Death of Australian Car Manufacturing - Another point of View.

Stefan · 27-01-2014, 05:05 PM

I had a read if a Modern Motor Article.....August 1972 and it made me double take a bit.

The test was dubbed "The Supercars" a shoot out between Ford XA GT, Holden HQ 350 GTS and Chrysler E38. Besides the interesting dissection of the each car, what made me double take is the opening few paragraphs, that told of each of the three manufacturers actually had no car to give out for a review. It stated the three big manufacturers don't have these high end models in their test fleet.

Cars ended up being sought from Dealers.

My thought was, were the car manufacturers back in 1972 a little more careful with cash. Probably not a coincidence that all three did not stump up cars and Modern Motor Mag did not expect them to be able to either.

I'm not saying its the only thing that killed our car makers but it just demonstrates a different generation that may have exercised a little more constraint if it had to.

lupin · 27-01-2014, 05:14 PM

Think it would have been more that they didn't want negative publicity. You have to remember this was the time of the super car scare when these things were being viewed as things that killed and used too much fuel.

And it still goes on. There are many reviews that I'm sure are done on cars that aren't supplied by the maker.

Stefan · 27-01-2014, 05:24 PM

Interesting take.

The funny thing is the article did close with a paragraph saying they can't wait for the GTHO Phase 4 "It (Phase 4) will be worth waiting for"

Ford17 · 27-01-2014, 06:52 PM

Interesting thoughts.

I often wonder why there are so many new cars, which could otherwise be sold for cashflow and profit, which are given to various people and groups as 'company' or loan cars.

Then there are often a multitude of used cars for sale at any one time, which are referred to as "Ford executive driven".

Particularly with Holden in the case of V8 Supercars, each driver seems to have a road car provided to them.

Not to mention the overall motorsport spend by local manufacturers, circa 1970's versus recent times. It seems to be massive these days, despite the fact they can hardly afford it.

superyob · 27-01-2014, 08:32 PM

Stefan, who won the shootout? Can you post it up or will that breach copyright?

Stefan · 27-01-2014, 09:40 PM

I have no scanner and it is a copy of a copy so a bit dodgy.

Interesting points.

Performance.

Acceleration 0 to 60MPH
Charger 6.3
Falcon 7.7
Holden 9.3

Quarter
Charger 14.8
Ford 15.1
Holden 15.3

Interesting one (shows torque and drivability
Acceleration (in top gear)
20 - 40 MPA
Holden 4.0 Sec
Ford 6.5 Sec
Charger 6.8 Sec

Braking 60 - 0
Ford 3.8 sec
Holden 4.0 sec
Charger 4.8 sec Woeful

Funny one, Tacho accuracy

Indicated Actual
Ford 6000 5600
Charger 6000 5800
Holden 6000 4300

Driving in summary

Handling, the Monaro was the worst, with Charger on top and Falcon close behind.

Day to Day drivability in traffic and easiest to live with is the Monaro as it is torquey, has the best vision and nicest gearshift (and needs less shifting due to torque from the 350).

All round performance compromise (does everything it has to) Falcon on top, but notes average gearshift susceptible to have a fist full of nothing ie shifter jambs up. (I took my XA GT for a drive today and this happened twice, so had to laugh as it was like that from the factory)

Also noted XA had the worst vision, but they meant it was real hard to judge the cars extremities when parking etc.

Charger suffered badly due to 3 speed and brake pedal pressure 3 time higher than others. Could not lock brakes using both feet.

new2ford · 27-01-2014, 10:31 PM

Recently I was reading Mary Groves "An Outback Life" about her life on cattle stations in the NT at around that time. On one occasion they bought a Monaro (later finding they'd been financially diddled by the dealer) and it ingested dust so badly she could, as she put it, only see her children in the back seat "when they opened their eyes"!

They quickly got rid of it and bought a Falcon which was OK.

castellan · 28-01-2014, 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stefan

I have no scanner and it is a copy of a copy so a bit dodgy.

Interesting points.

Performance.

Acceleration 0 to 60MPH
Charger 6.3
Falcon 7.7
Holden 9.3

Quarter
Charger 14.8
Ford 15.1
Holden 15.3

Interesting one (shows torque and drivability
Acceleration (in top gear)
20 - 40 MPA
Holden 4.0 Sec
Ford 6.5 Sec
Charger 6.8 Sec

Braking 60 - 0
Ford 3.8 sec
Holden 4.0 sec
Charger 4.8 sec Woeful

Funny one, Tacho accuracy

Indicated Actual
Ford 6000 5600
Charger 6000 5800
Holden 6000 4300

Driving in summary

Handling, the Monaro was the worst, with Charger on top and Falcon close behind.

Day to Day drivability in traffic and easiest to live with is the Monaro as it is torquey, has the best vision and nicest gearshift (and needs less shifting due to torque from the 350).

All round performance compromise (does everything it has to) Falcon on top, but notes average gearshift susceptible to have a fist full of nothing ie shifter jambs up. (I took my XA GT for a drive today and this happened twice, so had to laugh as it was like that from the factory)

Also noted XA had the worst vision, but they meant it was real hard to judge the cars extremities when parking etc.

Charger suffered badly due to 3 speed and brake pedal pressure 3 time higher than others. Could not lock brakes using both feet.

Come on the HQ 350 would not rev to 6000RPM. and that taco is not the norm and even an idiot would know 4300RPM is not 6000 come on.

A lot of these test drivers are just hopeless, you will see some fool revving a HQ 350 right out in 1st 2ed gear and you know that's still no the way you make porridge. you use the torque in 1st 2ed just going to 4500RPM then change she is off the boil at over 4500RPM yes she still pulls but not by half.

Stefan · 28-01-2014, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by castellan

Come on the HQ 350 would not rev to 6000RPM. and that taco is not the norm and even an idiot would know 4300RPM is not 6000 come on.

Story was quite funny about how they managed to rev it to 7,200 without valve bounce on the track. They know by feel imeditely that the tacho was out by a country mile.

Yeah I know journos are all idiots, I know that all of us on the forum know so much more about cars than motor journos who test cars for a living and have access to just about every new car released. As for this story heck havn't we all thrashed an XA GT, HQ350 Monaro and E38 when new back to back on a closed track.

castellan · 30-01-2014, 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stefan

Story was quite funny about how they managed to rev it to 7,200 without valve bounce on the track. They know by feel imeditely that the tacho was out by a country mile.

Yeah I know journos are all idiots, I know that all of us on the forum know so much more about cars than motor journos who test cars for a living and have access to just about every new car released. As for this story heck havn't we all thrashed an XA GT, HQ350 Monaro and E38 when new back to back on a closed track.

Mistaken 6 cyl tacho could be the answer.
I think i have read a lot of car mags and the amount of journos who are in depth is not many. they get a car given to them that does not run right etc and they still test it, just hopeless ! running bodgy examples.
So no my faith in journos is not what i would hope for, in fact aussie motoring jounos have been crappy standards that reflect only mainly clowns.
Your referral as to all of us on the forum knowing, you may be right but just some of us may be more that just enthusiast that others.
You know one could get a new car that one may not be happy with it's performance or handling but taken to the right person that car can be tweaked just a bit that she becomes a excellent car. and these idiots should have the understanding that if there is something they are bagging about a car that there is a cure to it or not.
Even Bill Tuckey could not grasp what Peter Hanenberger was saying about RTS and dampers with the HZ. it's all about geometry, dampers only function is to control the ride.

2011G6E · 30-01-2014, 12:48 PM

I can't access most of my old motoring magazines at the moment...locked away in the shed waiting to be unpacked at our other house...but the one I remember most was a road test of an SLR5000 Torana. Some European motoring test drive expert was out here for some event, and the magazine (possible Wheels, could be Motor) gave him a drive of a few of our local "supercars". The one that stood out as memorable was the SLR5000. At the end of a decent drive where he was assessing handling and other features, they came to the top of a long downhill stretch and said to the motoring journo "Hang on, I'm going to do a brake test", and screamed off down the road. At about 80kph the journo said the test driver "hit the brakes...hard!", and the car locked up and started sliding, totally out of control, but being kept on the road by the expert driver as he attempted to get the brakes just the right side of locking up, but without success. The journo said "It was obvious he wasn't going to ease up until it stopped, one way or another".
The journo said they eventually came to a stop in a cloud of tyre smoke at the end of long snaking black lines and the journo, drenched in sweat, turned to the test driver, who merely sat back, smoothed his hair, and causally said "So...tell me what sort of accidents you usually have in Australia..."

Chassis dynamics were hardly at the top of the list back then...still aren't in a lot of peoples minds who honestly believe outright power, 0-100 times, and quarter times are more important than good handling and steering...