Thread: A Straw Poll re Holden Conversions.

Hmmm, it was a long time ago. I can't remember the manufacturer of the kit, but it was a cast alloy adaptor, came with a new bronze spigot bush, engine mounts and.... Can't remember...

We had to cut a small bit out of one of the engine mounts to clear the exhaust, I remember them being a nice bit of kit.

It was a good kit though - came with everything (except a warning about aligning the gearbox). It may have even had radiator hoses but not 100% sure on that one.

IIRC it used the standard series pressure plate and clutch plate - the flywheel was thicker than a Holden one - I don't think we redrilled the Holden flywheel, it could have been a custom unit bought along with the kit. It was a no expense spared conversion so everything was done just right, but I just can't remember.

It was back in the day when the conversions were just starting to loose popularity, but it was still reasonably easy to get. I think it even came with instructions on sectioning the front crossmember.

Originally Posted by bacicat

Hmmm, it was a long time ago. I can't remember the manufacturer of the kit, but it was a cast alloy adaptor, came with a new bronze spigot bush, engine mounts and.... Can't remember...

We had to cut a small bit out of one of the engine mounts to clear the exhaust, I remember them being a nice bit of kit.

It was a good kit though - came with everything (except a warning about aligning the gearbox). It may have even had radiator hoses but not 100% sure on that one.

IIRC it used the standard series pressure plate and clutch plate - the flywheel was thicker than a Holden one - I don't think we redrilled the Holden flywheel, it could have been a custom unit bought along with the kit. It was a no expense spared conversion so everything was done just right, but I just can't remember.

It was back in the day when the conversions were just starting to loose popularity, but it was still reasonably easy to get. I think it even came with instructions on sectioning the front crossmember.

If alloy it sounds like a Dellow kit Don't know how many were non-axial and needed remachining.

Bob

Originally Posted by geodon

Punters, I thought you may be interested to know that after a few months on the road, I believe I made the right decision to stay with the GMH motor.
...
I really love the grunt of the 186 & am prepared to put up with a top speed of 47.5 MPH.

Seems slow... I have a 1973 series 3 SWB which had a 186 and now sports a 202. With both motors I could reach 65 mph, but it was loud. We can pootle down the road at 55 mph all day (on LPG no less)

Have you got freewheeling front hubs?
Is it breathing okay? Please tell me you have the paper air filter not a bodged tube to the oil-bath air filter ?

I've had mine for over 6 years now, and have religiously kept speedo/fuel figures for the time (except the times when the speedo drive cable was broken) and the one thing I see is that mileage was better on the 186 than the 202. If you want I can post that info .

We are currently on a four day trip touring about in our Landy at the moment and yesterday we travelled from Mildura to Tocumwal via Swan Hill and Deniliquin. It was a shocking day for wind with huge gusts, mainly side winds for us, but a tail wind every so often and the Landy returned 24 miles per gallon (8.5 kpl or 11.76/100). We cruise at 90 kmh which is comfortable and reasonably smooth and quiet, but occasionally i find the speed has crept up to 100-103. With the romerdrive engaged and the 3.54 diffs it's doing about 2200 rpm at 90 kmh. (Holden 186 motor). Overall makes for a reasonable vehicle to tour the countryside in. Took it on an overnighter to Mungo National Park last week and sitting on around 75-80 kmh (without the romerdrive engaged) and it delivered much the same economy.

Cheers, Mick.

Once-upon-a-time, as an 18yo, my 2nd car was a 1970 (never convinced, but that's what the rego lable said) SIII SWB fitted with a red 161.....and Toyota Land Cruiser semi floating axles of about the same vintage.
Being a young bloke, the 161 (was a bit tired) developed a knock, and was replaced by a nicely running HT 186S I bought from a mate of my brothers for $50!!! - cast headers & dual throat stromburg & all.
This got dressed up with polished cast alloy rocker & side covers, chrome dipstick etc - all this stuff was common then at my local AutoPro store.
No idea of the (all drum) axle ratios, but it flew.
Mum's fella at the time had a current MQ 2.8litre petrol (so similar cc capacity, but would have been heavier) Patrol LWB wagon, which I could drag off at will (& did often.....)
I did have to fix the gearbox twice in 4 years of abuse (Boronia, Eastern suburbs Melb, has "Forest Road" - I could 4 wheel drift around it's corners on 7.50x16 bar treads in the wet, as long as I kept my recovery gear & tool box in the back, otherwise the back end would break away & be nigh on imposable to catch with the SW
I never experienced a 2.25L to compare it with, but I was very happy with it as a package - great car.

Criggie, sorry I took so long to get back here! Stock air cleaner! I had FW hubs but I took them off.

Yes it gets too loud. It also feels wrong.

After decades of MANY old cars, I can easily detect an engine's "sweet spot". On mine it's def below 50MPH.

I don't doubt it will do 65MPH but I don't like driving with ear muffs and I want it to last a good while while I do up the 2.25.

Sorry i just can not resist this thread any longer The holden engine is a or was a cheap repower ,
In my opinion i would,nt ive owned one They can not handle over reving in standard form they self distruct they dont have torque no engine braking and the list goes on .
I would have a healthy 2 1/4 litre over any holden 6 any time .
Have you driven a healthy LR 4 ? they realy are not slugs

O Forum Sage, I agree with you. Buuuuuuut, faced with NO choice I repaired the Holden. It took me over 12 months to find a 2.25 with an alternator (mine had had the Lucas generator/regulator electrics gutted) and it was seized. I expect the 2.25 to be ready in a year or so.

You're right that the 2.25 revs higher safely cf to the GMH unit. Torque? For serious 4WD-ing, yes! Mine is mainly used to service a small acreage and fetch fencing stuff, collect plants, compost and the like, tip runs etc. The Holden does it well albeit SLOWLY!

I've engaged 4WD in anger only twice when I got bogged in a paddock and to pull out a big Yucca stump that laughed at the Fergy's effort; low ratio 4WD & it came out at a little over idling speed.