Turbo 253

[baker12]

Hi
I have a 253 that is getting rebuilt as we speak to into MI60FB.
What does everyone think about a turbo fitted to it/ Has it been done? if so WTF happened?
Keen to have a look so I can get some big Horsepower.
Thoughts of the wisemen of the FB EK forum would be appreciated.

[Mick]

people put turbos on 5 litres and they're basically the same design engine so there's no reason why it won't work, used to be a guy that raced a from memory HQ in wild bunch with a supercharged 253 block i think it was 270ci, don't know any more about it
why not just re engineer the car and go up to 5L
got a mate with a basically stock gen111 with a big turbo on it, has made 698HP at the wheels on about half the boost it's capable of him and his mate stick turbos on everything including for the short time it lasted the lawnmower

[Trev]

Sorry no advise for the turbo but why not do a 308, no substitute for cubes .
Then turbo it if thats what you want.

[Rusty EK]

How are you building the engine now ? if its high comp , big cam etc ,it wont be suitable for turbo .

[Cal]

Sorry no advise for the turbo but why not do a 308, no substitute for cubes .
Then turbo it if thats what you want.

Yeah, or even better keep the 253 block and put 308 internals into it.

Why have a cheeseburger when you can have Big Mac

[bootlegger]

Don't put 253,s down. I ran them in my raceboat for years.
Im not sure why but they seemed to hang together at high rpm better than the 308,s. One theory is the lighter piston weight. The engines I ran were quite happy at 7200rpm.
The only thing they lacked was torque.
Every 308 I had blew to pieces. I did everything I could to keep them together.

[baker12]

I had a shower and a beer and realised I am getting excited about nothing i will run the current setup and see how it goes there is a 253 turbo on you tube hurstune 253 stock didnt impress me enough to want one.
Its the old saying that you can never get enough horsepower,BUT! "I think you had better get that thing going first before you contemplate another f#$king adventure" (quote from wife)

[Trev]

Don't put 253,s down. I ran them in my raceboat for years.
Im not sure why but they seemed to hang together at high rpm better than the 308,s. One theory is the lighter piston weight. The engines I ran were quite happy at 7200rpm.
The only thing they lacked was torque.
Every 308 I had blew to pieces. I did everything I could to keep them together.

Makes sense, .

[Harv]

Turbo 253 may not be as silly as it sounds, despite the availability of (relatively) cheap 308/350s. From memory (admittedly blurry ) when I did the calcs on getting the EK wagon, the biggest I could go on a blown motor (and still meet NSW Light Vehicle Modification guidelines) was a 253 (could go up to 340 naturally aspirated, so went for 327).

Wan't there a Conformadore running around in the last few years (white wagon?) that was running a blown 253? Seem to remember it in quite a few magazines, and had run some decent times. Number plate was something like "YEP253".

Cheers,
Harv

[Mick]

when I did the calcs on getting the EK wagon, the biggest I could go on a blown motor (and still meet NSW Light Vehicle Modification guidelines) was a 253 (could go up to 340 naturally aspirated, so went for 327).
Harv

another curve ball thrown by NSW RTA and engineers the above mentioned LC torana when first regoed all he could have was a naturally aspirated 253 he just got it LEGALLY engineered and passed at the RTA with the turboed 5.7 litre

[Cal]

Was that passed with the 5.7 as one of those home built jobbies (ICV?), or does the rego still say Torana?

[Mick]

nup got engineers report went to RTA done as a normal engineered modified car, i was shocked aswell, even the guy that owned the car was iffy till he went to the RTA with the paperwork and they didn't even bat an eyelid at him

[Cal]

I suppose it depends who you get on the day at the RTA. I've seen some shockers (well engineered, but way outside what the law allows) get rego.

I remember the days of getting defects on a regular basis. I'd fail the noise test at one RTA branch, drive to the next one without doing anything to the car, and pass

[Harv]

Yep - as far as I understand it, the NSW "Guidelines" are just that - they can be interpreted many different ways, depending on engineer. Have seen some engineers that stick to them like glue, others that go "well and truly beyond", and others that have passed cars that are pretty shonky (even by my standard of engineering ).

Still, a turbo'd 253 would definitely be different...

[FB MAD]

If the current RTA rules are adhered to, the largest naturally aspirated V8 for an FB/EK based on the sedan weight version is 332 cubic inches and with forced induction it works out to around 260 odd cubes so a 253 blown is within that.

Interestingly, an FC Holden according to the rules as they are and based on the sedan version of the FC, is only permitted to fit a 253 in naturally aspirated form.This is because the weight of the FC falls into the formula for the under 1100 KG weight category, whereas an FB/EK Holden falls into the 1100 KG and above formula category and is permitted to have a much larger capacity increase all because it is a few tens of kilograms heavier car.

That said, there seems to be PLENTY of cars that would appear to have been engineered outside these "guidelines".

As has been already said, rules can be made ,however it is an individuals interpretation of these rules that leads to some cars being passed with certain mods and other cars not being permitted registration with similar mods all because they have been presented for inspection to a different engineer and/or to a different robot at the NSW RTA office.

If you find a person at the NSW RTA that is "modified car friendly" then definately keep their name and number and put them on your Santa Clause Xmas present delivery list.