Difference between 304 vn & vp engines

[75hjprem]

hey i was reading through a workshop manual and it states

Vn Commodore : 168kw@4600; 400 Nm@3200
Vp Commodore : 165kw@4400; 385 Nm@3600

was wondering if anybody could give me a reason for the difference ?

[VNSS90]

ive got holdens owners manual for both vn and vp and it says there the same lol my vp 5 liters flogs my vn ss but thats probly because its manual lol

[con7502003]

vn blocks are better than vp, vps bit thin in the walls guys have been pokin vn blocks out ta 396, wont last on vps keep splittin blocks, so if ya got a vn block can i have it pls

[_R_J_K_]

Maybe, just maybe, it was because they took those readings from different points in the rev range?

If anything, I doubt that there is any difference in the VN/VP blocks at all, and that this may even be a simple difference in tune.

[stocky]

vn blocks are better than vp, vps bit thin in the walls guys have been pokin vn blocks out ta 396, wont last on vps keep splittin blocks, so if ya got a vn block can i have it pls

Where did you hear that BS? They're the same block.

[agrsv8]

agreed, BS same block. I don't know why they are different in power but i can tell you right now that after 20 odd years its not that much anymore and i can make 3kw of power at the flywheel by breathing down the intake :P When i dynoed my VP SS when it was stock with an auto trans it had 135rwkw and 636Nm so factory quoted figures are BS too

[50LTRv8]

agreed, BS same block. I don't know why they are different in power but i can tell you right now that after 20 odd years its not that much anymore and i can make 3kw of power at the flywheel by breathing down the intake :P When i dynoed my VP SS when it was stock with an auto trans it had 135rwkw and 636Nm so factory quoted figures are BS too

It is probably a different tune, and those factory figures are at the fly, not rwkw

[kniever]

It is probably a different tune, and those factory figures are at the fly, not rwkw

even tho it still equals 180kw atf so it woulda had some sort of tune, my vn got 125rwkw when was completely stock which is about 168kw atf

[agrsv8]

how do you figure that. 165kw-15% for driveline=140rkw maybe -5kw extra due to the auto trans and i'm spot on.

[stocky]

How about some dynos just give out really high figures, especially the ones in SA? It may have said 135rwkw, but it was probably closer to 120

[agrsv8]

thats a pretty broad point of view, i'd hate to see what you think of Sydneys Dynos, what about QLD or is the Dyno you use the best one. :P wateva

[stocky]

thats a pretty broad point of view, i'd hate to see what you think of Sydneys Dynos, what about QLD or is the Dyno you use the best one. :P wateva

Uhh no, I don't use dyno's because they're a stupid way of trying to compare two completely different cars, especially when the same dyno isn't used. A lot of people on this forum would agree with me about SA dynos, with plenty of SA V6's pulling stupid numbers like 160rwkw. Probably comes down to having no track to back up the numbers.

[con7502003]

same block my ass first vn v8 thicker in the bores fact.

[stocky]

same block my ass first vn v8 thicker in the bores fact.

And you have proof of this? Would love to see it. Until then, BS

[_R_J_K_]

same block my ass first vn v8 thicker in the bores fact.

Yeah, no.

Not believing this until you can prove it. Also, what does "thicker bores" mean? If the bores were different, you would have to buy different pistons for VN and VP. Never seen that before.

[kniever]

how do you figure that. 165kw-15% for driveline=140rkw maybe -5kw extra due to the auto trans and i'm spot on.

lol where you get that calculation from? never heard that way b4, for years ive been using the 1.34 calculation, 135x1.34=180.9, same as the other way if you want to turn fwkw-rwkw, 180.9/1.34=135.

that would have to be the closest calculation i have seen for working that out, have been using it for years and i have seen many other people will use that same one too so no, you are not spot on...

[shifty6]

there is no calculation for fwkw to rwkw. it will be different for every car, even cars with the same engines n trans.

[_R_J_K_]

there is no calculation for fwkw to rwkw. it will be different for every car, even cars with the same engines n trans.

It's always been a guestimate (so yes, no exact calculation) percentage about how much the driveline anyway hasn't it? It's not really worth trying with cars that have stock engines that are nigh on 20 years old anyway.

[kniever]

there is no calculation for fwkw to rwkw. it will be different for every car, even cars with the same engines n trans.

like i said, it would have to be about the ''closest'' calculation

[agrsv8]

pretty sure you are wrong there mate, what you are using is the HP-kw conversion.
1.34 is for kw to HP ie 1.34Hp=1kw
cheers for the LOL
LOL

[VK_3800]

^ Its common to equate kilowatts at the flywheel with the same number of horsepower at the rear wheels

[STEALTHY™]

Someone has misread the info.

VN-VR are 165
VS are 168

And this was just bolt on stuff, motor is the same.
I had a read of the Aussie 5L book (which has all the specs for all the holdens 5Ls) and there was nothing of the sort about different blocks.....(wish i bought a copy so i could scan it in)

[VNSS90]

i thought vs series 1 was still 165 n series 2 was 168?

[kniever]

pretty sure you are wrong there mate, what you are using is the HP-kw conversion.
1.34 is for kw to HP ie 1.34Hp=1kw
cheers for the LOL
LOL

rwhp and fwkw are close enough to being the same number so that why it does work lol

if you want there is another calculation that works pretty close too, add a 3rd of your rwkw to achieve the fwkw, 135+45(1/3)=180

[david dubbo]

to much bloody maths for me put it on a track and give me a number