62 Studebaker Lark V8 Conversion

[stevemcstud]

Hi All,

I have a 62 Studebaker Lark. I am taking out the old 6 and I am now putting in a 66 ford 289 that is completely rebuilt.

I have the old engine out and the front end completely off and I knew I would have to relocate the oil filter and have bought the kit but I am kind of concerned about the steering linkage and I am thinking I might have to put a different steering in there, maybe R & P.

Any thoughts or advise on this subject would be great. Has anybody else done the same thing?

Steve

[allstateguy]

I'm pretty sure that there is a way to put a rear sump pan and pump pickup on the SB Ford. That would be a bunch easier than modifying the steering.

JohnP, driving & reviving
an early Lark

[Alan]

Steve, How about some pics. It will be easier to help if we don't have to guess where the interference problems are.

[mausersmth]

I think Broncos had a reversed pan... Check them out and see if they do.


Charles Eck
Essex, MD

'57 Commander 4 door sedan, 'Bluebird'
'66 Ford F-250
'53 John Deere 50

Studebakers were made to drive! (Besides, they don't get lost as easy in the Wal-Mart parking lot!)

[Dick Steinkamp]

In addition to the front sump problem, the SBF is a fairly long motor also. It is bound to mess with the fire wall and require relocation of the radiator.

I'd trade it for a SBC. No steering probs, no sump probs, no interference with the firewall. You can then use 65-66 Studebaker motor mounts, exhaust, throttle linkage, etc. since 65-66 Studes came with a SBC.

I'm sure the Ford install can be done, but you will be "inventing" everything in the process.

Dick Steinkamp
Bellingham, WA

[IMG][/IMG]

[stevemcstud]

I will post some pictures when I get back home today.

I measured the engines and I shouldn't have any problems with length as I have lots of room in there.

The engines are the about the same length and I had plenty of room between the fan and radiator when with the old engine in there.

I was going to get the 350 but I already had all the parts off my rebuilt mustang for the 289 and it was the cheapest route for me.

I am going to have to build custom mounts, but you guys are saying the 350 would work with the current set up just have to by new mounts?

Will post pics soon.

[Chucks Stude]

Whatever you do, upgrade the brakes.

[PackardV8]

Hi, Steve,

The Lark engine compartment is huge and both the SBC and SBF are relatively small engines. If you have a rear sump pan on the SBF, it is very little more difficult than the SBC. Finding the '65-66 V8 mounts and welding them in as about as difficult as the easy-to-fab SBF mounts. In the engine-swapping universe, either engine into a Lark is as easy as it can get.

However, you're considering an engine swap and have to ask:

quote:I knew I would have to relocate the oil filter and have bought the kit but I am kind of concerned about the steering linkage and I am thinking I might have to put a different steering in there, maybe R & P.

indicates perhaps a lack of experience in the dangers and difficulties of the REALLY important stuff.

Suggest a search here and read the many, many threads discussing R&P installations and failures thereof in Studes; then come back and talk to us some more.

Also, X2 on Chuck's suggestion about upgrading the brakes and suspension first.

thnx, jack vines

PackardV8

[StudeRich]

quote:Originally posted by stevemcstud

but you guys are saying the 350 would work with the current set up just have to by new mounts?

Yes, what Dick is saying is that your '62 Lark is not significantly different in dimensions than a '65-'66 Lark Type, Daytona or Cruiser that had a very nice factory cast iron engine mount bracket that excepts a GM Engine Mount now available in aluminum from most of us Studebaker Vendors at studebakervendors.com to secure the front of the SBC engine to the front crossmember by simply bolting it in! [^]

And if you can find a used '65-'66 rear tubular crossmember, it is a "Bolt-in", after adding a short ext. with only minor driveshaft, shifter & wiring issues with the right hand starter on the GM engine and left hand batt. on the Lark, all very easy stuff, but will add to the cost.

There are many '59-'64 Lark Type and even '53-'58 Sedans/Wagons running these brackets with their GM Engine.

Of course, the easiest swap is STILL the Stude. V-8! [^]


StudeRich at Studebakers Northwest -Ferndale,WA

[jclary]

I have a good friend that eats,sleeps,and breathes ford. He hates seeing all those chevy engines in other makes. Especially Fords! My reply to him has always been, "heck, you can get 'bout anything needed to keep a chevy going at Wal-Mart!" So,I guess what everybody is suggesting here is ... the chevy path is well lit! Engines are cheap. It's the stuff to make it work that can really cost you.
[img][/img]

John Clary
Greer, SC
SDC member since 1975

[Guest]

No need to go with anything but the Ford engine. The many street rods caught in the great floor of 92 Street Rod Nationals in Louiseville, KY proved that cars don't float so there is no need to put a boat anchor in the front of one! Use the SBF, it is narrower than the Chevy, weighs the same and the early Bronco pan will give you the rear sump

Bill, Many Fords and one great Stude!

[jclary]

Sometimes talking cars brings out the same passions as a bunch of cowboys talk'n horses! I have a question, are the front suspensions of the 6cyl larks, or are the 8cyl suspensions heavier duty? I have an 8cyl lark,but have not given it much thought.

John Clary
Greer, SC
SDC member since 1975

[Dick Steinkamp]

quote:Originally posted by 4-speed wagonaire
Use the SBF, it is narrower than the Chevy, weighs the same and the early Bronco pan will give you the rear sump

Same width as a SBC and 2" longer...

http://www.carnut.com/specs/engdim.html

The Ford is lighter.

I don't think the dimensions are a big problem, though. I'm fairly sure the radiator will have to be relocated due to the length, but that's not a big deal.

As Rich says...putting a Studebaker in it is the easiest, quickest, and cheapest solution.

A Chevy would be next due to the fact that all the swap parts needed can be found on a 65-66 Stude.

A Ford will certainly fit...Heck, a 392 Hemi will fit [8D].

Dick Steinkamp
Bellingham, WA

[IMG][/IMG]

[Dick Steinkamp]

quote:Originally posted by jclary

Sometimes talking cars brings out the same passions as a bunch of cowboys talk'n horses! I have a question, are the front suspensions of the 6cyl larks, or are the 8cyl suspensions heavier duty? I have an 8cyl lark,but have not given it much thought.

Front suspensions are identical...except for the springs.

Dick Steinkamp
Bellingham, WA

[IMG][/IMG]

[Transtar60]

quote:Originally posted by PackardV8


[size=2]
Hey Jack,

The stock Chevybaker engine frame mounts bolt onto the frame, they are not welded!
And the tranny mount bolts in too(you have to drill the holes on a 62 frame.)
[/size=4]

snip
Finding the '65-66 V8 mounts and [u]welding</u> them in as about as difficult as the easy-to-fab SBF mounts. In the engine-swapping universe, either engine into a Lark is as easy as it can get.







thnx, jack vines

PackardV8

3E38
4E2
4E28
5E13
7E7
8E7
8E12
8E28

59 Lark
etc