38 replies to this topic

[Tylzey]

Not expecting much at all but got a vb 173 with a holley 350, 186s manifold, aeroflow filter, extractors (not sure on brand but similiar to paceys) that go into 2 to a 2.5inch muffler...blue motor dizzy and electric fans and will try to get rid of some the emissions gear.

Like I said not expecting much but does anyone have a rough idea on power gains.

[N/A-PWR]

Here is a power read:

https://www.gmh-tora...02/#entry166078

[yel327]

At the back wheels? 50-60hp.

[Tylzey]

Here is a power read:

https://www.gmh-tora...02/#entry166078

Thanks for sharing that thread

Some really good info down a bit further in regards to how Holden measured HP

[EunUCh]

350 holley might be a bit too big , a 173 that spins to 6k will only need about 255 cfm of air .

[Maximart2]

Just a thought.

I had a 173 with Yella Terra head, extractors back in the 80's. I had a 350 Holley on a redline manifold on it, used petrol like there was a hole in the tank! Swapped to a stromberg WW carbie and it used shedloads less petrol and drove a lot smoother. 

I was 17 at the time so didn't know about fine tuning the Holley which may have lessened the fuel usage somewhat but the stromberg was an easy alternative.

Anyone else had experience tuning the WW?

[yel327]

WW was standard on LC 2600S and 2850S plus HK-HG 186S. It was also to be used on HQ GTS coupe except the model was cancelled prior to HQ release (this is why LJ GTR got a standard 3300 rather than 2850S which was the planned engine for it). So it won't be too hard to setup right - just copy one of these factory carb setups as a starting point.

[claysummers]

Late HR as well. I am told the far more common 253 and 302 Ford tuned WWs run well straight up on a warm six. More common because everyone ripped the off and replaced them with 308 or 351 induction. If you quote me the number stamped on the fuel bowl, I can tell you the jetting and what it was on originally, for most any Bendx Stromberg carbs.

Sent from my SM-G781B using Tapatalk

Edited by claysummers, 26 February 2024 - 03:55 PM.

[yel327]

Correct Clay but the HR 186S was essentially just the HK engine coming in early. It was obviously ready by mid 1967 like the bulk of HK as the first HK bodies were built in September 1967 including coupes and commercials.

[Kevrev]

Wasn't it a 202S (3300S?) engine that was going to be into both the HQ GTS as a base engine and the LJ GTR?

[yel327]

Not quite. HQ GTS was to get the 202S as standard, there was no optional engine. LJ was to be 2850S but when the HQ GTS coupe was dropped economies of scale must have killed the S engine altogether - cheaper and easier to use a stock 202 in LJ GTR.

[Tylzey]

350 holley might be a bit too big , a 173 that spins to 6k will only need about 255 cfm of air .

When measured at the correct pressure drop a 350 is only about 265 cfm there abouts

[EunUCh]

That is probly about right but it dosen't take into account that small engines like the sizes some of us play with simply can not use a big carb....it comes down to what the engine can use at certain rpm which is based on piston speed , cam , rpm,air speed. Over Big carbs on any engine will kill air speed hence cylinder filling , hence power....there is a thing called inertia charge which is based on cam specs , the bigger the cam , the more of a dog the engine is at low rpm until things start to work. Ppm mo

[yel327]

I agree with EunUCh, found the same thing with a 350 on a warm 202. I went to a 390 4BBL which was great on the primaries but still too much at WOT for a 202. You’d be much better off with a WW or a Weber off a Ford 6.

[claysummers]

Nah, 3xSUs.

Sent from my SM-G781B using Tapatalk

[yel327]

Nah, 3xSUs.

Sent from my SM-G781B using Tapatalk

 

Sure, but if you want to drive the car all the time and want reasonable economy it's hard to past a well sorted S setup. Imagine this:

 

We're back in early 1968. You own one of the new shiny XR GT's. It's your pride and joy, and the car just ate the competition at the Bathurst 500 a few months earlier. Your car is the king of the hill in Australia, barring exotics nothing is going to challenge you. You are aware of the new 5litre HK Belmont/Kingswood/Premier but they are only autos, single exhaust, moonshot rear axle and slow relatively. You are blissfully unaware of the fire breathing HK GTS327 that is still 2/3 of a year away.

So, you pull up at a set of lights on the exit of the town and next to you is a pretty but boring HR Premier. You just ease away from the lights at half throttle and away blasts the damn HR. Bugger this, you're into it. Your nose pulls ahead as you cross the unlimited speed sign. Hitting 60mph the HR starts to pull away and keeps pulling away from you as you hit 100mph.

That HR would be Dave Bennett's HR Premier. Original 186S 4spd. All he did to the car was changed the head to one of his Yella Terra heads and tuned it on his chassis dyno. Otherwise a stock 186S with a WW Stromberg.

 

What I'm getting at, in a light car like a HR, LC-LJ, LH-UC or VB a 173 with a mild cam and a WW will go OK. Just needs a 186S or similar cam and mild head to really wake it up. I suspect all a 350 Holley will do is waste fuel and lose low rpm torque.

[claysummers]

Yes, I agree on the economy, going on current experience. Funny to hear it from you though. I would have thought the efficiency gains from improved fuel distribution and flat torque curve would have equated to increased fuel efficiency, but doesn’t seem to have. And now I’m driving it across the Nullarbor to Bunbury…..


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[yel327]

I've never been interested in outright economy Clay, just that something is fit for purpose and makes sense. For example it's pointless me putting up with a diesel Hilux to achieve circa 10-12L/100 when I can have a Ram and average 15-16L/100 on a fuel that is normally 20-25c per litre cheaper than what the diesel would be. It'd mean I had to have the expense of two vehicles, some economical thing for daily and the Ram for towing.

I just spent 2 weeks in NZ and had a 2023 SR5 auto dual cab Hilux. It was OK and I put up with it for 2500kM as diesel is 60-80c per litre cheaper than E10. See below image, $2.84 for 91 and $2.16 for diesel, pretty typical across the South Island. It'd be stupid to own an everyday driver that needed to run even 91 over there. Here I buy E10 for around the $1.70-1.80 mark whereas I'd be paying $2.10 or more for diesel so that fuel economy gap shrinks to be not much and I don't have to then put up with something that doesn't suit me.

 

 NZ fuel.jpg   246.82K   2 downloads

 

The point with the S setup was it's just a 173, and if it's a daily then with a 350 Holley it'll use fuel like a 253 with a 3.55 rear axle. Might as well make it fun and get reasonable economy rather than wasting fuel. Save the fuel for the fun weekend car, with the proper amount of cylinders. Or in Clay world the proper amount of carbs!

[EunUCh]

Usually better fuel distribution aids with economy coupled with a cam etc.
Gearing has a bit to do with it , the cam you fitted should be sweet enough going on the dyno run , once the fuel curve is sorted it be even better
Not sure what a 186s cam specs are but I would suspect they would be around 220ish @ 50 ...might need a tad less in 173..not sure but should be able to liven up a 173 a bit without major operations.

[yel327]

Usually better fuel distribution aids with economy coupled with a cam etc.
Gearing has a bit to do with it , the cam you fitted should be sweet enough going on the dyno run , once the fuel curve is sorted it be even better
Not sure what a 186s cam specs are but I would suspect they would be around 220ish @ 50 ...might need a tad less in 173..not sure but should be able to liven up a 173 a bit without major operations.

 

4 or 6 thou specs (can't remember which they used) is:

 

inlet open/close 23/53 256 total.

exhaust open/close 58/18 256 total.

41 total overlap.

 

Not a huge cam but was widely used across 2600S, 2850S, 186S and HT-HG 186 (except Trimatic). The ADR27A auto 6cyl cam might be a better one to use, it was used in both 2850 and 3300 automatic pollution engines. Essentially the same as the first LC XU1 cam spec:

 

inlet open/close 29/59 268 total (XU1 29/57 266)

exhaust open/close 64/24 268 total (XU1 64/24 266)

53 total overlap XU1 same).

[Bruiser]

Here’s a chart with the 3”hg ratings for the Holley, the ww and the 2 barrel webers

 IMG_0336.png   343.23K   6 downloads

Interesting to see the bxuv-2 as used on the twin X2 setup
come in at 201cfm each

[claysummers]

Interesting chart. Pity he didn’t include the zenith Stromberg side draught carbs. The thing about over carbing doesn’t apply to the same extent with variable Venturi carbs, does it?

I do agree with you Byron. I was originally going to fit a WW. I’ve got half a dozen of them lying around. The wank factor of triples got me in, and I actually sold the X2 setup for more than it cost me to set up the SUs, including dyno, which I was always going to do. They are pretty affordable and relatively compact upgrade, as is the WW on factory manifold. The X2s are over priced relatively speaking and 3 x Webers are a bit out of my budget.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[warrenm]

I took the LJ on a club run 10 or so years ago, 3x2" SU's 262° cam, 4.1 diff. Most of the run was open roads, the car may have exceeded the 100 sign posts for an extended period of time, covering 150km, I got home, refilled & was very surprised at the 10 litres/100km of 98 that it consumed, so SU's can be very economical on fuel. 

[claysummers]

They should be, given the optimal venturi size and even mixture. Hopefully the 2800 km run will confirm.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[EunUCh]

Handy chart for cfm rates , over carbing.is a common problem , triples fall into another category ... going on the cam specs. for the s ...yeah they were not that "big" ...probly more like 214 @ 50 or even less to make peak 145BhP @ 4600 ...according to hk shop manual but they dont tell
us the lca..they were possibly on 109
Interisting stuff.