Javascript Disabled Detected

You currently have javascript disabled. Several functions may not work. Please re-enable javascript to access full functionality.

What is a 72 Bathurst XU-1?

Started by _ck1971_ , Jan 17 2007 06:17 PM

«
Prev

Page 4 of 21
2
3
4
5
6

Next
»

Please log in to reply

512 replies to this topic

#76 FLY_AGAIN_XU-1

Forum Fixture

Banned
1,653 posts

Joined: 01-September 06

Posted 01 February 2007 - 11:16 PM

They did produce 42 cars on Friday 1-9-1972 to show someone !

Back to top

#77 FLY_AGAIN_XU-1

Forum Fixture

Banned
1,653 posts

Joined: 01-September 06

Posted 01 February 2007 - 11:31 PM

These 'specials within a special' were sold as ordinary XU-1,s.

Back to top

#78 _ck1971_

Guests

Posted 02 February 2007 - 12:05 AM

GM had a no race policy, which we know killed the V8 XU2.

Now I would tend to believe that the 72 Specials and the V8 XU1 would have been developing almost side by side

The V8 XU-1 was killed off by the media and pressure from politicians not the GMH no racing policy.

For Bathurst 72 GMH originally planned to use the V8 XU-1 but when these were cancelled GMH needed a replacement to compete with the GT-HO and this is when the improved XU-1 we now call a 72 Bathurst Special was developed, so the two cars were never developed at the same time, had the V8 XU-1 been produced there would have never been another Special XU-1 produced in 72.

CK.

Back to top

#79 _ck1971_

Guests

Posted 02 February 2007 - 12:07 AM

There appears to have been a lot more than 150 73 Bathurst cars as well Sunburst !

Fly,

Which cars are you referring to?

CK.

Back to top

#80 FLY_AGAIN_XU-1

Forum Fixture

Banned
1,653 posts

Joined: 01-September 06

Posted 02 February 2007 - 12:33 AM

You may have to start a new thread ck :cry:

Ill start on the production figures !!!!!!!!!!!

Back to top

#81 _ck1971_

Guests

Posted 02 February 2007 - 09:35 PM

You may have to start a new thread ck

Not for the 73 Bathurst cars the list of engine numbers makes it much easier to identify those.

Back to top

#82 FLY_AGAIN_XU-1

Forum Fixture

Banned
1,653 posts

Joined: 01-September 06

Posted 02 February 2007 - 10:21 PM

PRODUCTION FIGURES 1973

( COMBINDED ADELAIDE & BRISBANE )

JUNE - 10
JULY - 92
AUGUST - 125
SEPTEMBER - 69
OCTOBER - 3
NOVEMBER - 2
(NNR) - 1

TOTAL 302

Back to top

#83 FLY_AGAIN_XU-1

Forum Fixture

Banned
1,653 posts

Joined: 01-September 06

Posted 02 February 2007 - 10:28 PM

Not for the 73 Bathurst cars the list of engine numbers makes it much easier to identify those.

Thats what i thought to ck !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Back to top

#84 FLY_AGAIN_XU-1

Forum Fixture

Banned
1,653 posts

Joined: 01-September 06

Posted 03 February 2007 - 08:51 AM

PRODUCTION FIGURES 1973

( COMBINDED ADELAIDE & BRISBANE )

JUNE� � � � � � -� � � 10
JULY� � � � � � -� � � � 92
AUGUST� � � � -� � � 125
SEPTEMBER� -� � � � 69
OCTOBER� � -� � � � � 3
NOVEMBER� -� � � � � 2
(NNR)� � � � � -� � � � � 1

TOTAL� � � � � � � � � 302

Amendment 6/6V 15-6-1973

PRODUCTION FIGURES 1972

( COMBINDED ADELAIDE & BRISBANE )

SEPTEMBER 302

Edited by FLY_AGAIN_XU-1, 03 February 2007 - 08:57 AM.

Back to top

#85 _Fanxu1_

Guests

Posted 03 February 2007 - 09:07 AM

GM had a no race policy, which we know killed the V8 XU2.

Now I would tend to believe that the 72 Specials and the V8 XU1 would have been developing almost side by side

The V8 XU-1 was killed off by the media and pressure from politicians not the GMH no racing policy.

For Bathurst 72 GMH originally planned to use the V8 XU-1 but when these were cancelled GMH needed a replacement to compete with the GT-HO and this is when the improved XU-1 we now call a 72 Bathurst Special was developed, so the two cars were never developed at the same time, had the V8 XU-1 been produced there would have never been another Special XU-1 produced in 72.

CK.

Motoring News..July 14th 1972..

Quote: " The whole deal was cancelled not so much because of media hysteria but the acting managing director rang the US head office after this newspaper article came out to ask advice on the ' racing car ' GM-H were builiding. As GM officially had a no race corporate policy at the time you can imagine the response."

Back to top

#86 _Fanxu1_

Guests

Posted 03 February 2007 - 09:31 AM

It's not a long stretch to summise that with the demise of the XU2 due to GM's ' no race ' policy ..the GMH's development of another race car for Bathurst 72 could/would have been a very shadowy process. The fact that' true ' performance figures of Special XU1 were suppressed by authorities under guise of registration and insurance purposes...poses it's own set of questions.

The Bathurst 72 Special was a race car designed to dislodge the Ford stranglehold.

Back to top

#87 FLY_AGAIN_XU-1

Forum Fixture

Banned
1,653 posts

Joined: 01-September 06

Posted 03 February 2007 - 09:51 AM

I wonder if the rules were the same in 1973 for the MANUFACTURERS CHAMPIONSHIP & BATHURST as they were in 1972 ????????????

Back to top

#88 FLY_AGAIN_XU-1

Forum Fixture

Banned
1,653 posts

Joined: 01-September 06

Posted 03 February 2007 - 10:05 AM

The V8 XU-1 was killed off by the media and pressure from politicians.

For Bathurst 72 GMH originally planned to use the V8 XU-1 but when these were cancelled GMH needed a replacement to compete with the GT-HO and this is when the improved XU-1 we now call a 72 Bathurst Special was developed.

CK.

Edited by FLY_AGAIN_XU-1, 03 February 2007 - 10:14 AM.

Back to top

#89 _Fanxu1_

Guests

Posted 03 February 2007 - 12:52 PM

Just to muddy the waters some more....

Fiv's book..Page 66

"Informed sources at around this time also indicated that Holden engineers were working on an automatic version of the 202 c.i.d ( 3310 ) LJ Torana XU1 which reportedly had a ' trick shift ' Trimatic automatic transmission coupled to a normal XU1 motor,"

While this does not clarify the XU2's and Specials being developed side by side, it does give some credence to the idea that during the XU2 phase, Holden was still looking at improving the performance of the XU1's.

Back to top

#90 _ck1971_

Guests

Posted 03 February 2007 - 04:30 PM

Motoring News..July 14th 1972..

Quote: " The whole deal was cancelled not so much because of media hysteria but the acting managing director rang the US head office after this newspaper article came out to ask advice on the ' racing car ' GM-H were builiding. As GM officially had a no race corporate policy at the time you can imagine the response."

Okay so if the V8 XU1 was cancelled because of the no racing policy then why did GMH produce firstly a Bathurst Monaro (327 & 350) and then the XU1. Surely the no racing policy would have prevented these cars being produced in the first place. Without the media hype and more importantly the ultimatum put to GMH, Ford and Chrysler by the transport Minister of the time these cars would have gone into production. The whole supercar scare was brought about by Evan Green writing his infamous newspaper article which started the whole thing rolling. The threat of losing government fleet sales was the main reason the V8 XU1 one was caned.

Back to top

#91 FLY_AGAIN_XU-1

Forum Fixture

Banned
1,653 posts

Joined: 01-September 06

Posted 03 February 2007 - 06:40 PM

PRODUCTION FIGURES 1973

( COMBINDED ADELAIDE & BRISBANE )

JUNE� � � � � �� -� � �� 10
JULY� � � � � �� -� � � � 92
AUGUST� � � � -� � � 125
SEPTEMBER� -� � � �� 69
OCTOBER� �� -� � � � �� 3
NOVEMBER�� -� � � � �� 2
(NNR)� � � � �� -� � � � � 1

TOTAL� � � � � � � � � 302
Amendment 6/6V 15-6-1973

PRODUCTION FIGURES 1972

( COMBINDED ADELAIDE & BRISBANE )

SEPTEMBER 302

All right, lets move on shall we ! :ZZZ:

Back to top

#92 FLY_AGAIN_XU-1

Forum Fixture

Banned
1,653 posts

Joined: 01-September 06

Posted 03 February 2007 - 06:42 PM

I wonder if the rules were the same in 1973 for the MANUFACTURERS CHAMPIONSHIP & BATHURST as they were in 1972 ????????????

Anyone ???

Back to top

#93 _ck1971_

Guests

Posted 03 February 2007 - 07:17 PM

It was Group C but the cars had to be homologated as before.

Back to top

#94 _Fanxu1_

Guests

Posted 03 February 2007 - 07:47 PM

Motoring News..July 14th 1972..

Quote: " The whole deal was cancelled not so much because of media hysteria but the acting managing director rang the US head office after this newspaper article came out to ask advice on the ' racing car ' GM-H were builiding. As GM officially had a no race corporate policy at the time you can imagine the response."
Okay so if the V8 XU1 was cancelled because of the no racing policy then why did GMH produce firstly a Bathurst Monaro (327 & 350) and then the XU1. Surely the no racing policy would have prevented these cars being produced in the first place. Without the media hype and more importantly the ultimatum put to GMH, Ford and Chrysler by the transport Minister of the time these cars would have gone into production. The whole supercar scare was brought about by Evan Green writing his infamous newspaper article which started the whole thing rolling. The threat of losing government fleet sales was the main reason the V8 XU1 one was caned.

The 2 most important questions to be asked about this period are.....

1) When and why was the ' no race car ' policy introduced and how long did it last?

2) Why was the introduction of the ' Special ' XU1 in 72....so underplayed?

This period was dominated by Ford and their ' big bangers ' and Holden would/could sell their right testicle to break the dominance. A car developed to win Bathurst will always be a race car.

And Fly...we have now maybe established that everything about this period of Australian Motor Racing History is steeped in disinformation and speculation.

Those who own the 73 Specials may find their numbers have just been doubled...forget the numbers and concentrate on the 72 dilemma that a vehicle was produced that GMH didn't want anyone to know about....apparently no race car was developed and produced in July/August/September 72......NOT :tease:

Back to top

#95 FLY_AGAIN_XU-1

Forum Fixture

Banned
1,653 posts

Joined: 01-September 06

Posted 04 February 2007 - 01:32 PM

Even AMC makes mistakes !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Issue 15 Page 118 AUSTRALIAN MUSCLE CAR magazine ( By The Numbers )

H289651 - H291062 85 examples
L251090 - L252674 66 examples ( 85 + 66 = 151 )

I once wrote to AMC asking them for help in tracking down the pink things history but just got fogged off. A mate who owns the geissler L34 wrote to them once to asking for help in tracking down its history and only got fogged off to. YES, im a little angry at them !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! But hey they still produce one of the finest magazines in the world ( Even though they do make a few little mistakes from time to time ) and the Australian Muscle Car Nationals is the greatest show on the face of this planet !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ay George, dont always believe what you read in books and magazines !!!!!!!!!

THEY WERE RIGHT ! I WAS WRONG !

( AMC ) My new Bible !

Back to top

#96 FLY_AGAIN_XU-1

Forum Fixture

Banned
1,653 posts

Joined: 01-September 06

Posted 05 February 2007 - 09:07 AM

PLEASE NOTE; These figures above ^^^^ are for the 1973 Bathurst cars not the 1972 Bathurst cars. SORRY for any confusion there.

Back to top

#97 FLY_AGAIN_XU-1

Forum Fixture

Banned
1,653 posts

Joined: 01-September 06

Posted 05 February 2007 - 09:25 AM

This is the only photo i have been able to find of the first round of the 1972 Manufacturers Championship on Sunday 27-8-1972 held at the Adelaide International Raceway. Peter Brock at the wheel ( page 66 ) Spotlight !

And yes, sprintmasters ! :spoton:

PS: Sorry for the poor picture Quality !

Back to top

#98 FLY_AGAIN_XU-1

Forum Fixture

Banned
1,653 posts

Joined: 01-September 06

Posted 05 February 2007 - 11:57 PM

These photos are thanks to wingnut ( JR )
The bottom photo is of Colin Bond the race winner in old silver ( note sprintmasters )
Thanks once again wingnut. :spoton:

Edited by FLY_AGAIN_XU-1, 06 February 2007 - 12:00 AM.