Hear, hear, Regards Frank.Quote:
Originally Posted by dobbo
Printable View
Hear, hear, Regards Frank.Quote:
Originally Posted by dobbo
They were powered by a Detuned (500HP) 427 Ford engine, available in Ford Galaxies available at any Ford dealership, a far cry from the exotic engines it was competing with, BTW the ZF Transaxle gears were replaced with Ford Top loader cogs, and the body and chassis was designed by Colin Chapman, Regards Frank.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Hjelm
Not claiming to know everything . I'm going off my own experiences in BA and AU falcons and thats why i went back to holden because i prefer it and think it's a better car. so take it how you want to but thats the way i see it :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Outback 1
Basically, the last good holden was the HR and the last good Falcon was the XY, to todays standards they are crap but classics but when you look at what they were in their day, there was nothing close to the performance for money and thats what it comes down to.
These days with all the electrickery driving aids, everything drives the same, they get similar fuel economy and they have the same gadgets and cost about the same so who cares.
I wouldnt buy either of their modern crap with my own money, I had an AU3 ute as a company car and the trans kept crapping itself and the diff got noisey after about 120000kms and even though it had 1 tonne badges on the side of it, I went into them with a weigh bridge ticket saying I was carrying 665kgs and they told me that it was over loaded.
My old man just got rid of his BA1 as it was costing him a fortune in juice and ford dealer reconed it was normal even tough his was a 6 and my BIL has an XR8 which he drives like hell but still returns better economy.
I wont bother with Holdens as I havnt had one since the VL and that wasnt impressive in the turbo 6 or the 5L and all the VT's and VX's that Ive had the mis pleasure to have on my hoist are just a waste of space which leak more oil than my landy and have more little stupid faults than you can poke a stick at.
Im just talking about what I have seen with my own eyes here and not what I have been told by others, but then again, most of what I see on cars is after the owner has had enough of the dealership or a bodgy mechanic so I tend to get the worst of the worst.
I have a Merc that isnt much better as well as a couple of Magna's so it isnt just Holden and Ford so in the end, the moral of the story is...............
Buy a Land Rover
:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D
Sorry, but you had better go back to your history books. The GT40 was derived from the Lola GT designed by Eric Broad. Nothing at all to do with Lotus or Chapman. The 427 side oiler used in Cobras and GT40's was a radical redesign of the 390/429 big sedan and truck engine. The name came from the foundry moving the oil galleries to the outside of the block to make more internal room dfor the improved crankshaft and rods, and the cross bolted mains necessary to make it into an endurance racer. The reason Ford went so heavily into this programme costing unknown millions was the refusal of Enzo Ferrari to honour an informal agreement to sell to Ford. Ford senior people and the Ford family felt they had been insulted and treated like servants and oafs by the Comendatore and entered into a whatever-it-costs programme to put Ferrari in his place.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tank
I took my XH 4 litre back to the dealership on several occasions complaining about high fuel usage. I keep an accurate log book. I was getting 19mpg in city service, and 21mpg fully laden and a best 24mpg unladen in highway service under ideal conditions. The dealership plugged in to the diagnostic machine and said machine showed an average fuel consumption of 11.6 litres/100k which they said was normal, whereas my log showed an average of over 14litres/100k.Quote:
Originally Posted by mcrover
My previous workhorse was a CM Valiant with 265 Hemi and auto, supposedly a notorious gas guzzler. It did 17-19mpg around town, and consistently 23mpg on-highway empty or laden. It also had better top end acceleration than the Falcon, necessary when rounding up doubles and triples in Western Queensland.
Yes I do. The "10 Bolt Salisbury". I had one in my WB ute and I still have one in my HJ ute.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tank
The first of the Gen III 5.7 engines did that, the later ones have no issues that I am aware of.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tank
Correct, also the multi pass radiator caused issues, the use of bosch componenta instead of nippon denso aswell:)Quote:
Originally Posted by dobbo
The 427 ford side oiler engine was not a radically redesigned engine, the side oiler refers to the rerouting the oil directly from the pump to the main bearings, (then to the camshaft) via an oil gallery along the lower side of the block, it was done to improve the oil supply to the main bearings, all other FE series engines (332 to 428) are Centre oilers where oil from the pump is routed by a central gallery above the camshaft to the camshaft bearings and then to the Main bearings. The oil gallery on Side Oilers was not moved to provide clearance inside the block for the crankshaft and rods, the 390 crank and the 427 crank are the same dimensions, the larger Le Mans con rods have no clearance problems in a 427 block, because of the larger (than other FE engines) bore size of 4.23" the 390 block has a bore of 4.050 and if the correct rod bolts are used then they will clear the bottom of the bore, not so on the smaller bore FE engines. The cross bolted mains (like 4L L/R engine, "Y" block design) were introduced in earlier versions of the High Perf. FE engines, 406 and 410 engine also had cross bolting, but were centre oilers, the first 427's were centre oilers and used the cast iron 390 crank, mostly in Nascar, the 390 crank has the same dimensions as the 427 crank whether cast or forged. the 429 engine that you say is an FE series engine, it is a 385 series engine and it is nothing like the FE, it has a shallow block like the Cleveland and Windsor engines, the crankshaft centreline is level with the crankcase sump rail, it is a large passenger car and truck engine and includes the 460, the Boss 429 was developed from the 385 series 429. The 428 FE series engine along with the 390 FE where not just Large passenger car and truck engines they were available in Fairlanes and Comets as well as the Mustangs from 1968 on, (Bullit 390, Gone in 60 seconds 428), the 428 was also available in the Cobras and most Cobras sold had the lower performance 428 rather than the 427. The 427 s.o. was the basis for the Ford 427 SOHC, which dominated drag racing for years, Nascar wouldn't allow the SOHC to compete, same s. o. block except for an extra oil return gallery at the rear on each side. Ford certainly put Ferrari and all the other European racers in their place all right, Ford with the GT40's redesigned by Colin Chapman with help from Carroll Shelby and the Daytona Coupes of Shelby kicked ass for years, Jim Hall was asked by a film crew what he thought of the 427 GT40's and he said, "it is very disheartening to be driving hard around a corner with the door handles scraping the ground (sic) (at the limit of his Chapparal) when a GT40 cruises by 50mph quicker". BTW I have a side oiler 427 block in the shed if you would like to have a look if you're ever down this way. did you know that in 1966 it cost Ford around $6000 to hand build 427's on their own specail production line, they were then fitted to Ford Galaxies to homologate the engine for NASCAR, the car cost between $3000 and $5000, depending on options, FORD were serious about racing, Regards Frank.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Hjelm