Which produced a whopping 122kw, less power and torque than a red motor 253...!
Figures never reflect the seat of the pants feeling though.
I had a Eunos 800M that was 2.5ltr V6 supercharged. It was a heavy car but when you put the boot in and used all of that 149kw, it felt fast. Never had to back off on sweeping bends because of the 4 wheel steering.
But compared to a lot of today’s offerings, it was simply underpowered.
The HQ feels quick because it's old and loud and not terrible wind proof or smooth, when you put the foot down and roars it feels like you're going somewhere. The inertia is far more noticeable.
But you really aren't. The stock VY V6 Commodore would smoke it no worries.
I think the Ecotec is rated around 150kw which would roughly be the same or a little more than the 253, which was about 130kw stock, done some modifications though which hopefully added a bit bringing it closer to 150.
Strange enough I feel more in control driving the HQ at 100mph+ than the VY. I don't know why this is.
Sent from my Nokia 7.2 using Tapatalk
If we're quoting power figures a standard 202 red produces 100kw, ok that's not much now but when Holden put those standard 202's in the Torana GTR's at the time they were reasonably quick, at the time, partly due to the approx 1 tonne of dry weight.
Then when they upped to the Bathurst XU1 to that ridiculous 165kw in that sort of weight - at the time, well then people started to err, more so the government.
My current LJ is a rebuilt 202, mild (we're talkin 215 degree cam so yeah mild) and I've dropped the gearing to a 2.78. Cruises a blip over 2k rpm on a true 100 kph brilliant little cruiser.
Then the phase 4 Falcon and the proposed GTR XU2 with, if I am correct, something similar to an L34 spec 308 job in one of these. Well now we're talking a reasonably fast car by today's standards even. Without the safety features of course!
That's when the Fed government stepped in and said 'shows over folks, you're not selling these supercars'