E49 Chargers

[4stanger]

Originally Posted by MethodX

They all hobbled their cars, for fear of a supercar scare happening (happened anyway), and not to run foul of the insurance companies.

Happened in America too.

I find this hard to believe, especially hobbling a hg monaro,
Supercar scare started 1972?
they finish building hg monaros by then.
Up until the supercar scare, I would have thought manufacturers would have been bending over backwards to build/sell the "fastest car"
This would help improve the image of the manufacturer at the time,
urban myths at the time would helped sales of the brand,
eg. holden makes the fastest car so I will buy the belmont

[Kingsley]

Originally Posted by MethodX

They all hobbled their cars, for fear of a supercar scare happening (happened anyway), and not to run foul of the insurance companies.

Happened in America too.

So now they all hobbled their cars??? Only strengthens my point that an R/T Charger E49 or XW GTHO PH II (even the XA GTHO PH IV or RPO 83) would run far better times under the exact same conditions 42 years later. By using the same method, my HQ 308 GTS 4 speed is now capable of sub 16.6 sec 1/4 times 40 years later (stop laughing people....it could happen!!)
If Harry Firth reckoned the HG GTS 350 was capable of winning Bathurst in it's new found high performance mode, he would've used it. But by the time 1971 rolled around, he was deep in developing the XU-1 anyway. I doubt the wished for larger oil cooled brakes on the HG GTS 350 wouldn't have changed his mind either. (power to weight is in favour of the Torana).
America?? Who cares??? Aren't we talking oz muscle cars??? In particular the R/T E49 Charger??
So back on topic, even the R/T Charger E38 ran an impressive 14.8. The later E55 340 a 15.5. But since Bathurst (which is what they were bulit for) has corners and requires you to brake, 1/4 mile times somehow seem irrelevant.

[MethodX]

Originally Posted by BluFGXR6

So now they all hobbled their cars??? Only strengthens my point that an R/T Charger E49 or XW GTHO PH II (even the XA GTHO PH IV or RPO 83) would run far better times under the exact same conditions 42 years later. By using the same method, my HQ 308 GTS 4 speed is now capable of sub 16.6 sec 1/4 times 40 years later (stop laughing people....it could happen!!)
If Harry Firth reckoned the HG GTS 350 was capable of winning Bathurst in it's new found high performance mode, he would've used it. But by the time 1971 rolled around, he was deep in developing the XU-1 anyway. I doubt the wished for larger oil cooled brakes on the HG GTS 350 wouldn't have changed his mind either. (power to weight is in favour of the Torana).
America?? Who cares??? Aren't we talking oz muscle cars??? In particular the R/T E49 Charger??
So back on topic, even the R/T Charger E38 ran an impressive 14.8. The later E55 340 a 15.5. But since Bathurst (which is what they were bulit for) has corners and requires you to brake, 1/4 mile times somehow seem irrelevant.

Forgetting that Holden at the time didn't have a gung ho, manager like ford did? Joe Felice wasn't prepared to keep releasing hotter and hotter holdens, with their cripping imported parts bills. Shame.

So they went with the Torana, much cheaper to hot up a local car with a small 6.

As for when they tested the HQ Monaro, you are right, they found it a dog, they installed the wrong rear shocks and broke the mountings.

[KW XRT]

Originally Posted by Stefan

Spot on! Chrysler never achieved any race domination in the 70's. If the E49 had achieved an outright win and then 4 or 5 scattered amongst the top ten there would be much more demand.

That is why XR GTs, Phase 2 and Phase 3s, A9X, XU1s, 327 Monaros have such a fan base. Racing success!

The Charger won 7 races from memeory and pretty much broke the lap record on every track it raced on save Bathurst.The reason it gets left out is simple we were all living under rocks in the those days.Who knows the charger won the Tobbe Lee 100 and filled five of the 6 first cars home.The is so much crap about the Chargers lies miss truths and down right thick as two bricks statements.Like the race cars were V8' HEMI"S .They didn't have brakes they didn't handle bla bla bla.Fact is the "3" speed E38 came up against the phase 111 after five years of development and as good as the E38 was it couldn't over come the four speed and five years of development.Even on Chargers second year at Bathurst it knocked 6 seconds a lap off from development with the four speed.Although the racing drivers of the day will tell you the three speed did not hamper lap times and they are right it killed their acceleration and qualifying position and forced them to waste too much time in the race for no good reason often racing back to their qualifying position.Sheer weight in numbers also hampered it.Had the Grace brothers charger of day raced by I think Norm Beechy had more development and used roller rockers as was the custom of the day it would have won the Improved production championship in 73 I think it was.

[KW XRT]

Further more the lies continue Chargers and valiant's in general were the most reliable cars to attempt Bathurst .Although they didn't win you had a 20% better chance of finishing than you did in both a ford and a holden.Fact is they broke more 9" diffs and more Top loaders and more 351's than any of the running gear in a charger.As for the Torana how it won any races is beyond me.With 11 DNF'S pretty much broke everything known to man and then some.lol

[Franco Cozzo]

Anyone done EFI and turbo on one of these 265s before? We all know how well the 4L I6 went with some extra help in the air department.

[KW XRT]

Originally Posted by KW XRT

Further more the lies continue Chargers and valiant's in general were the most reliable cars to attempt Bathurst .Although they didn't win you had a 20% better chance of finishing than you did in both a ford and a holden.Fact is they broke more 9" diffs and more Top loaders and more 351's than any of the running gear in a charger.

The E48 races on.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?f...type=3&theater

[KW XRT]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

Anyone done EFI and turbo on one of these 265s before? We all know how well the 4L I6 went with some extra help in the air department.

Still pretty much untapped but a bloke by the name of Russel {don't quote me** got some fanominal HP from a 265 at Summernats some years ago.It was like 363 RWHP.It was some 88 RWHP above the nearest rival.Absolutely unheard of.Can you imagine a someone in a 5lt doing that.lolAs for the turbo and the EFI pretty much all been done with limited success.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by KW XRT

The Charger won 7 races from memeory and pretty much broke the lap record on every track it raced on save Bathurst.The reason it gets left out is simple we were all living under rocks in the those days.Who knows the charger won the Tobbe Lee 100 and filled five of the 6 first cars home.The is so much crap about the Chargers lies miss truths and down right thick as two bricks statements.Like the race cars were V8' HEMI"S .They didn't have brakes they didn't handle bla bla bla.Fact is the "3" speed E38 came up against the phase 111 after five years of development and as good as the E38 was it couldn't over come the four speed and five years of development.Even on Chargers second year at Bathurst it knocked 6 seconds a lap off from development with the four speed.Although the racing drivers of the day will tell you the three speed did not hamper lap times and they are right it killed their acceleration and qualifying position and forced them to waste too much time in the race for no good reason often racing back to their qualifying position.Sheer weight in numbers also hampered it.Had the Grace brothers charger of day raced by I think Norm Beechy had more development and used roller rockers as was the custom of the day it would have won the Improved production championship in 73 I think it was.

Coulda, should, woulda.

They were a good thing but they never won any of the big races or championships, so no one cares. And Chrysler never had the following of Ford or Holden either so even less people care.

Might have been a different story if they had won Bathurst.

[mcnews]

I think they won something like seven NZ Touring Car Titles which may have been a better reflection on their qualities than a single top speed track like bathurst.

[PepeLePew]

Listening to those clips makes whats left of my hair stand on end. Been a while since I hit a subscribe button on a thread....

[Blem]

Loved that youtube link from GRIPPY. 7-9 seconds into it

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by mcnews

I think they won something like seven NZ Touring Car Titles which may have been a better reflection on their qualities than a single top speed track like bathurst.

Doesn't mean much here in Oz though.

[mcnews]

Depends if you have a wider understanding of motorsport than one weekend in October :-)

[smoo]

Originally Posted by mcnews

I think they won something like seven NZ Touring Car Titles which may have been a better reflection on their qualities than a single top speed track like bathurst.

Most likely not noticed in Oz(?) and I believe Chrysler who were assembling all models locally put just as much money behind the Charger as what Ford and Holden were doing with the GTs and Monaro/Torana. So who knows what the story would have been if Chrysler Australia had pockets as deep and Ford and Holdens racing budgets. I'm sure the Charger is also the most successful production race car in NZ as well.

The first season of the Castrol GTX series was a brutal affair. A young Jim Richards won the series, after building an early points buffer in his McMillan Falcon GT-HO Phase III. But early race wins were split evenly between the several tyre shredding GT-HOs and the more nimble Torana XU-1s, before Timaru racer Leo Leonard gave a taste of things to come, winning a spate of late season races in his E38 Charger. Leonard’s end of season momentum suggested the Chargers may be the car to have for 1973, and so it proved.

Chrysler Australia’s new four-speed E49 simply cleaned up. Those not running Chargers either quickly swapped brands, or became mere grid fillers. Ford arranged for Allan Moffat to come across from Australia to compete at Wigram, bringing with him one of the all-conquering GT-HOs which had dominated Australian production racing for the last two years. He was, naturally, expected to bring a halt to the Charger steamroller, but Leonard blew him away in practice, qualifying 1.1 seconds faster, and led the Canadian-Aussie during the early laps before the pair of them retired with their own dramas. Following their exit, the E49s of Ron Rutherford and Rod Coppins grabbed the top spots. The GT-HO was quietly sent home after it was again bombarded by the Chargers at Teretonga, Timaru, and Ruapuna, now driven by Jim Richards.

It seemed the only way to stop the flying Chargers was to outlaw them, which is what happened. As the rules favoured the Aussie Bathurst specials, and since Australia had changed to Group C from 1973, it became clear there would not be another production car capable of dealing to the Charger E49 on New Zealand turf any time soon, so the rules were simply re-written to outlaw them.

http://www.classiccar.co.nz/articles...gtx-series-183

AMC magazine have covered Moffats Ford funded trip to NZ. Cant remember what issue.

[XBROO]

Surprised it hasn't been said yet but 'HEY CHARGER'. For me I couldn't care if they never won a race. For a six in a big car, they are just awesome to go like they did. Even today show me a N/A six that can pull 14.4 down a quarter, straight from factory.

[EgoFG]

I just gotta say, that anyone that discounts the Charger was probably not around when school kids would do the V sign to police cars, and the police would smile.

Yeah, it aint around today, but it was a popular car in its day, and perhaps the most popular (relatively speaking) two door version of a four door car.

[Blem]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Doesn't mean much here in Oz though.

Hey Bossxr8
Appreciate all of your input & also knowledge from the production floor
but pls
IF you just want to crap on these great Australian cars pls don't.
All vehicles had/have their flaws.
Good thread on a great Aussie car.
IMO these cars are a very noteworthy part of our motoring heritage.

[CAMS290]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

Anyone done EFI and turbo on one of these 265s before? We all know how well the 4L I6 went with some extra help in the air department.

Mine was a 11/77 CL Charger SE, 265, 4 Speed single rail, BW single spinner, believed to be one of the last Chargers ever made, there was no CM Chargers made.

265 was bored 60 thou, E49 Crank and rods, forged pistons, custom turbo cam,
Wayne Mahnken custom manifolds, Garrett T04, Twin CD Strombergs, water/metho injection, new process 4 speed, twin plate clutch, nine inch 3.3:1
V8 torsion bars, B45 Simmons.

This car had over 450RWHP at 18 pounds boost and absolutely destroyed anything that came up against it, had trouble keeping head gaskets in it so in the end I de compressed it and used a custom copper head gasket and kept the boost down, it was still bloody fast.

[HO 3]

Originally Posted by mcnews

I think they won something like seven NZ Touring Car Titles which may have been a better reflection on their qualities than a single top speed track like bathurst.

The big problem for the E49 Charger is 2 questions.......

Which car won Bathurst in 1971 in the year of its manufacture 1, 2 and 3?

Which car won the ATCC in 1973?

It's the simple stats that bookend the E49s provenance as a race car in Australia

Cheers Mick

[CAMS290]

The E49 was the fastest accelerating Australian car until the HSV GTS-R came along in 1996, it was half a second quicker to 100mph than a phase 3, not bad credentials from a little 4.3 litre 6 cylinder.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by Blem

Hey Bossxr8
Appreciate all of your input & also knowledge from the production floor
but pls
IF you just want to crap on these great Australian cars pls don't.
All vehicles had/have their flaws.
Good thread on a great Aussie car.
IMO these cars are a very noteworthy part of our motoring heritage.

Did you read the part where I said they were a good thing. Obviously glossed over that to jump to conclusions.

Never did I say they were crap, just that they don't have the racing accolades the HO's had, because they never won any of the big races or championships here.

Who cares what they did in New Zealand, it means 2 fifths of bugger all here in Australia.

I'm sure it means something to the Kiwis, and it may also mean they have a higher regard for the Charger over there, but I don't live there so I don't know. Only thing that matters to me is the ATCC.

[Kingsley]

Originally Posted by MethodX

Forgetting that Holden at the time didn't have a gung ho, manager like ford did? Joe Felice wasn't prepared to keep releasing hotter and hotter holdens, with their cripping imported parts bills. Shame.

So they went with the Torana, much cheaper to hot up a local car with a small 6.

As for when they tested the HQ Monaro, you are right, they found it a dog, they installed the wrong rear shocks and broke the mountings.

Don't know what 'gung ho' managers have to do with it. Holden committed themselves to the same ****ing contest as Ford and Chrysler. They were all actively chasing the same performance image for the rewards it bought. And like Holden, Ford or Chrysler didn't have open cheque books either. Don't bring a spoon to a gun fight...

I doubt Holden ever considered developing the small block Chev engine locally. The only reason we got the Chev in the first place was as a stop gap measure due to the development of the new Holden V8 being way behind schedule and not available for the launch of the HK series. So why would Holden even want to spend money it supposedly didn't have on developing a very short term, stop gap engine, already obsolete to their future needs even before it was introduced? Particularly when they were devolving their own small block. Besides, it was a moot point by the time the HG arrived.

The decision by Firth to develop the 6cyl Torana over the V8 Monaro for racing would've been greatly influenced in part by the knowledge Holden gained from decades of developing the popular 6 banger from not only themselves, but from the many racers and high performance aftermarket tuners around at the time. Particularly when it's put in a light weight shell like the Torana, which also had better handling and braking than the Monaro. Much like he did with the Cortina over the early Falcon.

With all that in mind, until AMCM finds a time machine or factory fresh, unmolested XW GTHO's and RT/E49's to dyno tune running on cleaner fuel, then go out and re-run the quarter like they did the Monaro 40 years later, the results are debatable, regardless how good the McKinnon blocks were.

[mcnews]

When I think it was the 1996 HSV VS GTS-R (the extra special yellow thingo they did which was HUGE news at the time with HSV going from 5.0 to 5.7 litre for it etc.) came out Motor did a thing with EB GT, Phase III, E49, A9X etc. Brocky was really enthused about the E49 said it had so much torque compared to the others etc. It was still faster down the 1/4 than the VR GTS even with the optional I think it was $12,000 HSV blueprinting of the engine, lol. Was so funny.

[mcnews]

Here some pics of the one I had.

[Grippy]

That is absolutely beautiful mcnews.

[DJR-351]

Other than the number plate and mine having Hotwires, it's exactly the same as the one I had......

[EgoFG]

So ... given that the HSV is a modified car (GM Holden, purchased partially complete, and then modified by a Walkinshaw company).... what was the first Australian factory car to out-accelerate the val ?

[mcnews]

Probably another six-cylinder, the F6 :-)
Which is also the only other Aussie muscle car to have an Australian produced engine from the block up. I don't count any of the Holden 308s as muscle cars as they were all so dog slow in standard form that it is downright embarrassing.

[castellan]

Originally Posted by BluFGXR6

Don't know what 'gung ho' managers have to do with it. Holden committed themselves to the same ****ing contest as Ford and Chrysler. They were all actively chasing the same performance image for the rewards it bought. And like Holden, Ford or Chrysler didn't have open cheque books either. Don't bring a spoon to a gun fight...

I doubt Holden ever considered developing the small block Chev engine locally. The only reason we got the Chev in the first place was as a stop gap measure due to the development of the new Holden V8 being way behind schedule and not available for the launch of the HK series. So why would Holden even want to spend money it supposedly didn't have on developing a very short term, stop gap engine, already obsolete to their future needs even before it was introduced? Particularly when they were devolving their own small block. Besides, it was a moot point by the time the HG arrived.

The decision by Firth to develop the 6cyl Torana over the V8 Monaro for racing would've been greatly influenced in part by the knowledge Holden gained from decades of developing the popular 6 banger from not only themselves, but from the many racers and high performance aftermarket tuners around at the time. Particularly when it's put in a light weight shell like the Torana, which also had better handling and braking than the Monaro. Much like he did with the Cortina over the early Falcon.

With all that in mind, until AMCM finds a time machine or factory fresh, unmolested XW GTHO's and RT/E49's to dyno tune running on cleaner fuel, then go out and re-run the quarter like they did the Monaro 40 years later, the results are debatable, regardless how good the McKinnon blocks were.

One has to read all about the why we got the holden V8 over the chev V8 and that rubbish chev 6 cyl junk.
The holden V8 was more advanced than the chev V8 for our conditions it was lighter as well. the chev V8 has the number one cyl on the wrong side for aussie car. the cost involved in making chev engines hear came into it as well and we got the 351 Cleveland in aus because it was finished in the USA.

6 cyl Cortina were rubbish handling because the motor was to far forward and had nothing on the holden 6 as a race motor.

McKinnon blocks mean nothing, only the casting of some blocks are stronger due to metal type regardless of where they were made. and i do not believe the last batch of HG 350 were anything much better than the early HG or HT 350. if anything it would be due to the cam that would make it a faster engine but i have not come across anyone who can confirm that as a fact.