Griffith Newbe Question: Difference 500 vs 500 HC

[Higgins23]

I have started looking at different Griffith models for potential purchase. One thing that I have not been able to figure out is the difference between a Griffith 500 and a Griffith 500 HC. Can anyone provide enlightenment. Thanks Higgins23

>>> Edited by Higgins23 on Thursday 23 September 11:44

[Corin Denton]

None

[siwes]

all 500's are high compression engines, which contrary to arguments is what HC stands for
simon

[MikeG]

To spot a proper HC Griffith check that it has a badge on it's plenum chamber that says 500HC.

I believe however that apart from the badge there are no other differences

Mike

[TVRinBFG]

About 1997/98 when I first asked this question, Andy who use to run the TVR Service Dept, told me that the 500HC is the 340 bhp engine, that TVR launched the Griffith 500 with, circa 1993; and that the normal 500 is the 320 bhp engine. Note these are the bhp figures TVR claim in various brochures/postcards. Certainly, you'll find some 1995/96 cars with 500 on the top of the engine and some with 500HC. At that time Sue Stoker told me that supposedly the 500 is smoother to drive and at idle, which is why the 500HC was phased out; and interestingly Rob Ingleby told me the same as her, about 18 months ago. Now, I've never had an identical mileage 500 and 500HC in stock at the sametime to confirm this; and don't know if the above is TVR spin/folklore or not.

[Apache]

nowt

[budd]

I was told the HC uses an "higher" lift cam, this could explain the smoother running and better idle on later "non" HC badged cars.

[davidd]

what a lot of drivel..

All early 500s are supposed to be 340bhp, at some point (98,99 maybe) they detuned them by 20bhp to 320 to make them a little easier to drive.

The badge on the engine I'm sure is just whatever they had lying about but the HC is supposed to be high compression.

The thing to remember is that neither will make the quoted power and I suspect if you ran a series of them on a RR you would find that there is sod all difference in power output.

D

[starmist]

I wouldn't lose sleep over the different. Bang an ACT carbon plenum on and you'll lose the badge anyway. Stick in a Taraka cam, and you'll have eliminated any difference there might have been in the first place. Go the whole hog and you'll have the power TVR claimed it had in the first place!

[GreenV8S]

I'm reasonably confident HC does stand for high lift cam not high compression. First because several people who ought to know have said so, second because Team Central used to offer an 'HC' upgrade on the smaller engines which was essentially a cam change.

[budd]

davidd said:

what a lot of drivel.. All early 500s are supposed to be 340bhp, at some point (98,99 maybe) they detuned them by 20bhp to 320 to make them a little easier to drive. The badge on the engine I'm sure is just whatever they had lying about but the HC is supposed to be high compression. The thing to remember is that neither will make the quoted power and I suspect if you ran a series of them on a RR you would find that there is sod all difference in power output. D

what a lot of drivel..

[Corin Denton]

budd said:

davidd said: what a lot of drivel.. All early 500s are supposed to be 340bhp, at some point (98,99 maybe) they detuned them by 20bhp to 320 to make them a little easier to drive. The badge on the engine I'm sure is just whatever they had lying about but the HC is supposed to be high compression. The thing to remember is that neither will make the quoted power and I suspect if you ran a series of them on a RR you would find that there is sod all difference in power output. D what a lot of drivel..

Nope that is true.

[ian8542]

Corin Denton said:

budd said: davidd said: what a lot of drivel.. All early 500s are supposed to be 340bhp, at some point (98,99 maybe) they detuned them by 20bhp to 320 to make them a little easier to drive. The badge on the engine I'm sure is just whatever they had lying about but the HC is supposed to be high compression. The thing to remember is that neither will make the quoted power and I suspect if you ran a series of them on a RR you would find that there is sod all difference in power output. D what a lot of drivel.. Nope that is true.

270 Bhp is about right. (Rolling road figures)

[Apache]

"The thing to remember is that neither will make the quoted power"

perhaps you missed that bit?