Sorry i should have know better :)
Ill start again
I hate everything and everyone ""just because"" :eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:
Printable View
Sorry i should have know better :)
Ill start again
I hate everything and everyone ""just because"" :eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:
Must admit that the Ford 289 with twin exhausts does sound pretty good. Better than the 302 and the 351, and better than the Holden boat anchors. The Chevs sound pretty good too. Rover V8s of any capacity sound great with twin exhausts or a nice large single.
Had a look on a Commodore forum...a comment made about the 253....the power of a 6 with the economy of an 8...:p
Ron.
A mate of mine has a TRS 4.6 in his disco and it is a very nice thing to drive and was 5K drive in drive out and best yet looks and feels factory stock.There is a reason modded vehicles are worth less than stock,because they are generally troublesome vehicles. Pat
Reminds me of early Magnas... Power of a four with the economy of a six!Quote:
Originally Posted by RoverP6B
Interesting opinion of a 4.2 Holden and obviously comes from someone who has not owned one. The little 4.2 in my Torana won quite a few drags against 308, 302s, 351s and an assortment of 6's. I would really defy any of you stupid Ford Freaks actually quantify you boat anchor statements. Just look at most marine v8's they are either Holden or Chev. Most Ford Rods have Chev engines and the numerous Holden V8 conversions says they cant be that bad.Quote:
Originally Posted by RoverP6B
The 4.2 could rev significantly harder than the 308 and that is what its appeal was.
What are people comparing when they say power of a 6 with economy of an 8?? You can not compare old technology with new. For that matter how many years was the XR6 turbo actually quicker than Fords boat anchor 4.9 and 5.0 litre v8,s? Why do Fords not sell?
I would have to disagree, I think they are on par. Both fairly reliable and about same on power with the 253 slightly better. I reckon the 253 4.2 in my Torana and HQ was about the same as my 4.2 stroker RRC. The 253 leaks less oil and was easier to get parts for. Do not get me wrong I think they are actually both not bad motors.Quote:
Originally Posted by steve_35
A mate (no longer with us) built a 500HP 308 himself around 1986. Built for good power, street drive ability and reliability. In a SS Torana was a very quick car. There was not a lot around that could touch it including a 454 SS Torana I used to drive quite a bit. The engine went from his SS into another around 93. The engine is still running in a VK Commodore from memory and still strong with only minor freshening up over the years (rings, bearings, lifters, cam) to same specs. Total build cost was around $4k back in 86.Quote:
Originally Posted by steve_35
Probablly best to compare efi engines to efi engines and NA to NA.
Oh this Torana was also clocked by the police on a lake out of Kalgoorlie at 274kmph twice with a 4spd box and 9" diff. When it was put in the second SS we were out on a run and I was on my GSX Katana 1100 and was ringing that doing 245 kmph and this Torana went by me quick. Ofcourse was on private property.
Ron, the Rover motor is a good engine, but so it should be being an alloy v8. Really for what it is should be a lot better. The old V8s like Holden and Ford were cast and old technology, but were in production for so long as neither really wanted to tool up for an alternative. Holden looked at many options and purely for economical reasons went the GM 5.7 and variants path. A lot was due to GM only wanting minimal engine variants world wide. Plus they were in a HP battle with Ford. We actually have a 5.7 WK Statesman and it is a good car but I think the VT 5 litre with a few minor mods (air flow and fuel mainly) was far better, had more torque and more economical. It was a tyre shredder for a wagon and impressed a lot of sceptics. Put out 246 odd KW at the rear wheels and I did have the dyno sheets for this. The Statesman only puts out 240KW at the Flywheel.Quote:
Originally Posted by RoverP6B
Sounds like you had a good run out of your Rover and that is part of my point, any motor if looked after and used as intended will last. Most of the Holden engine failures were and are due to cheap HP mods that are not compatable with reliability. It is relatively easy to make HP, just not reliable big HP without $. Stroke out a Rover motor to 5 litres, put on a big carby and see how long it lasts. Have seen plenty of all motors including Rover V8s go bang. I can show you one yard in Perth were a guy has 20 Rover blocks sitting around that have gone to heaven and can not be salvaged. Most of the Holden and Ford blocks get rebuilt for street cars, drags and speedway.
My Grandfather had a HQ wagon with 253 from new in 1974 I think? until died 93 and it never missed a beat, did over 500,00kms and never ever let him down.
Dont get me wrong I loved my RRC 4.2 stroker and miss it greatly.
you mentioned the issue with the first batch of 5.7 litres in the VTs and VXs and these are well known and doccumented but have nothing on the 4.6 Rover issues or even the TD5 issues.
CraigE you say ...Stupid Ford Freaks!Quote:
Originally Posted by CraigE
Thats not being very nice. :( You might have to consider moderating yourself if you keep that kind of behaviour up.
Why quantify my comments about boat anchors your the one telling the story that Holden V8's deserve to be fitted in boats rather then Fords.
I'll go one step further I bet a standard 260 V8 Ford Compost would suck the pin stripes off of a standard 253 Kingswood. And beyond a doubt the Ford still sounds much better!
Great little engine the Windsor was, even the 221 was a better engine overall. [bigwhistle]
Have a nice day. :)
cheers,
Terry
[biggrin][biggrin][biggrin][biggrin][biggrin][biggrin][biggrin][biggrin][biggrin][biggrin][biggrin][biggrin][biggrin][biggrin][biggrin][biggrin]
Fight Fight Fight Fight Fight Fight Fight Fight Fight Fight