top 10 worst engines made
mmal3...@hotmail.com
2)holden gen 3 and upwards
3)bmw m3 v6
4)nissan v6
5)toyota 2.7 litre 4 cylinder
6)audi v6
7)saab 2.3 litre
8)mercedes v8
9)holden 202
10)volvo inline 5 engine
Trevor Wilson
<mmal3...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:351fa9d2-0f42-4c7a...@v39g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
> 1)holden 3.8 and 3.6 litre v6
**Nope. Rough running, but VERY economical (I regularly better 7.5L/100km
with mine) and quite reliable. In fact, the VP was the fastest accelerating,
most economical iron V6 Commodore.
> 2)holden gen 3 and upwards
> 3)bmw m3 v6
> 4)nissan v6
**Tell that to any late model 300Z owner. It is, by all reports, a very
impressive engine. Perhaps, not by 2008 standards, but, by 1990 standards it
was a beaut.
> 5)toyota 2.7 litre 4 cylinder
> 6)audi v6
> 7)saab 2.3 litre
> 8)mercedes v8
> 9)holden 202
**Agricultural, but reliable and VERY tough.
> 10)volvo inline 5 engine
11) The 1.6 Litre pushrod engine fitted to Australian Ford Escorts, after
1976. An absolute POS, which had kludges fitted all around the engine bay to
prevent problems (which still occurred anyway). It was pitifully hopeless,
compared to the crappy 1.3 Litre it replaced. In fact, I'd put this at #1.
--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
Avery
>1)holden 3.8 and 3.6 litre v6
>2)holden gen 3 and upwards
>3)bmw m3 v6
Did BMW ever make a V6? I don't recall it. The M3 6 cylinder engines were some of the highest output
non turbo production engines ever made.
>4)nissan v6
>5)toyota 2.7 litre 4 cylinder
>6)audi v6
>7)saab 2.3 litre
>8)mercedes v8
Which one? there have been an awful lot of them over the years. I kind of liked the 3.5 and the 6.9
of the 1960s
>9)holden 202
>10)volvo inline 5 engine
The Holden "starffire 4" is not on the list. The list is bunkum without it.
Dan----
> On Thu, 25 Sep 2008 16:54:13 -0700 (PDT), mmal3...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>>1)holden 3.8 and 3.6 litre v6
>>2)holden gen 3 and upwards
>>3)bmw m3 v6
>
> Did BMW ever make a V6? I don't recall it. The M3 6 cylinder engines
> were some of the highest output non turbo production engines ever made.
Bmw made a V6 only in mmal380vrx's stupid little mind He wouldn't know if
an engine was up him until someone turned the key. :-p.
--
Regards
Dan
hippo
3) BMW M3 V *8* or *straight* 6?
I don't agree that some of your choices should be there *at all*; but what
about these?
Nissan 3L tdi complete with melting pistons.
Kia Rover KV6 which seemed to have even more problems than the same engine
in its other applications.
Opel/Vauxhall V6 with it's 40K mile service interval for the cam belt
(unless it failed prematurely). IIRC, it caused *far* more Saab engine
probs than the 2.3 ever could.
I agree with Trevor about the 1.6, but I saw a few flogged then grenaded
1.3s in the UK too!
..and let us not forget that epitome of utter reliability and driving
nirvana, the Triumph Herald.... :-)
Fair's fair though: if you thrash/ignore/neglect most modern engines,
they'll still probably provide some sort of service for over 100,000Km,
which exceeds the life without rebuilds of many older generation engines,
even when they *were* serviced and treated well.
--
Message posted using http://www.talkaboutautos.com/group/aus.cars/
More information at http://www.talkaboutautos.com/faq.html
Brad
--
Brad Leyden
6° 43.5816' S 146° 59.3097' E WGS84
To mail spam is really hot but please reply to thread so all may benefit (or
laugh at my mistakes)
>
the_dawggie
> 1)holden 3.8 and 3.6 litre v6
> 2)holden gen 3 and upwards
> 3)bmw m3 v6
> 4)nissan v6
> 5)toyota 2.7 litre 4 cylinder
One in Prado and 'lux? Huh?
> 6)audi v6
> 7)saab 2.3 litre
> 8)mercedes v8
> 9)holden 202
> 10)volvo inline 5 engine
You omitted the smoke cloud known as Mitsubishi Colt.
--
Kipland.
OzOne
<jo...@chopthis.shoal.net.au> wrote:
>..and let us not forget that epitome of utter reliability and driving
>nirvana, the Triumph Herald.... :-)
>
Had 2 Heralds in our family, one was my sister's first car, a coupe
with twin carbs no less.
They were both as reliable as any car of their era, and actually a lot
of fun to drive.
My sister's one became a Canstel Clubman.
OzOne of the three twins
I welcome you to Crackerbox Palace.
Jeßus
No Rover/Leyland engines listed!
D Walford
> The Holden "starffire 4" is not on the list. The list is bunkum without it.
The Camira 1.6lt would give the Starfire a run for its money as would
any of the engines in a Mitsubishi Sigma, the 2.6lt was particularly
horrible.
Daryl
Noddy
> 1)holden 3.8 and 3.6 litre v6
Of course, we all know this is nothing other than trolling bullshit put up
by a 14 year old school kid with nothing better to do other than wank over
his old man's copies of Reader's Digest and try to amuse himself around
here.
However, my list of the top ten worst engines ever made (for what it's
worth, and in no particular order) would be:
1: JB Camira engine.
2: Any Mistubishi 4 cylinder up to the late 90's (and quite a few beyond
that).
3: Any Jaguar engine.
4: Ford Telstar/Mazda 626 engine from the '80's.
5: Ford Transit V4.
6: Holden starfire 4.
7: Opel 1.9 4 cylinder.
8: Mazda E2200 diesel.
9: Volvo V6 engine.
10: Any Passat engine from the '70's.
Other notables that didn't make the finals would be any Austin
Tasman/Kimberly 6 cylinder, Leyland 4 cylinder as found in Marina's and 6 &
8 cylinders as found in P-76's, late model Australian Clevelands, any 253,
5.4 litre Ford modular V8 and the current Ford Focus engine.
Also included, again for what it's worth and in no particular order, is my
top ten best engines, which are:
1: GenIII/IV V8.
2: Any BMW M3 engine.
3: Subaru 3.0 Liberty engine.
4: Current Maxima V6 engine.
5: Small block Chev.
6: Big Block Chev.
7: FE series Ford big block (and the 427 side oiler in particular).
8: Holden Red Motor.
9: Valiant slant 6.
10: Valiant hemi 6 cylinder.
Other notables would be the Datsun 1000/1200, Mini 1275 Cooper S engine,
Ford Boss 302 V8, Willys "Go Devil", Ford flathead V8, Chrysler Hemi V8,
Ford "shotgun" Boss 429 V8, BDA Cosworth V8, Repco Brabham V8 and last but
not least the humble Harley Davidson WLA side valve.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Jeßus
I helped change a clutch in an early Camira years ago. Took about six
fucking hours as I recall to complete the job. I think the book time was
six to eight hours, from memory.
sg...@hotmail.com
> <mmal380...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:351fa9d2-0f42-4c7a...@v39g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
>
> > 1)holden 3.8 and 3.6 litre v6
> > 2)holden gen 3 and upwards
> > 3)bmw m3 v6
> > 4)nissan v6
> > 5)toyota 2.7 litre 4 cylinder
> > 6)audi v6
> > 7)saab 2.3 litre
> > 8)mercedes v8
> > 9)holden 202
> > 10)volvo inline 5 engine
>
> Of course, we all know this is nothing other than trolling bullshit put up
> by a 14 year old school kid with nothing better to do other than wank over
> his old man's copies of Reader's Digest and try to amuse himself around
> here.
>
> However, my list of the top ten worst engines ever made (for what it's
> worth, and in no particular order) would be:
>
> 1: JB Camira engine.
> 2: Any Mistubishi 4 cylinder up to the late 90's (and quite a few beyond
> that).
> 3: Any Jaguar engine.
Oh, come on, Nod, the XK motors were good in their time - it's just
that their time was in the '50's. It's not the engine's fault they
couldn't be bothered replacing it for 40 years.
> 4: Ford Telstar/Mazda 626 engine from the '80's.
> 5: Ford Transit V4.
> 6: Holden starfire 4.
> 7: Opel 1.9 4 cylinder.
> 8: Mazda E2200 diesel.
> 9: Volvo V6 engine.
Which is apparently not a bad thing in it's Renault incarnations...
> 10: Any Passat engine from the '70's.
>
> Other notables that didn't make the finals would be any Austin
> Tasman/Kimberly 6 cylinder, Leyland 4 cylinder as found in Marina's and 6 &
> 8 cylinders as found in P-76's, late model Australian Clevelands, any 253,
> 5.4 litre Ford modular V8 and the current Ford Focus engine.
>
> Also included, again for what it's worth and in no particular order, is my
> top ten best engines, which are:
>
> 1: GenIII/IV V8.
> 2: Any BMW M3 engine.
> 3: Subaru 3.0 Liberty engine.
> 4: Current Maxima V6 engine.
> 5: Small block Chev.
> 6: Big Block Chev.
> 7: FE series Ford big block (and the 427 side oiler in particular).
> 8: Holden Red Motor.
Do you mean 6 or 8, or both?
> 9: Valiant slant 6.
> 10: Valiant hemi 6 cylinder.
No Chrysler V8's in the top 10?
>
> Other notables would be the Datsun 1000/1200, Mini 1275 Cooper S engine,
> Ford Boss 302 V8, Willys "Go Devil", Ford flathead V8, Chrysler Hemi V8,
> Ford "shotgun" Boss 429 V8, BDA Cosworth V8,
ANY BD Cosworth motor - the 4 pots are sensational, too.
> Repco Brabham V8 and last but
> not least the humble Harley Davidson WLA side valve.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Noddy.
I think somewhere in there a mention has to go to a Toyota 4AGE -
although it may owe a bit to Cosworth for inspiration, it was a
superbly engineered motor to turn up in a shopping trolley.
Cheers,
Steve
Avery
If you lined up a 1.6 Camira and a Sunbird for a drag, I don't think anyone in the world would
care. Include a 4 cyl Commodore and people would really laugh.
Aahh, the 2.6 Astron. Counter rotating balance shafts that didn't, and chain guides that fell apart
causing instant and total destruction.
Avery
>Don't feed the TROLL
Unfortunatley the TROLL has accidenrally hit on a very interesting topic.
OzOne
<dwal...@internode.on.net> wrote:
And unfortunately Athol has such a complex that he is unable to
recognise the fact.
John_H
>
>Other notables that didn't make the finals would be any Austin
>Tasman/Kimberly 6 cylinder, Leyland 4 cylinder as found in Marina's and 6 &
>8 cylinders as found in P-76's, late model Australian Clevelands, any 253,
>5.4 litre Ford modular V8 and the current Ford Focus engine.
Isn't the current Ford Focus engine a Volvo... or is that only the
turbo model?
--
John H
George W Frost
"Noddy" <m...@home.com> wrote in message
news:48dc8ac1$0$70637$c30e...@lon-reader.news.telstra.net...
Oi !, where is my Ford 5.4L ?
RainbowWarrior
news:6k2pfoF...@mid.individual.net...
More obviously completly fictional bullshit from or trol Oz380Pest
He completely missed,
Saturn1400 & 1600.
Astron 1800,2000,2600
Astron II 2600
The Magna V6
The 380 V6
Triton Diesel,
Bascally anything with a Misushity badge on it.
Las decent block to come out of a dealer with their badge on it was the 1981
265 Hemi
hate'em
5l hilux
any ford explorer
Noddy
<sg...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3f861c25-5a18-4a0b...@b38g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> Oh, come on, Nod, the XK motors were good in their time - it's just
> that their time was in the '50's. It's not the engine's fault they
> couldn't be bothered replacing it for 40 years.
Lol :)
I never thought they were good period, and had a lot of issues that were
present from day one. The *really* sad part is that those issues were left
unchecked for 40 years :)
> Which is apparently not a bad thing in it's Renault incarnations...
Maybe, but it was appalling in Volvo green livery.
> Do you mean 6 or 8, or both?
The Six. I don't care for the eight much at all.
> No Chrysler V8's in the top 10?
The only one I'd pick would be the 426 Hemi, and as good an engine as it was
I'd prefer a 427 Ford.
> ANY BD Cosworth motor - the 4 pots are sensational, too.
They are indeed.
> I think somewhere in there a mention has to go to a Toyota 4AGE -
> although it may owe a bit to Cosworth for inspiration, it was a
> superbly engineered motor to turn up in a shopping trolley.
Fair call.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Noddy
"George W Frost" <george...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:IU0Dk.832$sc2...@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> Oi !, where is my Ford 5.4L ?
It's in the first part of the list, amongst the other "bad notables" :)
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Noddy
"John_H" <john...@inbox.com> wrote in message
news:4q5pd49hnrloqsd32...@4ax.com...
> Isn't the current Ford Focus engine a Volvo... or is that only the
> turbo model?
Can't say.
I've driven a couple of the non turbo variants, and the engines are
absolutely appalling.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
atec77
> OzOne wrote:
>
>> Had 2 Heralds in our family, one was my sister's first car, a coupe
>> with twin carbs no less.
>> They were both as reliable as any car of their era, and actually a lot
>> of fun to drive.
>> My sister's one became a Canstel Clubman.
>>
>
>
> The Triumph Herald was a complete cunt of a car, its abject
> miserableness exceeded only by that of the Triumph Spitfire.
>
> How's that alloy Dino again OzLiar?
Funny thing is when I had my herald and the spitfire they were both
relatively new and gave little trouble once the rust was fixed
both the wolsly's were pretty good as well but required regular hair
spray on the ignition or they would just stop in the wet ( like a mini)
the holden 4 pot in the little toyota was however a pariah and I would
certainly wish such shite on several posters here.
Noddy
"Blue Heeler" <wo...@bark.net> wrote in message
news:6k3lrtF...@mid.individual.net...
> Once again Ozwald's experience runs counter to the rest of the world.
You're surprised by this? :)
> The Triumph Herald was a complete cunt of a car, its abject
> miserableness exceeded only by that of the Triumph Spitfire.
Absolutely.
The Herald was not only a mechanical nightmare, but it was also one of the
most evil handling and deadly cars ever built. They were an *appalling*
vehicle that should never have seen the light of day, even in the
politically incorrect 1950's.
> How's that alloy Dino again OzLiar?
The world's only aluminium one? :)
--
Regards,
Noddy.
ausmartin
wrote:
> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@_SPAMBLOCK_rageaudio.com.au> wrote in message
>
> news:6k2pfoF...@mid.individual.net...
>
>
>
>
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
LOL You got that right !
Besides the 3800 Buik Turbo aka 3.8 V6 series II ecotec won many
awards and was awarded best engine 1997
NOTE Pre-pubecent OZ - Not One Mitsubishi over all these years LOL !
Ward's 10 Best Engines
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Ward's 10 Best Engines is an annual list of the ten "best" automobile
engines available in the U.S. market that are selected by Ward's
AutoWorld magazine. The list was started in 1994 and has been drawn
every year since then. Engines must be available in regular-production
vehicles on sale in the U.S. market no later than the first quarter of
the year. To be eligible, the engine also must be available in a
vehicle with a base price of no more than $54,000 (for current 2007
list). During a 2-month testing period, Ward's editors evaluate each
engine according to a number of objective and subjective criteria in
everyday driving situations – there is no instrumented testing. The
selection takes into account power and torque output, noise, vibration
and harshness (NVH) levels, technical relevance and basic comparative
numbers. Each engine competes against all others.
The Nissan VQ engine is the only engine to have been present on the
list every year since the competition’s inception in 1995.
Maker Country Displacement Type Engine
2008[1]
Audi 2.0 L I4 FSI turbocharged DOHC
BMW 3.0 L I6 N54B30 twin turbo
Mercedes-Benz 3.0 L V6 Bluetec Turbodiesel
Ford 4.6 L V8 Modular 3V SOHC
General Motors 3.6 L V6 High-Feature
General Motors 6.0 L V8 Vortec OHV Hybrid
Honda 3.5 L V6 J35
Mazda 2.3 L I4 DISI turbocharged DOHC
Nissan 3.7 L V6 VQ37VHR
Toyota 3.5 L V6 2GR-FSE
2007[2]
Audi 2.0 L I4 FSI turbocharged DOHC
BMW 3.0 L I6 N52B30
BMW 3.0 L I6 N54B30 twin turbo
Mercedes-Benz 3.0 L V6 Bluetec Turbodiesel
Chrysler 5.7 L V8 Hemi Magnum
Ford 4.6 L V8 Modular 3V SOHC
Ford 3.5 L V6 Duratec 35
Mazda 2.3 L I4 DISI turbocharged DOHC
Nissan 3.5 L V6 VQ35HR
Toyota 3.5 L V6 2GR-FSE
2006[3]
Audi 2 L I4 FSI turbocharged DOHC
Audi 4.2 L V8 DOHC
BMW 3.0 L I6 Model N52B30 Naturally Aspirated, magnesium-aluminium
block, Double-VANOS, Valvetronic
Chrysler 5.7 L V8 Hemi Magnum
Ford 4.6 L V8 Modular 3V SOHC
General Motors 2 L I4 Ecotec LSJ supercharged DOHC
General Motors 2.8 L V6 High-Feature turbocharged DOHC
Mazda 2.3 L I4 MZR DISI turbocharged DOHC
Nissan 3.5 L V6 VQ35DE
Toyota 3.5 L V6 DOHC 2GR-FSE
2005[4]
Audi 4.2 L V8 DOHC
Audi 3.2 L V6 DOHC FSI
Mercedes-Benz 3.2 L I6 DOHC CDI Turbodiesel
Chrysler 5.7 L V8 Hemi
Ford 4.6 L V8 Modular 3V SOHC
General Motors 4.2 L I6 Atlas LL8
Honda/Acura 3.5 L V6 J35
Honda 3.0 L V6 J30 IMA Hybrid
Mazda 1.3 L Wankel engine Renesis
Nissan 3.5 L V6 VQ35DE
2004
Audi 4.2 L V8 DOHC
BMW 3.2 L I6 S54
Chrysler 5.7 L V8 Hemi
Cummins 5.9 L I6 Cummins turbodiesel
General Motors 4.2 L I6 Atlas LL8
Honda 3.0 L V6 J30
Mazda 1.3 L Wankel engine Renesis
Nissan 3.5 L V6 VQ35DE
Subaru 2.5 L H4 STi EJ257
Toyota 1.5 L I4 1NZ-FXE Hybrid Synergy Drive
2003
BMW 3.2 L I6 S54
BMW 3.0 L I6 M54
Chrysler 5.7 L V8 Hemi
Ford 6.0 L V8 Power Stroke turbodiesel
General Motors 4.2 L I6 Atlas LL8
Honda 2.0 L I4 K20
Honda 3.0 L V6 J30
BMW MINI 1.6 L I4 supercharged
Nissan 3.5 L V6 VQ35DE
Volkswagen 1.8 L I4 DOHC turbo
2002[5]
BMW 3.2 L I6 S54
BMW 3.0 L I6 M54
DaimlerChrysler / 5.0 L V8 SOHC
Ford 5.4 L V8 Modular SOHC
General Motors 4.2 L I6 Atlas LL8
Isuzu 6.6 L V8 Duramax Turbodiesel
Honda 2.0 L I4 K20
Nissan 3.5 L V6 VQ35DE
Porsche 2.7 L Flat-6 DOHC
Volkswagen 1.8 L I4 DOHC turbo
2001[6]
Audi 1.8 L I4 5-valve turbo
Audi 2.7 L V6 twin-turbo
BMW 3.0 L I6 M54
DaimlerChrysler / 3.2 L V6 SOHC
Ford 5.4 L V8 Triton
Isuzu 6.6 L V8 Duramax Turbodiesel
Honda 2.0 L I4 F20C
Nissan 3.0 L V6 VQ30DE
Porsche 2.7 L Flat-6 DOHC (Used in Boxster models)
Toyota 1.5 L I4 1NZ-FXE Toyota Hybrid System
2000[7]
Audi 2.7 L V6 twin turbo
BMW 3.2 L I6 DOHC
DaimlerChrysler / 3.2 L V6 SOHC
Jaguar 3.9 L V8 AJ-V8
Ford 5.4 L V8 Triton
General Motors 3.5 L V6 DOHC LX5
Honda 2.0 L I4 F20C
Nissan 3.0 L V6 VQ30DE
Porsche 3.2 L Flat-6 DOHC
Toyota 4.0 L V8 1UZ-FE DOHC
1999
Alfa Romeo 2.0 L I4 TwinSpark VVT DOHC[citation needed]
BMW 3.2 L I6 DOHC
Chrysler 4.7 L V8 PowerTech SOHC
General Motors 3.5 L V6 DOHC LX5
Mercedes-Benz 3.2 L V6 SOHC
Nissan 3.0 L V6 VQ30DE
General Motors 5.7 L V8 LS1
Toyota 4.0 L V8 1UZ-FE DOHC
1998
BMW 3.2 L I6 DOHC
BMW 2.5 L I6 M52
Ford 2.5 L V6 Duratec SVT
Ford 5.4 L V8 Triton
General Motors 5.7 L V8 LS1
Mazda 2.3 L V6 KJ-ZEM
Mercedes-Benz 3.2 L V6 SOHC
Nissan 3.0 L V6 VQ30DE
Toyota 4.0 L V8 1UZ-FE DOHC
Volkswagen 1.8 L I4 DOHC turbo
1997
Audi 1.8 L I4 1.8T, DOHC 5-valve turbo
Ford 5.4 L V8 Triton
General Motors 3.8 L V6 3800 Series II
Nissan 3.0 L V6 VQ30DE
Mazda 2.3 L V6 KJ-ZEM
Volkswagen 1.9 L I4 TDI
BMW 3.2 L I6 DOHC Double-Vanos
BMW 4.4 L V8 DOHC
Ford 4.6 L V8 DOHC
Cadillac 4.6 L V8 Northstar, DOHC
1996
BMW 4.0 L V8 Quad-Cam 32V M60
BMW 2.8 L I6 M52
Ford 2.5 L V6 Duratec 25
Ford 4.6 L V8 Modular DOHC
General Motors 3.8 L V6 3800 Series II
General Motors 4.6 L V8 Northstar
Honda 2.2 L I4 F22
Mazda 2.3 L V6 KJ-ZEM
Nissan 3.0 L V6 VQ30DE
Saab 2.3 L I4 LPT B234
Toyota 3.0 L V6 1MZ-FE DOHC
1995
BMW 740IL 4.0 L V8 Quad-Cam 32V M60
BMW 2.8 L I6 M52
Ford 2.5 L V6 Duratec 25
General Motors 3.8 L V6 3800 Series II
General Motors 4.6 L V8 Northstar
Honda 2.2 L I4 F22
Mazda 2.3 L V6 KJ-ZEM
Nissan 3.0 L V6 VQ30DE
Saab 2.3 L I4 LPT B234
Volkswagen 2.8 L V6 VR6
20th Century
BMW I6 M06
Cadillac V8 L-Head
Ford I4 Model T
Ford V8 Flathead
General Motors V6 3800
General Motors V8 Small-block
Honda I4 ED CVCC
Porsche Flat-6
Toyota/Lexus V8 UZ
Volkswagen Flat-4 E-motor
Mines fine - No Dramas & very economical
Avery
I have to agree. The XK engine was awesome in 1948, it was still awesome in 1958, by 1968 it was
getting a little tired, but still produced excellent performance. Unfortunately the build quality
was abysmal. It should have been replaced by 1978 but of course it continued on till , what, early
'90s. By then it was just a joke, but there is no way it should be included in a list of bad
engines.
the_dawggie
> <mmal380...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
Whats wrong with ToyCo 5L?
--
Kipland.
jonz
Brad wrote:
> Don't feed the TROLL
you not hungry?????????
>
Avery
A couple of good lists there Noddy, cannot realy disagree with any of them with much passion,
although the inclusion of the Cosworth and Repco engines is hardly fair.
Here's a good one you missed - the Daimler SP250 V8 from the early '60s. What a gem.
D Walford
Thats not that bad for a FWD car, standard time to do a clutch on an
Austin 1800 was 10hrs to remove and replace the engine/trans plus
another hour or two to dismantle the transfer gears and replace the clutch.
I've done one in a day but it was bloody long days work.
Daryl
D Walford
> I think somewhere in there a mention has to go to a Toyota 4AGE -
> although it may owe a bit to Cosworth for inspiration, it was a
> superbly engineered motor to turn up in a shopping trolley.
I'd put it at no 4 or 5 on Noddys list, they are a brilliant engine.
Daryl
D Walford
> On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 16:53:59 +1000, D Walford <dwal...@internode.on.net> wrote:
>
>> Avery wrote:
>>
>>> The Holden "starffire 4" is not on the list. The list is bunkum without it.
>> The Camira 1.6lt would give the Starfire a run for its money as would
>> any of the engines in a Mitsubishi Sigma, the 2.6lt was particularly
>> horrible.
>>
>>
>>
>> Daryl
>
>
> If you lined up a 1.6 Camira and a Sunbird for a drag, I don't think anyone in the world would
> care. Include a 4 cyl Commodore and people would really laugh.
By "run for its money" I meant that in the competition for being the
worst engine the Camira would be as bad as the Starfire.
>
> Aahh, the 2.6 Astron. Counter rotating balance shafts that didn't, and chain guides that fell apart
> causing instant and total destruction.
Lack of performance and terrible fuel economy as well.
Daryl
D Walford
> On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 16:53:59 +1000, D Walford
> <dwal...@internode.on.net> wrote:
>
>> Avery wrote:
>>
>>> The Holden "starffire 4" is not on the list. The list is bunkum without it.
>> The Camira 1.6lt would give the Starfire a run for its money as would
>> any of the engines in a Mitsubishi Sigma, the 2.6lt was particularly
>> horrible.
>>
>>
>>
>> Daryl
>
> And unfortunately Athol has such a complex that he is unable to
> recognise the fact.
Whats Athol got to do with what I posted?
Daryl
D Walford
>
> Other notables that didn't make the finals would be any Austin
> Tasman/Kimberly 6 cylinder, Leyland 4 cylinder as found in Marina's and 6 &
> 8 cylinders as found in P-76's, late model Australian Clevelands, any 253,
> 5.4 litre Ford modular V8 and the current Ford Focus engine.
Whats the problem with the Focus engine?
Daryl
D Walford
> "Blue Heeler" <wo...@bark.net> wrote in message
> news:6k3lrtF...@mid.individual.net...
>
>> Once again Ozwald's experience runs counter to the rest of the world.
>
> You're surprised by this? :)
>
>> The Triumph Herald was a complete cunt of a car, its abject
>> miserableness exceeded only by that of the Triumph Spitfire.
>
> Absolutely.
>
> The Herald was not only a mechanical nightmare, but it was also one of the
> most evil handling and deadly cars ever built. They were an *appalling*
> vehicle that should never have seen the light of day, even in the
> politically incorrect 1950's.
The transverse leaf spring rear suspension wasn't great.
For a joke a mate fitted a 289 V8 into a Herald, if you think the
original was evil handling then the mates V8 version was positively scary:-)
Oddly enough Herald front suspension uprights are common on Clubmans,
they are fitted to my mates Haynes Clubman race car which has
sensational handling.
Daryl
Daryl
atec77
and lowering 50mm which cured all but the most determined handling
faults and they could be driven with relative impunity...
Noddy
"Avery" <Av...@home.sydney.au> wrote in message
news:decpd4t1a7725784u...@4ax.com...
> I have to agree. The XK engine was awesome in 1948, it was still awesome
> in 1958, by 1968 it was
> getting a little tired, but still produced excellent performance.
> Unfortunately the build quality
> was abysmal. It should have been replaced by 1978 but of course it
> continued on till , what, early
> '90s. By then it was just a joke, but there is no way it should be
> included in a list of bad
> engines.
I included it in *my* list of bad engines because it was incredibly
unreliable, and had all the quality of something that was built in a
sheltered worlshop.
Which is was :)
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Noddy
> A couple of good lists there Noddy, cannot realy disagree with any of
> them with much passion,
> although the inclusion of the Cosworth and Repco engines is hardly fair.
I wasn't limiting it simply to road going car engines, which is why I
included those, the Go Devil and the Harley side valve.
> Here's a good one you missed - the Daimler SP250 V8 from the early '60s.
> What a gem.
I never really thought they were much, but then again I've always hated
anything Jaguar/Daimler with a passion :)
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Noddy
"D Walford" <dwal...@internode.on.net> wrote in message
news:fOadnduWd-jVV0HV...@posted.internode...
> Whats the problem with the Focus engine?
It's *woefully* breathless, noisy and harsh.
I'm not kidding, I've driven a couple of current model ones now and they're
absolutely shitfull. The engines make a 10 year old Hyundai Excel look race
car by comparison.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Noddy
"atec77" <atec77...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:gbij72$7g2$1...@aioe.org...
> Common alteration was a motorcycle coil over shock fitment to the rear and
> lowering 50mm which cured all but the most determined handling faults and
> they could be driven with relative impunity...
Yeah, but then why would you *want* to?
The things made almost as much power as a milshake maker.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
jonz
atec77 wrote:
> Blue Heeler wrote:
>> OzOne wrote:
>>
>>> Had 2 Heralds in our family, one was my sister's first car, a coupe
>>> with twin carbs no less.
>>> They were both as reliable as any car of their era, and actually a lot
>>> of fun to drive.
>>> My sister's one became a Canstel Clubman.
>>>
>>
>> Once again Ozwald's experience runs counter to the rest of the world.
>>
>> The Triumph Herald was a complete cunt of a car, its abject
>> miserableness exceeded only by that of the Triumph Spitfire.
>>
>> How's that alloy Dino again OzLiar?
> Funny thing is when I had my herald and the spitfire they were both
> relatively new and gave little trouble once the rust was fixed
> both the wolsly's were pretty good
hmmmmm,pray tell,.... wtf is a
*wolsly* oh knowlegeable one...????.....you in a parallel universe
perchance..????
OzOne
>OzOne wrote:
>
>>
>> Had 2 Heralds in our family, one was my sister's first car, a coupe
>> with twin carbs no less.
>> They were both as reliable as any car of their era, and actually a lot
>> of fun to drive.
>> My sister's one became a Canstel Clubman.
>>
>
>Once again Ozwald's experience runs counter to the rest of the world.
No, only yours and Dod's.....I'd suggest that you never owned nor
drove one.
>
>The Triumph Herald was a complete cunt of a car, its abject
>miserableness exceeded only by that of the Triumph Spitfire.
>
>How's that alloy Dino again OzLiar?
Never had an alloy Dino...though I would have loved one.
Mine had alloy door skins and rear deck.
You feel better when you invent stuff about me that didn't happen?
Make you feel like something better than the dogshit that you are?
OzOne of the three twins
I welcome you to Crackerbox Palace.
OzOne
>
>"Blue Heeler" <wo...@bark.net> wrote in message
>news:6k3lrtF...@mid.individual.net...
>
>> Once again Ozwald's experience runs counter to the rest of the world.
>
>You're surprised by this? :)
>
>> The Triumph Herald was a complete cunt of a car, its abject
>> miserableness exceeded only by that of the Triumph Spitfire.
>
>Absolutely.
>
>The Herald was not only a mechanical nightmare, but it was also one of the
>most evil handling and deadly cars ever built. They were an *appalling*
>vehicle that should never have seen the light of day, even in the
>politically incorrect 1950's.
Nightmare?
Actually they were incredibly simple, I'm surprised that someone of
your vast experience had trouble with them!
>
>> How's that alloy Dino again OzLiar?
>
>The world's only aluminium one? :)
Yeah..it exists in the Heelers mind....just like that announcement
that the 380AWD was going into production exists ONLY in yours!
George W Frost
"Noddy" <m...@home.com> wrote in message
news:48dca45a$0$70637$c30e...@lon-reader.news.telstra.net...
No, I meant in the GOOD notable section.
Dan----
> Avery wrote:
>
>> The Holden "starffire 4" is not on the list. The list is bunkum without
>> it.
>
> The Camira 1.6lt would give the Starfire a run for its money as would
> any of the engines in a Mitsubishi Sigma, the 2.6lt was particularly
> horrible.
I wouldn't even give either of those engines any of my time. :-).
Be like me buying a new Holden Caprice with the V6 engine it does not
make any sense. :-).
--
Regards
Dan
Dan----
>
> Of course, we all know this is nothing other than trolling bullshit put
> up by a 14 year old school kid with nothing better to do other than wank
> over his old man's copies of Reader's Digest and try to amuse himself
> around here.
I wonder mentioning that 4404 380's have been recalled for LHR fuel tank
retaining strap bracket may fail allowing the fuel tank to dislodge
resulting in the possibility of a fuel leak. Would make the little fuck
cry.
4404? That's the whole lot isn't it? ;-)
Regards
Dan
Dan----
>
> Isn't the current Ford Focus engine a Volvo... or is that only the turbo
> model?
Only on the XR5 Turbo model also they sound pretty good too when nailed.
--
Regards
Dan
Dan----
>>
> Why does it make you feel better to constantly invent things you claim
> to have done, or things you claim to own? Given the number of time your
> stupid, sorry, lying arse has been handed to you any normal person whose
> self esteem climbed somewhere above roadkill would have fucked off by
> now.
Probably has a dominatrix effect on him that's why he enjoys sticking
around copping it all the time. :-).
--
Regards
Dan
Dan----
> "D Walford" <dwal...@internode.on.net> wrote in message
> news:fOadnduWd-jVV0HV...@posted.internode...
>
>> Whats the problem with the Focus engine?
>
> It's *woefully* breathless, noisy and harsh.
I've read some reviews on them and it seems like the norm for them.
Actually you might laugh but I know someone who has a Renault 5 and I was
surprised on how smooth the engine was for a god knows what year it was.
--
Regards
Dan
hate'em
"Athol" <athol_S...@idl.net.au> wrote in message
news:gbit9r$4cr$2...@aioe.org...
> the_dawggie <the_d...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sep 26, 6:52 pm, "hate'em" <barts_...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>
>>> 5l hilux
>
>> Whats wrong with ToyCo 5L?
>
> It's an archaic, gutless, stinky diesel.
>
> --
> Athol
> <http://cust.idl.com.au/athol> Linux Registered User # 254000
> I'm a Libran Engineer. I don't argue, I discuss.
we've pulled about 9 down so far with No 4 bearings chewed out
also another 3 that have popped a hole in the block.
3l good motor
5l shocker
OzOne
>OzOne wrote:
>
>
>> > Once again Ozwald's experience runs counter to the rest of the
>> > world.
>>
>> No, only yours and Dod's.....I'd suggest that you never owned nor
>> drove one.
>> >
>
>
>Unlike you I am smart enough to have never owned one. Ill-handling,
>rust-ridden heaps of shit that they were.
>
Funny init...you are so much like Dod...formed firm opinions on thisng
of which you have no experience
Herald had no rust problems at all..mainly because of theit
construction method....of which you are no doubt unaware
>The only saving grace was that they were cursed with an engine that
>wouldn't have troubled the skin on a rice pudding which at least meant
>that the fools and unfortunates that did own them were at least less
>likely to get themselves in too much trouble, too often.
Ahhhh they had typical power and performance of small cars of their
day.
>
>
>
>
>> > The Triumph Herald was a complete cunt of a car, its abject
>> > miserableness exceeded only by that of the Triumph Spitfire.
>> >
>> > How's that alloy Dino again OzLiar?
>>
>> Never had an alloy Dino...though I would have loved one.
>> Mine had alloy door skins and rear deck.
>>
>
>Ah yes the "back-peddle" position you have tried to adopt since that
>particular lie was served up to you.
Ahhh so when you claim something and I correct you then it's a back
pedal? (note the spelling).
Sorry...never claimed my Dino was alloy....just as I never claimed the
380AWD was going into production....Both inventions of Dod's dodgey
mind.
>
>
>> You feel better when you invent stuff about me that didn't happen?
>> Make you feel like something better than the dogshit that you are?
>>
>
>Why does it make you feel better to constantly invent things you claim
>to have done, or things you claim to own? Given the number of time your
>stupid, sorry, lying arse has been handed to you any normal person
>whose self esteem climbed somewhere above roadkill would have fucked
>off by now.
Ahhh yes...I do recall the times you've claimed to show I'm lying then
conveniently dropped the subject when shown that your proof had no
basis in fact.
Still if it keeps you viable then continue....
OzOne
<checkheaders...@Fu-trolls.com> wrote:
Go for it Danny...you have someone to stand behind!!
OzOne
<checkheaders...@Fu-trolls.com> wrote:
I'd mention that Holden DID NOT issue a recall for cracked rear
suspensions.....on HSV's.....because it was caused by hard use.
Guess an HSV is only a shopping cart after all.....
sg...@hotmail.com
> <s...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:3f861c25-5a18-4a0b...@b38g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Oh, come on, Nod, the XK motors were good in their time - it's just
> > that their time was in the '50's. It's not the engine's fault they
> > couldn't be bothered replacing it for 40 years.
>
> Lol :)
>
> I never thought they were good period, and had a lot of issues that were
> present from day one. The *really* sad part is that those issues were left
> unchecked for 40 years :)
I often wonder how they actually got away with it - imagine if you'd
gone to buy a VH Commodore, and the only choice of engines was a
Holden Grey motor!
>
> > Which is apparently not a bad thing in it's Renault incarnations...
>
> Maybe, but it was appalling in Volvo green livery.
Horribly undertuned - in Alpine 310's it made about 50% more power
than in Volvos - and even then it's probably unstressed. Actually,
the same motor was used in Deloreans (but the flux capacitor made a
big difference :-) )
>
> > Do you mean 6 or 8, or both?
>
> The Six. I don't care for the eight much at all.
>
> > No Chrysler V8's in the top 10?
>
> The only one I'd pick would be the 426 Hemi, and as good an engine as it was
> I'd prefer a 427 Ford.
Not a 440 max wedge? Come on!
>
> > ANY BD Cosworth motor - the 4 pots are sensational, too.
>
> They are indeed.
>
> > I think somewhere in there a mention has to go to a Toyota 4AGE -
> > although it may owe a bit to Cosworth for inspiration, it was a
> > superbly engineered motor to turn up in a shopping trolley.
>
> Fair call.
I've seen normally aspirated 4AGE's turn 130+ kw at the wheels. Not
at all shabby, and the standard internals would probably handle that,
too.
>
Cheers,
Steve
the_dawggie
> the_dawggie <the_dawg...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sep 26, 6:52 pm, "hate'em" <barts_...@bigpond.com> wrote:
> >> 5l hilux
> > Whats wrong with ToyCo 5L?
>
> It's an archaic, gutless, stinky diesel.
Errr, it's a bit newer than a 350 :-p
It needs a turbo though, I was not really impressed with the one
I drove in Perth a few years back, or one someone I know bought.
EFI shite on them does not do a lot of good, my 3L-T kills them.
That's not to say it cannot be properly turboed, there are kits for
them.
--
Kip.
the_dawggie
> "Athol" <athol_SPIT_S...@idl.net.au> wrote in message
>
> news:gbit9r$4cr$2...@aioe.org...
>
> > the_dawggie <the_dawg...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Sep 26, 6:52 pm, "hate'em" <barts_...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>
> >>> 5l hilux
>
> >> Whats wrong with ToyCo 5L?
>
> > It's an archaic, gutless, stinky diesel.
>
> > --
> > Athol
> > <http://cust.idl.com.au/athol> Linux Registered User # 254000
> > I'm a Libran Engineer. I don't argue, I discuss.
>
> we've pulled about 9 down so far with No 4 bearings chewed out
> also another 3 that have popped a hole in the block.
> 3l good motor
> 5l shocker
Oh, that's not good, urk then meybe not install a turbo.
--
Kip.
D Walford
margin.
Daryl
hippo
>Je�us wrote:
>> D Walford wrote:
>>> Avery wrote:
>>>
>>>> The Holden "starffire 4" is not on the list. The list is bunkum
>>>> without it.
>>>
>>> The Camira 1.6lt would give the Starfire a run for its money as would
>>> any of the engines in a Mitsubi**** Sigma, the 2.6lt was particularly
>>> horrible.
>>
>> I helped change a clutch in an early Camira years ago. Took about six
>> ****ing hours as I recall to complete the job. I think the book time
was
>> six to eight hours, from memory.
>Thats not that bad for a FWD car, standard time to do a clutch on an
>Austin 1800 was 10hrs to remove and replace the engine/trans plus
>another hour or two to dismantle the transfer gears and replace the
>clutch.
>I've done one in a day but it was bloody long days work.
IIRC, book time was 14 hours all up. Wasn't about to pay that! Pain in the
bum job, but very satisfying to have it all running again. Can't remeber if
it was a Kimberley or a MkII now, but with one of them we shaved a fair bit
off the total by parking the powertrain on the ground, then lifting the
front of the car and pushing the whole thing backwards... Minis and 1100s
were a doddle by comparison because there were some good, non destructive
ways to cheat :-)
--
Message posted using http://www.talkaboutautos.com/group/aus.cars/
More information at http://www.talkaboutautos.com/faq.html
D Walford
> On Sep 26, 6:55 pm, "Noddy" <m...@home.com> wrote:
>> <s...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:3f861c25-5a18-4a0b...@b38g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>> Oh, come on, Nod, the XK motors were good in their time - it's just
>>> that their time was in the '50's. It's not the engine's fault they
>>> couldn't be bothered replacing it for 40 years.
>> Lol :)
>>
>> I never thought they were good period, and had a lot of issues that were
>> present from day one. The *really* sad part is that those issues were left
>> unchecked for 40 years :)
>
> I often wonder how they actually got away with it - imagine if you'd
> gone to buy a VH Commodore, and the only choice of engines was a
> Holden Grey motor!
>
>>> Which is apparently not a bad thing in it's Renault incarnations...
>> Maybe, but it was appalling in Volvo green livery.
>
> Horribly undertuned - in Alpine 310's it made about 50% more power
> than in Volvos - and even then it's probably unstressed. Actually,
> the same motor was used in Deloreans (but the flux capacitor made a
> big difference :-) )
>
>>> Do you mean 6 or 8, or both?
>> The Six. I don't care for the eight much at all.
>>
>>> No Chrysler V8's in the top 10?
>> The only one I'd pick would be the 426 Hemi, and as good an engine as it was
>> I'd prefer a 427 Ford.
>
> Not a 440 max wedge? Come on!
>
>>> ANY BD Cosworth motor - the 4 pots are sensational, too.
>> They are indeed.
>>
>>> I think somewhere in there a mention has to go to a Toyota 4AGE -
>>> although it may owe a bit to Cosworth for inspiration, it was a
>>> superbly engineered motor to turn up in a shopping trolley.
>> Fair call.
>
> I've seen normally aspirated 4AGE's turn 130+ kw at the wheels. Not
> at all shabby, and the standard internals would probably handle that,
> too.
The mates Black Top 4AGE which has stock internals gets 102kw at the
wheels in a car (Haynes Clubman) that weighs 530kg so it goes very well.
Daryl
Scotty
They can be made to reach an easy 150kW if you feel the need to make it go faster. the Toyo
supercharger units from the MR2s are bolt on and Im sure that they could be screwed more than that.
Dunno how reliable they are though at that output?!?!?!
Id like to see just how much they can get from the 4AGE they are bloody good donks. That was a
mistake I made , I went for the much cheaper (and waaaay heavier) 2TG when I built a car and only
had 115HP at the rear wheels. And that was very much a budget motor.
BTW Is HP at the wheels equal to kW at the Flywheel? (In approx terms?)
OzOne
>OzOne wrote:
>
>> > Unlike you I am smart enough to have never owned one. Ill-handling,
>> > rust-ridden heaps of shit that they were.
>> >
>>
>> Funny init...you are so much like Dod...formed firm opinions on thisng
>> of which you have no experience
>> Herald had no rust problems at all..mainly because of theit
>> construction method....of which you are no doubt unaware
>>
>
>Funny init that you will firmly hold to your opinions based on YOUR
>experience that is so utterly different tot he experience the rest of
>the world has had with the same item.
>
>Claiming that the Herald had NO rust problems is akin to claiming that
>all politicians tell the truth ALL the time - a measure of your abject
>lying stupidity. Didn;t your usual desperate googling tell you anything?
I'm always amazed when you mention the Googling you think I do
The go on to show taht you've googled up all you know about something
when you quote without attribution.
IOW...You're a fool!
>The Herald was constructed by placing a central "tub" onto a chassis
>and then bolting the panels to the central tub - it was done this way
>because their sheet metal pressing contractor was unable to produce
>panels of sufficient complexity to allow monocoque construction. The
>whole confection being held together with enough 3/8 bolts to wear out
>a couple of sockets pulling the bastard thing apart to fix the
>INEVITABLE and SEVERE rust problems.
>
>
>> > The only saving grace was that they were cursed with an engine that
>> > wouldn't have troubled the skin on a rice pudding which at least
>> > meant that the fools and unfortunates that did own them were at
>> > least less likely to get themselves in too much trouble, too often.
>>
>> Ahhhh they had typical power and performance of small cars of their
>> day.
>> >
>
>If you had said "typical low cost English cars of the day" then you
>might have just begun to have a (poor) point - they were gutless heaps
>of shit.
>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> > The Triumph Herald was a complete cunt of a car, its abject
>> >> > miserableness exceeded only by that of the Triumph Spitfire.
>> >> >
>> >> > How's that alloy Dino again OzLiar?
>> >>
>> >> Never had an alloy Dino...though I would have loved one.
>> >> Mine had alloy door skins and rear deck.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Ah yes the "back-peddle" position you have tried to adopt since that
>> > particular lie was served up to you.
>>
>> Ahhh so when you claim something and I correct you then it's a back
>> pedal? (note the spelling).
>
>the (peddle) was deliberate - it more adequately covers the constant
>stream of utter bullshit you try to peddle as truth.
>
>
>Remaining Ozliar bullshit snipped.
Of course....You can't face the facts!!!!
RainbowWarrior
news:00ed5f4c$0$20648$c3e...@news.astraweb.com...
Yes, well we are talking about someone who by their own admission when they
last drove a Holden V8 ended up gibbering & naked in the shower.
OzOne
<anemai...@somewhere.com.fr> wrote:
>Yes, well we are talking about someone who by their own admission when they
>last drove a Holden V8 ended up gibbering & naked in the shower.
>
Yeah...he didn't expect a car that drove quite as badly....
Shocked me to when I went into a corner at about 2/3 the speed that
I'd comfortably do it in my Verada, and the Holden wanted to
understeer off the road before flicking into oversteer when outrageous
amounts of power were applied to achieve it.
Noddy
"Dan----" <checkheaders...@Fu-trolls.com> wrote in message
news:00ed5f4c$0$20648$c3e...@news.astraweb.com...
> 4404? That's the whole lot isn't it? ;-)
Including the thousand or so 2006 models siting around in dealerships
waiting to be sold :)
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Noddy
<sg...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:161d231e-cc22-4f69...@x16g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
> I often wonder how they actually got away with it - imagine if you'd
> gone to buy a VH Commodore, and the only choice of engines was a
> Holden Grey motor!
Sats a heel of a lot about the menality of Jag buyers really :)
> Horribly undertuned - in Alpine 310's it made about 50% more power
> than in Volvos - and even then it's probably unstressed. Actually,
> the same motor was used in Deloreans (but the flux capacitor made a
> big difference :-) )
It was, but then DeLoreans weren't terribly quick cars.
> Not a 440 max wedge? Come on!
They were okay, and I'm not saying they were a bad engine, just that I'd
prefer a 427 Ford.
>I've seen normally aspirated 4AGE's turn 130+ kw at the wheels. Not
>at all shabby, and the standard internals would probably handle that,
> too.
Nice.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Noddy
"D Walford" <dwal...@internode.on.net> wrote in message
news:H_ednQ8OFtwIWkDV...@posted.internode...
> Bad example, by the time VH came out the red was well past its use by
> date.
Perhaps, but the VH "red" was a hell of a lot better than the old Gray, and
that's the point.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Kwyjibo
"Noddy" <m...@home.com> wrote in message
news:48de0f2c$0$70628$c30e...@lon-reader.news.telstra.net...
>
> <sg...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:161d231e-cc22-4f69...@x16g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
>
>> I often wonder how they actually got away with it - imagine if you'd
>> gone to buy a VH Commodore, and the only choice of engines was a
>> Holden Grey motor!
>
> Sats a heel of a lot about the menality of Jag buyers really :)
>
>> Horribly undertuned - in Alpine 310's it made about 50% more power
>> than in Volvos - and even then it's probably unstressed. Actually,
>> the same motor was used in Deloreans (but the flux capacitor made a
>> big difference :-) )
>
> It was, but then DeLoreans weren't terribly quick cars.
>
>> Not a 440 max wedge? Come on!
>
> They were okay, and I'm not saying they were a bad engine, just that I'd
> prefer a 427 Ford.
Especially if it was the OHC version........
--
Kwyj.
Noddy
> Err. By VH it was an XT6 "Improved Performance" - ie blue motor. :-)
Yeah, I know, that's why I put "red" in quotation marks.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Noddy
"Kwyjibo" <kwy...@ozdebate.remove.com> wrote in message
news:xsCdnSgnXJM...@westnet.com.au...
> Especially if it was the OHC version........
They look pretty, but I'd rather the boss 429 or the side oiler 427.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
D Walford
> They can be made to reach an easy 150kW if you feel the need to make it go faster. the Toyo
> supercharger units from the MR2s are bolt on and Im sure that they could be screwed more than that.
> Dunno how reliable they are though at that output?!?!?!
Its not so easy to just bolt a supercharger to any 4AGE, the 4AGZE has
quite a few differences from a base 4AGE like lower compression and oil
squirter's under the pistons.
A pulley kit can increase the boost to 14psi which is the max you can
run with a stock computer, a few people have "twin charged" (super
charged plus a turbo) and claim to get over 300hp which is impressive
for a 1.6lt, not sure how long they last though.
>
> Id like to see just how much they can get from the 4AGE they are bloody good donks. That was a
> mistake I made , I went for the much cheaper (and waaaay heavier) 2TG when I built a car and only
> had 115HP at the rear wheels. And that was very much a budget motor.
What car is it in?
>
> BTW Is HP at the wheels equal to kW at the Flywheel? (In approx terms?)
>
Very approximate.
Daryl
D Walford
> Noddy <m...@home.com> wrote:
>> "D Walford" <dwal...@internode.on.net> wrote:
>
>>> Bad example, by the time VH came out the red was well past its use by
>>> date.
>
>> Perhaps, but the VH "red" was a hell of a lot better than the old Gray, and
>> that's the point.
>
>
Holden's attempt at polishing a turd more like it and the black version
was ever worse.
Daryl
Kwyjibo
"hate'em" <bart...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:PIeDk.963$sc2...@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
The 12HT was the last decent diesel made by toyota IMHO.
--
Kwyj.
Kwyjibo
I was referring to the OHC side oiler 427 ford. The last one I heard of was
a NOS crate engine going for US$50k on craigslist.........
--
Kwyj.
Noddy
> I was referring to the OHC side oiler 427 ford.
You were indeed, and I was aware of that. I'd prefer the non OHC version
myself.
> The last one I heard of was a NOS crate engine going for US$50k on
> craigslist.........
They're certainly getting pretty thin on the ground, but that price is
ridiculous. I know a bloke who has one complete one and almost enough parts
to build a second.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Kwyjibo
>
> "Kwyjibo" <kwy...@ozdebate.remove.com> wrote in message
> news:b-WdnQhV6rJ...@westnet.com.au...
>
>> I was referring to the OHC side oiler 427 ford.
>
> You were indeed, and I was aware of that. I'd prefer the non OHC version
> myself.
To drive I'd prefer the single cam, but for wank value an OHC version would
be nice :-)
I did read that they were pretty fragile things.
>
>> The last one I heard of was a NOS crate engine going for US$50k on
>> craigslist.........
>
> They're certainly getting pretty thin on the ground, but that price is
> ridiculous. I know a bloke who has one complete one and almost enough
> parts to build a second.
I think the fact that it was still brand new was what pushed the price so
high.
--
Kwyj.
the_dawggie
> "hate'em" <barts_...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
>
> news:PIeDk.963$sc2...@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Athol" <athol_SPIT_S...@idl.net.au> wrote in message
> >news:gbit9r$4cr$2...@aioe.org...
> >> the_dawggie <the_dawg...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Sep 26, 6:52 pm, "hate'em" <barts_...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>
> >>>> 5l hilux
>
> >>> Whats wrong with ToyCo 5L?
>
> >> It's an archaic, gutless, stinky diesel.
>
> >> --
> >> Athol
> >> <http://cust.idl.com.au/athol> Linux Registered User # 254000
> >> I'm a Libran Engineer. I don't argue, I discuss.
>
> > we've pulled about 9 down so far with No 4 bearings chewed out
> > also another 3 that have popped a hole in the block.
> > 3l good motor
> > 5l shocker
>
> The 12HT was the last decent diesel made by toyota IMHO.
1HZ had some bearing problems IIRC, 2L had head crack problems,
3L is OK.
--
Kip.
John_H
>
>BTW Is HP at the wheels equal to kW at the Flywheel? (In approx terms?)
It's not even a rough approximation. Actual drive train losses, when
accurately measured, are about one tenth of what that relationship
assumes. Something around 2 to 2.5% difference would be much nearer
the mark.
A vast number of chassis dynos can't measure power at the wheels
accurately because of the roller setup used... ie the commonly assumed
losses are in the dynanometer rather than the car's drive train.
Hence the furphy (which has been around for as long as I can
remember). :)
--
John H
Jeßus
> Jeßus wrote:
>> D Walford wrote:
>>> Avery wrote:
>>>
>>>> The Holden "starffire 4" is not on the list. The list is bunkum
>>>> without it.
>>>
>>> The Camira 1.6lt would give the Starfire a run for its money as would
>>
>> I helped change a clutch in an early Camira years ago. Took about six
>
> Thats not that bad for a FWD car, standard time to do a clutch on an
> Austin 1800 was 10hrs to remove and replace the engine/trans plus
> another hour or two to dismantle the transfer gears and replace the clutch.
> I've done one in a day but it was bloody long days work.
Point taken. That was the first (and hopefully last) FWD vehicle I
change a clutch on...
D Walford
chassis dyno and if you accept being out by 10-15kw a rough approximation:-)
Daryl
John_H
Except that you can't believe the readings from the majority chassis
dynos, for the reason I've stated. ;-)
Nor will the error be a constant, or even be reproducable to any
degree of certainty.
They are however very useful devices for tuning up wallets. :))
--
John H
Scotty
The 2TG, it was in a British version of the Gemini - Vauxhall Chevette
All I did was a quick freshen up, mild cams, mild porting job, twin sidedraft Solex carbs,
Extractors, and the Matching Box.
It was a bloody fun car as I did all sorts of events in it from Rallies to Autocross to Street
Races, Hill climbs, Motorkhanas etc.
It cost stuff all to build and it was definately never compeditive (Unless you compare it to other
street registered cars in its class) but boy I had many miles of fun in it thats for sure. It did
very well in Motorkhanas as it was very agile for a rear wheel drive.
I miss it.
: >
: > BTW Is HP at the wheels equal to kW at the Flywheel? (In approx terms?)
: >
:
: Very approximate.
:
:
: Daryl
Scotty
Im happy with a rough estimate, those that are worried about the difference of 1-2 HP are tossers.
Who the fuck cares unless your spending thousands and thousands to get the most from your car. Im
talking about general chat about a car "Yeah mine had around XXX HP/kW" , "Oh mine had XXX and
1....." who cares.
John McKenzie
>
> Of course, we all know this is nothing other than trolling bullshit put up
> by a 14 year old school kid with nothing better to do other than wank over
> his old man's copies of Reader's Digest and try to amuse himself around
> here.
Try as I might public access medline records don't list any studies
proving a link between chronic painkiller
usage and obsessive compulsive need to respond to internet trolls, which
is fucking bizarre, on the basis you can get funding for climate change
studies, why not something more useful.....
>
> However, my list of the top ten worst engines ever made (for what it's
> worth, and in no particular order) would be:
>
> 1: JB Camira engine.
absolute standout, and admittedly some stiff competition from the UK and
the pizza eating surrender monkeys.
> 2: Any Mistubishi 4 cylinder up to the late 90's (and quite a few beyond
> that).
Even if they picked up their game, anyone with prior experience is more
weary of them than the prospect of fucking paris hilton bareback in the
dirtbox.
> 3: Any Jaguar engine.
Engine? A little optimistic to put that behind the J word.
> 4: Ford Telstar/Mazda 626 engine from the '80's.
> 5: Ford Transit V4.
No personal experience, but take your word for it.
> 6: Holden starfire 4.
You'd think that lopping off 2 cylinders from a red/blue would leave one
with a fairly underpowered but otherwise arguably reliable and
semi-economical result. Don't know what happened - I'm thinking perhaps
they got the think tank that made Mark Latham leader of the opposition
back in the day onto the project and didn't check over their work
frequently enough.
> 7: Opel 1.9 4 cylinder.
opeless
> 8: Mazda E2200 diesel.
If I recall (and it's been a while) - problems with the head cracking???
> 9: Volvo V6 engine.
Probably honestly deserves a spot near the top imho. I did work on a
fair few of them as an apprentice though, so it's a bit hard to be even
remotely fair about them. So bad Jaguar probably could have improved
them!
> 10: Any Passat engine from the '70's.
nfi
I'd probably want to include the first run of the ford ohc 6s in that
list. I did actually manage to see a fairly reliable one, that was
thrashed mercilessly day in day out, but it seems it was a freak in that
regard.
>
> Other notables that didn't make the finals would be any Austin
> Tasman/Kimberly 6 cylinder, Leyland 4 cylinder as found in Marina's and 6 &
> 8 cylinders as found in P-76's, late model Australian Clevelands, any 253,
> 5.4 litre Ford modular V8 and the current Ford Focus engine.
I suppose one could argue the red 253, was reliable enough. Certainly
gutless, and not great on juice (probably because it had to be caned to
buggery to get it moving even remotely well)
>
> Also included, again for what it's worth and in no particular order, is my
> top ten best engines, which are:
>
> 1: GenIII/IV V8.
> 2: Any BMW M3 engine.
> 3: Subaru 3.0 Liberty engine.
> 4: Current Maxima V6 engine.
> 5: Small block Chev.
> 6: Big Block Chev.
> 7: FE series Ford big block (and the 427 side oiler in particular).
> 8: Holden Red Motor.
> 9: Valiant slant 6.
> 10: Valiant hemi 6 cylinder.
Personally I'd argue for higher placing of the sbchev. On reliability
and fast for cheap stakes, hard to beat. Of course some of the stuff
that can be done with cam and pipes on a late model Gen 3/4 is
astounding.
The red motor definitely. Never a big output engine, it was nonetheless
in light enough cars to make it an option to do up, in it's day. And
certainly reliable (esp the 3 inch stroke variants - as close to the
brick shithouse as anyone could reasonably expect.
I do love the slants, esp as a tow/cruise engine. they might not make
enough oommph for a very heavy tow (well they'd do it, but some would
want to be quicker up hills, but if one theoretically stayed Vic speed
limit legal all the time) A couple of tiny faults, but piss easy to
address, and a very strong motor, forged cranks, massive rods, heavy
thick block, all good stuff.
The hemis - as much as I love them, I reckon probably deserve a mention
(esp in terms of their power for an NA 2valve 6, and esp for their time,
with fuck all resources as chrysler were going down the gurgler) for
their output, but there's just enough issues with them ((I've no doubt
detailed a thousand times) to keep them off the list proper. 99% of the
issues are easily enough solved. I'd also mention that Andrew Saunders
has gotten (afaik, based on mph etc) over 850bhp out of one, with a
factory crank/rod combo (forgies of course) and a relatively down to
earth factory cast iron head (albeit ported, but not radically). Last I
heard he had another factory head, but one that had been welded up
extensively and more extensively ported/developed. If he gets it to hook
up (it has real trouble, relatively speaking, but I must stress it's
setup very well, it's just not got enough weight on teh rears, and it's
probably not long enough of a car either, the first 60ft esp, it's just
that much torque) it'll do a low-mid 8, or it might have already (last I
saw, it broke into the 8s and 160 odd mph. Not bad at all considering
he's a real bloke, not a millionaire on a trust fund.
But I _would_ put the hemi v8 in there. Of course the current top fuel
engines are loosely based at best (all things considered) but they were
having no trouble making over 2000bhp way back when in top fuel with
factory blocks (heck a person or two still ran bbchevs in top fuel until
what, the early 70s?)
>
> Other notables would be the Datsun 1000/1200, Mini 1275 Cooper S engine,
Toyota K series (particularly early 3k) rate a mention too - those and
the dattos capable of over 150bhp in historic trim (most I know of is
around 180bhp for a 3k out to 1300cc, but the blocks lasted 1-2 races at
best)
> Ford Boss 302 V8, Willys "Go Devil", Ford flathead V8,
I guess the flathead deserves its due, but I must say, those people into
them, well they've got that jaguar lover masochisting thing going as
well!
Chrysler Hemi V8,
> Ford "shotgun" Boss 429 V8, BDA Cosworth V8, Repco Brabham V8 and last but
> not least the humble Harley Davidson WLA side valve.
WLA? Jesus. I'm pretty sure that's what the old man had - the war-time
(*i.e. ww2) era ones? very low comp and just about enough power to climb
a steep hill :)
Actually speaking of the hd v-twin, I know this might hurt some fana,
but their engines (and I think they were shovels only) - not just of the
shovel family, but specifically those made during the time AMF ran, or
failed to competently run HD - I've seen nothing but grief with them out
of the friends (and their dads) that have them - cam loves chewing up,
running hot irrespective of tune/operation, leaks, and to a certain
extent (and arguably worse earlier on) the electrical system - hell they
were at one time the American answer to Lucas.... In general I always
thought their dual fire ignition was a cunt of an idea, given the uneven
spacing - go for anything but a near stock cam, and a good likelihood of
backfires at various rpms/loads.
--
John McKenzie
tos...@aol.com ab...@yahoo.com ab...@hotmail.com ab...@earthlink.com
ab...@aol.com vice.pr...@whitehouse.gov pres...@whitehouse.gov
swee...@accc.gov.au u...@ftc.gov admin@loopback ab...@iprimus.com.au
$LOGIN@localhost world's #1 sardine whisperer ro...@mailloop.com
$USER@$HOST $LOGNAME@localhost -h1024@localhost ab...@msn.com
ab...@federalpolice.gov.au frau...@psinet.com ab...@asio.gov.au
$USER@localhost ab...@sprint.com ab...@fbi.gov ab...@cia.gov
John McKenzie
>
> > 9: Volvo V6 engine.
>
> Which is apparently not a bad thing in it's Renault incarnations...
I'd like to see someone prove that in court (and provide evidence of a
recent psychiatric evaluation that pronounced them sane!) :)
> I think somewhere in there a mention has to go to a Toyota 4AGE -
> although it may owe a bit to Cosworth for inspiration, it was a
> superbly engineered motor to turn up in a shopping trolley.
That's a fair call, people have done remarkable things with them for
performance work.
Neil Gerace
0) Mitsubishi Astron
0.5) Holden Starfire / Toyota 1X
> 1)holden 3.8 and 3.6 litre v6
> 2)holden gen 3 and upwards
> 3)bmw m3 v6
> 4)nissan v6
> 5)toyota 2.7 litre 4 cylinder
> 6)audi v6
> 7)saab 2.3 litre
> 8)mercedes v8
> 9)holden 202
> 10)volvo inline 5 engine
Neil Gerace
> I helped change a clutch in an early Camira years ago. Took about six
> fucking hours as I recall to complete the job. I think the book time was
> six to eight hours, from memory.
That's odd, it was supposed to be one of the few designs where you could drop the clutch out without removing the transaxle.
Noddy
> To drive I'd prefer the single cam, but for wank value an OHC version
> would be nice :-)
> I did read that they were pretty fragile things.
The cam drive arrangement certainly was.
> I think the fact that it was still brand new was what pushed the price so
> high.
Big money for an engine that was never fitted to any factory car.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Noddy
"John_H" <john...@inbox.com> wrote in message
news:g9ltd417572fjnc92...@4ax.com...
> They are however very useful devices for tuning up wallets. :))
They are indeed.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Noddy
"John McKenzie" <jmac_me...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:48DEFE...@bigpond.com...
> If I recall (and it's been a while) - problems with the head cracking???
Massive.
They had hopeless cooling systems and heads that would crack *wide* open at
the slightest sign of an overheat. Being a stinky they made only just enough
power to lunch their cranks, which they seemed to do with frightful
regularity.
> I'd probably want to include the first run of the ford ohc 6s in that
> list. I did actually manage to see a fairly reliable one, that was
> thrashed mercilessly day in day out, but it seems it was a freak in that
> regard.
I was going to whack that in and forgot about it.
> I suppose one could argue the red 253, was reliable enough. Certainly
> gutless, and not great on juice (probably because it had to be caned to
> buggery to get it moving even remotely well)
They seemed to suffer from cam lobe and oil pump problems more than the
308's in my experience, but then that was only word of mouth from people I
knew unfortunate enough to own one. I only ever had one, in a HQ ute, and I
only owned it long enough to find some woodduck to buy it off me.
> Personally I'd argue for higher placing of the sbchev. On reliability
> and fast for cheap stakes, hard to beat. Of course some of the stuff
> that can be done with cam and pipes on a late model Gen 3/4 is
> astounding.
Absolutely.
Despite it's obviously ridiculously cheap construction, it's a *brilliant*
engine.
> The red motor definitely. Never a big output engine, it was nonetheless
> in light enough cars to make it an option to do up, in it's day. And
> certainly reliable (esp the 3 inch stroke variants - as close to the
> brick shithouse as anyone could reasonably expect.
Yep.
> I do love the slants, esp as a tow/cruise engine. they might not make
> enough oommph for a very heavy tow (well they'd do it, but some would
> want to be quicker up hills, but if one theoretically stayed Vic speed
> limit legal all the time) A couple of tiny faults, but piss easy to
> address, and a very strong motor, forged cranks, massive rods, heavy
> thick block, all good stuff.
>
> The hemis - as much as I love them, I reckon probably deserve a mention
> (esp in terms of their power for an NA 2valve 6, and esp for their time,
> with fuck all resources as chrysler were going down the gurgler) for
> their output, but there's just enough issues with them ((I've no doubt
> detailed a thousand times) to keep them off the list proper. 99% of the
> issues are easily enough solved. I'd also mention that Andrew Saunders
> has gotten (afaik, based on mph etc) over 850bhp out of one, with a
> factory crank/rod combo (forgies of course) and a relatively down to
> earth factory cast iron head (albeit ported, but not radically). Last I
> heard he had another factory head, but one that had been welded up
> extensively and more extensively ported/developed. If he gets it to hook
> up (it has real trouble, relatively speaking, but I must stress it's
> setup very well, it's just not got enough weight on teh rears, and it's
> probably not long enough of a car either, the first 60ft esp, it's just
> that much torque) it'll do a low-mid 8, or it might have already (last I
> saw, it broke into the 8s and 160 odd mph. Not bad at all considering
> he's a real bloke, not a millionaire on a trust fund.
Outstanding stuff.
I can remember back in the days when I owned my GTHO my brother had a mint
original E-49 for a while, and we raced the crap out of each other all over
the place in what could only be described as "Bathurst gone nuts on public
roads" (coming soon to a theatre near you). The stuff we did in those days
would see us publicly executed today, but *Jesus* that Hemi engine was
fucking sweet when it was singing it's guts out.
We'd often race off to Warnambool along the GOR, and after a rest we'd swap
cars and race home again. I've got some really fond memories of that Charger
revving it's nuts off in some wonderful sweepers that saw the GT slow down a
tad and take it a bit easier. The GT was a fair bit quicker on the straight
sections, but the Charger was a lot more fun to drive.
> But I _would_ put the hemi v8 in there. Of course the current top fuel
> engines are loosely based at best (all things considered) but they were
> having no trouble making over 2000bhp way back when in top fuel with
> factory blocks (heck a person or two still ran bbchevs in top fuel until
> what, the early 70s?)
Yeah, a lot of people (and especially out here) were still running iron
block Hemi's for quite a while into the 70's for fuel racing simply because
"proper" engines were way too expensive and there wasn't the money in the
sport to justify the expense back then. I wouldn't be surprised if half the
original Hemi engines made ended up on the scrap heap simply due to being
destroyed running Nitro.
> I guess the flathead deserves its due, but I must say, those people into
> them, well they've got that jaguar lover masochisting thing going as
> well!
I tend to agree.
I've never been into them, and I don't understand why people persist with
them today doing all kinds of weird and wonderful conversions and
modifications, but for 1932 they must have been out of this world. The whole
hotrod industry owes it's existence to the flathead V8 and the '32 Ford, and
that's something to be thankful for.
> WLA? Jesus. I'm pretty sure that's what the old man had - the war-time
> (*i.e. ww2) era ones? very low comp and just about enough power to climb
> a steep hill :)
That'd be them :)
Certainly not powerful, but *extremely* reliable and again one of the
engines (and machines) that gave birth to a legend.
> Actually speaking of the hd v-twin, I know this might hurt some fana,
> but their engines (and I think they were shovels only) - not just of the
> shovel family, but specifically those made during the time AMF ran, or
> failed to competently run HD - I've seen nothing but grief with them out
> of the friends (and their dads) that have them - cam loves chewing up,
> running hot irrespective of tune/operation, leaks, and to a certain
> extent (and arguably worse earlier on) the electrical system - hell they
> were at one time the American answer to Lucas.... In general I always
> thought their dual fire ignition was a cunt of an idea, given the uneven
> spacing - go for anything but a near stock cam, and a good likelihood of
> backfires at various rpms/loads.
Yeah, it's not great.
HD's (and their various bits & pieces) are like anything else in that
there's good and bad stuff. The Shovels weren't my favourite engine and I'd
never own one, but I know plenty of blokes who swear by them and wouldn't
have anything else. I had a '61 Duoglide with a Panhead that was a
*fantastic* bike, and I loved it to death. It was a typical Harley in that
it had no brakes, handled like absolute shit and was about as fast as a
120Y, but then I never expected anything of it other than for it to be the
excellent cruiser that it was. It was kinda like owning a Statesman or an
LTD: nice and smooth with plenty of comfort, but if you thought you were
going to set any records you were fucking kidding yourself.
2 things I want to do before I die are build a nice '34 three window rod,
and a HD trike.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
John McKenzie
> I can remember back in the days when I owned my GTHO my brother had a mint
> original E-49 for a while, and we raced the crap out of each other all over
> the place in what could only be described as "Bathurst gone nuts on public
> roads" (coming soon to a theatre near you). The stuff we did in those days
> would see us publicly executed today, but *Jesus* that Hemi engine was
> fucking sweet when it was singing it's guts out.
I haven't done anything remotely like that in some time, but I will say
this - there was a time when I was licenced (circa 1990) that you could
still do it here and there if you kept in certain stretches of road, at
night etc, where no-one could get hurt except the 'idiots' involved.
>
> We'd often race off to Warnambool along the GOR, and after a rest we'd swap
> cars and race home again. I've got some really fond memories of that Charger
> revving it's nuts off in some wonderful sweepers that saw the GT slow down a
> tad and take it a bit easier. The GT was a fair bit quicker on the straight
> sections, but the Charger was a lot more fun to drive.
Since you've had the early fords to mind recently, I'm wondering if I
could ask some advice/clarification.
I'm helping a mate with a ZC fairlane, no big deal, fairly
straightforward stuff. He mentioned getting new wheels/tyres (currently
12 slotters) on there, and I saw them Sunday morning. The seller (his
brother's close mate) had told him they were genuine early gt rims (the
steel ones that had the 5 jelly bean slots). Anyhoo, he wanted $1600 and
my mate was about to pay. Took a look, and they weren't ROH (*which I
think the early gt rims are supposed to have been???) they were a poorly
made (and covered with powder coat) chinese thing, with steel rivets in
3 groups of 3 joining the rim halves together, no weld. The chrome hub
cab/ring didn't attach like all the ford ones I've seen (and they were
stamped with ROC - i.e Taiwan, so it's like the worst of the region, a
bit from each dodgy locale) The tyres, were what looked like remoulds,
and made in the best place ever for safety - mainland china. So all in
all he had rims that I'd not even trust to put on display, let alone a
car to be driven, and tyres worth, at best, $60 each.
The question (after all that) is - what precisely were the early gt rims
- what brand, and what is a realistic price for them. Further on that
(as it's a fairlane, and the rim choice is purely his own taste,
obviously not a concourse accurate resto) - are there any options that
are or have been made since then that look the same, or predominantly
so, brand names? ways of identifying them??
> Yeah, a lot of people (and especially out here) were still running iron
> block Hemi's for quite a while into the 70's for fuel racing simply because
> "proper" engines were way too expensive and there wasn't the money in the
> sport to justify the expense back then. I wouldn't be surprised if half the
> original Hemi engines made ended up on the scrap heap simply due to being
> destroyed running Nitro.
Allegedly it's why it's hard to get HQ panels now - the racers have
crashed and bashed their way through them!
> 2 things I want to do before I die are build a nice '34 three window rod,
> and a HD trike.
Out of interest - why the trike? I'm taking a leap of faith here that
you're injuries mean it might be the only option to get you back on
bikes practically/safely, but it's pure speculation.