P76

Policies at the time meant that all local cars had to have a percentage of local content, which is why a lot of them used Borg warner. Considering that most people think of the P76 as being British, it actually had the most local content out of the other 3 Aussie manufacturers.
The BW35 was not a bad box if treated with respect, but it was not up to 'enthusiastic' driving or heavy towing. Mine destroyed itself in the driveway with no warning, parked it after work and then went to reverse out the next day, reverse gear was gone and required a full rebuild. I had it rebuilt with BW40 bits.

Ford were not using Borg-warner behind their V8. It was a US box. So why was Leyland forced to under content rules?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by d2dave

Ford were not using Borg-warner behind their V8. It was a US box. So why was Leyland forced to under content rules?

---

Possibly not content rules as such - they probably had no access to a suitable box from overseas, and certainly not one as cheaply as Ford (or GM or Chrysler) could supply. When did an auto become an option for Rangerover? And where did Leyland get that?

"World cars" were not even a concept in the seventies, and using another manufacturer's (as opposed to a suppliers) parts was much less common than today, pretty much restricted to small scale manufacturers.

John

No Ford didn't use Borg Warner in their v8's. But they used BW for just about every other model. Under the plan at the time, by using local content in the p76, British Leyland could import Jaguar's and Rover's duty free. That all changed when British Leyland made the decision to close all manufacturing plants outside the UK largely due to the '73 coal miners strike which left them nearly a billion pounds in debt. The p76 had only been in production for 6 months at the time and waiting lists were 3 to 6 months for some models. This coupled with early quality issues meant it didn't take much convincing for the public to cancel their orders for a p76, when they could walk next door and buy something else without waiting. Actually, the p76 production very nearly was going to be taken over by Toyota!
Another bit of trivia, the entire p76 program including tooling, design, manufacture etc. Cost $20m, roughly what Ford spent retooling to change the XW Into the XY. It was quite an achievement to produce something as good as it was with such a low budget.

the late 60's & 70's also saw a lot of industrial action which made life very hard for car makers, Borg Warner Albury went on and off for ages which was why Chrysler Aust models of the day came with a mix of BW35's and the imported Mopar 903 (Baby bro to the 727).

Incidentally the 2 highest Aussie content cars ever were the HQ and the VG Val from memory.

A good bloke I knew years ago (Grimey) had a nice collection of P76's and we rebuilt the Borgy for his daily before it got a fresh 4.4 V8 and it was a surprisingly nice drive and not what I expected at all BUT being used to Valiants I had a fair amount of experience in cars of the Era and I think that makes a big difference in how you view others of the time period.
The sheer boat like styling of the P76 made people expect the things to handle like a drunk wombat but if you ignored the perception and had enough nouse to be unbiased they were pretty good things for their time.

Build quality varied though on both the cars and components and the Borgy 35's were not spectacular quality when the Unions were cranky.

As for the comment about a 35 not doing well behind V8's?

Well most of the Non factory Automatic early 80's 4 door Rangies had Borg warner 35's as did the 2 doors from memory and they did just fine behind the 3.5........

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rick122

No Ford didn't use Borg Warner in their v8's. But they used BW for just about every other model.

---

Ford also used the C4 trans when BW35's were not available due to industrial action.

Holden from memory didn't have this issue as the 3 speed Traumatic had no supply issues.

The Falcon's BW40 upgrade mainly concerns the improved design of the reverse band piston mounting, a breather on top of the case and bronze thrust washers in the planetary gear set. I've rebuilt plenty of both and there's really very little else different between them. I always meant to fit a BW40 to a P76 but interest fizzled out after I fitted a TH700 to the P76 wagon. That really is a nice match for the P76's torque.:)

BW 40 has a bigger sun gear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tony66_au

.......
As for the comment about a 35 not doing well behind V8's?

Well most of the Non factory Automatic early 80's 4 door Rangies had Borg warner 35's as did the 2 doors from memory and they did just fine behind the 3.5........

---

Wasn't the P76 V8 a bit bigger than 3.5?

John

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JDNSW

Wasn't the P76 V8 a bit bigger than 3.5?

John

---

Absolutely but the 4.4 only had a small 2bbl stromberg opposed to the Zeniths on the 3.5 .

Both had relatively short intake runners as well so Torque was also down on what it could have been.

Reverse seemed to be a common failure on the P76's and we rebuilt 3 that all failed in that manner.

The 3.5's also had different cam specs between Auto and Manual and the converted 2 and 4 door rangies still had the manual cam spec which made them a bit punchier off the line.

My opinion on the square bore/stroked 4.4 is that it made more HP and revved cleaner than the 3.5 but really didnt make much more torque down low.