Holden HD Holds Australian record for monthly sales

[castellan]

Originally Posted by T-Pak Addict

Like I said it did have a TH350 3 speed Auto....
and it came that way, Dad was the 2nd owner (bought 1975).

My dad was a diesel mechanic by trade and knew his cars... He knew exactly what he had when he bought it.... He checked into it at the time as some things didn't seem right (trans was one of them), but with help from the dealer he bought it from it was legit... I have never seen another with that setup.

The TH350 wasn't used in cars til 1969 but was developed at the same time as the TH400 and that was 1st used in 1963, How that transmission landed up in the car at the time of when it was made is anyones guess... Strange things happened in the old days....

Sure it was not the good old 3 speed Hydramatic auto.

[HK1837]

Originally Posted by castellan

The 4sp sagnaw was behind GTS 186's with 3.55 diff ratio and ute and p van

M21 was also optional behind HK 6cyl passenger vehicles, but it was the standard 4spd in HK-HT commercials, however it was a wider ratio M22. In HT you could get M22 behind 186S in passenger vehicles.

[Kingsley]

Originally Posted by HK1837

I never said they underquoted power figures, in fact it was the opposite, example the auto 350 engine was given 20hp it didn't have on its US figures. They HOBBLED the cars so they wouldn't perfrom to their potential. GTS327 and GTS350 were built to win races, one in particular, like the GT-HO was. Cat was well and truly desired to be left in the bag. Just like it was with the HK.
Rest is fact, whether you choose to believe it or not is no skin off my nose.

Can't see why any manufacturer would've 'hobbled' any performance car before a test for a national motoring magazine. What would be the point? The supercar scare was over 12 months away when the HG McKinnon thing was released. And the Torana was the weapon for Bathurst by the time the HG McKinnon was released so there was no need to keep its performance a secret.

Unless someone can provide figures from the day, not figures obtained from an allegedly stock example 40 years later and after the benefit of dyno tuning prior to the test then the figures mean ****. And I'm not going to believe the 'testimony' of several unnamed drag racers from the era either. Nor am I going to believe two Wheels journo's based on 'yeah they went faster' as fact.

To be fair, why doesn't AMCM afford the same luxury to all muscle cars from the era?? Find stock survivors, dyno tune them and re-test the lot. I bet all improve times dramatically.

The rest is fact? You've provided zero evidence. I'm simply asking you to. If I'm going to believe this story I might as well start believing the 8 or 9 people who have told me they still own a phase 4, the guy who's uncle owns a factory v8 XU1, the factory twin turbo L34 the bloke at the pub has hidden in his shed and my daughter who believes in the mythical unicorn....

BTW, if your that keen on Monaro's, I have a Peter Brock's HQ Monaro for sale here for $125k. (I have no proof that Brock drove it other than he drove one in a black and white tv ad. It could've been mine....prove me wrong!!!)

[HK1837]

Originally Posted by BluFGXR6

Can't see why any manufacturer would've 'hobbled' any performance car before a test for a national motoring magazine. What would be the point? The supercar scare was over 12 months away when the HG McKinnon thing was released. And the Torana was the weapon for Bathurst by the time the HG McKinnon was released so there was no need to keep its performance a secret.

Unless someone can provide figures from the day, not figures obtained from an allegedly stock example 40 years later and after the benefit of dyno tuning prior to the test then the figures mean ****. And I'm not going to believe the 'testimony' of several unnamed drag racers from the era either. Nor am I going to believe two Wheels journo's based on 'yeah they went faster' as fact.

To be fair, why doesn't AMCM afford the same luxury to all muscle cars from the era?? Find stock survivors, dyno tune them and re-test the lot. I bet all improve times dramatically.

The rest is fact? You've provided zero evidence. I'm simply asking you to. If I'm going to believe this story I might as well start believing the 8 or 9 people who have told me they still own a phase 4, the guy who's uncle owns a factory v8 XU1, the factory twin turbo L34 the bloke at the pub has hidden in his shed and my daughter who believes in the mythical unicorn....

BTW, if your that keen on Monaro's, I have a Peter Brock's HQ Monaro for sale here for $125k. (I have no proof that Brock drove it other than he drove one in a black and white tv ad. It could've been mine....prove me wrong!!!)

They never hobbled the HG, it was the original HT press test cars that were hobbled, they did the same to the HK. They were hobbled to hide the car's potential. Those cars were built to win races, and they didn't want Ford or others to get a heads up on it. That is 100% understandable. Ford built the XR GT as it knew what GMH was planning with the HK Monaro GTS, that info was leaked from inside GMH and has been confirmed by people inside Ford at the time.This is all spelled out in AMC as well if you choose to read it. If it is published there with a certain author's name on it it is fact, just because the original trabnscripts of conversations or original documents aren't published doesn't mean it isn't fact.

The proof of the hobbling was when motor journalists got hold of both early and late HG GTS350's to test. They couldn't believe how good the cars were. Those articles are re-published in the AMC magazine if you want to see them. The 40 years old car was tested to see if what the tests on those cars in 1971 were factual, and it matched those results near perfectly using the same testing methods, hence it is 100% valid. That was the purpose of testing an untouched car. The same applies to HK. Find tests done on cars that weren't supplied by GMH for HK testing as well. I think it was ??? Luck (surname) who tested one and the title of it was "Forget everything you have been told" or something like that. Dave Bennett's HK was also tested prior to him modifying it for drag racing, that test is out there too if you are interested.

I don't need to provide this evidence, I have it which is all I need for my purposes. If you are interested go looking, it is in magazines and newspapers of the day. Amazing what you'll find. I've found heaps recently on unrelated stuff just looking at old newspaper archives, some stuff which was obviously public knowledge back then but not used in later historical publishing outside of AMC as they all just go for original road tests.

And nothing I have said is anything other than fact. I wouldn't write it on a public forum otherwise, I know you don't know me and understand that but if you did you'd also know that to be fact.

[BENT_8]

This place is embarrassing sometimes.

Someone posts a thread about 50 year old Holden's, a bloke comes along who obviously has a keen interest in Holden's of that era, hence his choice of user name on a Ford forum.
Offers what appears to be well researched information comparing the two marquee's from 50 years ago without slagging the Ford at all and all he gets is hammered with sarcasm because his conclusions dare to question the faithful.

Your wasting your time HK, Aussie performance started with the XR GT and ended on lap 130 of the '71 Bathurst race.
Nothing else matters...

[HK1837]

No problems Bent8 mate. Happy to be here. I'm in general a GM/GMH fan but if an XA RPO83 coupe came my way for the right place i'd happily have it. My mate had a black/black one years ago and it got trashed by the locals in NQ, just panel damage though. If the car had been here i'd own it today, it was too damaged (glass as well) to get here. I could have owned it for $3500 in the early 90's. It was a weapon, still all original engine with big Holley, extractors etc.

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by HK1837

No problems Bent8 mate. Happy to be here. I'm in general a GM/GMH fan but if an XA RPO83 coupe came my way for the right place i'd happily have it. My mate had a black/black one years ago and it got trashed by the locals in NQ, just panel damage though. If the car had been here i'd own it today, it was too damaged (glass as well) to get here. I could have owned it for $3500 in the early 90's. It was a weapon, still all original engine with big Holley, extractors etc.

Must be something about the XA, I too passed up a deal which still has me kicking myself.
Factory XA Fairmont Coupe, Hot 351 FMX? auto, wind back roof, mint body, 2 owner car for $4k in 2000.
Knocked it back because it was a pig to drive.

The owner, an old school panel beater, had it for 25 years and it was immaculate.
He'd debarred it, put Landau touches through it and fitted a B&M shifter with the console removed.
Went through a nasty divorce and swapped my brother for an XD Fairmont which itself was a mint example, she ended up with $400...lol.

My Brother offered the Coupe to me for $4k as he had no room for it and is into GMH stuff.

Not quite an RPO, but something you'd gladly own.

[HK1837]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

Must be something about the XA, I too passed up a deal which still has me kicking myself.
Factory XA Fairmont Coupe, Hot 351 FMX? auto, wind back roof, mint body, 2 owner car for $4k in 2000.
Knocked it back because it was a pig to drive.

The owner, an old school panel beater, had it for 25 years and it was immaculate.
He'd debarred it, put Landau touches through it and fitted a B&M shifter with the console removed.
Went through a nasty divorce and swapped my brother for an XD Fairmont which itself was a mint example, she ended up with $400...lol.

My Brother offered the Coupe to me for $4k as he had no room for it and is into GMH stuff.

Not quite an RPO, but something you'd gladly own.

I love the look of an XA GT, one of may favourite of all Aussie cars, probably only eclipsed in my eyes (in looks) by the HK GTS, HQ GTS coupe and HJ GTS coupe. It isn't very often I like the style of a sedan either, and an XA GT sedan sits right up there with a HQ GTS sedan style wise for me in any case.
But funnily I detest XB and XC, just not a fan of them.

[buickman]

Most of us that go on car forums have the same passion CARS but prefer different makes. So you will always have disagreements as some have a great passion on certain models and have done a fair bit of research on the car. I’ve mainly owned Fords but have 2 old Buicks in my garage and admire a car in great condition not matter what the make.
I just found it amusing that the HD Holden of all models and makes holds a record not for the biggest rustier out of the Holden models but Sales in a month that I cannot see being broken in my life time.

[castellan]

Originally Posted by buickman

Most of us that go on car forums have the same passion CARS but prefer different makes. So you will always have disagreements as some have a great passion on certain models and have done a fair bit of research on the car. I’ve mainly owned Fords but have 2 old Buicks in my garage and admire a car in great condition not matter what the make.
I just found it amusing that the HD Holden of all models and makes holds a record not for the biggest rustier out of the Holden models but Sales in a month that I cannot see being broken in my life time.

HA ! just because a model made a record in bread and butter cars, does not mean much to me as it's the GT or GTS etc that i would be interested in seeing how well they sold, be it by model or monthly sales. and why ?
GTS 350 sales to all of the GT 351 ?
GTS 327 sales to the XT GT 302
Now I am interested in that lot above, but not 161 HR base model Holden sales.
How many HR 18S 4 sp yes that would be of interest.

[Iggle Piggle]

delete

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by castellan

HA ! just because a model made a record in bread and butter cars, does not mean much to me as it's the GT or GTS etc that i would be interested in seeing how well they sold, be it by model or monthly sales. and why ?
GTS 350 sales to all of the GT 351 ?
GTS 327 sales to the XT GT 302
Now I am interested in that lot above, but not 161 HR base model Holden sales.
How many HR 18S 4 sp yes that would be of interest.

Fair enough, but it is a HD thread and as far as I know there was no HD GTS or XP GT so its a little hard to compare those...

[Davehoos]

I was waiting for someone to point out the obvious.

It would have been common knowledge that a new bodystyle was coming since that the EH was a sales boom, and the important bit was that it wasn't much different to the previous model. there was a lot of talk at the time that the design team went to the USA got drunk and signed off on the vehicle that shared the GM world design look- ONE GM-

the HK was the equal to the VN commodore in that it shares a little with a VB but miles better.

I have never seen a factory sagnaw gear boxes I do know they had been around because we carried mounts and clutches.

done so many M20-M21 Datsun conversions because of the dead toranas in wreckers. power glide was always in demand for HJ. the dealer i worked for carried 130 ci red motors and massive demand for EH 149.
never seen a 6cyl 4 speed ute told panel van was common.

lost count of the V8 I replaced with 6cyl. think mates got some HG 253 in the shed. mine went for scrap.

the dealer i worked for servived on camira, pulsar and pintara. In the 60's in Newcastle BMC was the big brand followed by European brands. if you wanted V8 you bought American import. the workshop was full of conversion stuff post ADR.

[Kingsley]

Originally Posted by HK1837

They never hobbled the HG, it was the original HT press test cars that were hobbled, they did the same to the HK. They were hobbled to hide the car's potential. Those cars were built to win races, and they didn't want Ford or others to get a heads up on it. That is 100% understandable. Ford built the XR GT as it knew what GMH was planning with the HK Monaro GTS, that info was leaked from inside GMH and has been confirmed by people inside Ford at the time.This is all spelled out in AMC as well if you choose to read it. If it is published there with a certain author's name on it it is fact, just because the original trabnscripts of conversations or original documents aren't published doesn't mean it isn't fact.

The proof of the hobbling was when motor journalists got hold of both early and late HG GTS350's to test. They couldn't believe how good the cars were. Those articles are re-published in the AMC magazine if you want to see them. The 40 years old car was tested to see if what the tests on those cars in 1971 were factual, and it matched those results near perfectly using the same testing methods, hence it is 100% valid. That was the purpose of testing an untouched car. The same applies to HK. Find tests done on cars that weren't supplied by GMH for HK testing as well. I think it was ??? Luck (surname) who tested one and the title of it was "Forget everything you have been told" or something like that. Dave Bennett's HK was also tested prior to him modifying it for drag racing, that test is out there too if you are interested.

I don't need to provide this evidence, I have it which is all I need for my purposes. If you are interested go looking, it is in magazines and newspapers of the day. Amazing what you'll find. I've found heaps recently on unrelated stuff just looking at old newspaper archives, some stuff which was obviously public knowledge back then but not used in later historical publishing outside of AMC as they all just go for original road tests.

And nothing I have said is anything other than fact. I wouldn't write it on a public forum otherwise, I know you don't know me and understand that but if you did you'd also know that to be fact.

Maybe you need to re-read some of your previous posts. For example, they hobbled the cars and now they didn't hobble the HG.
I have the mags of the era. 15's are the best for the Munro's. Provide me the details of the mag that claims otherwise that isn't printed 40 years after the fact.
Basically I don't care who you are. I really don't. However you made a claim, A claim without proof or fact. Please provide the evidence otherwise there's no reason why I should believe you. Not hard is it?

[HK1837]

Originally Posted by BluFGXR6

Maybe you need to re-read some of your previous posts. For example, they hobbled the cars and now they didn't hobble the HG.
I have the mags of the era. 15's are the best for the Munro's. Provide me the details of the mag that claims otherwise that isn't printed 40 years after the fact.
Basically I don't care who you are. I really don't. However you made a claim, A claim without proof or fact. Please provide the evidence otherwise there's no reason why I should believe you. Not hard is it?

Just re-read, never I said the HG's were hobbled that I can see. 15sec quarters is correct for the hobbled GMH provided test cars.

Fair enough, I have no desire to prove anything, and there is no need to. History is history, so nothing for me to prove. AMC published the unhobbled road tests if you wish to read them.

[Silver Ghia]

Its funny how as soon as a thread on old Holdens is started, the Holden fanatics come out of the woodwork and start arguing about stuff that has nothing to do with the subject of the thread, HD Holdens.

My mate had a HD when he got his licence in 1973, it was light blue and white, but he repainted it in British racing green. It had a reco 186 motor in it, manual transmission, 3 on the tree and went like the proverbial (relatively speaking of course, to what we were used to back then).

[buickman]

Ford and Holden current sales combined together are not selling anywhere near that Qty . I,ve only owned 3 Holdens FB that I destroyed with tacky stuff like Impala shifter,HT GTS Serbing Orange 308 Power glide and HQ 253 Ute but never liked the HD.

[KW XRT]

I don't believe for a second that press cars were hobbled.In fact I believe it's laughable that anyone would think such a thing.Even if they were hobbled how hard would it be for the motoring writers of the day to detect it.I mean what could they do beside back the timing off a little.I'd be more inclined to think that they were under engineer or simply weren't tuned properly.Like a one of maybe.If this was the case and the bosses at GMH found out the cars that were tested were not up to scratch the teams that prepped them would have got their back side canned.

I still shake my head with how the 327 and the 350 manaro are held way up there in fairy land.

Fact is if the E38 and it's 3 speed box had of come up agaist either 327 or a 350 manaro on it's first outing at Bathurst it would have wiped the floor with both of them to the tune of 20 and 30 minutes respectfully.Sort of puts the chev in a whole new light unless the race cars were hobbled too.lol

[Kingsley]

Originally Posted by HK1837

Just re-read, never I said the HG's were hobbled that I can see. 15sec quarters is correct for the hobbled GMH provided test cars.

Fair enough, I have no desire to prove anything, and there is no need to. History is history, so nothing for me to prove. AMC published the unhobbled road tests if you wish to read them.

History maybe history and the best Wheels journo Mel Nichols ever squeezed out of a HG 350 when new was a 16......Same over at Modern Motor.

I have issue 51 of AMC. Proves my point that when you dyno tune an allegedly low mileage, unmolested 40 year old car and retest it the performance figures will be favorable than when new. With this in mind I'm willing to bet that if you found low mileage originals of all those old muscle cars, dyno tune them, and retest, I guarantee every one of them records far better times than 1971 given the benefit of the same conditions. They'd have to as you said with the exception of the HG they were all hobbled... So what changes 40 years later?? Nothing. The HG McKinnon is still slower than a XW GTHO and a R/T E49.

All I'm asking is where is this history FROM the day is published?? Why is that difficult for you?

The HD wasn't that bad. I wouldn't mind a HD X2 Premier. It's funny that some of the necessaries we take for granted these days were options back in 1965. Looking through the NASCO option list for the HD you could order seat belts (and they were non retracting), handbrake warning lamp, a portable 'Air Chief' radio, power brakes, heater, reverse lamps, windscreen washer, locking petrol cap (don't even have one for the FG Falcon!!!) high note horn, glove box lamp, tinted windscreen, visor vanity mirror and for that travelling family a matching 6 piece luggage set and water bag carrier!!!

[BENT_8]

Why is it so hard to believe, you do know the two famous letters, HO, stood for High Output, not Handling Options don't you.

Just because the supercar scare hadn't arrived in news papers at that stage doesn't mean they weren't already fearing public/political backlash.

If Ford new insurance companies were concerned with these new supercars, why wouldn't Holden?

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by BluFGXR6

History maybe history and the best Wheels journo Mel Nichols ever squeezed out of a HG 350 when new was a 16......Same over at Modern Motor.

I have issue 51 of AMC. Proves my point that when you dyno tune an allegedly low mileage, unmolested 40 year old car and retest it the performance figures will be favorable than when new. With this in mind I'm willing to bet that if you found low mileage originals of all those old muscle cars, dyno tune them, and retest, I guarantee every one of them records far better times than 1971 given the benefit of the same conditions. They'd have to as you said with the exception of the HG they were all hobbled... So what changes 40 years later?? Nothing. The HG McKinnon is still slower than a XW GTHO and a R/T E49.

All I'm asking is where is this history FROM the day is published?? Why is that difficult for you?

The HD wasn't that bad. I wouldn't mind a HD X2 Premier. It's funny that some of the necessaries we take for granted these days were options back in 1965. Looking through the NASCO option list for the HD you could order seat belts (and they were non retracting), handbrake warning lamp, a portable 'Air Chief' radio, power brakes, heater, reverse lamps, windscreen washer, locking petrol cap (don't even have one for the FG Falcon!!!) high note horn, glove box lamp, tinted windscreen, visor vanity mirror and for that travelling family a matching 6 piece luggage set and water bag carrier!!!

How can you prove something from 40 years ago.

Prove Moffat's XY HO was a genuine 1 of 300 HO, seeing as it was scrapped after the Surfers event and unless im mistaken there is no ID tag around to prove it.

Yes, someone will type in capitals that IT WAS A GENUINE GTHO, because that's the belief, but as far as I know it cant be 100% proven, even with the caps lock on.

[Kingsley]

If everybody got on here and said that journo X reckons that car Y actually faster than car Z wouldn't you want to see the results yourself or are you just happy to rely on hearsay or tests done 40 years later after the fact?

Like I said I have a Brock Monaro here I'll sell you cheap....you'll have to take my word it was his though......

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by BluFGXR6

If everybody got on here and said that journo X reckons that car Y actually faster than car Z wouldn't you want to see the results yourself or are you just happy to rely on hearsay or tests done 40 years later after the fact?

Like I said I have a Brock Monaro here I'll sell you cheap....you'll have to take my word it was his though......

No, I don't, I can ask for the same evidence that you require.

[Kingsley]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

How can you prove something from 40 years ago.

Prove Moffat's XY HO was a genuine 1 of 300 HO, seeing as it was scrapped after the Surfers event and unless im mistaken there is no ID tag around to prove it.

Yes, someone will type in capitals that IT WAS A GENUINE GTHO, because that's the belief, but as far as I know it cant be 100% proven, even with the caps lock on.

How do you prove something from 40 years ago??? Easy in this case. He said magazine articles with tests done at the time. Which magazines is what I'm asking. How's that a difficult concept to grasp? That's all I want to know.

Couldn't care less if Moffs car was a HO or not because it was a factory race car and we all know race car's are a little different. In fact it is about as far removed from a HD Holden or McKinnon HG as you can get. Do you one better. You seem to have all the answers, prove it wasn't a GTHO. Not that I care one iota, but since you bought it up......

Again on my word of it's authenticity, (and since we apparently we don't need facts or proof) do you still wanna buy my HQ Brock Monaro? I'll throw in a bridge I own in Sydney..You can see the Opera House I own from there. Can do you a package deal if you want...

Proof?? Ok

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKvwm4VY8hg

Disclaimer..Brock may or may not have ever owned said HQ Monaro. Claims on bridge and Opera House ownership may also be false...

Fact is I'm a history buff and have a keen interest in this era. I prefer to be able to read the evidence from the period for myself, not rely on 'because I said so'. Why is that so hard for you to grasp BENT 8?? Your happy to believe what was written 40 years later, I prefer at the time which HK said is available. I'd like to know where. Is that too hard or maybe non existent?

Oh and to answer your other irrelevant question from before 'HO' was Fords tribute to the humble gardening implement. It was later changed to 'Housing Oz'.....

[castellan]

Originally Posted by HK1837

They never hobbled the HG, it was the original HT press test cars that were hobbled, they did the same to the HK. They were hobbled to hide the car's potential. Those cars were built to win races, and they didn't want Ford or others to get a heads up on it. That is 100% understandable. Ford built the XR GT as it knew what GMH was planning with the HK Monaro GTS, that info was leaked from inside GMH and has been confirmed by people inside Ford at the time.This is all spelled out in AMC as well if you choose to read it. If it is published there with a certain author's name on it it is fact, just because the original trabnscripts of conversations or original documents aren't published doesn't mean it isn't fact.

The proof of the hobbling was when motor journalists got hold of both early and late HG GTS350's to test. They couldn't believe how good the cars were. Those articles are re-published in the AMC magazine if you want to see them. The 40 years old car was tested to see if what the tests on those cars in 1971 were factual, and it matched those results near perfectly using the same testing methods, hence it is 100% valid. That was the purpose of testing an untouched car. The same applies to HK. Find tests done on cars that weren't supplied by GMH for HK testing as well. I think it was ??? Luck (surname) who tested one and the title of it was "Forget everything you have been told" or something like that. Dave Bennett's HK was also tested prior to him modifying it for drag racing, that test is out there too if you are interested.

I don't need to provide this evidence, I have it which is all I need for my purposes. If you are interested go looking, it is in magazines and newspapers of the day. Amazing what you'll find. I've found heaps recently on unrelated stuff just looking at old newspaper archives, some stuff which was obviously public knowledge back then but not used in later historical publishing outside of AMC as they all just go for original road tests.

And nothing I have said is anything other than fact. I wouldn't write it on a public forum otherwise, I know you don't know me and understand that but if you did you'd also know that to be fact.

From all the test I have on the HK GTS 327 Monaro's and HT-G GTS 350 Monaro's it's the diff ratios the fools don't talk about and this can make a big difference then theirs hopeless test drivers and test where the car is running off song.
You don't rev one of this lot to 6000 RPM in 1st 2ed 3rd gear. but how many do you see do it. even 5500 RPM is to much and it kills the times like you would not believe. try 4500 in 1st 4500 in 2ed maybe 5000 in 3rd. and you will see the times drop.

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by BluFGXR6

How do you prove something from 40 years ago??? Easy in this case. He said magazine articles with tests done at the time. Which magazines is what I'm asking. How's that a difficult concept to grasp? That's all I want to know.

Couldn't care less if Moffs car was a HO or not because it was a factory race car and we all know race car's are a little different. In fact it is about as far removed from a HD Holden or McKinnon HG as you can get. Do you one better. You seem to have all the answers, prove it wasn't a GTHO. Not that I care one iota, but since you bought it up......

Again on my word of it's authenticity, (and since we apparently we don't need facts or proof) do you still wanna buy my HQ Brock Monaro? I'll throw in a bridge I own in Sydney..You can see the Opera House I own from there. Can do you a package deal if you want...

Proof?? Ok

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKvwm4VY8hg

Disclaimer..Brock may or may not have ever owned said HQ Monaro. Claims on bridge and Opera House ownership may also be false...

Fact is I'm a history buff and have a keen interest in this era. I prefer to be able to read the evidence from the period for myself, not rely on 'because I said so'. Why is that so hard for you to grasp BENT 8?? Your happy to believe what was written 40 years later, I prefer at the time which HK said is available. I'd like to know where. Is that too hard or maybe non existent?

Oh and to answer your other irrelevant question from before 'HO' was Fords tribute to the humble gardening implement. It was later changed to 'Housing Oz'.....

I don't even care honestly, all I was pointing out was that things happened 40 years ago which either cant be confirmed or isn't available at the click of a mouse button.
If HK turns up with something to back it up so be it, if not, who cares, it wouldn't be the first time inaccurate info was displayed on here.
Don't get worked up over it, its just cars man, we've all got bigger issues...

[The FOMOCO]

The HD Holden actually holds 2 records 1 for sales and 2 is for being the biggest rust bucket the general has ever produced the HR is second for rust. Compared to a Falcon they were badly designed for rust problems but were cheaper to run

[HK1837]

It is simple.

GMH did hobble the press test HK and HT GTS327/350. THESE CARS WERE BUILT FOR RACE DUTY. Simple. These were built to race cars, same as HO's were built for one purpose. I don't know how they were hobbled but I have been told it was most likely to do with the operation of the secondaries on the Quadrajet, a simple and effective mod and easily reversed.

Mel Nichols tested a HG GTS350 (early car, same identical mechanical specs as HT GTS350) in wheels in 1970. Article is titled "Wheels on Fire". He was getting 0-100mph times of 16sec, 3 seconds faster than the press fleet HT GTS350's. Not hobbled my butt!
Robbo then tested the McKinnon spec HG GTS350 and reported in July 1971 Wheels and apologised to Mel as he had scoffed at Mel's article on the HG. Sound familiar??

The low mile HG was tested to prove that Mel and Robbo were correct, simple.

It is all there in black and white in AMC issue 51. Enough said. No conspiracy, no smoke and mirrors. All facts presented in a clear and logical fashion. If that isn't understandable to blue eyed Ford fans then nothing will be.

There is a lot more info from the day that I won't make public, as a friend is actually doing a book on these cars and will reveal it all in time. I'm not going to jump the gun on this.

A HT/HG GTS350 being slower than an XW GT-HO. Hmmm. Both of these cars were purposebuilt race cars, so the track is where it matters most I guess. What won not just Bathurst 1969 but a lot of other races against the XW GT-HO in the same period? What car had the fastest lap times at Bathurst in 1969 (very famous driver)?
I have no doubt the PhaseII and III are and have always been the benchmark of Aussie production vehicles of their day, and are undoubtedly faster than any standard GMH product of their day on the road, and more than likely still would have beaten even an LT1 fitted HG GTS350 on the race track primarily due to brakes as a race prepped LT1 would have been a match for either of these cars in power. Maybe the E49 was quicker, but maybe the car tested to give the low 14sec time was fiddled with? I'm no Chrysler nut so I don't know. But history shows Ford built the PhaseII as the GT-HO wasn't good enough to beat the HT GTS350 where it mattered, ie at Bathurst. The GT-HO was built because of the HK GTS327. Al Turner's directive to win at any cost created these fantastic PhaseII and III HO's that Ford fans cherish. This is all well spelled out in AMC issue 71 if you are interested.

[castellan]

Originally Posted by HK1837

It is simple.

GMH did hobble the press test HK and HT GTS327/350. THESE CARS WERE BUILT FOR RACE DUTY. Simple. These were built to race cars, same as HO's were built for one purpose. I don't know how they were hobbled but I have been told it was most likely to do with the operation of the secondaries on the Quadrajet, a simple and effective mod and easily reversed.

Mel Nichols tested a HG GTS350 (early car, same identical mechanical specs as HT GTS350) in wheels in 1970. Article is titled "Wheels on Fire". He was getting 0-100mph times of 16sec, 3 seconds faster than the press fleet HT GTS350's. Not hobbled my butt!
Robbo then tested the McKinnon spec HG GTS350 and reported in July 1971 Wheels and apologised to Mel as he had scoffed at Mel's article on the HG. Sound familiar??

The low mile HG was tested to prove that Mel and Robbo were correct, simple.

It is all there in black and white in AMC issue 51. Enough said. No conspiracy, no smoke and mirrors. All facts presented in a clear and logical fashion. If that isn't understandable to blue eyed Ford fans then nothing will be.

There is a lot more info from the day that I won't make public, as a friend is actually doing a book on these cars and will reveal it all in time. I'm not going to jump the gun on this.

A HT/HG GTS350 being slower than an XW GT-HO. Hmmm. Both of these cars were purposebuilt race cars, so the track is where it matters most I guess. What won not just Bathurst 1969 but a lot of other races against the XW GT-HO in the same period? What car had the fastest lap times at Bathurst in 1969 (very famous driver)?
I have no doubt the PhaseII and III are and have always been the benchmark of Aussie production vehicles of their day, and are undoubtedly faster than any standard GMH product of their day on the road, and more than likely still would have beaten even an LT1 fitted HG GTS350 on the race track primarily due to brakes as a race prepped LT1 would have been a match for either of these cars in power. Maybe the E49 was quicker, but maybe the car tested to give the low 14sec time was fiddled with? I'm no Chrysler nut so I don't know. But history shows Ford built the PhaseII as the GT-HO wasn't good enough to beat the HT GTS350 where it mattered, ie at Bathurst. The GT-HO was built because of the HK GTS327. Al Turner's directive to win at any cost created these fantastic PhaseII and III HO's that Ford fans cherish. This is all well spelled out in AMC issue 71 if you are interested.

Race cars ! you have to be joking ! most people bought them because they performed well and never raced them, maybe the odd drag or two and a good fang now and then.

A HT GTS LT1 Monaro now that's the one I would pick to buy for the street back in the day.

A HK GTS 327 is on par with a XT GT 302
A HT-G GTS 350 is on par with a only the XW-Y-A GT 351
A HQ GTS 350 is on par with a XB GT 351

Bathurst does not mean jack to me as it's only a race track.

Look at the Torana XU-1 it's not a race car, only the so called Bathurst were the big guns and not many could even buy one from new as well as the LH L34 or even the best of the XA GT RPO.

Even the GT-HO P2 and P3 did not have the higher lift cam that some used at Bathurst.

I have the 1986 book 'muscle cars' and she has all the old cars times and all and but as for the HG GTS 350 they say she fell off song and they claim because of faulty timing equipment they recorded only one 0 to 100 mph in 16.3 sec now I do believe the HG is using a 3.08 diff ( the idiots don't say the ratio ) and the HT is using a 3.36 diff ratio.

They have a XA GT with 0 to 100 mph in 18.7 sec & 1/4 in 15.6 with a 3.0 ratio diff, now that close to the HT GTS 350 and what about the XY GT-HO it did 0 to 100 mph = 15.2 / 110 mph in 18.5 sec / 120 mph in 22.5 sec

[HK1837]

They were built to make the car to qualify for race duty. GM had a worldwide ban on racing, GMH had to disguise the HK as its own model not an option pack like GM did it in those days. It was in GMH's interest to play the car down as much as possible. This is what I mean by race cars, and they did what they were designed to do ie win the Bathurst 500. As far as the car's street performance that was of secondary concern - you can tell by the HK GTS suspension that this is the case.
I agree, a HK is direct competition for an XT GT, albeit significantly quicker around Bathurst. Just look at the colour photo at autopics of the end of the first lap. Monaros as far as you can see. No Fords. The HK had a little more power and Bathurst was a power track.
Also agree HT GTS350 race car is a direct competitor for an XW GT-HO, but was never developed to go up against the Cleveland engined cars. They'd have needed Firth's HG LT1 for that. he talks about it in the magazine articles he was writing at his death, called Holden and I.
HQ GTS350 was never designed as a race car, engine is simply a stock low comp slug. A HQ currently holds the Masters record around Bathurst today though, but a far cry from a 1971 HQ!
Toranas were never really race cars either, not in those early days, they were the start of the homologation of parts cars. By the time Group C hit the cars were a far cry from anything we could buy and drive on the streets.