Holden Alloytec 3.6 V6 de-tuned for production!

wilsonnw · 02-10-2005, 11:54 PM

Sorry to bring up 'Holden' again, but it's late at night and I have had too much Dr. Pepper oh and the Tigers won, Gold I tells ya.

Anyhow, I have been looking at crate motors based on the old GM 3800 V6 that has been cutting chaff for Holden since '88/9. Why? don't ask, I like my EF thankyou very much.

I noticed that the only way an alloytec 3.6 motor (the new-new one for holden) leaves the Michigan plant is in the 190kw form. There is no mechanical difference between the 179 and 190kw versions (exec to hi-spec commy).

Holden is de-tuning the bloody things to create a value for money proposition that can be manuvered quickly to combat the BF and 380 Magna - what a joke ;-).

So what's the point? This: Any kid with an commy 'exec' can spend $500 on a chip flash (based on US Cadillac CDS mapping) and they will play the "I'm 100kgs lighter, with shorter gears, and 8kw's up on you Mr BA man!" game.

Bugger.

NC 5ltr · 03-10-2005, 12:04 AM

well considering the bf 6 is going out to 190kw thats nullified that out

vztrt · 03-10-2005, 12:07 AM

You lose alot of power thru an auto (unless you go stage two, three..) and as the base model exec dosent come in a manual it isn't going to be as quick at the wheels.

Kryton · 03-10-2005, 12:10 AM

off topic a little.
the mitsubishi 380 was sposed to come out with 190kw but now it has a class rivaling 175kw. i think they too have detuned in fear of fuel prices, just as holden are going to do on the next model.

Supa R00 · 03-10-2005, 12:11 AM

its amazing how far these family sixes have came, only a bit over 10 years ago the S-XR6 came out with 161kw and it was a demon in its day, but now the stinkin family hack has more oomph than a AU XR8 and some of the old clubbies... where will it end and how far further will they have developed in a further 10 years? will we be looking at in the year 2015, 230kw I6 family hacks/taxis? lol just some food for thought

Perana · 03-10-2005, 12:12 AM

The engines are infact different... the base engine misses out on VCT on the exhaust cams and the variable length manifold that the 190kw motor has..

Fairlane · 03-10-2005, 12:17 AM

Torque, the Alloytec motor doesnt have the low down torque that the 4.0 DOHC has. The VE commo soon will need all the power it can get shifting 1.6 ton + in weight.

And finally that's new nothing kid's with commo exec's on 15" steelies have been flogging Falc's in 0-100 runs since the VN days. But personally id prefer longer gearing and more torque for the highway, commo's can be quite nasty at 110kmh.

vztrt · 03-10-2005, 12:17 AM

Well if you look at the 1972 E49 charger it had 225KW. But that car and the XY GTHO made the government crack down on these cars. Also the chager had a 265 hemi. Not bad for over 30 years ago!.

So the question is will the government crack down and make manufactures slow cars down again?

wilsonnw · 03-10-2005, 12:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Perana XR8

The engines are infact different... the base engine misses out on VCT on the exhaust cams and the variable length manifold that the 190kw motor has..

Aha! Well, I stand corrected.

As for the future of family hack/taxi, I think that the answer to power 'one-upmanship' will come from everyday people who complain if the sun rises. Next think you know the unwashed bohemians will be burning our 'family weapons of bland 6-cyl death' in the streets.

(however, GM dosn't list a motor in the non 'vct, vlm, ec' spec, do they mod them here?)

wilsonnw · 03-10-2005, 12:22 AM

Fairlane, an Avalon?

Fairlane · 03-10-2005, 12:24 AM

The power was is great though. The good old company car can smoke just about any classic sports car you can think of- 240Z, E-Type Jag, Valiant Pacer, Any 308 holden and even stuff like mustangs pretty much stock.

Next years Avalon is supposed to have over 200kw, and I bet the all-new Falc will have more than, it's a marvelous age we live. I just hope manufacturers start upping the tyres a bit $80 RE92's on a 175Kw Commo isnt really safe, neither really is the 16"'s on the Falcon

*Im saving for my next falcon now

Dave_au · 03-10-2005, 12:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wilsonnw

Fairlane, an Avalon?

Think Avalon sells more?

Quote:

Originally Posted by wilsonnw

So what's the point? This: Any kid with an commy 'exec' can spend $500 on a chip flash .... 8kw's up on you Mr BA man!" game.

Be careful, marketing is an amazing tool.

Both ford and holden use different techniques for measuring flywheel kw - Holden's ratings are usually conservative as opposed to ford. For instance, a 297kw clubsport would put out 306-308kw on the ford scale, and a FPV GT would put out maybe 282-285kw on a holden scale - I forget what the actual measurement system is called - someone will remember.

Falcon Freak · 03-10-2005, 12:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by davway

off topic a little.
the mitsubishi 380 was sposed to come out with 190kw but now it has a class rivaling 175kw. i think they too have detuned in fear of fuel prices, just as holden are going to do on the next model.

Not true. The media claimed that the 380 would have 190kW. Mitsubishi never said this. The SOHC engine was always going to be in the 170kW range. If Mitsubishi survives then there may be a variable valve timing variant of the engine released for a face lifted model.

FF

vztrt · 03-10-2005, 12:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave_au

Be careful, marketing is an amazing tool.

Both ford and holden use different techniques for measuring flywheel kw - Holden's ratings are usually conservative as opposed to ford. For instance, a 297kw clubsport would put out 306-308kw on the ford scale, and a FPV GT would put out maybe 282-285kw on a holden scale - I forget what the actual measurement system is called - someone will remember.

Holden actually use the international standard were all the belts that will be on the car are added while ford don't. But your right that Holden give more conservative measurements.

Falcon Freak · 03-10-2005, 01:06 AM

Ford and Holden both use international standards. But they use different standards. Here are two main standards - DIN and SAE:

Information

The Japanese on the other hand use the following JIS standard:

More information

FF

03-10-2005, 01:36 AM

Competition and choice is the winner. If there wasn't competition we wouldn't have a choice! GO THE FALCON AT BATHURST!!!!

vztrt · 03-10-2005, 01:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rustyEB

Competition and choice is the winner. If there wasn't competition we wouldn't have a choice! GO THE FALCON AT BATHURST!!!!

You know that either Ford or Holden go under (the australian branch), than the other company will cease producing australian cars and all we'll have is imports.

I know Holden uses an American motor and blah blah blah but they employ more engineers than Ford does (that surprised me) but if something like this happed it would be more than the jobs lost at the two comapnies, there would be a run on the the component manufactures in oz. (Ford uses about 80% aussie made components).

Bossxr8 · 03-10-2005, 08:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wilsonnw

Sorry to bring up 'Holden' again, but it's late at night and I have had too much Dr. Pepper oh and the Tigers won, Gold I tells ya.

Anyhow, I have been looking at crate motors based on the old GM 3800 V6 that has been cutting chaff for Holden since '88/9. Why? don't ask, I like my EF thankyou very much.

I noticed that the only way an alloytec 3.6 motor (the new-new one for holden) leaves the Michigan plant is in the 190kw form. There is no mechanical difference between the 179 and 190kw versions (exec to hi-spec commy).

Holden is de-tuning the bloody things to create a value for money proposition that can be manuvered quickly to combat the BF and 380 Magna - what a joke ;-).

So what's the point? This: Any kid with an commy 'exec' can spend $500 on a chip flash (based on US Cadillac CDS mapping) and they will play the "I'm 100kgs lighter, with shorter gears, and 8kw's up on you Mr BA man!" game.

Bugger.

Holden have deleted the full spec VCT system and variable length manifold from the base 175 motor as a cost reduction measure. Pretty embarrising for them now that the 380 has the same power and more torque.

VertexZ · 03-10-2005, 09:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vztrt

Well if you look at the 1972 E49 charger it had 225KW. But that car and the XY GTHO made the government crack down on these cars. Also the chager had a 265 hemi. Not bad for over 30 years ago!.

So the question is will the government crack down and make manufactures slow cars down again?

thats not entirely correct.

in the late 70's car manufacturers changed from quoting gross hp/kw to net hp/kw.

a good example is the Zed series. My 260z has the engine output stamped on the build plate as 162hp (121kw). However the Nissan quoted figure for the 280zx is 103kw. Given that the 280zx has efi over the twin carbs and an additional 200cc of displacement, it should be more powerful (and is!). best guess is that the 260z has approximatel 90-95kw net. So realistically, to convert oldskool power output to newskool, knock about 20-25% off quoted gross figure.

Also remember that although newer cars are alot more powerful in terms of kw output (hell, a new 1.8l 4 cyl corolla puts out only 3kw less than that 2.8l inline six of the 280zx) they are alot safer - better brakes & tyres, traction control, abs, airbags etc etc

VertexZ · 03-10-2005, 09:45 PM

also, with regards to de-tuning - look at what HSV do - pretty much different exhaust and engine mapping and they get a claimed extra 10-20kw...surely holden engineers could do this without significantly increasing the price of a exec?

jmc-007 · 04-10-2005, 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave_au

Think Avalon sells more?

Be careful, marketing is an amazing tool.

Both ford and holden use different techniques for measuring flywheel kw - Holden's ratings are usually conservative as opposed to ford. For instance, a 297kw clubsport would put out 306-308kw on the ford scale, and a FPV GT would put out maybe 282-285kw on a holden scale - I forget what the actual measurement system is called - someone will remember.

So everyone keeps saying. but looking at the real figures the kw difference is a bee's dick of difference.

they are called ECE and DIN.

The difference is the Drivetrain package.

Deadman · 04-10-2005, 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Falcon Freak

Not true. The media claimed that the 380 would have 190kW. Mitsubishi never said this. The SOHC engine was always going to be in the 170kW range. If Mitsubishi survives then there may be a variable valve timing variant of the engine released for a face lifted model.

FF

And there's even talk of Ralliart stepping in and actually doing something (rather than just lending the name - ala the Magna Ralliart)

I'm all for it. I'll always drive a Falcon, but I don't want to see ANY company have to pull out when it provides so many jobs in Australia... (and always had a soft spot for Magna's anyhow).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave_au

Both ford and holden use different techniques for measuring flywheel kw - Holden's ratings are usually conservative as opposed to ford. For instance, a 297kw clubsport would put out 306-308kw on the ford scale, and a FPV GT would put out maybe 282-285kw on a holden scale - I forget what the actual measurement system is called - someone will remember.

I think it's fair though because Ford always performs better at the dyno than Holden and seems to be able to get power to the wheels better...

melon466 · 04-10-2005, 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wilsonnw

Sorry to bring up 'Holden' again, but it's late at night and I have had too much Dr. Pepper oh and the Tigers won, Gold I tells ya.

Anyhow, I have been looking at crate motors based on the old GM 3800 V6 that has been cutting chaff for Holden since '88/9. Why? don't ask, I like my EF thankyou very much.

I noticed that the only way an alloytec 3.6 motor (the new-new one for holden) leaves the Michigan plant is in the 190kw form. There is no mechanical difference between the 179 and 190kw versions (exec to hi-spec commy).

Holden is de-tuning the bloody things to create a value for money proposition that can be manuvered quickly to combat the BF and 380 Magna - what a joke ;-).

So what's the point? This: Any kid with an commy 'exec' can spend $500 on a chip flash (based on US Cadillac CDS mapping) and they will play the "I'm 100kgs lighter, with shorter gears, and 8kw's up on you Mr BA man!" game.

Bugger.

Don't quote me but aren't the alloytec v6's being produced at the Port Melbourne GM Engine Plant?

Link:

The Taipan · 04-10-2005, 12:00 PM

Also Ford tend to put the peak power numbers as to a reliable figure that most engines should put out. From what I hear the GT's Boss290, the i6 and the turbo's quite regulalry are dyno'd with rwkw above what they should be capable of at the flywheel, and above their equivalent holden product despite being packaged similarly at the factory. One example I heard of, on the same dyno, a stock 290 and a HSV 300kw both running rwkw of very similar numbers. I can't remember the exact figures though... Perhaps Ford have slightly less drivetrain loss?

rst2000 · 04-10-2005, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Taipan

Also Ford tend to put the peak power numbers as to a reliable figure that most engines should put out. From what I hear the GT's Boss290, the i6 and the turbo's quite regulalry are dyno'd with rwkw above what they should be capable of at the flywheel, and above their equivalent holden product despite being packaged similarly at the factory. One example I heard of, on the same dyno, a stock 290 and a HSV 300kw both running rwkw of very similar numbers. I can't remember the exact figures though... Perhaps Ford have slightly less drivetrain loss?

yeah but how do you explain the power loss the 290 boss has in the ute compared to the sedan..around 15-20rwks.

geckoGT · 04-10-2005, 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rst2000

yeah but how do you explain the power loss the 290 boss has in the ute compared to the sedan..around 15-20rwks.

Don't the utes have a different final drive ratio? That will affect a dyno at the rear wheels.

SSbaby · 04-10-2005, 03:14 PM

What's funny is that the US now have an independent agency measuring power ratings. Under the new US standard, the Japanese based manufacturers were the biggest losers. Honda VTEC V6 was previously rated at 255bhp but under the new standard now puts out a little over 240bhp. Ditto Camry and Nissan V6s. A lot of buyers look at the spec sheet and say, wow, Japanese power and efficiency... when really it's more to do with marketing. In comparison, the US manufacturers have actually revised their power ratings upwards... the LS7 was rated at 500bhp... now its 505bhp. A lot of power wars are fought over paperwork than real world measures (e.g. dyno).

Btw, there is a new 3.6L HFV6 on the horizon putting out 225kW. Personally, I find that torque is more important than peak power but peak power seems to win a lot of arguments down at the local pub.