wagoon

Thanks XF001 for the mention Yeah I have just taken a tailgate off an XH and can confirm that many a weetbix are needed to remove the hex head bolt, but I only have a small L shaped handle for undoing the bolts as none of my ratcheting screw driver handles were strong enough to remove the bolt. I used CRC and left soak for 5 minutes which got 5 out of the 6 loose. With the last one I just used a small hammer and tapped the bracket to help loosen what the crc couldnt and it came out no worries.

The reason for the upgrade in an 80's x series is that it is cheaper to change the diff than to upgrade and you go from 25 spline in 80's diffs to 28 spline in 90's. You also go from 2 pinion in the 80's diff to 4 pinion in the 90's diff plus all the 90's diffs have disc brake. And in general the cost in parts isn't huge to change them over. Yes the 90's diffs are stronger but unless you plan on clutch dumps, massive burnout and to have the engine producing lots of torque you can make an 80's diff last. Like any modification you make, know the limitation and nothing will go wrong. I can't help you in regards to what is needed to actually put one in an early falcon, there are others that will help there.

I like the fact that they were running a four barrel as standard.

RCA's are ment to run to the amp. By having 2 sets you can run a 4 channel amp without running an RCA splitter cable. I havn't checked out the RCA to speaker cable connetors but that sounds dodgey as hell. So with what you are saying you have, run the RCA's to your amp then connect your speakers to your amp. If you only have a 2 channel amps you will only use 1 set of the RCA's then wire all 4 speakers to the amps with the fronts on one channel and rears on the other

Surprised no one has mentioned Mr Hankey the christmas poo yet, probably the most famous log of all time

Thanks Ants.

Ants do the fronts rub on anything?

Thats cool

Sorry mate. Yeah the only difference between wheels from xy to ef was the centre bore size. I do believe your xa will be small bore and these wheels being for Au onwards it will have the big hole which will require using a locating ring which can be had at any good tyre place. Offset was all the same from xy to ef at +6mm (although Im sure someone will correct me as I believe xy had +5.5mm as its actually an imperial measurement or something like that) so on an 8 inch rim there should be around 4 1/4 inches from mounting surface to rear of rim. Then measure how far the mounting surface is from the face where the centre attaches to the ring and that will tell you how wide the rear ring needs to be. Maybe send Ants a pm as he has them on his xe and he might measure the rings for you.

Looking at those rims they have a front wheel drive offset which is +35 or more ie AU onwards. E series is +6 which would put the mounting surface a lot closer to the centre of the rim. I'll go out on a limb and say the ones in your pics are 16x8 with +42 offset

From people with a lot more experience than me I have been told that crossflows LOVE carby spacers and this allow for a bigger carby, but the inlet manifold needs to be of a good design for both of these to work. Also changing the location of the carby on the manifold gains a lot. When TF250 had his crossflow(now mine) when he used a spacers to move the carby closer to the engine he gained 1mph through the bottom end, this doesn't sound much but when drag racing the speed indicate the true horsepower of the engine. So gaining mph means a gain in horespower in real world terms.

Its a credit to you that the car ran so well the first time out and just kept improving through the night in changing conditions.

Hope you don't mind if I update here Jason. Car ran great and sounded really crisp with a slight note change to the crossy. The first run was just a shake down run, powered to 60 foot and coasted from there and still ran 15.05 off a soft launch. Next was a full run where he ran 11.76@115.07mph then backed up with 11.74@114.86. Jas said that 115mph is a PB so that is a win right there. The night was tricky for tuning as the conditioned changed several times so to keep improving in those condition with a brand new setup I think is a job well done. I did take some vids but the lights were shining into the lens so its really bad.

Hope Ken doesn't mind if I update. Ran very consistant last night with quickest of 11.09@120.07 was a bit breezy and had a rain shower just before the runs started

Damn sexy. Great job

If I get time I might pop down.

You going to be at willowbank saturday Jason?

I get where both arguments are coming from and think they are both correct. Sly your cars setup requires a custom unit because you have an completely custom setup. And agree that just because a convertor is made for another application and it happens to fit a crossflow doesnt mean it will work. But I also agree with pro in that most applications will be fine with an off the shelf unit if it suit the working range of the car. Most people will not notice if the convertor is not perfect for there car so long as its close. All comes down to cost vs benifit imho. But having said that you still need to know which off the shelf convertor to get so unless you know someone that has experience with your engine setup ( I know there has to be a forum somewhere full of crossflow tragics ;-) ) or speak to someone that works with convertors that will understand your needs.

Looks like a build thread is needed

Sounds abit more open than leyburn. Comp cams suggests 3.73 but thats with an auto and most likely bigger diameter wheels like pro touring setup. So if you are using standard 25 inch diameter tyres with something like 3.08 or 3.23 it should be nice and fun

+1 above. Speak to an expert

Thom I believe the cam is XE274H which is a hydraulic and an absolute ripper and not saying that cause thats the one I was going to use before going crossflow. Ando what is the track like for the sprint up there? Leyburn is quite tight with slow corner speeds so gearing at or very close to 3.0 should allow you to keep the car in 2nd and third using the mountains of torque out of the corners.

Wow thats a BIG hole in the crossflow curve. 60 footers should improve quite a bit and pull better through half track, all leads to some better times ahead. Yes pun intended

Righto report time. First up I watch mythbusters way to much (my sons favorite show) so I got a little carried away with testing procedures and uninterupted runs ect. I tried 2 Android phone apps with no success, either there was very little consistency or it just didn't work so all results rely on my fat arse dyno sorry. WOT runs were done on a completly flat peice of highway where I pulled onto the highway from side roads, so it was a standing start position. Rolling tests were conducted on back roads were there was no traffic but still 100km/h zones so I slowed down to 60 then sped up to 100. I used 2 different lids as i found putting the rubber ring back in was a pain as it would fall out and would not seal properly, both lids were completly original with the only difference being the ring removed. Both WOT and rolling test I started with the rubber ring in. WOT- Apart from a much louder induction noise I felt very little difference.With the rubber ring in the car felt like it was a standard car just accelerating away, it felt like it was building road speed rather than pulling hardThe car may have accelerated very slightly faster, this is were the phone app would have helped but it did not feel like it pulled any harded. If I was to only use this test I would say that there is little to no benefit. Rolling- With the ring removed there was a definate louder induction noise but nothing like the WOT tests. With the rubber ring in, the car felt like it was a standard car just accelerating away. It felt like it was building road speed rather than accelerating. With the ring removed the car felt like it pulled and was able to rev easier. The car gained road speed faster, again this is where the phone app would have helped with numbers. After testing was completed I put the lid with the rubber ring back on and drove home. The car felt like it was being smothered, wasn't able to breath and could not build revs anywere near as fast as with the rubber removed. I was amazed at how much slower the car felt, the difference felt bigger than when I had the ring in then went to no ring.

yeah considering his crossflow with less power and torque ran 11.58 I'm guessing a 12 would be a shock to say the least