Holden HD Holds Australian record for monthly sales

[Davehoos]

cam shaft.

cam lobe has a hardened surface or case hardening. I often told by good engine rebuilders about running engines on dyno at certain RPM to work harden the cam lobe face. cant see that happening on a production engine.
look at a black smith making a sword blade a compare that to a cast $20 shaft run on a grinder.

Then add in the fact that some tooling may have been a bit at the end of life and the inspections may have been a bit average. In my time `1980's the V8 line stopped and started, the dealer had sold bucket loads of V8 in the 70's as the media had claimed the end of the world stuff without oil and the old blokes came in regular for there dealer service.

on top of that I had replaced valve springs push rods, cyl heads [holden heads are cast iron without inserts] due to poor fuel or oil decoke was required to stop running on and over heating.

lifter on a holden normally last till the cam gears need replacing but it could be possible for them to get stuck with engine varnish and not rotate.
most red holden 6 or V8 had cork/paper gaskets and with NSW rego inspections you rip off the valley side and rocker covers every other year. when you flushed the cooling system-water pumps and radiators lasted a few years with salt spray on the coast.

to replace a lifter you can flick it out and fit a new one and not worry about how worn the cam lobe was and most garages would have buckets of used lifters you clean up on the grinder--refacing concave bottom of a lifter was part of mechanics apprentiship training at tafe.

VK and VN V8 rebuilt loads of these. never touched a VL V8.must have had university trained engineers on assemble making it quicker by lining up the rings and using silastic on rubber gaskets. the oil pump that had been machined so the oil filter fell off.

engine rattles.
taught early not to get involved with customer unless it was someones mate-had lots of stories about A9X vintage engines with piston slap-then the brock inprooved and group A started to come in, the racing quality pistons rattling around in a cold bore until the engine warmed up.

VN-VP.
I had the fortune to work ant landrover building vehicles and on my return to Newcastle I was a senior mechanic dealing with the public. .For a time I was refreshing 2 x 6 cyl a day due to build quality of the new product.
took an 4-5 hours to R/R engine-replace gaskets and seals. sand down the paint on the gasket surface, check valve springs, drive plate, water pump and core plugs, cam tensioner, balance shaft.
then latter on it was cam shaft and cam bearings and crank shaft because of oil pressure issues. from the oil pump.

I had a few EA-EB that I purchased as ex taxi and had minimal breakdown.
mostly fuel and ignition-fan belts related issues. I scrap these when the cooling system was dodgey. the AU I scrapped when a cheeper car came along.

I come from owning P76 Nissan-pintara/skyline/bluebird and magna charade that had never left me on the roadside

sorry for the dribble its raining and cold.

[johnydep]

Holden 253 & 308 engine design was flawed. End of story, otherwise they'd still be in production today.

The v was too wide, oil delivery to the top of the engine was slow causing rocker gear to wear prematurely, the camshaft bearings too soft, camshaft lobes too narrow causing lifters to mushroom, single row timing chains stretch was common, pollution control models suffered from cracked heads between the valves, the 308/5.0 cylinder walls were too thin resulting in easy overheating & cylinder distortion.

When you compare it to the Chev & Ford engines of the time you can see that the 253/4.2 & 308/5.0 are not on the same level.

After saying all that, I've always loved the 308. When built well they were a fantastic motor, pulled hard and loved to rev. I've built and used them for street, strip, super charged & 4WD. They just need to be tweaked to get the best out of them & improve durability.

Only once did I have a problem; dropped a cam lobe on the 4WD with a Crow Cam. Never liked the look of that cam, but could have been a bad batch of oil because it happened 5kms after an oil change.

[HK1837]

Originally Posted by johnydep

Holden 253 & 308 engine design was flawed. End of story, otherwise they'd still be in production today.

The v was too wide, oil delivery to the top of the engine was slow causing rocker gear to wear prematurely, the camshaft bearings too soft, camshaft lobes too narrow causing lifters to mushroom, single row timing chains stretch was common, pollution control models suffered from cracked heads between the valves, the 308/5.0 cylinder walls were too thin resulting in easy overheating & cylinder distortion.

When you compare it to the Chev & Ford engines of the time you can see that the 253/4.2 & 308/5.0 are not on the same level.

After saying all that, I've always loved the 308. When built well they were a fantastic motor, pulled hard and loved to rev. I've built and used them for street, strip, super charged & 4WD. They just need to be tweaked to get the best out of them & improve durability.

Only once did I have a problem; dropped a cam lobe on the 4WD with a Crow Cam. Never liked the look of that cam, but could have been a bad batch of oil because it happened 5kms after an oil change.

I think they did pretty good considering (they lasted from the release of HT through until 2000), but I agree they had design flaws like the oil pump and the valley bolt bosses. I've never had head issues before, never seen a cracked one pre VL. I've pulled them apart after 20 years on LPG with no upper cyl lubricant and seen minimal wear or valve recesssion unlike SBC's which have valve problems pretty quickly on LPG. Apart from the first of the ADR27A engines they were pretty well optimised in most areas (308 wise), manifolds and heads flowed OK for what they were, unlike regular duty Chevs which needed better heads, better inlet manifold, exhaust, cam and tune to optimise what was there whereas a 308 woke up pretty well with exhaust, cam and tune. It didn't take HDT much to make a standard engine go far better.
Plus they were a pretty successful race engine.
Building from scratch i'd still use a SBC unless something else forced me into a 308, and then i'd simply stroke it. A 304/308 stroked to 350ci with EFI heads, roller cam and decent hang ons is a pretty good engine in a light car like U size Torana or HQ-WB cab-chassis, and far easier to get regoed in an ADR27A car.

[castellan]

Originally Posted by johnydep

Holden 253 & 308 engine design was flawed. End of story, otherwise they'd still be in production today.

The v was too wide, oil delivery to the top of the engine was slow causing rocker gear to wear prematurely, the camshaft bearings too soft, camshaft lobes too narrow causing lifters to mushroom, single row timing chains stretch was common, pollution control models suffered from cracked heads between the valves, the 308/5.0 cylinder walls were too thin resulting in easy overheating & cylinder distortion.

When you compare it to the Chev & Ford engines of the time you can see that the 253/4.2 & 308/5.0 are not on the same level.

After saying all that, I've always loved the 308. When built well they were a fantastic motor, pulled hard and loved to rev. I've built and used them for street, strip, super charged & 4WD. They just need to be tweaked to get the best out of them & improve durability.

Only once did I have a problem; dropped a cam lobe on the 4WD with a Crow Cam. Never liked the look of that cam, but could have been a bad batch of oil because it happened 5kms after an oil change.

You can bore a Holden V8 out 0.060 try that with a ford.
So much for the Chevy V8 and gutless 307 and the HQ 350 that was flat out trying to hose off a HQ 308.

The small block Chevy must be flawed to as they would be in production now as well ?

The alloy V8's that GM have from 1997 and today are not Chevy engines.
Have a look see at the last of the Holden 5.7L performance to the new VT 5.7L LS1 the good old Holden had it all over the new Gen3 for power and reliability.
I have never had a problem with any of my Holden V8's and I drove them hard.
I bought a new VS V8 ute in Nov 1999 when I got it home I took the oil cap off the rocker cover with the engine running, I could see metal pumping up through the push rod into the rocker bucket, it was just pumping all this metal out so I changed the oil right then and there and no more metal was ever seen.
I look after my cars but most engines I have seen that are a problem is due to some fool.
I had a 308 HQ type built it myself and it did over 400K only front crank seal went on it had a billet 20/60 cam not a reground rubbish and she was getting a bit of a rattle from the lifters by then she was .060 over and never got hot the oil pump must of done 600K as I just use it off the old 308.

[buickman]

single row timing chains stretch

The HT/HG 253/308 that the oil was filled from the Timing cover had double row chains

I look after my cars but most engines I have seen that are a problem is due to some fool.

Agree there some car owners find servicing and washing a car is a waste of money and effort.

[johnydep]

The Chev small block is still in production, just updated for the 21st century. I'll post more tomorrow when I'm home.

[castellan]

Originally Posted by johnydep

The Chev small block is still in production, just updated for the 21st century. I'll post more tomorrow when I'm home.

So is the Holden 308 and you can get it in alloy as well.

[Davehoos]

Why would you want an alloy 308? friend makes alloy chev V8 so you can use bolt on stuff like ford cyl heads and valve gear and oil pumps.

its not that big of an engineering leap from a holden to a chev engine. except the lastest versions. the deal in the 60's was local production and different oil pump location.

repco-or similar had done loads of engineering on the GM buick V8 that became the Leyland V8 in the late 60's-as rover got to it. you see a lot of that engineering gone into the holden block when they did the race engine stuff.

P/S when the rover engine was earmarked for extinction lot of magazine paraded the idea of holden V8 converted to alloy for Europe. shame about BMW. shame there ant more toms out there looking at fords.

[johnydep]

This is getting off topic, so I'll keep it short sharp & sweet.

Holden V8 -
The pre-polution heads did not crack. It was the later heads fitted with EGR valves that had a tendency to crack, between the centre where the two exhaust valves were at their closest; cause was due to the new EGR port thinning out the wall, increased heat, etc. Fixed with valve inserts.
The rocker gear was a common wear item, the design was not as good as the same era Ford, Chev & Chrysler. The stamped steel rockers wore at the valve stem contact point & push rod seat pivot. The alloy posts wore at the contact point of the rocker.
253 engine inlet valve size was limited by cylinder bore size. Installing oversized valves required a notch to be added to the top of cylinder bore.
308 cylinder wall thickness between cylinders is not the ideal thickness, with no coolant flow between them. Side affects on heavy duty or performance vehicle includes - stressed cooling system, and cylinder bore distortion.
Yes, you can bore a 308 to 60thou, but no engine builder that knows their stuff will guarantee that it will be 100% successful 100% of the time; the early engines suffered from casting porosity, I've seen it and I took the gamble when I had my own bored 60 thou.

Later engines improved the pollution cylinder heads from early red, to the blue, then black to the final EFI heads that changed the valve order so there was no more exhaust valves side by side.

For those saying they drove their 308ci 600,000 kilometres after a rebuild - that's my point, you had it rebuilt and improved.

All I'm saying is that the Holden V8 was an engine designed as an Aussie V8 to a price - a production engine that was economical to design and economical to build & repair. Nothing wrong with that, but it had flaws due to those factors.

For an every day passenger car, they were fine. Start towing heavy stuff or racing it and the engine didn't like it too much; especially the pollution red and blue motors. They cracked heads between the exhaust valves, they stretched the single row chains, they wore the rocker gear and the cam bearings and lifters.

As far as a standard engine goes, there was better out there. Rebuild them with care and better gear and the Holden motor was amazing.

Holden dropped the 304 for a few reasons, including not being able to squeeze anymore power or economy out of them at a decent R&D price.

The alloy holden V8 is not a Holden built motor.

As for the small block Chev, it stayed in production a lot longer than the Holden. It had various generational changes and I believe that the current SBC is still based on the original 4.4-inch bore spacing, so theirs still a tiny bit of the original design there. The SBC that everyone knows was discontinued in 2003, but the engine is still made by a GM subsidiary in Mexico as a crate engine.

I'm not trying to attack peoples beloved Holden V8, it was a great engine and I have a huge soft spot for it. However, it was not an engine that you can put on the same level as the SBC.

[castellan]

Originally Posted by johnydep

This is getting off topic, so I'll keep it short sharp & sweet.

Holden V8 -
The pre-polution heads did not crack. It was the later heads fitted with EGR valves that had a tendency to crack, between the centre where the two exhaust valves were at their closest; cause was due to the new EGR port thinning out the wall, increased heat, etc. Fixed with valve inserts.
The rocker gear was a common wear item, the design was not as good as the same era Ford, Chev & Chrysler. The stamped steel rockers wore at the valve stem contact point & push rod seat pivot. The alloy posts wore at the contact point of the rocker.
253 engine inlet valve size was limited by cylinder bore size. Installing oversized valves required a notch to be added to the top of cylinder bore.
308 cylinder wall thickness between cylinders is not the ideal thickness, with no coolant flow between them. Side affects on heavy duty or performance vehicle includes - stressed cooling system, and cylinder bore distortion.
Yes, you can bore a 308 to 60thou, but no engine builder that knows their stuff will guarantee that it will be 100% successful 100% of the time; the early engines suffered from casting porosity, I've seen it and I took the gamble when I had my own bored 60 thou.

Later engines improved the pollution cylinder heads from early red, to the blue, then black to the final EFI heads that changed the valve order so there was no more exhaust valves side by side.

For those saying they drove their 308ci 600,000 kilometres after a rebuild - that's my point, you had it rebuilt and improved.

All I'm saying is that the Holden V8 was an engine designed as an Aussie V8 to a price - a production engine that was economical to design and economical to build & repair. Nothing wrong with that, but it had flaws due to those factors.

For an every day passenger car, they were fine. Start towing heavy stuff or racing it and the engine didn't like it too much; especially the pollution red and blue motors. They cracked heads between the exhaust valves, they stretched the single row chains, they wore the rocker gear and the cam bearings and lifters.

As far as a standard engine goes, there was better out there. Rebuild them with care and better gear and the Holden motor was amazing.

Holden dropped the 304 for a few reasons, including not being able to squeeze anymore power or economy out of them at a decent R&D price.

The alloy holden V8 is not a Holden built motor.

As for the small block Chev, it stayed in production a lot longer than the Holden. It had various generational changes and I believe that the current SBC is still based on the original 4.4-inch bore spacing, so theirs still a tiny bit of the original design there. The SBC that everyone knows was discontinued in 2003, but the engine is still made by a GM subsidiary in Mexico as a crate engine.

I'm not trying to attack peoples beloved Holden V8, it was a great engine and I have a huge soft spot for it. However, it was not an engine that you can put on the same level as the SBC.

The 253 does not need bigger valves ever as they loose power if you go to big.
Ford Cleveland rockers were nothing to talk about as well as the cams.
Never heard of any problems with 253 or 308 bore thickness being a problem.
Most Repco GEM engines were always taken out to 0.060 in all holdens, not ford Cleveland that's for sure.
I am not a fan of going 0.060 with any thing but I had to with my 308 and I held it flat for miles and miles and the temp was fine but I had the big radiator.
308 from 1969 to 2000 =31
253 from 1969 to 1984 =15
202 from 1971 to 1986 =15
186 from 1966 to 1971 =5
179 from 1963 to 1966 =3
132.5 grey from 1948 to 1959 =11
138 from 1960 to 1963 =3
Gen 3 from 1997 to 2006 =9 in Aus
Chevy 283 1960 to 1964 I think.
307 1968-9
327 1965 to 1968
350 1969 to 1974
Ford Cleveland 1970 to 1983 =22
289 W 1966 to 1968
302 W 1968 to 1971
Leyland P39

[johnydep]

http://www.aussiev8.com.au/holden-v8...cyclinder.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrol...l-block_engine

A marvel of engineering fifty years and counting
Chevrolet may not have invented the engine, but we did invent THE engine. You know the one. The reason wind blown became a hairstyle. Even the dust left in its wake packs a punch. We call it the Small Block and the 100-millionth one is about to roll off the lot.
“The introduction of the Small Block changed everything,” says Jim Campbell, vice president, GM Performance Vehicles and Motorsports. “It started a wave of innovation and escalating performance that influenced the entire automotive industry. In the process, the Small Block fundamentally changed the Chevrolet brand by powering our most iconic cars—on the street and the track.”

Before its 1955 introduction, Chevrolet offered only 6-cylinder engines. They needed to design an engine that could compete with industry heavyweight Ford’s flat head V8. The goal was to match the power of the V8 but to keep the engine lightweight and affordable.
Their answer, the Small Block, delivered 195 horsepower with an optional 4- barrel carburetor. An engine that outperformed almost everything it went up against.
“The Small Block transformed Chevrolet Racing, and soon fuel-injected Chevys were banned after dominating on the NASCAR® circuit, Corvettes were winning at Le Mans, Camaros were winning Trans Am championships,” says Campbell.
So what is next for the engine that brought innovation and performance to production vehicles and race cars alike? “We are already developing the fifth-generation Chevy Small Block,” says Sam Winegarden, executive director for global engine engineering. “No doubt, it will hold true to the power, light weight and affordability that made the original engine an instant success, while continuing the technological innovation that has made the Chevy Small Block an icon of performance.”

http://www.chevrolet.com/culture/art...all-block.html

It's not unreasonable to say the Chevrolet small-block V-8 changed the face of automotive engine history. Innovative and technologically advanced when it debuted in 1955, it greatly influenced future V-8 engine designs, both inside General Motors and among the competition. Enthusiasts embraced it and an entire performance aftermarket sprang up around it. Over the years, variations of the small-block V-8 have been used in race cars, off-road trucks, boats, and even custom motorcycles. It can also be found under the hood of everything from classic Ford hot rods to radical Jeep conversions. "The small-block Chevy is unquestionably the dominant domestic engine both in terms of sheer numbers and also in terms of longevity," said Jeff Smith, senior technical editor for Car Craft Magazine. He cites the engine's interchangeability as one of the biggest reasons for its popularity. "It's possible to swap a set of heads from a 1990 Vortec truck engine onto the original '55 265. I doubt there's an engine ever built (perhaps the VW) that you could swap parts from engines 45 years apart.

Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/features/c...#ixzz3BIs1oQBY

[castellan]

Originally Posted by Davehoos

Why would you want an alloy 308? friend makes alloy chev V8 so you can use bolt on stuff like ford cyl heads and valve gear and oil pumps.

its not that big of an engineering leap from a holden to a chev engine. except the lastest versions. the deal in the 60's was local production and different oil pump location.

repco-or similar had done loads of engineering on the GM buick V8 that became the Leyland V8 in the late 60's-as rover got to it. you see a lot of that engineering gone into the holden block when they did the race engine stuff.

P/S when the rover engine was earmarked for extinction lot of magazine paraded the idea of holden V8 converted to alloy for Europe. shame about BMW. shame there ant more toms out there looking at fords.

The Chevy v8 was not what Holden wanted as it was to heavy and the number one cyl was on the wrong side and they did not want a engine over 5.0L the chev 307 was rubbish bore for power the 283 to small and to big the 305 chev was rubbish the 302 chev was rubbish for a road car.
253 fitted in with what they wanted most people to have but rego prices killed that or most holden buyers would of had the 253 not that grubby little 202 6 cyl.
Most ford owners had the big 250 6 cyl.
And Valiant the 245 hemi.

[castellan]

Originally Posted by johnydep

image

image
http://www.aussiev8.com.au/holden-v8...cyclinder.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrol...l-block_engine

http://www.chevrolet.com/culture/art...all-block.html

That is just an old rusty block and any block that is rusty will do that.

[johnydep]

Originally Posted by castellan

That is just an old rusty block and any block that is rusty will do that.

The photo also shows the other problem with the 308 - Siamesed cylinders are engine cylinders arranged in such a way that have no channels between them to allow water or other coolant to circulate. Coolant can't get there, that's the point where the cylinder temperature can become higher than the sides which do have coolant flow. If there was more metal between the bores the heat issue would not have been a problem, but then there would have been the added weight.

Like I said before - I like the engine. The first high performance engine I built for myself was a 308 at 19 years old 27 years ago. I read everything I could about the engine & mods, I still have a all the books & mags. Stuff from some of the great Aussie engine builders of the time.

When I researched rebuilding the engine it was already 40 thou, I was warned about going 60 thou by Repco machining (where my brother worked) & by my trade school teachers. Confirmed by a publication or two.

[Davehoos]

problem is a state by state deal.
engine size doesn't change rego cost in NSW. it was 2 door that saw insurance through the roof.

4 liter engine was preffered with larger families or the family with a trailer. 2 to 2.6 for a smaller family commuter. by the 70's most government buyers had engine capacity rules.

my mum bought 302 Fairmont wagons for health commission until they changed to 200B wagons-you couldn't sell a used 250 falcon pre cross flow locally.

the valiant owners I know had the full range of engines.slant 6 in most pensioners homes..

as a kid growing up the 186 was always refered to as a big block holden and 60 thou was starting point for a rebuild often 120 thou was used-but 60 thou in a V8 was considered scrap metal.
I remember fitting 10 thou as a second re-ring. and using spun cast iron rings to stop the bore wear.

my racing contacts would not have a V8 engine long enough to worry about. and performance fords came in 1600 and 2000.

202 red was always called unfortunate-or you cant you find someone to pass rego for a ADR27 A/B car with a early block. different storey when 3.3 blocks became cheep. and blue engines went into everthing.

my dealer working period the exchange engine business was in decline. companies would line up a production run of engines and over machine the batch using items like valves with non stock diamentions. after market heads. often the new reco would just get the end of the warranty before destructing.

working for a dealer we had items machined including resleeving or just replace engine blocks etc with brand new items. replacement cyl heads from perfomane engine builder at the time was so cheep you didnd bother to do regrinds.

Im told that taxi operators in the 60's used a workshop bay to overhaule cyl heads and carby.

[castellan]

Originally Posted by johnydep

The photo also shows the other problem with the 308 - Siamesed cylinders are engine cylinders arranged in such a way that have no channels between them to allow water or other coolant to circulate. Coolant can't get there, that's the point where the cylinder temperature can become higher than the sides which do have coolant flow. If there was more metal between the bores the heat issue would not have been a problem, but then there would have been the added weight.

Like I said before - I like the engine. The first high performance engine I built for myself was a 308 at 19 years old 27 years ago. I read everything I could about the engine & mods, I still have a all the books & mags. Stuff from some of the great Aussie engine builders of the time.

When I researched rebuilding the engine it was already 40 thou, I was warned about going 60 thou by Repco machining (where my brother worked) & by my trade school teachers. Confirmed by a publication or two.

Siamesed cyl in a 308 ? they are not at all.
If there was a problem with the 308 block as such, now why did the 308 win Bathurst and all so many times.

[castellan]

Originally Posted by Davehoos

problem is a state by state deal.
engine size doesn't change rego cost in NSW. it was 2 door that saw insurance through the roof.

4 liter engine was preffered with larger families or the family with a trailer. 2 to 2.6 for a smaller family commuter. by the 70's most government buyers had engine capacity rules.

my mum bought 302 Fairmont wagons for health commission until they changed to 200B wagons-you couldn't sell a used 250 falcon pre cross flow locally.

the valiant owners I know had the full range of engines.slant 6 in most pensioners homes..

as a kid growing up the 186 was always refered to as a big block holden and 60 thou was starting point for a rebuild often 120 thou was used-but 60 thou in a V8 was considered scrap metal.
I remember fitting 10 thou as a second re-ring. and using spun cast iron rings to stop the bore wear.

my racing contacts would not have a V8 engine long enough to worry about. and performance fords came in 1600 and 2000.

202 red was always called unfortunate-or you cant you find someone to pass rego for a ADR27 A/B car with a early block. different storey when 3.3 blocks became cheep. and blue engines went into everthing.

my dealer working period the exchange engine business was in decline. companies would line up a production run of engines and over machine the batch using items like valves with non stock diamentions. after market heads. often the new reco would just get the end of the warranty before destructing.

working for a dealer we had items machined including resleeving or just replace engine blocks etc with brand new items. replacement cyl heads from perfomane engine builder at the time was so cheep you didnd bother to do regrinds.

Im told that taxi operators in the 60's used a workshop bay to overhaule cyl heads and carby.

I remember some 70 yo southern sod saying that to me back in 1979 about his big block 202, I looked at him big block ? the block is the same as any holden red 6 only the crank has a little bit more stroke and bigger mains, it's a little 6 cyl. maybe a 6 cyl hemi could be called a big block but in no way could anyone call any holden a big block.

The only red 6 you could bore 120 thou was a 179 because the 186 block is a 179 block only they bored it 60 thou to make it a 186 and this is a fact.

The ADR has got nothing to do with the block being the problem, that's just got to do with law, not the blocks problem is it. and also if you go ADR prefix on a pre July 1976 you have to have the ADR fitted on a pre ADR.

[johnydep]

Originally Posted by castellan

Siamesed cyl in a 308 ? they are not at all.
If there was a problem with the 308 block as such, now why did the 308 win Bathurst and all so many times.

No standard 308 won Bathurst. The one year that the Holden's had to use standard rocker gear instead of the rollers (without checking - VH or VK), because of homologation rules, saw many Holden's breaking rocker gear. The attempted fix was to heat treat the rockers.

As I have mentioned several times now - the Holden motor was a decent plant. When built well it was amazing. However it had flaws, because it was built to a price - they kept the cost down on design and production, but also for maintenance. Oil pump is a classic example.

During the early years of its life it was a good engine. Time caught up with it, pollution emission laws saw the 1977 motors turn into slugs, with massive heat problems. The Blue motor was an improvement but still in trouble. The Black motor fixed a lot of the problems and was a decent enough engine. The EFI engine was fantastic but there was nothing left for the engineers to get from it, the engine had reached its design limits.

So when comparing it to the Chev design - 4.4 inch bore spacing, internal pump, engine width, timing cover assembly, able to increase compression with less side affects - the Chev was/is an engine that is a better design than the Holden.

General Motors had many V8's in their fleet, they even sold one off to Leyland which reminds me of the Holden motor. In the end there was only one GM V8 that stood the test of time - the small block Chev.

If you'd like to continue this debate, I suggest that you start a new thread. This one is about the HD and I think that we've gone way off track now.


ps. I learnt this the hard way - trying to beat a mate that was a engine builder for drag racing. He tried to tell me but I would not listen. I built mine after reading everything that I could. Fully balanced and blue printed it, took off weight from the rods and crank, shot peened, used Chev pistons because they are shorter, machined the block deck to suit, Yella Terra heads re-worked, rollers, and lots more that I can't remember now. My mate spent less $$ and time than me and built a Chev 350. Both were good engines but I had to do a lot more.

[Bushbasher]

Originally Posted by johnydep

No standard 308 won Bathurst. The one year that the Holden's had to use standard rocker gear instead of the rollers (without checking - VH or VK), because of homologation rules, saw many Holden's breaking rocker gear. The attempted fix was to heat treat the rockers.

Wasn't that the VK GrpA and it wasn't so much the rocker gear as the single row timing chain that was the biggest weakness. I remember Brock in the Mobil VK chasing down John Goss in the Jag with full face helmet on, because the front and rear glass was removed, when the timing chain let go on Conrod @ Lap 160 because he had upped the rpm to 6500 to catch and pass the BMW of Johnny Cecotto, instead of the 6k he'd been running all day to save the engine.

[HK1837]

Originally Posted by Bushbasher

Wasn't that the VK GrpA and it wasn't so much the rocker gear as the single row timing chain that was the biggest weakness. I remember Brock in the Mobil VK chasing down John Goss in the Jag with full face helmet on, because the front and rear glass was removed, when the timing chain let go on Conrod @ Lap 160 because he had upped the rpm to 6500 to catch and pass the BMW of Johnny Cecotto, instead of the 6k he'd been running all day to save the engine.

That was a standard VK in 1985. VK GroupA was next year, Bailey and Grice. Not 100% sure if 1985 was still a 308 or not, I think the 1986 car was the first 304. Brock was catching Goss and if not for the broken timing chain could well have had his 10 offical Bathurst wins.

[Bushbasher]

Sorry, I meant it was the first year of GrpA, not a Blue Meanie, and yes, he was catching Goss.

[Davehoos]

The ADR has got nothing to do with the block being the problem, that's just got to do with law, not the blocks problem is it. and also if you go ADR prefix on a pre July 1976 you have to have the ADR fitted on a pre ADR.

HJ had different levels of emission depending on the state it was sold.
202 had a habbit of early death. mostly cooling steam, crank and piston speed issues. Often the engine was a throw away.

short stoke holdens often had steel cranks and iron rings that lasted for years.

fitting a late model red engine in an early car did not require pollution stuff till later years when they started to demand engineers reports.

told there are certain blocks that you can go crazy boring. you just have to find them.
I have a Leyland 4.4 [3.5 bore] bored out with 120 thou 186 pistons. its a mandrel held liner alloy block.

[Davehoos]

we had loads in the workshop with spring and rocker issues in those years. some of it was the roller rocker lift ratio probably just to get it homoligation.

VH 253 blue engine you never touch it. VC and VH brock was great but it was nothing like a factory car.

and VK was seen as the end of Australian made cars-so I wouldn't think the build quality was good. it was a dealers nightmare-sales dropped big time, VH we do up to 35 cars a month-VK it was cars per month. we had loads of hyway patrols that you box up and send to auction--not realy holdens fault.

the thing was that the race cars had to use normal parts and the normal chain wasn't up to the job. I don't think it was the chain itself.

[HK1837]

Originally Posted by Davehoos

HJ had different levels of emission depending on the state it was sold.

Not exactly. As far as I recall NSW required canisters early, but that doesn't affect the engine much, it is just a sealed fuel tank and sealed carby bowl with vapour recovery.

HJ had 3 x levels of emissions:

Early (8/74 through to 12/74) was the same as HQ, ie ADR27 (PCV etc) and no canister.
1975 onwards had canister added, so carbies changed to sealed, fuel tank was sealed and vapour lines installed.
Pilot ADR27A - these HJ's had the HX full emission engines. Pretty rare though they do turn up on the odd occasion.

HJ commercials do not even have ADR27 compliance on their compliance plate, although the engines are ADR27 compliant. 27 must have been notyet mandatory for commercials, although late HQ commercials do show 27.

[johnydep]

Originally Posted by Bushbasher

Wasn't that the VK GrpA and it wasn't so much the rocker gear as the single row timing chain that was the biggest weakness. I remember Brock in the Mobil VK chasing down John Goss in the Jag with full face helmet on, because the front and rear glass was removed, when the timing chain let go on Conrod @ Lap 160 because he had upped the rpm to 6500 to catch and pass the BMW of Johnny Cecotto, instead of the 6k he'd been running all day to save the engine.

Yes, I remember that race now. Front windscreen damaged so he kicked it out. race officials told him to remove the rear window, so he had to call into the pits. Took off like a rocket & pushed so hard that he was almost 2 seconds quicker than the race leader, then bang. No more engine with about 2 laps to go. was a sad day in motoring history, for me anyway.

Rocker gear was also a big problem. I remember a race with Peter Brock limping into the pits with engine trouble, the pit crew replaced some rockers & he was off again.

The problem was sorted, with roller rockers & other bits, once they sold the required number of cars.

http://www.brock05.com/Ateam.php

Delays in the Group A road cars forced Holden to race the 1985 season with a VK powered by the old 5044cm3 engine...Formula Blue VK Group A road car incorporated whatever was need to avoid a repeat and was the first serious advance for a Holden racing V8 since the L34 of a decade earlier. Fracture prone rocker arms were replaced by Crane roller rockers activated by a high lift camshaft driven by a new double row timing chain. Ports and manifolds were matched and honed to the absolute limit, while specific Group A extractors developed from the later Group III items maintained the easy breathing.

[castellan]

Originally Posted by johnydep

No standard 308 won Bathurst. The one year that the Holden's had to use standard rocker gear instead of the rollers (without checking - VH or VK), because of homologation rules, saw many Holden's breaking rocker gear. The attempted fix was to heat treat the rockers.

As I have mentioned several times now - the Holden motor was a decent plant. When built well it was amazing. However it had flaws, because it was built to a price - they kept the cost down on design and production, but also for maintenance. Oil pump is a classic example.

During the early years of its life it was a good engine. Time caught up with it, pollution emission laws saw the 1977 motors turn into slugs, with massive heat problems. The Blue motor was an improvement but still in trouble. The Black motor fixed a lot of the problems and was a decent enough engine. The EFI engine was fantastic but there was nothing left for the engineers to get from it, the engine had reached its design limits.

So when comparing it to the Chev design - 4.4 inch bore spacing, internal pump, engine width, timing cover assembly, able to increase compression with less side affects - the Chev was/is an engine that is a better design than the Holden.

General Motors had many V8's in their fleet, they even sold one off to Leyland which reminds me of the Holden motor. In the end there was only one GM V8 that stood the test of time - the small block Chev.

If you'd like to continue this debate, I suggest that you start a new thread. This one is about the HD and I think that we've gone way off track now.


ps. I learnt this the hard way - trying to beat a mate that was a engine builder for drag racing. He tried to tell me but I would not listen. I built mine after reading everything that I could. Fully balanced and blue printed it, took off weight from the rods and crank, shot peened, used Chev pistons because they are shorter, machined the block deck to suit, Yella Terra heads re-worked, rollers, and lots more that I can't remember now. My mate spent less $$ and time than me and built a Chev 350. Both were good engines but I had to do a lot more.

Standard 308 block did race and it was not siam nor were the L34 blocks or the HP race blocks siam.

308 has the same bore spacing as a chev SB

The early 308's had only the old weak holden piston you could use and that was the main problem with the people who wanted hot up mods and had to use the stronger 327 chev pistons that sat to low in the bore to make good power.

From the ADR 27A HX 308 on they were gutless rubbish up to the VL just hopeless. even my mates VC brock was gutless.
Hell even the blue VK Group A SS with the big exhaust and cam and the motor panted red could only just hose my old HQ 308 engine of in top end due to it having a 5 sp box.

The main problem with Holden V8 and 6 cyl is that the rod bolts are rubbish.
There is nothing wrong with the oil pump on the V8 holden, I think the problem is when fools clean the head gaskets up they let bits of it drop into the engine and it goes into the alloy pump and there is your problem or fools who change there oil up to 10K.

[castellan]

As for the single row timing chain that was a joke they were double row in the early V8's and still had the double row gears and C.A.M.S the moronic fools would not let them use a double row chain in racing, now that was so rude, I would of punched someone in the face for it.

[buickman]

Originally Posted by castellan

As for the single row timing chain that was a joke they were double row in the early V8's and still had the double row gears and C.A.M.S the moronic fools would not let them use a double row chain in racing, now that was so rude, I would of punched someone in the face for it.

I thought they all had the double chains until a few years ago a Holden mechanic told me the later 253/308 Motors had single chains. Unusual they would weaken this part of the Motor cost I gather.

[HK1837]

Originally Posted by buickman

I thought they all had the double chains until a few years ago a Holden mechanic told me the later 253/308 Motors had single chains. Unusual they would weaken this part of the Motor cost I gather.

I pulled some untouched red 253's apart in the 80's and they were single row. It will be cost savings, simple as that. All manufacturers would do the same. I have GMH Engineering change notices for all sorts of cost savings measures where the cost savings is as low as 10c, spread that over 200000 cars and it is worth it. One of them was to reduce the number of screws holding the backboards on HX van bucket seats from like 10 to 6. Many will be employee suggestions too. Welding the throttle pedal rather than bolting them will be another, saves 2 x screws.,

[castellan]

Originally Posted by buickman

I thought they all had the double chains until a few years ago a Holden mechanic told me the later 253/308 Motors had single chains. Unusual they would weaken this part of the Motor cost I gather.

I don't think it will weaken to the degree of being a problem in a normal car, as even the gen 3 only nuns a single chain.

The thing is as to C.A.M.S nonsense is that the sprockets are double anyway and that holden did run double chains once.

But the mob who run C.A.M.S must be halfwit fools as some of the rubbish they do just goes to show there total ignorance, just like block prefix difference when there is no difference in the block type at all worth mentioning.

Holden V8 blocks are stronger than the 2 bolt small block chev as the holden can handle more power at the mains, this must be due to the 90 degree design.