HJ Kingswood question -

[4Vman]

Out of curiosity how do you "race" engines? i though you raced cars....

[trippytaka]

Frustratingly slow. But not as bad as the roadpacer :P

[big_landau]

Originally Posted by burnz

slant 6 was rubbish in my expereance allways no5 threw the side.
hemi was better.

as for 253 v 250, no contest 253 wins.
me and my mate's had good battle with 253 v 289 v 283 and they were all very even, hard driven even.

have to disagree on that one.my brother had a stock xb falcon 500 with 250 log motor and column auto and my best mate had a stock hq ls monaro with 253 t bar auto and the xb blew the hq off every time,my mate was shattered and ended up selling the monaro and buying a xb fairmont which he still owns 20 years later.
every 253 i have every been in is a gutless slug.

[cosmo20btt]

A lot of people might have forgotten the old 221 motor (3.6 litre) in the XW s they were an awesome bit of kit for its day.

[big_landau]

Originally Posted by cosmo20btt

A lot of people might have forgotten the old 221 motor (3.6 litre) in the XW s they were an awesome bit of kit for its day.

with a 2v head they went pretty good.

[302 XC]

just to throw a cat amongst the pigeons here
theres a road test here from an old car mag (motor ???, ill look for it )
it punts the 253 LH torrie,cortina 250, centura 245
and hate to tell yas the centura ate the lot !!!
now we all know how good the 250 corties were but there you have it
although the old 250 2v were great , have read somewhere the XE 250 2vs are just as good ???(maybe someone verify)
but sorry to tell some non beleivers here
but give me a good 250 2 barrell over a 253 2 barrell all day everyday
maybe the threads goin a little OT
253s are a slug end of story
maybe start a thread
"do the 253s make a good boat anchor" ??

[FGX-351]

I've had a muck around with a couple of 253 powered Kingswoods and 1st gen commodores with my old XF 250 a few years back now, obviously it doesnt mean to much because of all the variables but they didnt seem at all quicker than 202 powered Holdens of the same vintage.

[big_landau]

Originally Posted by 302 XC

just to throw a cat amongst the pigeons here
theres a road test here from an old car mag (motor ???, ill look for it )
it punts the 253 LH torrie,cortina 250, centura 245
and hate to tell yas the centura ate the lot !!!
now we all know how good the 250 corties were but there you have it
although the old 250 2v were great , have read somewhere the XE 250 2vs are just as good ???(maybe someone verify)
but sorry to tell some non beleivers here
but give me a good 250 2 barrell over a 253 2 barrell all day everyday
maybe the threads goin a little OT
253s are a slug end of story
maybe start a thread
"do the 253s make a good boat anchor" ??

dosnt supprie me with the centura at all.i had a stock te cortina with 250 auto and my cousin had a stock kc centura with a 245 auto and no matter how i tryed the centura blew it away.
best early ford 6 was the 250 2v,one of them in an xy with a toploader and a twin system now they sounded great and went hard.

[Bushbasher]

Well I have to say,I had a couple of 253 HQ's , both 4 speeds, and I can't ever remember being passed by too many 6 cylinder fords with the exception of the Cortinas. I'll admit, from HJ on the ADRs' choked them progressively and they were indeed slugs but a well tuned early 253 went quite well I thought. A mate had a 4dr HG 253 4sp and it was a car length quicker than my HQ at the time.


Bushbasher

[xbxd351]

Originally Posted by big_landau

have to disagree on that one.my brother had a stock xb falcon 500 with 250 log motor and column auto and my best mate had a stock hq ls monaro with 253 t bar auto and the xb blew the hq off every time,my mate was shattered and ended up selling the monaro and buying a xb fairmont which he still owns 20 years later.
every 253 i have every been in is a gutless slug.

I have to agree with big_landou. I used to bash around in a 250 XB column auto when I was doing up my V8s and it surprised me with how much balls it had. Had no trouble leaving 253s behind. Even embarassed a few late model fours

[pottery beige]

i use to have a 253 that put a lot of GT's on toast.. it was in a little LJ torry though... hehehehe..

[ZA-289]

nobody under 30 in this thread eh?

[big_landau]

most young people probably wouldnt even know what a 253 was,most of them dont know what a valiant is thats for sure,although my charger gets a fair bit of attention.

[Mr Hardware]

Originally Posted by ZA-289

nobody under 30 in this thread eh?

do i appear that old?
still half a decade to go!

[Bud Bud]

Originally Posted by cosmo20btt

A lot of people might have forgotten the old 221 motor (3.6 litre) in the XW s they were an awesome bit of kit for its day.

Originally Posted by big_landau

best early ford 6 was the 250 2v,one of them in an xy with a toploader and a twin system now they sounded great and went hard.

It is just not the 250 that sounded so good pre ADR pollution control with a twin system, I had a mate that had an XA van that ran a 221 from an XW, column manual and had Genie extractors and a twin 2" system with side pipes (late 70's). Everything else was stock. This thing sounded awesome. Most people thought it was an eight but it did tend to lose the rumble above 3500 rpm so he never tried to push it though!

Originally Posted by 302 XC

it punts the 253 LH torrie,cortina 250, centura 245
and hate to tell yas the centura ate the lot !!!.........253s are a slug end of story
maybe start a thread
"do the 253s make a good boat anchor" ??

For those of you that are too young or had very little to do with the 245 Hemi six in a Centura well let me tell you as a stocker these were very quick (and bloody thirsty) for their day. I also had a mate that loved to blow away anything he could including Six pot Torries and Cortinas etc. and although he did not beat them all, he also made many stock V8’s work hard for a living as well.

Originally Posted by The-ShowStoPPa

I've had a muck around with a couple of 253 powered Kingswoods and 1st gen commodores with my old XF 250 a few years back now, obviously it doesnt mean to much because of all the variables but they didnt seem at all quicker than 202 powered Holdens of the same vintage.

Originally Posted by Bushbasher

Well I have to say,I had a couple of 253 HQ's , both 4 speeds, and I can't ever remember being passed by too many 6 cylinder fords with the exception of the Cortinas. …..A mate had a 4dr HG 253 4sp and it was a car length quicker than my HQ at the time.
Bushbasher

Also the discrepancy between many 253’s and posted experience also could lay in the fact that there was a hi-comp version of the humble 253 as an option for some reason as well. Standard three on the tree Kingswoods did seem to be gutless but hi-comp 4 on the floor versions easily punched above their weight. Today I even know of an HQ Prem hi-comp 253 auto that is maintained in original condition that actually goes very well for its age.

[trippytaka]

Originally Posted by big_landau

most young people probably wouldnt even know what a 253 was,most of them dont know what a valiant is thats for sure,although my charger gets a fair bit of attention.

253... thank god they don't know what it is. Sound great after dumping the pipes, but my lord they were slow.

[302 XC]

pottery beige,
so how would your 253 torrie go against an xu1 ????
money would be on the xu1
mate used to run flat 13s with a dirty grity stock bottom end 202 LJ
(no nitros or turbo i mite add)
its great to know im not the only semi old dude on here
most under 30 wouldnt know much beyond a hyundai excel with 7" exhaust tail pipe

[mik]

Originally Posted by burnz

slant 6 was rubbish in my expereance allways no5 threw the side.
hemi was better.

as for 253 v 250, no contest 253 wins.
me and my mate's had good battle with 253 v 289 v 283 and they were all very even, hard driven even.

it must have been a tired 289, neither of those would get near my stocker 289, i can remember a friend of the family`s utter dismay, he paid for a brand new 4.2 hj prem to tow his caravan, to say he was ****ed at how gutless it was is an understatement.

[FGX-351]

Originally Posted by Bushbasher

Well I have to say,I had a couple of 253 HQ's , both 4 speeds, and I can't ever remember being passed by too many 6 cylinder fords with the exception of the Cortinas. I'll admit, from HJ on the ADRs' choked them progressively and they were indeed slugs but a well tuned early 253 went quite well I thought. A mate had a 4dr HG 253 4sp and it was a car length quicker than my HQ at the time.


Bushbasher

Thats a very good point aswell, any of the models that i've seen were the emmissions choked versions.

Originally Posted by ZA-289

nobody under 30 in this thread eh?

I'm 22 lol.

[MexicanBatman]

Cmon I'm under 30 and first car was a 69 vf hardtop then and ap6 followed by an ap5. All really nice cars that'd fetch good coin today

Hardtop started out 225 slant but was 245 hemi when I got it then a 265 went in then 5k went into the 265 then in went a 318 she was totaly stock looking but very low dead straight and brandnew interior in factory pattern. Awesome car great as a wedding car. Sadly ex wanted it gone so we could buy houses etc. Day we broke up I brought the ap5 stock but nice and low awesome car that was

[pottery beige]

Originally Posted by 302 XC

pottery beige,
so how would your 253 torrie go against an xu1 ????
money would be on the xu1
mate used to run flat 13s with a dirty grity stock bottom end 202 LJ
(no nitros or turbo i mite add)
its great to know im not the only semi old dude on here
most under 30 wouldnt know much beyond a hyundai excel with 7" exhaust tail pipe

no way a 'stock' XU-1 would run a flat 13...
this is the way my old Torry rolled, we knocked it up when i was 17, the 253 and aussie 4 speed was out of a HQ junker for $500.
suspect it had a little bit of a cam in it as it went real hard for what it was...
say it was an easy low 14sec car..

sleeper style... and Fred the dog....

just sticking up for the little 253's a bit... not all of them are slugs

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by calais

IMHO The little 253 never got the credit it deserved for serving up V8 grunt for six cylinder money for all those years. It was Australias first home grown V8, and was priced where any working man could afford to have one in the shed.

Just like Ford's flathead which ignited the American love affair of the V8, the Holden 253 and 308, should get some kind of recognition for dispensing V8 grunt to the Australian masses!

Fair enough they might not have the cachet amongst the ford fans here on the Forums like the Mighty Cleveland, Humble Windsor and the Boss, but a little credit where credit is due perhaps?

This is the funniest post of the thread. The 253 was utter garbage, commonly referred to as the Claytons V8. The V8 you had when you didn't really have a V8. You only need to look up the acceleration (I use that term loosely) figures to see how much of a gutless waste of iron it really was. Hosed by 6's of the day and chewed juice like a supertanker.

Why the hell anyone chose a 253 over a 308 is beyond me, the price difference would have been bugger all.

[xy500]

Originally Posted by calais

Err. Regardless of your previous experience, I don't believe anyone has made such outrageous calls in this thread.

And, just to clarify, I used the term "grunt" loosely.

how many ford blokes would talk up a 308? you see it all the time in street machine readers rides - blokes with fair on stock engines claiming enormous power (never dynoed though). just idiots.
i'd take a 202 or even a 186 over a 253 any day.

[MexicanBatman]

as were posting pics here, heres my old girl

with a mild 265 she dragged off the local pannel wreckers new VYss 6m 245kw ute 3 times in a row by 2 carlengths to 80km/h all on the crappy old bw35 auto that was down about 3L fluid which was on the driveway at the time (ute later ran 13.6)

my proudest ever moment was when i came across a skyline r31 running a VL 5.0 wagon, there on the front row, i was behind the VL, light went green, off they went, then VL drivers face turned upside down when i pulled alongside passing him..... then the look was priceless as i passed him and so did the trailer i was pulling with mates DR200 and a complete diff (for my car which died that afternoon) LOL


me and my mate were in tears, they didnt line up again at next red light, damn it...

below is the old AP5 with the $100 slant totally stock push button auto 1bbl that was faster than VT commos.... sadly both cars are long gone.... the AP5 was a much better daily driver, freeking awesome it was and better on fuel than my 2004 magna that replaced it LOL

[BradZ]

In regards to the 0-100 times, i feel bad for Holden just saying this but, my paddock bomb ( nans old car) an 86 Mazda 626 4cyl does 0-100 in 11.8??? That cant be right? If so, its faster than a 253??

[calais]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

This is the funniest post of the thread. The 253 was utter garbage, commonly referred to as the Claytons V8. The V8 you had when you didn't really have a V8. You only need to look up the acceleration (I use that term loosely) figures to see how much of a gutless waste of iron it really was. Hosed by 6's of the day and chewed juice like a supertanker.

Why the hell anyone chose a 253 over a 308 is beyond me, the price difference would have been bugger all.

Professor Farnsworth posted a thread today in the Bar detailing the problem with a thread on such a topic and then antagonistic posts like this.

As for this thread, I'm out.

[pottery beige]

well nothing will beat a 253 at doing thong clapper's.. 253 FTW!!..

[pottery beige]

lol.. i'm a Ford dude and i'll talk up the 308... a solid cammed, standard valved 308 will punch well above it's weight, run 11sec no prob's.. hahaha..

[big_landau]

nice vals andrewg6e
a 308 in a torana or vb to vl commodore went fairly well,torana was actually very quick.only way to get a 253 going would be to put it into a torana but in a full size car mmmm i dont think so.
stock xu1 i think only done a 16 sec 1/4 i have driven an original lj xu1 in the 90's and to me it wasnt very fast but it handled very very well even on dirt roads.funny thing one night 4 of us were going to the lakeland downs pub and the hoodlining got sucked off the roof at about 110mph that was a bit scary lol.

[castellan]

Originally Posted by Boosh Brus

I googled as well and got:

# 253 HJ Premier Tri-Matic automatic:

* 1st: 56 mph (90 km/h)
* 2nd: 83 mph (134 km/h)
* 3rd: n/a
* 0-100 km/h: 14.4 seconds
* Standing Quarter Mile (400 metres): 19.3 seconds

# 308 V8 HJ Monaro GTS four-door Tri-Matic automatic:

* 1st: 56 mph (90 km/h)
* 2nd: 91 mph (147 km/h)
* 3rd: 113 mph (182 km/h)
* 0-100 km/h: 10.4 seconds
* Standing Quarter Mile (400 metres): 18.1 seconds

# 308 V8 Statesman Caprice Tri-Matic automatic:

* 1st: 48 mph (77 km/h)
* 2nd: 82 mph (132 km/h)
* 3rd: 113 mph (182 km/h)
* 0-100 km/h: 13.4 seconds
* Standing Quarter Mile (400 metres): 17.9 seconds

# 308 V8 Statesman Caprice Turbo-Hydramatic automatic:

* 1st: 56 mph (90 km/h)
* 2nd: 93 mph (150 km/h)
* 3rd: 112 mph (180 km/h)
* 0-100 km/h: 11.2 seconds
* Standing Quarter Mile (400 metres): 17.6 seconds

If we are to be realistic about these cars performance being in std factory spec.
Those old test magazine testings were not always good examples.
They were not tuned before hand.
You can always get a slack motor or a good one in the same type of motor.
In the above test it does not say what diff ratios are used, the temperature of the day. or a wet day. how many miles it had up on it. who was driving it ect.
I have seen test where one driver could get 15 sec over the 400m and a other driver on the same day could only get 16 sec over the 400m.

But having said that. i would have to say i was some one who was out looking for and experimenting with basically stock type cars mainly.
And how to tune them to perform there best. i would say am not prejudice because i don't care, the truth is the truth.
A 202 HQ performed about the same as a 250 XY-B only the 250 had more low down torque. a 250 2V went better but could not cut it with a VG 245 2 barrel.
A 253 was about the same performance as a 302, why because most 302's only had a 2 barrel carb and the falcon was bigger heavier car. but the 302 had more torque down low.
The 308 was gutless if it only had a single exhaust it performed about the same as a 253 only with more torque down low. but if a 308 had a twin exhaust even the 351 2V with 4 barrel carb had to look out. but the 351 had more torque.
But if you had a GT 4V 351, well a 308 had nothing on it.