared to the release tests. The reason was.....hobbling.

I never claimed the HT/HG GTS350 or the final spec HG GTS350 was faster than a Cleveland GT-HO, just it wasn't as far behind as previously thought. The use of the word "King" is Joe Kenwright's editorial style, and he has usid it is a question. Yes that comment ****** me off too, but hey i'm only interested in the factual information not his glamorising of the story. Joe has that polarising ability.

Bathurst 1969 (and the Lakeside 1500 win not long after and the Surfer's Paradise 12 hour not long after, in the same car, same untouched engine, driven back to Victoria from Bathurst and then driven to QLD and back to win those subsequent races) are relevant. The HT GTS350 is the same car as a HG GTS350, and it served its function. To win races. That is why I was using the reference, somewhere in a prior post it was claimed the GTS350 was far slower than a Windsor GT-HO. My original post was that the HD platform produced some great cars, HR 186S 4spd, HK GTS327 and the GTS350. You guys started the rest of the discussion!

My reference to Brock was a meant that he was the fastest Monaro during the race, not qualifying. It was a question to see if anyone here knew (BTW I ain't a Brock fan any more than I am a fan of any other driver, yes a fan of his achievements on the race track). What I didn't say was offical HDT records show how quick he was, but the HDT timers hide the fact from old Harry as it was against his instructions to push so hard. He wanted to conserve the engines. Brock was going too hard and had an oops, the car started to falter near to the end as a result of him pushing it too hard. As far as I am aware (please correct if wrong) the fastest race laps were 2:57 both by Fords on racing rubber, about 90min into the race. The fastest Monaros on Michelins were marginally slower, mainly due to a lower top speed on Conrod. Harry had them short shifting and being conservative too. Yes Harry had a far superior pit process, and knew what he was doing. He even up to his death admitted that 1969 was a line ball result. The real bad luck stories from these years ('68-'69) are Bruce McPhee missing out on back to back wins, and Des West (that story will be told one day,not by me).

At least one of those lightweight HG's does still exist, I have a photo of its GMH Engineering tag still on the car. The tag shows L31, M22 and 2.55:1 rear axle from memory. Harry reckons these were to be a Saginaw 3spd (used in exported LHD Toranas around that time) but this particular car was a wide ratio 4sp Saginaw as used in 6cyl HK-HG commercials. Page 56 of AMC51 goes into a little detail on one of these specials but they are talking about the LT1 powered car, of which Harry believes none were actually made.

Explained above.

Agree totally. HT GTS350 ran at Bathurst and these engines were all improved (ran the "optional" 186 cast fuellies), blueprinted etc so whatever a HT did the HG would be similar - the 370 casr fuellies of the HG are only slightly better that the 186. The bigger difference is between the stock HT GTS350 head and the 186 availabel at a cost when the dealers made the "free" Forth upgrades to road cars. I don't think many of the cars run in 1970-71 were "stock" though! Especially old Harry's!

I'd love to see AMC test all thse cars if they can find Survivors like Paul Kelly's car.

When the book comes out if you are a car fan you will love it. There will be some historical facts that does contradict what many believe to be fact, but as I have stated in prior posts (using the V8 XU1's being crushed example) this does regularly happen.

Yes some red tint for my love of GM/GMH product. But I'm a V8, old school car fan first, GM/GMH fan second. And I do like historically correct information. I have a few HK GTS's and GTS327's, a V2 CV8 and a Survivor HJ Premier. But my daily driver is a V6 auto SR5 Hilux, and the best part about it is the "good" engine was $2000 cheaper than the dunger engine!

[HK1837]

Originally Posted by johnydep

Nice HT. Shame that rust loved the old Holden's so much

Huh? HK-HG aren't all that bad rust wise, and are relatively easy to repair (taking panel supplies today out of the equation). HQ were and are far worse, especially the doors and the cowl! The biggest high volume Aussie made rust buckets as far as I am aware were XA-XC especially commercials. I know the construction is far different allowing HQ-WB commercials to survive a lot longer (separate chassis rather than monocoque), but how many XA-XC commercials do you see today?

I guess they were/are all rust buckets compared to modern stuff though.

[GREGL]

Originally Posted by HK1837

Garbage. All 3 x cars left, we have AOMC documentation of the orange and pink cars as both were registered in Victoria. The white car is in a for sale ad in a 1974 newspaper, spelling out quite clearly what it was - this person got hold of it somehow, they've just got the number of cars built wrong, there was only 3 actual cars built plus Firth's 2 x development cars. I've attached the ad, the tender document showing the orange one was in the last AMC. And at least one of the cars still exists today (pink one), the white one does too as far as I know but I do not know its condition. The Ewe't which was in the same tender as the orange car also lived a life post GMH. The gold HQ GTS350 on the same tender still exists and drives today. The 350Z is the elusive car off that tender.

I guess some people will never accept facts no matter what! But that doesn't bother me, I know what I know and if others choose to not accept factual information then so be it.

Alright . you win you have produced irrefutable proof from 1974 of a car advertised in a paper . How can anyone argue with that sort of documented history .

[buickman]

Originally Posted by HK1837

Huh? HK-HG aren't all that bad rust wise, and are relatively easy to repair (taking panel supplies today out of the equation). HQ were and are far worse, especially the doors and the cowl! The biggest high volume Aussie made rust buckets as far as I am aware were XA-XC especially commercials. I know the construction is far different allowing HQ-WB commercials to survive a lot longer (separate chassis rather than monocoque), but how many XA-XC commercials do you see today?

I guess they were/are all rust buckets compared to modern stuff though.

The rust the HT had was bad in the upper quarters both sides and the original owner had a black vinyl roof fitted and rust bubbles were showing all over the roof under the vinyl and they were not sought as a collector car then. I must admit the car mechanically was very reliable, I drove from Melbourne to QLD may times pulling a caravan including one trip to Cairns and back never let me down though drank the fuel. The HQ Ute I had rusted out in the roof and plenum chamber and again the 253 V8 in it was a reliable engine.
As for the newer cars not as rusty on the FG section on this forum there are some concerns with rust issues with cars only a few years old. So far mine has not visually shown any.

[GREGL]

Originally Posted by buickman

Wow you blokes have done a lot of research on Holden’s and Fords of yesteryear. I posted about how the HD was a record holder for monthly sales. Then all this information of special cars of that time, I’ve never heard of a McKinnon HG GTS and only read in old magazines about factory LJ’s fitted with 308cu V8’s. I found a picture back in the 80’s of my old HT GTS 308 2 speed I ended up selling it for $1,500 because of rust issues. How the tide has turned with values of these cars.
Attachment 84425

No research required when you lived and breathed cars in that era . Unlike today , the cars in that era of production series racing were not a hell of a lot different to a road car . Sure they played with heads . they had blueprinted engines and the best tuners available , but they still ran with the basics in place , and no one can change history by saying IF a hg gts ran it might have would have won something .
A McKinnon blocked gts would have run against the touring car category cars of Moffatts mustang and the bob jane Camaro , which were NOT road going versions or any thing close .
As for cars being "hobbled" I have to agree . the GT's were held back by bad brakes a couple of times , the Xu1 ran out fuel , chargers apparently would have won if the wheel studs hadn't seized , and the ultimate hobble award goes to D.J who had the best chance of winning until the ROCK hit him .

Yet life goes on .

[gokhan]

Originally Posted by HK1837

VS was the longest running GMH/Holden series: 4/1995 to 12/2000 (just under 6 years). VE overtook it in 2012: 8/2006 to 5/2013 (just under 7 years).

VT/VX are included in the VS series?

[GREGL]

He is including the ute .

[HK1837]

Originally Posted by gokhan

VT/VX are included in the VS series?

No VS Statesman and Ute continued alongside VT and VX just like HR ute and van did alongside HK passenger vehicles until HK commercials were released around 3/68, HG commercials continued alongside HQ until HQ commercials were released around 11/74 and W size (WB Statesman and commercials) continued alongside Commodore and Calais passenger vehicles until early 1985. After VS Holden Ute series designations didn't align with Commodore/Berlina/Calais again until VY, so they went VG, VP, VR, VS, VU then VY where Commodore/Berlina/Calais went VN, VP, VR, VS, VT, VX, VY. Prior to becoming W size again, sometimes Statesmans had their own series designation (eg VQ), but mostly they used the Holden or Commodore/Calais series designation ie HQ, HJ, HX, HZ, WB then VP, VR, VS.

[HK1837]

Originally Posted by buickman

The rust the HT had was bad in the upper quarters both sides and the original owner had a black vinyl roof fitted and rust bubbles were showing all over the roof under the vinyl and they were not sought as a collector car then. I must admit the car mechanically was very reliable, I drove from Melbourne to QLD may times pulling a caravan including one trip to Cairns and back never let me down though drank the fuel. The HQ Ute I had rusted out in the roof and plenum chamber and again the 253 V8 in it was a reliable engine.
As for the newer cars not as rusty on the FG section on this forum there are some concerns with rust issues with cars only a few years old. So far mine has not visually shown any.

HK-HT did rust, just not in areas as hard to fix as HQ. 253's were a really good engine, they just suffered from oiling issues associated with an externally mounted alloy oil pump and associated cam lobe wear. Easy fix though for today. They weren't ever a powerhouse, but in a light car like a HT-HG and with a reliable gearbox (3spd column, Saginaw 4spd or a powerglide) were a nice relaxed and easy to drive car. Thirsty with a 'glide though!
Never heard that about FG's. Glad I didn't buy one then, I seriously looked at replacing the Hilux at lease end with a XR6 turbo auto ute as Holden utes are useless as a tow vehicle, but I tried reversing a demo up my driveway and it really wasn't suitable for it - It really needs decent ground clearance and suspension travel. If they still had those lifted things I could have got away with one of them.

[Kingsley]

Originally Posted by HK1837

Apologise for the delay, I had to check a few things before I replied.

I understand most people here will see things with blue eyes, I get that. My preference as stated many posts ago is with GM or GMH product, but I have not and do not bag out or disbelieve anything anyone tells me about Ford stuff as it is all pretty well documented and I don't have much knowledge of them outside what is directly related to Holdens or Toranas. The reason I came here in the first place was to ask a question about XA Falcon commercial rear drum backing plates. I'll try to answer the above in order.


No I have no affiliation with AMC, nor have in the past. Other than to write a letter blasting Joe Kenwright for a HT article he did once that was full of inaccuracies. Yes there is other material, but most other recent and easily obtained material on Monaros is inaccurate, or to be fairer contains a large amount of innacuracies. The person you want to read or ask about Monaros particularly HK-HG is the supplier of the info for the HG article (and isn't Joe Kenwright). Outside of AMC stuff written by this person the only other publications that have very good accuracy are the Monaro Story/Facts and the second edition of Norm Darwin's Monaro book. My referral to the AMC material is because it is readily available to those here and it is accurate.

The figures Joe Kenwright used on page 63 are the only published tabular figures ever of a new HG GTS350, these are from the Mel Nichols Wheels magazine article from December 1970. Joe has even reproduced the "(see text)" from the original table that was intended to point to the Wheels article text which is where the poor figures obtained are explained. Only some of that article has been reproduced in AMC (parts of it also appear in the Sports Car World publication in 1975 with the title "Top Aussie Supercars" or something of that fashion - I no longer have a copy). The whole purpose of the AMC article was to correct historically incorrect information on the HT-HG GTS350 for the HG's 40th anniversary, but it does fall down in the area of making it totally clear what they were intending to say, however the information is in there. The original Mel Nichols Wheels article had to test the car at 2 x diffferent time periods due to GMH road test commitments, one when the car was new and this is when they recorded the 0-100mph times in the low 16's. This was a highway and dirt road evaluation. The didn't get the car back until a month and 4000 miles later for track and time testing and (their words) "the Monaro by this time was off song and the performance times suffered". They only recorded 0-90mph in 16.5s and a 1/4 mile of just under 16s. It is this test's results that are on page 63. This car was the earlier spec HG GTS350 (mechanically identical to the HT GTS350). Robbo never gave tabular results for the later HG GTS350 (McKinnon engined car) he tested in mis 1971, other than to say a car in good condition will indeed achieve 0-100mph in just over 16s. The purpose of testing Paul Kelly's Survivor HG GTS350 in AMC was because is had an unopened, totally original engine with less than 40,000 miles on it. The figures obtained are consistent with Mel Nichol's original tests and Robbo's later tests. Averaging 3 x runs AMC achieved 0-100mph in essentially 16s using the same test techniques as perfromed in the early 70's. The idea here was to confirm what both Mel and Robbo achieved, which it does. I cannot see how this can not be anything but good work. The information does nothing to discredit the road and track tests of standard PhaseII's of the day or Phase III's from later. They will always be the benchmark of carburetted Aussie performance cars. Just the GTS350's weren't as far behind than has long been believed.

The cars were hobbled. I'm not going to say much more on this as no matter what I say you guys aren't going to believe me. The HT cars were not dealer supplied, they were test cars straight from GMH. As far as I am aware no other cars were tested until Mel's article in Wheel on the HG GTS350. Journailists/testers were not even allowed to test the HT GTS350's without a GMH rep being in the passenger seat. They weren't allowed to rev them past the 5500rpm (6cyl GTS) rev limit on the tacho. The same thing happened in later HK and then in HG when un-hobbled cars were tested and the journos were astounded, compared to the release tests. The reason was.....hobbling.

I never claimed the HT/HG GTS350 or the final spec HG GTS350 was faster than a Cleveland GT-HO, just it wasn't as far behind as previously thought. The use of the word "King" is Joe Kenwright's editorial style, and he has usid it is a question. Yes that comment ****** me off too, but hey i'm only interested in the factual information not his glamorising of the story. Joe has that polarising ability.

Bathurst 1969 (and the Lakeside 1500 win not long after and the Surfer's Paradise 12 hour not long after, in the same car, same untouched engine, driven back to Victoria from Bathurst and then driven to QLD and back to win those subsequent races) are relevant. The HT GTS350 is the same car as a HG GTS350, and it served its function. To win races. That is why I was using the reference, somewhere in a prior post it was claimed the GTS350 was far slower than a Windsor GT-HO. My original post was that the HD platform produced some great cars, HR 186S 4spd, HK GTS327 and the GTS350. You guys started the rest of the discussion!

My reference to Brock was a meant that he was the fastest Monaro during the race, not qualifying. It was a question to see if anyone here knew (BTW I ain't a Brock fan any more than I am a fan of any other driver, yes a fan of his achievements on the race track). What I didn't say was offical HDT records show how quick he was, but the HDT timers hide the fact from old Harry as it was against his instructions to push so hard. He wanted to conserve the engines. Brock was going too hard and had an oops, the car started to falter near to the end as a result of him pushing it too hard. As far as I am aware (please correct if wrong) the fastest race laps were 2:57 both by Fords on racing rubber, about 90min into the race. The fastest Monaros on Michelins were marginally slower, mainly due to a lower top speed on Conrod. Harry had them short shifting and being conservative too. Yes Harry had a far superior pit process, and knew what he was doing. He even up to his death admitted that 1969 was a line ball result. The real bad luck stories from these years ('68-'69) are Bruce McPhee missing out on back to back wins, and Des West (that story will be told one day,not by me).

At least one of those lightweight HG's does still exist, I have a photo of its GMH Engineering tag still on the car. The tag shows L31, M22 and 2.55:1 rear axle from memory. Harry reckons these were to be a Saginaw 3spd (used in exported LHD Toranas around that time) but this particular car was a wide ratio 4sp Saginaw as used in 6cyl HK-HG commercials. Page 56 of AMC51 goes into a little detail on one of these specials but they are talking about the LT1 powered car, of which Harry believes none were actually made.

Explained above.

Agree totally. HT GTS350 ran at Bathurst and these engines were all improved (ran the "optional" 186 cast fuellies), blueprinted etc so whatever a HT did the HG would be similar - the 370 casr fuellies of the HG are only slightly better that the 186. The bigger difference is between the stock HT GTS350 head and the 186 availabel at a cost when the dealers made the "free" Forth upgrades to road cars. I don't think many of the cars run in 1970-71 were "stock" though! Especially old Harry's!

I'd love to see AMC test all thse cars if they can find Survivors like Paul Kelly's car.

When the book comes out if you are a car fan you will love it. There will be some historical facts that does contradict what many believe to be fact, but as I have stated in prior posts (using the V8 XU1's being crushed example) this does regularly happen.

Yes some red tint for my love of GM/GMH product. But I'm a V8, old school car fan first, GM/GMH fan second. And I do like historically correct information. I have a few HK GTS's and GTS327's, a V2 CV8 and a Survivor HJ Premier. But my daily driver is a V6 auto SR5 Hilux, and the best part about it is the "good" engine was $2000 cheaper than the dunger engine!

No need to apologise for the 'late' response. I was thinking that like me you bored with it....

The Monaro expert in which you refer is known to me. As for Norm's book, it isn't bad. I preferred it over Gavin Farmers though. I thought Warren Turnbull's and Ben Stewarts book is far better more descriptive, factual and technical. Less said about the 'Spotlight' book the better....

No where does AMC mention on page 63 (issue 51) that the times quoted were from 1971. They are from the actual feature car (HG GTS 350 McKinnon) which reeled off a 15.8 sec quarter in a 'retro road test'. What''s quoted in the article is 16 or above with the exception of the time on page 53 and it's a 14.78. AMC aren't helping their cause here. One issue I have are those times are compared to a XY GTHO PH III who's time were from October 1971, 43 years ago (14.7)!!!! Take the PH III, give it a dyno tune and run it. I wouldn't be surprised times would be close to 13's under the same conditions the Monaro ran.
Anyway, until they do a test giving all muscle cars from that era the same luxury as they afforded the HG GTS 350, it seems a little premature for it to be called it 'king'.

Hobbled cars for test purposes doesn't really wash. There were plenty of times in that period Wheels had to use dealer supplied cars too. As I said, they weren't hobbled from the factory (unless it was a 'Friday' or 'Monday' build.) Most got to the dealership not needing any work. Others did. They did there best work at 5000 RPM anyway. No need to go much higher.

Bathurst 1969 and the fastest lap qualifying was Pete Geoghegan with a 2:48.9. Fastest lap during the race was a 2:52.1. Moffat/Hamilton and the Seton/Gibson car shared the lap record for the race. Des West (Brock's co-driver) claims that he and Brock were an average 3 seconds a lap slower per lap. It doesn't surprise me there are now people claiming these days Brock was faster. More 'legends' for the converted to preach on forums .... However what ever the HDT official lap records recorded it would be interesting to compare to the official ARDC lap scoring chart. Odd to claim Firth didn't know seems a stretch considering his obsession with lap times and reviewing them post race. It was while he was reviewing the 1974 lap charts he found Brock did the opposite of what he had been told to do in the final laps.
Ford won the 1969 Datsun 3 Hour at Sandown prior to Bathurst (Moffat). Holden won Bathurst. The next race was at Surfers Paradise 12 Hour in January 1970 where the HDT Monaro won against a field of privateers. The Tasman Touring Series saw Moffat win at Surfers Paradise and Sandown while Bond won at Warwick Farm. Ford won the series. Holden ran an advertisement which read 'You can't win them all'. Pretty even all round and hardly dominating. After this, Holden fronted in Torana's.

According to Firth the V8 XU-1's were destroyed and buried at Lang Lang (White and Pinks cars) and the LC and orange LJ converted back to 6 cylinders.

I know of the lightweight Monaro and it wasn't any of the proposed HG GTS 308's. It was the HT GTS 350 that was stripped of weight for race/rallying. Various claims to it's survival are like Elvis sightings, usually by the same people who claim to know that the Bowden owned ex-Beechey Monaro is a re-body and not the original shell.

I would imagine the rest of the forum is bored ****less with this, maybe carry it on through pm's??

Anyway, the HD was pitiful as a car as far as performance was concerned. Didn't mind the look of them though...

[castellan]

Originally Posted by HK1837

Huh? HK-HG aren't all that bad rust wise, and are relatively easy to repair (taking panel supplies today out of the equation). HQ were and are far worse, especially the doors and the cowl! The biggest high volume Aussie made rust buckets as far as I am aware were XA-XC especially commercials. I know the construction is far different allowing HQ-WB commercials to survive a lot longer (separate chassis rather than monocoque), but how many XA-XC commercials do you see today?

I guess they were/are all rust buckets compared to modern stuff though.

Yep ! XA, XB ,XC were the biggest rust buckets ever sadly as I did like that lot the best.

Now why is it that they were so bad. as all the other falcons before them were not any where as bad.

[HK1837]

Originally Posted by BluFGXR6

No need to apologise for the 'late' response. I was thinking that like me you bored with it....

The Monaro expert in which you refer is known to me. As for Norm's book, it isn't bad. I preferred it over Gavin Farmers though. I thought Warren Turnbull's and Ben Stewarts book is far better more descriptive, factual and technical. Less said about the 'Spotlight' book the better....

No where does AMC mention on page 63 (issue 51) that the times quoted were from 1971. They are from the actual feature car (HG GTS 350 McKinnon) which reeled off a 15.8 sec quarter in a 'retro road test'. What''s quoted in the article is 16 or above with the exception of the time on page 53 and it's a 14.78. AMC aren't helping their cause here. One issue I have are those times are compared to a XY GTHO PH III who's time were from October 1971, 43 years ago (14.7)!!!! Take the PH III, give it a dyno tune and run it. I wouldn't be surprised times would be close to 13's under the same conditions the Monaro ran.
Anyway, until they do a test giving all muscle cars from that era the same luxury as they afforded the HG GTS 350, it seems a little premature for it to be called it 'king'.

Hobbled cars for test purposes doesn't really wash. There were plenty of times in that period Wheels had to use dealer supplied cars too. As I said, they weren't hobbled from the factory (unless it was a 'Friday' or 'Monday' build.) Most got to the dealership not needing any work. Others did. They did there best work at 5000 RPM anyway. No need to go much higher.

Bathurst 1969 and the fastest lap qualifying was Pete Geoghegan with a 2:48.9. Fastest lap during the race was a 2:52.1. Moffat/Hamilton and the Seton/Gibson car shared the lap record for the race. Des West (Brock's co-driver) claims that he and Brock were an average 3 seconds a lap slower per lap. It doesn't surprise me there are now people claiming these days Brock was faster. More 'legends' for the converted to preach on forums .... However what ever the HDT official lap records recorded it would be interesting to compare to the official ARDC lap scoring chart. Odd to claim Firth didn't know seems a stretch considering his obsession with lap times and reviewing them post race. It was while he was reviewing the 1974 lap charts he found Brock did the opposite of what he had been told to do in the final laps.
Ford won the 1969 Datsun 3 Hour at Sandown prior to Bathurst (Moffat). Holden won Bathurst. The next race was at Surfers Paradise 12 Hour in January 1970 where the HDT Monaro won against a field of privateers. The Tasman Touring Series saw Moffat win at Surfers Paradise and Sandown while Bond won at Warwick Farm. Ford won the series. Holden ran an advertisement which read 'You can't win them all'. Pretty even all round and hardly dominating. After this, Holden fronted in Torana's.

According to Firth the V8 XU-1's were destroyed and buried at Lang Lang (White and Pinks cars) and the LC and orange LJ converted back to 6 cylinders.

I know of the lightweight Monaro and it wasn't any of the proposed HG GTS 308's. It was the HT GTS 350 that was stripped of weight for race/rallying. Various claims to it's survival are like Elvis sightings, usually by the same people who claim to know that the Bowden owned ex-Beechey Monaro is a re-body and not the original shell.

I would imagine the rest of the forum is bored ****less with this, maybe carry it on through pm's??

Anyway, the HD was pitiful as a car as far as performance was concerned. Didn't mind the look of them though...

Fair enough, this will be it and PM's can do afterwards!

Agree on the Monaro Story/Facts. Most of that was Ben. He also fixed Norm's book hence why the 2nd edition is the better one by far.

The AMC figures on page 63 are from 1970, from Mel Nichol's test, which is reprinted in that other magazine I quoted from 1975. These are the only ever known full road test figures recorded for a HG GTS350. Part of this article is reproduced in that AMC issue. This is what I had to check, and which took time to get a response. It is also what I was getting at when I said it isn't totally clear, and I do get where the misunderstanding is. The 14.78 is the Survivor car tested for the issue. Also agree that dyno a Survivor Phase II and it'll probably run fast as well, but I never said that these cars were slow. I'd be ignoring the "King bit", as I said that is Joe at work. It is the article's facts I was more interested in not speculation!

GMH supplied HK GTS327 and HT GTS350 were hobbled. No other HT's were tested until Mel Nichol's tested the HG GTS350 in late 1970. There were two HK's not GMH supplied tested later, and both were a lot quicker than the GMH supplied cars. This is how it was, it will all be spelled out and sources quoted (afaik) in the book I mentioned.

That is news to me, I always thought the equal fastest race lap was 2:57 by both Geoghegan and Tuckey. In any case you'd expect the Fords to be quicker even if the cars were identically matched otherwise due to the racing rubber on the cars. Harry put race rubbber on the car he thought would be fastest (it was the most powerful) but the driver he put in it was a dud. You are forgetting who the HDT keeper of records/times etc was, and this is the source. I'll leave that also for someone else to reveal at a later date.

The reason Bond's car was at Surfers for the 12 hour is it was taken up to the Lakeside 1500 which it also won prior to the Surfers 12 hour race. You'll have to dig deep if you want to find these records though, I don't think much exists outside those from withing HDT of the day. Harry never spoke of it (there is a reason for that too).

Like much of Harry's last work that info is false about the pink and white V8 GTR's. He is going by what he was told, just like Joe Felice was told the same thing and was gobsmacked when he found out iot was false. As I said I know where the pink car is, it is alive and well and we have full registration history for the car since its first registration. It is a consective PSN with the orange car. I put up a for sale ad for the white car showing it escaped too, but it is also known to exist today, I just don't know where. The orange car was stolen in the 70's, no-one has seen or heard of it since. I don't know what happened to the V8 LC that ran at Bathurst at Easter 1972. The other car played with by Harry with a V8 is a styling exercise car painted in a colour called "Barney's Shirt", a friend of mine owns that car, it was an XU1 unlike the orange, white and pink cars which were GTR's. It was sold with its original XU1 engine, whereas the pink and orange cars just got HQ or HJ 202's.

The car i'm talking about is a HG GTS with 308, as I said I have full photos of the car's ID plates and its Engineering plate from about 1 year ago. I think it is in SA, I have had limited contact with the owner. It is one of the cars Harry often talked about.

I agree the HD was pitiful performance wise, but my original point was its the same vehicle platform as HR-HG and there were some special cars in all 4 of those series. The HD was a first for Holden though as it was the first to get disc brakes, and the first to have a 4spd, and effectively was the first production "performance" Holden (relative to others in its series) in those cars optioned with the X2 engine.

[castellan]

HR first 4 speed box.
As for cars given to testers some times they are not 100% what we could buy.
Peter Hannenberger had a HZ at the Holden test track and the 5.0L was not standard.

[HK1837]

Originally Posted by castellan

HR first 4 speed box.
As for cars given to testers some times they are not 100% what we could buy.
Peter Hannenberger had a HZ at the Holden test track and the 5.0L was not standard.

Correct, my bad. It was HR for 4spd.

You are right, many made for test cars were far better than volume production examples. In the case of the road test HK and HT GTS327/350 there was some smoke and mirrors going on. making them look worse.

[castellan]

Originally Posted by HK1837

HK-HT did rust, just not in areas as hard to fix as HQ. 253's were a really good engine, they just suffered from oiling issues associated with an externally mounted alloy oil pump and associated cam lobe wear. Easy fix though for today. They weren't ever a powerhouse, but in a light car like a HT-HG and with a reliable gearbox (3spd column, Saginaw 4spd or a powerglide) were a nice relaxed and easy to drive car. Thirsty with a 'glide though!
Never heard that about FG's. Glad I didn't buy one then, I seriously looked at replacing the Hilux at lease end with a XR6 turbo auto ute as Holden utes are useless as a tow vehicle, but I tried reversing a demo up my driveway and it really wasn't suitable for it - It really needs decent ground clearance and suspension travel. If they still had those lifted things I could have got away with one of them.

253 oil pump problems ? what about the last of the holden V8's up to 1999 then, I think the pump is the same thing ?

cam wear ? I think that has more to do with the oil some use.

I did 160,000 mile in a HG Premier 353 auto with no problems, I did pull the oil pump out at about 130,000mile just for a look see and the bit that holes the spring in was chocker with metal, I just cleaned it up and tossed it back on no problem. I think problems come about by people slack with oil changing.

The HT-G-Q 253 run the same size cam as the 308 so they perform well, as my brother with his XB 351 auto ute with twin exhaust and old mate Kenny's stock XC 5.8L auto and Donny's stock XC 5.8L found out that they could not beat the little 253 with just a 2 1/4 single exhaust with a sports muffler on it from start to 115 MPH it had a 2.78 ratio diff in it but when I blew that up I put a 3.36 ratio in it and that killed the performance of it badly and I went back to a 2.78, I was looking for a 3.08 but rare as hens teeth back then.

[HK1837]

Originally Posted by castellan

253 oil pump problems ? what about the last of the holden V8's up to 1999 then, I think the pump is the same thing ?

cam wear ? I think that has more to do with the oil some use.

I did 160,000 mile in a HG Premier 353 auto with no problems, I did pull the oil pump out at about 130,000mile just for a look see and the bit that holes the spring in was chocker with metal, I just cleaned it up and tossed it back on no problem. I think problems come about by people slack with oil changing.

The HT-G-Q 253 run the same size cam as the 308 so they perform well, as my brother with his XB 351 auto ute with twin exhaust and old mate Kenny's stock XC 5.8L auto and Donny's stock XC 5.8L found out that they could not beat the little 253 with just a 2 1/4 single exhaust with a sports muffler on it from start to 115 MPH it had a 2.78 ratio diff in it but when I blew that up I put a 3.36 ratio in it and that killed the performance of it badly and I went back to a 2.78, I was looking for a 3.08 but rare as hens teeth back then.

Could well be oil quality too, but pump wear was an issue on them, I think they oil wierdly too compared to other GM engines ie the oil passage paths. HG Prem are a pretty light car too, probably a good 200kg+ lighter than a Cleveland engined XB/C. That would have helped a bit!

[Davehoos]

oil pump.
most boy racers up rated the pump output with a cheep bolt on high volume pump--and never up graded the drive gear.

GM cam shaft- I replaced dozens if not more cams in a small holden dealer within the 12 month 20K warranty period between WB and VS and was told the older models had often lasted longer. So I cant believe there was a cam shaft issue for first Australian made GM V8.

[buickman]

Originally Posted by Davehoos

oil pump.
most boy racers up rated the pump output with a cheep bolt on high volume pump--and never up graded the drive gear.

GM cam shaft- I replaced dozens if not more cams in a small holden dealer within the 12 month 20K warranty period between WB and VS and was told the older models had often lasted longer. So I cant believe there was a cam shaft issue for first Australian made GM V8.

Never had any issues with either the 308 or 253 V8's with camshafts. When I sold them of both engines were unopened more than I can say of an old 3.9litr EB 1 I had for a short time lost count how many times that car let me down worst car I ever owned as far as reliability goes.

[castellan]

Originally Posted by Davehoos

oil pump.
most boy racers up rated the pump output with a cheep bolt on high volume pump--and never up graded the drive gear.

GM cam shaft- I replaced dozens if not more cams in a small holden dealer within the 12 month 20K warranty period between WB and VS and was told the older models had often lasted longer. So I cant believe there was a cam shaft issue for first Australian made GM V8.

Do you know why the problem was with the under 12 months 20K.

If not all were a problem there has to be a reason.

Were the lifters making a noise and the customer complaining.

Most likely it may of been the first start up running in the cam was not done the correct way. or some soft cams or another problem.