Best Engine Offered In Australian Car?

[ebxr8240]

Originally Posted by Nikked

I'ld believe it, everyone was looking for an edge.

I stand corrected.. The Ford teams had the pistons facing to back.. It increased mid range torque.. At the time no one could work out how the factory teams where faster..
Putting the pistons in backwards changes the centre line on pin which in an around about way increased rod length.. It gave more side loading and cold piston knock when cold but wasn't a concern in a race engine..
The engines.. Windsor due to being re engineered from early 60's all the way through to 2000 or so.. The Holden and Clevo V8..
But the question wasn't about performance race engines ..
So the inline 6 has to be up there too...
Families just want a lump of iron to power them reliably to there destination nothing more or less..If electronic ignition was in the earlier motors? They would hardly need to be worked on other than oil changes and rear main seals.. But thats been an issue with all of them !!
The Chevy engines warn't realy fitted to general family cars.. The 307 was but short time..

[GTP290]

We should start a thread...the worst engine ever offered in an Aussie built car...any suggestions??

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by GTP290

We should start a thread...the worst engine ever offered in an Aussie built car...any suggestions??

Easy answer. Holden starfire 4 in the VC Coomo. Alloytec is pretty garbage too. For pure rough as guts NVH then the VN V6.

[5.4 GT]

Originally Posted by FPV8U

The Bathurst 12Hour has been running for 2-3 years, the F6 was in it last two years from memory, it's been about as fast as the pre-mentioned XR8 and finish one place behind it.

Yeh it was great. I've been there the past couple of years watching the XR6Ts have hissy fits and spitting the dummy, not wanting to finish the race, where as the XR8s soldiered on. They replaced the F6 with a GT-P the previous year because the F6 was also problematic (heat issues). The 5.4 is MUCH better for the track.

Having said that the 335i (twin turbo inline 6 BMW coupe) made it's racing debut there and has been unstoppable the past few years (awesome to watch caining the competition), so not all turbos chuck a wobbly when the going gets tough like the Fords do.

[GTP290]

sounds like the sierra days all over again

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by flappist

Actually after my visit to Bowdens and conversations with those who currently own and drive Bathurst et al winning cars from all sides and having heard stories of all the "modifications" done to the "factory stock" cars originating from those who drove or managed said cars (Moffat,Brock,Goegan,Bartlett etc) I am VERY sure THERE WERE NO SHOW ROOM STANDARD PRODUCTION FORDS OR HOLDENS RACING AT BATHURST (or Sandown etc) during the muscle car era, they were all VERY modified.

Before the true believers arc up remember there were more than 20 AFF members went on the tour and we were actually SHOWN some of the non factory mods on actual Bathurst GTHOs, Brocks A9Xs, Goegans Monaro etc etc etc

Ive got no doubt, but im also not sure how many of their cars would be in 1971 or earlier spec, from 1972 onwards they were allowed a few more freedoms, the moffat HO is in 1972 spec, but the pre 72 cars were virtually stock by the definition of the rules, im sure most probably "bent" them with subtle tweaks.

[Gobes32]

Starfire gets my vote for worst engine......lol

[Escort_RPDriver]

yep starfire get my vote too i remember my uncle offering me a starfire powered commadore for my first car glad i got the VB SL/E 202 the tought of one of the starfire engines in a commadore not somthing i want to experiance.

[TUF_302]

Easily the Turbo6!!, nothing can compare in my opinion!

[Rev28K]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

Manufacturers championship is damn close to std spec...
I think that result just demonstrates how good the Boss powered cars really are when pushed hard and set up correctly compared to the holdens.....

Are you kidding? Have a look on the CAMS website for class 3E production cars and see what freedoms are allowed. While all the manufacturers have to comply with the same rulebook (and they are trying parity formulas) these cars are a long way from showroom spec. I'd certainly expect a GT to come alive if it weighed 10% less, had free camshaft, piston & conrod (do you reckon they were changed?), free suspension (springs, shocks, limited mounting point modifications), etc, etc.

You also don't want to be drawing too much from some of the results as some of the teams & drivers aren't the most proffessional or well funded. One of the guys who works on one of my cars has raced in the last 2 12 hour events.

Having said all that I still reckon Holden's publicity department would still be smarting over the Sportwagon's result in the last one.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

Ive got no doubt, but im also not sure how many of their cars would be in 1971 or earlier spec, from 1972 onwards they were allowed a few more freedoms, the moffat HO is in 1972 spec, but the pre 72 cars were virtually stock by the definition of the rules, im sure most probably "bent" them with subtle tweaks.

From memory, phase 1, phase 2 & phase 3 GTHO & HT Monaro. They were not even remotely stock. The monaro had a shorter wheelbase, others had metal removed, extra welds, engine mods and lots of thing I don't specifically remember. This is not third hand, the actual cars not replicas are there.

[Gobes32]

I wouldn't like to do 300kph down conrod straight in a stock XY either.................

[nugget378]

Originally Posted by Gobes32

I wouldn't like to do 300kph down conrod straight in a stock XY either.................

A stock XY could'nt even get anywhere near that speed on an unlimited highway, let alone conrod straight..

[HEMI POWER]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

Ive got no doubt, but im also not sure how many of their cars would be in 1971 or earlier spec, from 1972 onwards they were allowed a few more freedoms, the moffat HO is in 1972 spec, but the pre 72 cars were virtually stock by the definition of the rules, im sure most probably "bent" them with subtle tweaks.

Norm all the front runners back then didn't run factory spec engines.If you believe this your kidding yourself and others.These engines were all blueprinted no factory spec HO was ever blueprinted.Pistons were also heat treated they even ran more oil capacity and even the cars were much lighter than any road going HO.
My pick goes to the ol HEMI 6 and a close 2nd with the Clevo.In the more modern engines the Holden 304 was also one of the best going around.

[rosco426]

Reading this thread again. Hemi 6 is number one, I6 (or I6T) 2nd.

4VMAN, your judging results from a car race to determine which engine was better? I thought this thread is about engines, not steering/braking/suspension components or a drivers ability.

[Daymoe]

The Hemi 6 engine everyone seems to give good praise for it, whats so good about it compared to the Ford I6s of the time as an example? Not trying to be a smart ***, wanting to learn more

[blackers10]

Ford 4ltr SOHC and DOHC I6 for straight up reliability
otherwise they'd NEVER use them in taxis

[ebxr8240]

The 250 was "around" 160 h.p while 265 Hemi was over 200 h.p..
The Hemi was a much better breathing engine..

[rosco426]

Originally Posted by Daymoe

The Hemi 6 engine everyone seems to give good praise for it, whats so good about it compared to the Ford I6s of the time as an example? Not trying to be a smart ***, wanting to learn more

It also took over 20 years for its straight line performance to be matched.

[Gobes32]

Originally Posted by nugget378

A stock XY could'nt even get anywhere near that speed on an unlimited highway, let alone conrod straight..

I am aware of that, I was merely suggesting that the touring cars of the 70's could not have possibly been stock cause that would be a death sentence.

On another note, why is it free season to shoot everyone's opinions down lately? Is this a free speech forum or what?

[PALE ALE]

for those raving about the hemi 6, you obviously didnt lean on it much. The oil pump has a gear that runs on a gear on the camshaft (much like a pinion/crown wheel on a diff) When you want to rev this thing, the cam flexes, the gears dont mesh properly and you start chewing the gears out, 'til one night clunk,clunk ,clunk, oil light comes on, no oil pressure.
When you pull the engine down, it looks like some one has filed the teeth off the gear on the cam. This is with a E49 spec cam, I would hate to see what would happen with a bigger cam/ stiffer valve springs.

[mik]

another vote for Falcon inline 6 na and turbo variants, history and longevity alone easily give it the win, and on sheer torque in their respective classes nothing comes close, and last but not least reliability.

[mik]

i had a hemi myself in a cm as a stocker they were certainly nothing to write home about, always seemed fairly gutless.

[Rev28K]

Originally Posted by Gobes32

On another note, why is it free season to shoot everyone's opinions down lately? Is this a free speech forum or what?

Yeah well meah culpa, 4V man my reply to you came out a bit stronger than I wanted it to, you helped me with a PM a while ago and I hope it didn't get up anyone elses nose.

Back on topic - the worst engines. I only know of some of them by reputation only. Starfire, 3.8 ecotec (I saw a VN with "you're never late with a 3.8" window sticker the other day) and the 253 (even though it would rev a mate described his as having the performance of a 6 with the fuel economy of an 8). Any others?

[FPV70]

I would certainly say the Clevo 351/302 for it's day was a great engine in the V8 class.

250 2V Ford and 265 Hemi also another good one for the oldies in 6cyl.

Old 4cyl would go to either the RS2000 Escort or the 18R Engine in the Toyota Celicas.

For modern Engines would no doubt have to go to the 4.0 Single and Double OHC motors of the Falcons in 6cyl form Turbo or not they are great motors.

V8, I Would have to say Merc 6.2 or perhaps the FPV BOSS 5.4.

[ebxr8240]

Trouble is the newer engines have hardly stood the test of time..
The Clanger Clevo keeps going and the Weezy Windsor is often still going when the body has long gone!! Same with Chryslers Hemi and Fords 6's over the years..
I'm 50 + and have longer memory..
Keeping racing out of this as in most cases they are hybrid engines..
But it must be said to have a good race engine you still need the durability to last..

[Dodge]

old skool, road 351 cleveland, on a twisty track a 1275 mini cooper s , lol

[mcnews]

Originally Posted by Daymoe

The Hemi 6 engine everyone seems to give good praise for it, whats so good about it compared to the Ford I6s of the time as an example? Not trying to be a smart ***, wanting to learn more

In E49 spec the engine was rated at 302hp (226kw). Not too shabby for a naturally aspirated 4.3 litre engine.

[Daymoe]

Originally Posted by mcnews

In E49 spec the engine was rated at 302hp (226kw). Not too shabby for a naturally aspirated 4.3 litre engine.

Fair enough, I just thought I would bring it up because when I was out with Dad 2 days ago, we parked next to some sort of Valiant car with a Hemi 6 and he started talking about it. Is it expensive to build one to E49 spec?

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by HEMI POWER

Norm all the front runners back then didn't run factory spec engines.If you believe this your kidding yourself and others.These engines were all blueprinted no factory spec HO was ever blueprinted.Pistons were also heat treated they even ran more oil capacity and even the cars were much lighter than any road going HO.
My pick goes to the ol HEMI 6 and a close 2nd with the Clevo.In the more modern engines the Holden 304 was also one of the best going around.

Of coarse they blueprinted the engines, gearboxes diffs etc... blueprinting is just ensuring exact factory tolerances are met, its not modifying it though, all the stock parts are used.