The Studebaker V8 - One Of America's Most UNDERRATED Engines
Vložit
- čas přidán 26. 08. 2024
- It has been an awful long while since I made any new content, right? Thus, I have some back with a few words about a powerplant that doesn't really get the attention it deserves from the car community as a whole. Please note that this video is made to be more like a general guide with just enough information for you to research more on your own. If you want, that is. I'm not the Studetruppen or anything.
Loved this video, my dad’s first Studebaker was a 59 with the 259v8. I learned to drive in his 62 hawk 289 4brl. 4spd and later I had a 63 hawk 289 2brl automatic trans. My aunt had a 66 with the 283. One Sunday while working the local parts store, a Avanti owner, traveling cross country needed a fuel pump. I went out to the alley, removed the pump from my hawk, sold it to them, called my mother for a ride home and ordered a reman pump on Monday. Thanks for posting.
I'm leaning now on age 75, and I yet mourn the loss of Studebaker. Their horse drawn wagons, their cars and trucks were designed and crafted very well indeed.
Ahh the olden days. V belts, 18436572, Autolite generator, rebuildable fuel pump, engine mounted in the right direction, AC compressor with service valves, real dual exhaust, fan driven by the engine!
Hi Jake.I believe you are the youngest studebaker fan on the planet and judging by your extensive knowledge and contagious enthusiasm i dont doubt it for 1 second. However i believe that many years ago that crown used to belong to me. When i was 18 years old (1982) i was working in construction and one morning i noticed a vehicle parked which immediately drew my attention. It was a 1962 gt hawk.I was mesmorized by its low slung stance and sexy, classy timeless design. So completely different to anything local in Australia from that time frame. I had never even heard of Studebaker and through my initial enquiries discovered that Hawks and Larks were assembled in right hand configuration in very limited numbers.The police force used theV8 Larks and are still fondly remembered.I think your Gt Hawk is stunning and possibly the most underrated american classic of all time.Its great to see them starting to gain some traction in the all too fickle collector car world.All my life i have dreamt of owning one and although that opportunity has more than likely passed me by i am still glad i had those dreams. I very very seldom see one these days but on that rare occasion it puts a massive smile on my face and brings back memories of that very special day that i first one.Enjoy your classic and happy motoring in one of the most beautiful cars of that era.
Cheers from downunder!
My dad was a mechanic from the 30s through the 60s and rebuilt many engines. I remember him doing a few Stude V8s and setting the valve gap as they were running. With the valve covers off oil drenched the exhaust manifolds and smoked like crazy. Not quite sure why he didn't take a set of covers and cut them open to access for adjustment.....he must have liked to smoke up the town.
I worked in an automotive machine shop in the 1970’s and we rebuilt Studebaker engines for a local restorer. They were a very refined engine and the castings were much better than others and had more attention to detail with cleaning casting flash etc. They were also painted with, I believe, an epoxy paint on the inside to aid oil flow back to the pan. They were great engines. The Avanti is one of my favorite cars of the 1960s, I know it was rereleased in the 70’s but that wasn’t a Studebaker! Love your car and thanks for the video!
Nice video and presentation, Jake! Thanks for being a part of the worldwide Studebaker “family”. Studebakers are Great...Studebaker People are the Greatest.
Not all are. I am finding out. 😱😩
I’m a direct descendent from them always cool learning more
For a time the Ontario Provincial Police used Studebaker V-8 as highway pursuit cars.
My parents used to get Studebaker cars. However, when they started to use Chevrolet engines my father,
like many other Studebaker loyalists, figured that if he was going to get a car with a Chev engine it might as well be a Chevy. Our Studebaker dealer became a Plymouth/Chrysler dealer and we switched loyalties with him.
Fun fact, the "Visible V-8" model engine that is still made today, by Revell, I believe, is a accurate model of the Studebaker V-8.
Cool stuff. Thanks for sharing!
I had one, I taped an electric drill to it to see how fast it would turn, it never did break spun it to 3500 probably lol
I thought the Visible V8 was based off the ‘50’s Rambler V8.
Interesting video and comments. I had 63 Lark. Read on after you are done laughing. it had 93k miles on it when I got it. Replaced the alternator and the 289 ran fine. No early Mustang had a chance. It had dual points, Carter 4bbl carb, 4-speed B-W T10, Hurst shifter, front disc brakes, dual exhaust, "Hollywood" mufflers, posi-traction, roll bar, racing harness, battery in the trunk - but I moved it back up front, and chrome valve covers just to pretty it up. It was quite the machine, but the body was pretty well rusted. Sold it to a guy who put all that stuff in a 55 Hawk. This was in the early 70's. Now I want it back.
Amazing how even a fairly pedestrian car like the Lark can elicit emotions like that. Of course, I would also submit that the Lark is also an underrated car. Such a clean and pure design, very unusual for late 50s, early 60s America. Interior and exterior use of space is also among the best I've ever experienced.
The Hawk didn't come out until 1956. The 55 would have been either a Champion or a Commander. I have my dad's 55 Champion coupe and wish I had that running gear for it. The Larks were incredible cars.
The K-Code Mustang 289 would have had a chance.
Beautiful sounding V-8. Pretty cool that you have A/C, looks factory in your car. I knew anguy out here in California that collected Studebakers. I took a body shop class with him. He was working on a 1959 Hawk, V-8 post model with factory A/C. He also had a Wagonaire, a few more hawks amd several Larks. After I lost contact with him I found a 1959 mint Lark sitting at a local Pick A Part. I am guessing either Salmon or Pink. 2 door, V-8. Sad that it was there, but probably the person who owned it was the original owner that died and the estate didn't want to deal with it so off to the wrecking yard. I've seen many like that unfortunately. Also met a guy in Tucumcari NM that had a bunch of Studebakers in his yard right off the highway.
Hi Jake
I was disappointed with your review of the Stude V8
You left out many facts supporting the premise ; that it is an amazing and under appreciated engineering marvel
Let’s start ;
Block is cast in tough steel alloy not ductile iron
Forged crank and connecting rods
Gear driven camshaft ( taxi and cop models have a metal gear ; fibre for conventional )
Twenty- two head bolts per side ( this is what limits the bore size as water jackets would be weakened )
Small end of conrods capture the wrist pin offering more contact surface area
Had they included forged pistons at the time every engine that left the plant would be able to take boost from superchargers or turbos
As it is , that is really the only mod necessary to get massive performance upgrade with boost
The Cadillac thing showed up when aftermarket performance intakes could be made to work on Stude engines with one modification
The Society of petroleum Engineers produced a white paper advising automakers to look to the future in new engine designs by going for higher octane fuels and you are right in saying it did not materialize
They got snookered by the timing of their development , but produced a bulletproof engine that many have been able to boost reliably
It is a very heavy engine because of this construction
Mate it to a modern light weight five speed !
Studebaker first denied that their engine was a copy of the Cadillac, but later admitted they took it as a model and even consulted with Cadillac's designers. The Studebaker was similar in overall concept but much different in detail. It was only about 3/4 the size, used solid valve lifters instead of hydraulic, gear driven camshaft instead of chain, and had other detail differences. Since the Cadillac was the best, most modern engine in any car at the time they could have done a lot worse.
The new engine debuted at 232 cu in and 120HP replacing a 245cu in 102HP six cylinder. A significant advance in power at the time. Road tester Tom McCahill said it made the Studebaker a rip roaring, hell for leather performer compared to previous models. A mildly hopped up sedan made 117 mph officially timed at the Daytona speed trials at the hands of owner Gober Sosebee. The fastest stock car in the trials was a Chrysler New Yorker sedan with 331cu in Hemi v8 at 100.13, the only stock car to top 100 that year.
Using something as a reference and making a 1:1 copy are two very different things. Regardless, this was an excellent comment.
@@jakekaywell5972 External size was close despite the 100 cubic inch difference. In fact early Cadillac hot rodders buy Studebaker adjustable rocker arms to use on their Caddy motors. Intake manifolds are interchangeable, too, with minor mods. The bore spacing of the Studebaker block at 4.50 inches was actually larger than the small block Chevy's 4.40 bore spacing (that's bore center to center distance, not the actual bore size itself), or Chrysler's 273-318-340-360 small block at 4.46, or, especially. Ford's 221-260-289-351-400 small block at 4.38. The reason the Studebaker's engine remained limited in cubic inches was finances, not block capacity. Studebaker was essentially broke after the 53 model year, and never had the money to upgrade its motor to the 340 cube version that was in future production plans (a few 340 blocks may actually have been cast, although that is disputed). The Studebaker V8 may not be a 1:1 copy of the early Cad motor, but there are way too many similarities, design and dimensional, to be just coincidental.
By the way, the first gen Chrysler Hemi had the same 331 cubes, the same bore, the same stroke and the same bore spacing as the first Caddy V8, Plenty of differences, including especially the hemi heads of the Chrysler vs. the wedge heads of the Cadillac, but Studebaker clearly wasn't the only company to at least be looking at the 49 Caddy V8 when designing its own.
@@herman452 The Chrysler and Cadillac were so similar, the rods and pistons interchanged. Briggs Cunningham used Caddy rods and pistons in his Chrysler powered Cunningham race cars because they were lighter and gave higher compression.
@@herman452 You're right in that it that its not a coincidence. Studebaker engineers did use the Cadillac 331 V8 from 1949 as a reference. Key word being "reference".
This video explains what has long been a mystery to me. When you purchase gaskets for "small block Chevy" one of the applications is for Studebaker; I never knew that Stude' used Chevy engines. Thanks.
You're welcome.
I learned to drive on a 51 Commander, 232 V8, automatic, and I now own a 1960 Lark Convertible with a 259 V8 and an automatic, have had others inbetween :) Excellent job on this video.
You're quite welcome! My goal with this was to correct the public on an issue that's deeply rooted. The Studebaker 289 cu. V8 is not a Ford no matter how you dice it! It's also quite the performer, as evidenced by the likes of Ted Harbitt.
@@jakekaywell5972 and his Stude Tomato! :)
Love your Lark brother!
Looking for an Avanti R2 motor once I ran across a man who pulled two 289 Studebakers from a fishing boat and replaced them with small block Chevrolets. Performance was minimally increased but fuel usage went from 7 to 12 gallons per hour!
I think the 259 with an overdrive can approach 30 mpg
When I was about 15 years old (I’m 73 now), my uncle and I found and bought a studebaker that some kids had played gas station with the water hose. We drove the car, stopping every 20 minutes or so to empty the water that flooded the engine. Took us all day to drive it home (about 150 miles). When home, we took the engine down to the block. For the next couple of months we replaced every part of the engine cause water had rusted it all up. All these years, I’ve been wondering why my uncle would bother with this particular studebaker and I think I know why thanks to your video. I think that my uncle knew about the Cadillac engine under that hood. Needless to say, I learned enough about engines those couple of months to later find success working for General Motors. Thanks, big guy. I can now have peace.
In the 60's, Andy Granatelli broke several class records at Bonneville with a Studebaker Avanti using the supercharged 289 c.i. R4 engine. So the potential was certainly there.
Ya , a few you say? Try 337-357 speed and endurance records with a nearly 15 year old engine . No other company even tried to duplicate that.
And the big 3 engines were almost all of new 60s origin.
IMHO not even the venerable chev family of 283 forward could begin to come even CLOSE to that. Why ? Not even the 327 Fi could top the R3 ,304 cuber producing 400+ HP,
Topping 178.5 mph AND hang together in one piece like a stude V8.
And which chev Ford or Mopar 300 cube engine in the sixties seventies and beyond could muster 600 HP,like the R5 in 1963? That's right NONE! Propelling the Avanti to , 196+ mph. Not even the nascar big 3 could do that.
Or Indy cars either. True performance leader of the 60s was not big 3 --it was STUDEBAKER.
The Studebaker V8 was indeed quite similar to the Cadi V8. So much so that with very minor modifications with a rotery porting tool and a slight "plane" adjustment on the 'head to intake' surface the Cadillac intake manifold would fit on the Studebaker V8 motor. Some minor hole relocation was required on Cadi manifold as well. It's been years since I built one but the 3 hole bolt pattern for the " tri power " Cadi manifold which employed the Stromberg 97's carbs could be easily modified with an adapter to fit any four bolt carborator of the day. A progressive linkage was easily fabricated as well that allowed the engine to run nice on the street using the center carb and then full throttle when racing. No supercharger naturally.
Nice video
Just for the record Pick a part in Bakersfield on Union Avenue has a 65 Champion 4 door no parts are missing off it except for minor engine parts it appears that nobody knows what it is you might want to check out their stock list and you can see pictures of it it was put out to the pasture 928 2021 that's of October 8 2021
Herb here. TOTALLY UNDERAPPRECIATED car! The so called " muscle car/hot rod experts" of today are totally clueless.
Raised on the myth of Chevrolet superiority.
I agree with you whole heartedly. I dont even live in america (Aust) and i think the 1950s commander and golden hawks are the most beautiful underrated american classics of all time and if the so called experts did their research they would find out that the very first muscle car was
indeed a Studebaker! Still cannot believe they have gone!
Chevrolet is superior to everything except Studebaker. We have a 1962 Studebaker station wagon with a 259 V8 that whooped the socks off of a1984 Corvette at a traffic light back when I was a teenager. That was with nine people in the station wagon.
I had a nice 65 cruiser and a 55 champion. I recall as a boy hearing mechanics refer to studebakers as " stud busters", perhaps in reference to our new england rust, because mechanically, they were fine cars.
Fabulous engines, I have a 1961 259 cu. in. in my Ford model A. It runs like a Swiss watch.
Had a 51stude conv we put the 55 259 engine in it was good the 232 s blew up .🤗
Interesting combo. How did that come about?
@@jakekaywell5972 I was hotrodding a model A, a flathead was out of reach and I didn't want a belly button engine. I decided that if it was good enough for Dean Moon back in the days, It's good enough for me.
First car was a 1959 Studebaker wagon with the venerable 289 that I paid $25 for from my dad. My dad said it was essentially a Caddy design engine, over-engineered and robust. I used it through high school and into college. The interior was very clever and roomy, with a front seat that folded flat into the rear bench, creating an instant bed. Used it as a surf wagon until the auto transmission just gave out one day. I got out, laughed, and left it by the side of the road, as it had run its adventurous race and didn't financially pencil to fix it. The little beast regularly got 20mpg and hauled anything you could close the doors on.
Interesting the subject of the million mile motor did not come up. It is my understanding that the 289 V8 was engineered for up to 5 over bores, and crankshaft regrinds.
The over-bore, and crank regrind specs, are admirable, however, had Studabaker employed thin-wall casting techniques,and widened the bore-spacing for more displacement, they may have remained competitive, and stayed in business.
5 overbores without core shifts. It's my understanding that Studebaker needed thick castings because their foundry couldn't always keep the cores on center.
Privileged to own a '63 Lark V8. The Stud V8 is rated as I believe has been rated within the top 5 of all iconic American engines ever made.
Yessir. Had a 59 Lark VIII with a V8/automatic. Loved that car.
What is interesting is the cylinder bore spacing was more than adequate for larger displacement but it would have required substantial casting and tooling changes that couldn't be justified by 1957.
Hi Jake, Love your content. I have a GT Hawk that I'm busy restoring.
Pretty accurate. But starting with the '63 model year there was a 304.5 CID supercharged version of the Studebaker V-8! I was fortunate enough to have one of the limited number of those engines.
The largest I have heard of was a 259 bored .125" over with a 289 crank swapped in. That resulted in 320 cubic inches - but not all blocks would accept a .125" overbore, I am guessing.
I'm still hoping Studebaker will stage a comeback.
Building Zeppelins, perhaps?
We were basically a Studebaker family. My father drove them. My brother drove a few from the 51 Starlight coup though the last of the Hawks I drove them starting with the 50 Champion a 52 Champion and a 52 Commander with that great V8. In my opinion, they engineered themselves out of business. They developed so many innovations that were far and above the others. True self adjusting brakes, hill hold braking system to mention a couple. The original owner of my Commander must have been a total idiot and ran it dry on oil. I won't get into all the problems we found during the overhaul. Nothing internal was salvageable. I mean nothing.. After the overhaul, and complete and proper break-in, it was a quiet beast. I still had it when I joined the Navy. My father sold it for me while I was overseas. If they were still making them with the same quality, I'd still be driving them. Great Automobile.
Your experiences seem to be shared amongst many other Studebaker owners. Solid and well-engineered beyond belief. December 20, 1963 was a sad day for many in this country. Thanks for your service and have a good one.
My older sister had a 52 4 door , suicide design, with the V8. It wasn't the fastest car around but it would show you a 100 any day of the week with a little left if you weren't scared.
I really thing the hp ratings were conservative .
Awesome video! Thanks for making it!
My Father had a1956 Studebaker President with a V8, a/c, automatic transmission. The right front frame broke and he put it back together some how!
I've noticed many guys in my club have the '70s Chrysler ignition setup on the firewall seems to start much better specially when the car is cold or hot
That’s interesting considering Chryslers generally have the starting characteristics of I think I can, I think I can while simultaneously causing the starter motor to sound like a cat being swung around by its tail!! 😂
Nothing on earth sounds like a Studebaker V8 - its got it all and more.
For horsepower comparisons, Studebaker offered four engine choices, R-1 through R-4, as "Jet Thrust" engine options for the Avanti. And also available optionally in other Studebaker models.
R-1, 289, 240 hp. Normally aspirated 4 bbl carb.
R-2, 289. 289 hp. Supercharged with 4 bbl carb. (The magic "one horsepower per cubic inch".)
R-3, 304.5, 335 hp. Supercharged with 4 bbl carb and many other improvements. This is the version run at Bonneville breaking 29 records.
R-4, 304.5, 280 hp. Similar to the R-3, but not supercharged and with two 4 bbl carbs. No Avanti was delivered with one, but I think one Lark was.
R-5, 304.5, 638 hp. Twin supercharged factory car.
Speed advancements were overseen by Andy Granatelli. He had been president of Paxton Products (making the superchargers) and Studebaker acquired Paxton (they had a spate of acquiring many companies) to also get Granatelli in the bargain. Studebaker also bought STP and Granatelli was president of that for awhile. If you look at oil filler caps on these engines of this period, you see a factory applied label to add STP with each oil change.
Granatelli drove an R-3 Avanti himself to break 29 records at Bonneville (a fact heavily advertised by Studebaker). This included a two-way average of 168.15 for the flying mile. The highest speed attained was 178.5 mph during part of the return leg of the 20 mile run. All of these efforts resulted in the Studebaker Avanti being the world's fastest production car in 1963. Only nine Avantis were delivered with the R-3 but there have since been a number of clones made.
Both Joe and Andy Granatelli drove the R-5 factory car (Engine named "Duo Cento") at Bonneville with a best two-way average of 196.58 mph. Studebaker submitted a paper to the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) on this engine stating it had 638 hp. Some references say 575 hp., but the paper provided to the SAE is probably the best reference.
Excellent comment. Thanks for posting!
The R5 had twin Paxton superchargers, and I believe fuel injection. ( have built a model kit of a 64 Avanti, with that engine ) Also, R4 Lark Daytonas were road raced successfully in England and Australia, including one that currently is raced in England in Vintage races, running quite well against 427 Galaxies ( see the 78th Members Meeting at Goodwood , on CZcams, filmed just weeks ago.) The 304 cubic inch displacement was used, probably because 5 liters was the maximum allowed for sedan racing in the SCCA, in the U.S. ( Hence, the Boss 302 Mustang, the 302 Z28 Camaro, AMC Javelin 304, in the Trans Am series). Another engine line strongly influenced by the 331 Cadillac, was the 1st generation AMC V8, launched in 1956, at 250 Cid, followed in '57 with the 327, which was used until 1966. In '63 the 250 was replaced by the 287, also used thru '66. These engines also only have 3 exhaust ports per head, and weigh as much as the Studebaker V8. Second gen AMC V8s got the thin wall casting tech in '66, along with front mounted distributors and the proper number of exhaust ports.
Studebaker was the brand that stud alone in style and quality. The cars were so cool looking.
it went from 289 to 304.5 for the R3,, R4 engines , the 283 was a GM motor standard from Canada
Nice sound. Would have loved to see the whole car.
Thanks! I have a few other videos here on my channel showing off more of my car if you want.
In 1959 my cousin who was a repo man called me, he had Golden Hawk and it could be mine for $600.
For some reason my father didn't think a 300 hp car would be a good 1st car for a teenager :(
I remember lusting after, choose one, a Golden Hawk, or, if necessary, a Silver Hawk. But I was only 20 at the time, and had only started my first full-time job.
He was right, but when I was a teenager, I thought like you did - "There is no such thing as too much power".
The Studebaker was and is a very stout and strong V8 The nickle iron alloy block and Studebaker V8 with the cast crank was a strong motor. One of the standout V8 versions you left out was the 224 a high reeving version of the 259
How did they put a Pontiac crank into a Chevy small block?
One of America's most UNDERRATED, and beautiful, cars.
I would have liked to have learned more about the Paxon supercharger. (FYI, it's pronounced Sen-TRI-fi-gull.) Belt driven, but it had a variable speed ball drive transmission. That eliminated the crazy boost characteristics of a direct drive centrifugal. The drive increased speed at low RPM and then tapered off as engine RPM increased. So why not a Roots/Eaton type of positive displacement supercharger? Centrfugals, eccentric vane, and scroll superchargers are more efficient. The compression takes place in the unit instead of just packing more air into the manifold.
You can see a hint of the big 3 in that engine. From the fuel pump to the intake bolts.
That's because Studebaker engineers did use the Cadillac 331 V8 from 1949 as a reference. The resulting Stude 232 was nowhere close to being a 1:1 copy, as the rumor goes, but it's still there.
My first car was a 63 daytona, T10 transmission 259 2 bbl bucket seats, light blue. In 68-69 it was easier to find stude parts, i promptly picked up a 4bbl intake with wcfb carb and a hurst shifter. It developed a radiator leak, right when it started to turn cold that year and i would open the radiator petcock to drain the water when id get home, One night it was cold enough to freeze and split the block open before it drained out. Mom had the car hauled off when I went off to college. If she'd left it alone I would have transplanted a 440 into it.
Still the finest and toughest V8 'all rounder' ever produced - bar none.
Most definitely. Most folk don't know what they're missing. Raised on the myth of Chevrolet/GM superiority.
Studebaker V8 ~ Music to my ears! 🙂
Enjoyed your video, nice to see young people with older cars. Great to see your gt. I owned a golden and a silver hawk, would one of those be your GT?
No. The Silver and Golden Hawks differed in a number of ways from my GT, most notably in the roofline and their much larger tailfins. The Silver and Golden Hawks also never lived to see the 1959 model year, whereas my GT Hawk was made from 1962-64.
@@jakekaywell5972 Just to pick a nit, the only Hawk available in 59, 60 and 61 was just called the Hawk, but it was the same as the Silver Hawk... and in 61 you could get one with a 4 speed.
I owned a 259 in a 55 President had 4 barrel WCFB Carter carb and solid, not hydraulic lifters.
Lots of fun Tranny was Borg/Warner 3 speed
There's a fellow on CZcams that put a Cadillac 2 four barrel setup on a Studebaker V8 with, according to him, just a slight modification of a bolt hole or two.
I've heard of that trick, I think you also have to do some machining of the ports to make it run right. The dimensions are similar, but not the same.
I’m the former owner of Avanti R3565, an Avanti Red 1963 factory supercharged R2 4 speed. The engine was well built, but not very impressive power in stock form. I’ve been to the Bonneville Salt Flats in 2006 with Dave Bloomberg trying to set a land speed record in his wildly modified Studebaker powered Avanti. A couple of years later he went 215 mph in his car. Studebaker speed freaks are an odd if stubborn and dedicated group - there are so many other easier ways to go fast. It’s really too bad Studebaker chose such a small bore size for such a massive block - and those cylinder heads were very flow challenged.
thats what the supercharger is for.
@@riogrande163 Even with a factory Paxton supercharger it was still a 16 second car at the drags - not exactly a threat in the stoplight grand prix. Dave's R2 was highly modified with a large supercharger, extensive cylinder head modifications, a fuel injection system originally designed for a helicopter engine to produce ~ 2.5 times the original horsepower.
In the 60s I built a 350 cube Study by bore and stroking the engine
The tail pipe end sounds good , the hood end is a bit loud . The heavy cast block makes supper charging the way to go . You are a good old iron guardean guardean !
The hood end being loud probably stems from the fact that my A/C pump was on in that clip. Thanks for the compliment.
That's a smooth running engine.
Part of it is fundamentally good design, but part of it is also just basic maintenance.
And scores of people refuse to maintain their cars.
I agree the Studebaker V8 is outstanding! However; if Studebaker & Packard were merged in 54 why did the larger Packard engines get discarded? S-P management made a decision to put the Packard engine in a 56 Golden Hawk and then just stopped. I do believe the Stude V8 is superior in design and quality but it's only drawback is limited cid. Great video!!!
Thanks for the good comment! If I recall correctly, the 352 cid. Packard V8 was pretty much just thrown together out of desperation in just over a year's time because Packard needed a specific V8 and needed it now for public appeal. It was known for its poor metallurgy in the blocks and thus they were prone to cracking. You also have to keep in mind that the Studebaker-Packard Corporation was hemorrhaging money and just trying to stay in business. Ditching a bad-to-mediocre engine seemed like the right idea to save some costs on this front.
You're also right that the Studebaker V8 is a tough little unit and very well designed, as it cost significantly more to manufacture and was more durable than Ford's 289 cid. V8. That said, it was also pretty heavy for a small block, coming in at 700 pounds.
@@jakekaywell5972 I did hear about quality issues on those Senior Packard's. I just got my Hawk running after blueprinting the 289 engine. .040 over stock cam 2bb carb. This engine has got the same "voodoo" the Chrysler slant six has. It just wants to run!!! The salt flat racers have tremendous respect for the Stude V8 engine. In it's highest race tune it has a distinctive "siren" sounding exhaust note at 6000 rpm. There's a video from 1992 you must see and hear. I'll see if I can link it. Cheers!
@@kevincruz4045 Glad to hear that your own Hawk is up to snuff! As a closing note, I think the design of the Studebaker V8 is very much Soviet in terms of its philosophy. Old tech, even when it was new, but so simple and overbuilt that it would always function in pretty much any condition you could put it up against. The YAMZ 238 diesel V8 for heavy-duty trucks I think would be a good comparison.
I had not heard of the metalurgy problems in the Packard V8s. I had heard they had some minor oil system issues, but first year problems were common in those days, even the SBC had minor problems the first couple years that were addressed in minor changes for '57. I think the bigger reason for not using the Packard motor was the location of the plant. They needed to consolidate to save money and studebaker was the volume car. So they sacked the Packard plant and engine and kept Studebaker. Might it have made a difference in sales to use the Packard motor? Maybe. I think so. But the logistics of bringing the motors from Detroit could have slowed up the assembly line and they needed to act quick to save the company.
‘56 was the last year for the true Packard. All production was moved to South Bend and there was no need or justification for 57 Studebakers and Packardbakers to use the 352 Packard engine. Money was scarce at SP.
Well done, Jake!
Great video! I am just curious as to where that accent of yours comes from, I cannot place it. Also, if you could do a video explaining on a part by part basis how the Studebaker engine ended up being 250 pounds heavier than the equivalent displacement Ford V8, that would be great from an engineering point of view. That’s a lot of weight difference for a small block V8! Thanks.
I'm from Florida and believe in speaking clearly and distinctly, if that helps. As for the reason why Studebaker's V8 is so heavy relative to it's displacement, I won't need a video to explain that. Studebaker didn't have the thin-wall casting technology the Big Three did by the mid-to-late '50s, so an old-fashioned heavy V8 was the result.
You could always tell a Stude with an engine transplant...it sat a bit higher in the front.
one great car all round!
Great sounding mill.
Type the name "Ted Harbit" into you tube , and watch a 73 year old man HUMILIATE Buick Gs's , Pontiac GTO's , and Plymouth road runners in the "Pure stock Motor car Drags" . His weapon ? A little red 1963 Studebaker Daytona coupe with an R2 motor , that he calls "the Stude Tomato " ..........Oh yeah , he runs pretty consistently in the low to mid 13's , with an occasional foray into the high 12's ..........Enjoy !!!!!!!
Ted Harbit is awesome to watch! I think he also drives the plain brown wrapper for the cars owner in the pure stock series.
We had a 58 four door Commander growing up, had 289 with side draft carb, alot stronger engine than 283 chevy in 66 impala that replaced it
They may not be powerful, but they're heavy too!
Heavy, yes. Powerful, also yes.
My friends in the 70s were finding Studebaker larks. I loved the cars, but every one I was around kept breaking teeth off of the flywheels that engaged the starters. They couldn't find replacement parts so abandoned the cars that I thought was a shame. Didn't they make a 426 for the gran tourismo?
No, most all of the GT's had 289s, although a few built for export had six cylinders. The 305 (R3 and R4) engines were technically available in the GT but I don't think any were ever built.
I really like the styling. The early Comanders are Sweet lookin.
How early? The Commanders were first introduced in 1927.
The Ford Y-block 239 to 312 was also designed to hopefully run on higher compression . Up to 13 to 1 . Both engine were very good and unfortunately never were able to reach the potential they were designed for .
In addition to the R3 engines there were 2 more, an R4 and an R5. These were experimental engines however and to my knowledge were not used in street vehicles. The R3 was quite impressive however with the 304 cu engine producing very close to 350 HP and making 1\4 miles runs in the mid 12's depending on driver and setup. The R5 was the bad boy with a 304cu inch twin turbo setup making over 500 horse power and Bonnivile speeds of over two hundred mph. The factory R3 Avanti posted speeds of 170 plus at the Bonnivile speedway and is still today the fastest production car ever made. The factory boys even took a lark convertible with an R3 engine up to 140 mph. The small bore and large stroke made this vehicle very torque positive and even overcame the siamese center exhaust port flawed design penalty.
The R-4 was offered as an option for the Avanti and others. No Avanti was ever delivered with one, but I believe one Lark was. They also sold some R-4's engines they had built as just engines (not many) but I don't know what they wound up in. For the R-5 (also named "Duo Cento") Studebaker submitted a paper to the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) rating it at 638 hp. Some references say 575 hp, but that Studebaker submitted paper is probably the most authoritative.
Any Corvette made since about 1992 will hit 170 mph. The higher performance ones will go much faster.
@@andyharman3022 But what could Corvettes do in 1963? I think that even with their best engine, the L84, it was something like 130 mph. A Studebaker Avanti with the lowest engine option available could almost do that.
@@trainliker100 Dave Wallace said "fastest production car ever made". I doubt the factory Avanti could do that, either. Yes, after the Granatelli brothers got done massaging it. I read Andy Granatelli's autobiography many years ago, and recall from it that they spent a lot of time at Bonneville with those cars setting the records.
@@andyharman3022 The factory Avanti with the factory available R-3 engine topped 170 mph at Bonneville. Anybody could buy an R-3 equipped Avanti and get that performance. You didn't need Granatelli working on it to get it. In reality, he had already worked on the design so Studebaker could crank out engines that had that performance. Actually, the factory cars had slightly more horsepower because the R-3 Granatelli ran at Bonneville was only bored to 299 to stay within a class limit and the factory cars were 304.5.
1:35 The '51 Commander V8 was rated at 120 horsepower, 18 more than the '50 Commander six, almost 18% higher.
2:10 No mention of the 224 cubic inch Commander V8?
The 232 commander V8 delivered 15% more horsepower than the outgoing six, which is not significant enough for me to mention in my opinion. I did neglect to comment on the 224, but it existed for less than six months, so again not worth mentioning.
I did hear that these engines had forged internals. Is that true,m
My '57 Silver Hawk has a 259, how long does it take to adjust the valves?
If you have never done it before figure 4 hours. You have to take off the valve covers, clean them, then fit the new gaskets. Stick the gaskets to the covers with silicone and press on a flat surface and let the silicone dry while you adjust the valves. When you are ready to reinstall the covers coat the gasket with grease or oil and it will come off easy next time. Snug up the bolts, warm up the engine, and recheck the bolts. Do not over tighten or you will squish the gasket out.
😈🔱👿... is it easy or difficult to find parts for these old engines in 2024 and if you can get parts can somebody tell me there where i can purchase them ?...ty
The Advanri with the Studebaker V8 with a single Paxton Super Charge was the fastest American Production car in 1962 with a recorded top speed of 170 mph at the Bonneville Salt Flats
That's Avanti.
@@Zekais So much for phonics
On weight, some online references have the Studebaker 289 at 650 lbs. and the Ford 289 at 460 lbs. But I have also seen the Studebaker shown as 650 lbs. dry and 695 lbs. installed. But the 650 lbs. versus 460 lbs. is probably a good comparison for the engines as delivered on pallets.
The Ford 289 engine was a newer design and by the early 1960s Ford had experience with the FE using thinner cylinder walls to reduce engine weight.
With data this old, and because Studebaker's unfortunately not the most preserved or loved automaker out there, there's bound to be some fluctuation present. Thanks for the comment.
65/66 Chevy 283. "thunderbolt " on the valve covers. I have many
Smooth runner.
Actually the engine was pumped up to 304 CI.
Only for a limited series which wasn't widely produced, which is why I didn't mention it.
Jake is correct. There were only nine Avantis factory-equipped with the supercharged 304 cubic inch R3, which weren’t really production engines in the same sense as the smaller versions. Those engines used blocks carefully selected for minimal core shift in the cylinders, so they could be bored to minimal wall thickness without breaking through into the water jacket. The engines were hand-built by Paxton, and ran a relatively high supercharger boost pressure, which required a sealed enclosure around the 4-bbl carb so the relative pressures inside and out- were correct. There was also a naturally-aspirated R4, with twin 4-bbl carbs; this was a hot-cammed, high rpm mill. If memory serves, there was one Daytona convertible factory-equipped with an R4. These are engines are covered in the parts manual for the Avanti. Paxton built somewhere between 100 and 200 total R3/R4 engines; not even a good approximation is known, although most authorities seem to think it was approaching 200. Most of these were actually sold to hot rodders after South Bend was closed. The nine Avanti R3s were all 1964s, I believe all consecutive serial numbers at the end of the run. Real R3/R4 cars had a host of other special performance parts (steering, suspension, even the speedo) that are missing on conversions.
excellent video.
Hey Jake, where did you get that leather jacket? I’ve been looking for a leather jacket like that and one that says Studebaker Packard on it would be perfect 😂
Thanks so much! Honestly, I just got a standard Bomber-style jacket and sewed a S-P patch onto it. Modern repros of the patches exist on eBay. Still have it. In fact, I'm wearing it now as I type this comment.
Solid lifters I take it ?
We had half a dozen Studebakers in our family in the 50's and 60's. The one thing i remember most was that they were all very fast and I suspect the engines were a bit underrated.
We had a 1950 Coupe with the flat head six and it would pretty much bury the needle at 100 any day of the week.
We also had a 52 4 door with suicide rear doors It had the V8 and automatic transmission and that thing would fly.
I wish i had one today. They were great cars. We had Chevys Plymouths and Fords also but it seems they broke down a lot more often than the Studebakers did , which btw was Never.
what a sound! WOW! just add some texas glas pacs!
timing chains need to be replaced every two hundred thousand miles . your distributer runs of the cam and timing chain. gears dont wear and last forever
gears cost a lot more time in the initial machining of the engine there for cost increases
My generator has a plate on it and it says Frigidaire for the air conditioning pump also for the generator I also noticed that in my 62 Pontiac LeMans it generator says Frigidaire
Frigidaire was a division of General Motors.
I was nineteen fifty-one Studebaker champion
Sure the valves are set right? .025 dead cold
Nice to see a new video from you.
Glad you think so! I've certainly got a lot better at this sort of thing, so there's that at least. What have you been up to?
@@jakekaywell5972
Also, your speech has cleared up quite a bit.
Something that might also help is to join the Toastmasters. Your interest in automotive history and willingness to share it is very much appreciated.
It was a good sturdy V8 that's true. However Studebaker did make some mistakes. It was 200 lb overweight and the lack of hydraulic lifters was not a good idea either. However the amount of power and torque that came out of those engines despite their small displacement was impressive.
I believe that the "overweight" property of the Studebaker V8 is an asset rather than a detriment, as it adds to its overall reliability. Agree about the lifters though. I generally prefer small displacement engines to larger ones in any case. Glad you enjoyed the video!
@@jakekaywell5972 You got it right on that account. There is something almost magical about the V8's with a displacement between 260 and 300 Cid. Don't care who the manufacturer was. The durability, power and economy were all there. There was also the the potential for modification that made larger engines more advertising than anything else. Great video. I am very glad that you have this treasure. Thank you for keeping it up and letting us enjoy it with your videos.
I know you! I saw your Hawk on Scotty K's channel!
Guilty as charged. I just decided to do this just because.
Had a 289 in my Pickup truck
She sure is sweet Jake!
😈🔱👿... did they ever make different heads and exhaust manifolds for these old Studebaker engines because the exhaust manifolds look like they're choking off the engines..
Rod bearings trouble on early stude v8s 232 259 think a 224 was avail in 55.also .had a 51commander conv w 259 once that's the rarest 🙄
Good stuff! You know there were some 305 cubic inch versions of this engine?
Yes there was! It was the absolute maximum cubic capacity that the old block could handle without immediately cracking, so it was wildly impractical for any sort of long term ownership. Fun though and original 305-machined blocks command big money today.
@@jakekaywell5972 I would think so. I have never seen one. I'm almost ashamed to admit my Lark has a small block Chevy. One day I'll find the right deal on a 289 and rebuild it.
@@buffdelcampo I wish you luck in your search. Some of those hoary old 289s are still floating around, here in the States especially. Did you know that Studebaker had the largest foreign presence out of any other American independent car company?
@@jakekaywell5972 No, didn't really think about that. I was on an airliner a few years ago. The passenger sitting next to me enjoyed talking about cars. I told him I had a Lark. It turns out he was the son of one of the last Studebaker presidents. He spent some of his childhood traveling with his father. We discussed almost everything. It was a long and interesting conversation. I know they had the plant in Canada and I know about the Mercedes dealerships, but that's all I can remember. I have a good friend that has a 259 that he'd probably sell, but I think a 289 will pop up somewhere and I'll buy it. In the meantime, the small block Chevy will be okay, painted black and wishing it had yellow valve covers. Mine has Edelbrock aluminum valve covers. It seems the valve covers that Studebaker used are a little rare. I passed up a set a couple of years ago because they weren't perfect. I should have bought them.
@@buffdelcampo Lovely stuff! It seems that Australia and Belgium in particular were popular markets, with the Belgian cars being assembled at their D'Ieteren plant. I think your best source of Studebaker valve covers would be Studebaker International. They supposedly bought out the entire NOS parts stock way back when and it's supposedly going strong.
It weighed HOW MUCH? Jeez.
Nice old school V8 what was the top pump for ? Air con
Yup! That pump is about 15 pounds on its own and works in much the same manner as a tiny engine to draw and compress air. Even has cylinders!
Thanks for the reply
A/c awsome
My first car was a 53 Studebaker with a 289-
Not from the factory it didn't. If your '53 had a V8 from new, it would have been the 232 cu. unit.
@@jakekaywell5972 I put it in-was from an Avanti
A stout and reliable engine, for sure, but very heavy for a small block. Ditto the Packard V-8.
That may be true, but because it's such an oversquare design, there's a lot of performance potential to be had.
The first generation V8s (Olds, Caddy, Chrysler, Studebaker) were heavier than the slightly later Buick and Chevrolet V8s and much heavier than the thinwall casting engines of 1962 and later. The Ford 289 was the first of these but new designs from other makers soon followed.
Packard was a 1955 design and was not heavy considering its large displacement. About 50 pounds heavier than the Studebaker.
The early Studebaker, AMC, Pontiac, Dodge, Plymouth and Ford overhead valve engines were small displacement engines, not small blocks. Even the Chevy wasn't referred to as a small block, until the 348 ( a larger block motor, designed for truck use ) came in '58. Pontiac's 1955 V8 was 287 ci, but was enlarged to 455 ci over 15 years , without changing the external dimensions. AMC's second gen V8 started as 290 ci, is now considered a small block, because it's light in weight, but was enlarged to 401c.i. One needs to know some history, before throwing the terms "small block" and "big block" around indiscriminately.
I hear a whistling sound is that the AC pump is turned on
Yup! That's it alright.
@@jakekaywell5972 supercharger!
studebaker didnt cut machining hours in their engines.chev small block has less machine shop hours in their engine.that what made studebaker go bankrupt