355 replies to this topic

[yel327]

The HJ engines must have been one of those top secret hidden tyre shredding missiles that where only given to select people and one that the new car magazines where only given the friday car (or Holden took a piston out ..... LOL)

 

HQ 308 4 speed Monaro Taxi

0 - 48 kph = 3.0sec

0 -128 kph = 14.4sec

0 - 400m = 16.4sec (best)

 

 

HJ 308 4 speed Monaro Coupe

0 - 50 kph = 3.1sec

0-130 kph = 15.1sec

0-400m = 16.3sec (best)

 

 

Now I am not sure how the HJ jumped into Holden's giant killer engine but ...... are we talking performance?

Or are we talking impression or something like the FORCE ie Luke Skywalker?

 

Back to being serious.

 

It's just that for me performance is measurable. If its not or its splitting hairs (i.e. 0.1sec or 2mph) or some other small increment then we are just talking powder puff nonsense. Obviously I have far different expectations and experience. For me no Holden has even come close to what I consider a factory muscle car  (by a long long long way). Holden has some very good looking classic cars, but none fall under my opinion of a muscle car. That involves a hellof a lot more than a v8 and a stick shift ------ in my humble opinion.

 

This to me unlike anything done by Holden this is a Muscle Car and its numbers still stand up nearly 1/2 a decade later.

I just like them very fast and very light.

 

The changes to the HJ engine were no secret, and it wasn't a "high performance" engine by any means, it was a higher performance version of the previous HT-HQ engine. The cars were definitely significantly quicker than those with the earlier engines, in the same way the ADR27A engines went backwards in perfromance. My only point was that the earlier LX 308 powered cars were significantly quicker than a A9X which makes it hard to try to claim muscle car status for an A9X when it is always going to be resoundly smashed in perfromance by an earlier Torana. 

[RallyRed]

looks like Toranas and Monaros are not eligible anyway.....


muscle car
Web definitions
Muscle car is a term used to refer to a variety of high-performance automobiles. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines muscle cars as
"any of a group of American-made 2-door sports coupes with powerful engines designed for high-performance driving. ..

But then again ....


General Motors Holden produced the Holden Monaro with 161 cu in (2.6 L), 186 cu in (3.0 L) (186 and 186S specification) 6-cylinder engines, 307 cu in (5.0 L), 327 cu in (5.4 L), and 350 cu in (5.7 L) Chevrolet smallblocks, and later253 cu in (4.1 L) and 308 cu in (5.0 L) Holden V8. This was followed by the release of four high-performance Toranas, the LC GTR-XU1 (1970–1971), LJ GTR-XU1 (1972–1973), L34 (1974), and the A9X (1977).
The LC XU1 Torana was fitted with a 186 cu in (3.0 L) triple carbureted 6-cylinder engine, later increased with the release of the LJ model to 202 cu in (3.3 L), as opposed to the 308 cu in (5.0 L) single q­-barrel carbureted V8 in the SL/R 5000 L34, and SLR5000/SS A9X. There were many homologation changes over the four or so years of XU-1 production culminating in a special "Bathurst 1973" specification LJ XU-1.
The L34 was primarily an engine option on the lesser specification LH SL/R 5000 sedan; a factory HO pack providing an upgraded camshaft, Holley carb, and other race ready items was also available. The basic L34 also gained other homologation features such as improved brakes and wheel arch flares. The A9X was an option on the LX SLR5000 sedan and the LX SS hatchback (2-door) and unlike the L34 package was not an engine performance upgrade, but a suspension, differential, and brake upgrade, as the L34 engine was already homologated for Group C use. Hence, the A9X had a basically standard 308ci engine.

just thinkin.......

[RallyRed]

ha ha...yeah its a l o n g w a y from the original thread.

[Indy Orange]

Nice.

[Dr Terry]

What relevance has a 455 Pontiac Trans-Am & 427 BBC Corvette in a conversation about HJ Monaros ?

Also there has been too much reliance here on road test 'performance' figures as measured by motor magazines. As I said earlier these guys are not engineers or technicians, they're journalists. OK, history-wise it's all we have to work with, but at least them with the proverbial 'grain of salt' that they deserve.

Dr Terry

[yel327]

Yeah fine, but do you consider the HK GTS 327 to be an Australian Muscle Car.....??  or just the HT GTS 350??

 

It depends where you draw the line in the sand!

 

If you use one of  the US formulas the HK GTS327 is the only Australian version of a muscle car as it is the only one where the manufacturer has taken a bigger engine out of their full sized car (the 1968 Pontiac Parisienne or Chevrolet Impala assembled here by GMH) and stuck it into their mid size car to create a significantly higher performance car.

 

If you decided performance was the only criteria then you'd probably only list the final spec HG GTS350, the PhaseII and III Falcons and the E38/49 Chargers.

 

However if you simply picked a group of Australian built cars that were designed and built to be the highest performance version of their series vehicle with the intent of being a road registered race car that could be in the public's face by flying the manufacturer's flag at premier race events then the cars are obvious. In essence I think this is these cars that people see as Australian Muscle Cars. The ones that fit this bill to me are: 

 

HK GTS327

HT GTS350 (HG is the facelifted version of this car)

LC XU1

LJ XU1

LH XU2+L34

 

XR GT

XT GT

XW GT-HO

XW GT-GO PhaseII

XY GT-HO PhaseIII

XA RPO83

 

I'm not that up on Pacers, but whichever Valiant Pacers were built to be the flagship race car.

VH E38

VH E49 (and any subsequent facelifts)

 

After XA RPO83 and L34 and because CAMS changed the rules due to ADR27A being on the horizon there was no need for Ford or GMH to make factory performance cars. All they did was homologate parts needed to either upgrade older race shells or allow newer cars to compete using previously allowed engines. Of course this changed somewhat with Group A so you could fast forward to the late 80's and include the 4 x GMH based Group A vehicles if you liked or leave it back in the 60's/70's. Not sure how to classify HDT cars, one problem is they are all so different!

 

That is how I see it anyway. The reason I don't include the A9X optioned LX's is because the aren't a performance car and they weren't designed to be. They probably sit in an almost unique category alongside the 30 or so specially constructed XC Cobras. At the end of the day how many proper A9X's were successfully raced? Weren't most of them (at least the uber successful cars) either a factory produced purpose built race shell very different to the road cars or an updated L34? Bruce McPhee took delivery of his Warwick Yellow GTS327 from Wyong Motors, pulled it apart to make sure everything was in perfect order (like shocks matched etc), replaced what wasn't up to spec, drove it to Bathurst, put on some buffed Michelins and won the race. To me that is the essence of an Aussie Muscle Car. Nothing to do with desirability, value, how people remember them etc.

[yel327]

Aaron I totally agree on the low gear thing if the car is fitted with such ..... then absolutely it is not apples to apples but if you look at top speeds you can see that clearly. Take a look at that 427 vette review its 12.8@112mph with a 152mph top speed. If you dial in the weight and terminal 1/4 speed into the moroso slide rule you sort out the men from the boys. The Quick ET thing can just be gears, tyres and suspension set up but WEIGHT VS VELOCITY can tell you a non biased story about horsepower.

 

Awesome things, and that is only the L72 single 4BBL version! The L71 435hp tri-power was introduced the next year.

 

These engines are what I am trying to replicate for my Warwick Yellow GTS327. I'll be using the later 1969 style pistons (lumpy top) and open chamber heads like the 1969 L88 and ZL-1 engines but with the slightly less agressive L71/L72 cam.