PDA

View Full Version : R-3 engines are transplants, not clones!



TOMMO
11-04-2009, 01:56 PM
This is not meant as an antagonistic post as we seem to be getting along lately but I cant take the misinformation anymore! There seem to be a huge amount of people on this board offering erroneous information that has been picked up here and there concerning the R3 engine. If your not sure of something, say so, as the info can be passed on as truth.
First off, all A,B, and EX serial numbered engines are in fact REAL "R-3" engines. They are not clones, never were, never will be. The only ones in question would be the very last 4 or 5 engines that were pieced together (with genuine, BRAND NEW, studebaker built parts) at Paxton products. The earliest engines were all 299 cubic inches, quickly changing to 304.5 that most of us associate with the R-3. ALL the Bonneville records (worlds fastest car in 1964) were broken with 299 engines, not the 304.5 version as used in the 10 factory cars. There was even an R-3 259 at bonneville and the engine exists today with a bad cylinder or two (John Hora used to own it).


Many people on this board are calling these "B" series engines clones and that is ridiculous. Do you really think Studebaker offered these to the public and made them on a one by one basis? Of course not , this was a huge company, producing 69,555 cars in 1963 and double that just 4 years earlier. Studebaker produced roughly 1800 supercharged Avantis, yet they planned on making only 9 R-3 engines to sell to the public....please. It was in fact quite the opposite. While most of the exact records from daily operations at Paxton were conveniently lost in a fire, we know the majority of the 118 REAL R-3 engines were built,crated and sitting in South bend waiting to be put into factory cars (Avantis,Daytonas, Commmanders,cruisers,challengers.....even pick up trucks if ordered as they did build 3 factory R-2 champ trucks)I have been in manufacturing for 18 years and there is no way in hell you made these engines a few at a time. The heads, intake manifolds, headers, air boxes, connecting rods, pistons and even the valve covers were all R-3 specific and needed to be manufactured in the hundreds at the bare minimum. The blocks were then sonic tested and only 1 in 12 had the wall thickness to survive the .093 overbore. After that, all the components (every screw,gasket,etc)had to be shipped clear across the nation to their performance division "Paxton Products" to be hand ported, polished,balanced and assembled. Then back on the train to make the long,slow rail trip back to Indiana. Can you imagine the massive delays if this was done a few at a time? Paxton Products, although an official Studebaker company did not make the heads, headers, etc., they assembled,machined,tested and sometimes provided field engineering as they really were part of Studebaker but not in a manufacturing sense.


To avoid making these costly delays even worse , Studebaker ran larger amounts of these engines at a time and eventually virtually all of the R-3 engines were cradled snuggly inside the familiar confines of South Bend. The sad irony is all this finally became real in the final weeks of Studbakers existance....hence the reason why the nine R-3 cars were at the end of the line with the VERY LAST Avanti built being an R-3!!!!


The production serial numbers tell us this is true as well. I own 3 real R-3 engines, one being in a factory R-3 Avanti. The proof is in the fact that I own B-24 which was bought from Paxton after Studebaker died, yet my factory R-3 is serial # B-38. How could B38 come before B24 even though B24 is a clone engine to some of you people? They were made in order and Stubaker grabbed which ever one was easiest to grab with a forklift and then put there own serial number after the B number . In the case of R5546 the engine reads r-3, B38 k309. What happened to B1 through B37 which should have gone into production cars before B38? Ill tell you what happened....they were bought by Paxton when Studebaker died and sent back to California in STUDEBAKER crates to be resold as REAL, AUTHENTIC, studebaker re

JDP
11-04-2009, 02:11 PM
quote:Originally posted by TOMMO
Snip
First off, all A,B, and EX serial numbered engines are in fact REAL "R-3" engines. They are not clones, never were, never will be.
Snip
Tom



1. No question a real complete "B" engine is not a clone engine, but dropping it in a Avanti a few years ago does not make a production "R3 Avanti"
2. A old, bare, "B" block built with who knows what, does not make a R3 engine.
The rest I agree with, but none of that changes the fact that the nine production R3's are at the top of the food chain. The Bonneville record cars should be very close to that level IMHO. What category to put them in is not for me to decide. Perhaps special engineering cars, and certainly valuable historically.

JDP/Maryland

1950 Champion RegalDeluxe
11-04-2009, 02:12 PM
Well said and well written.

:)

studegary
11-04-2009, 02:36 PM
I agree with most of what you nicely state. The clone part, in my interpretation, is the Avanti that was not originally equipped with an R3 engine being represented as an R3 Avanti. The R3 engine is a true R3 and not a clone engine. The Avanti is a true Avanti. The R3 placed in this car does not make an authentic R3 Avanti. It is an Avanti that has had an authentic R3 engine transplanted into it. To me, the only true and authentic R3 Avantis are the nine built by Studebaker.

Gary L.
Wappinger, NY

SDC member since 1968
Studebaker enthusiast much longer

StudeRich
11-04-2009, 02:37 PM
Thank you Tom, that was very good, informative and CORRECT info on the much fabled and misunderstood 1964 R3 Jet Thrust Studebaker Engines!

All of this, myself and many others (some Forum Members) like my X-South Bay Area Calif. neighbor (near Santa Monica) and friend Jon Myer already knew.

The only thing I was not aware of (still not positive about) is not important anyway, and that is your statement about the Studebaker Automotive Sales Corp. rather than the Paxton Products Division of Studebaker having contracted the R3 headers, Heads etc. to be made.
Hey, they got made, that's all that matters! [^]

You will recall that employees of Paxton have stated that Andy had those thousands of Power Shift linkage and shifter parts made, and the Co. he was President of, SOLD them to Studebaker Corp. enough to put a P/S in every '64 built and still have plenty of spares!

Maybe I missed something, but I thought we were all just saying that the ebay car is in NO WAY a REAL Studebaker Authorized R3 car, not even aftermarket, after Plant closure or anything but a clone, as you said. That is really about IT! [:0]

And please understand, I am not trying to start an argument here, only stating what I believe to be true, having 47 years of experience with the cars and working for Studebaker dealers, and my memory stands to be corrected, that's fine no hard feelings. :)

By the way I have known John Hora, since I sold him parts for his Wagonaire from the Parts dept. of Frost & French Studebaker on Western Ave. in L.A. in 1970 and know of his R3 Avanti and his Bonneville speed run car.

StudeRich

TOMMO
11-04-2009, 03:12 PM
Thanks for the nice words guys...whether we agree on everything or not. I also agree with all of you that a real R3 AVANTI is one of only nine...period. Then come the real R-3 engines, followed by what JDP said as the bare block "B" engines with a variety of possible piece combinations and lastly the complete reproduction version which are a very cool and affordable alternative but in NO WAY , shape or form an R-3.....just a cool clone. I own an original R-3 Avanti as I said earlier and dont want to confuse or detract from its value as the Holy Grail which it really is, but the engine that resides inside the engine compartment is the same as other REAL R-3 engines that I own, of which are correct down to the R-3 carb.

My suggestion is to call the real B engines that were paxton or owner installed, transplants. I thinks its the perfect word as they are real engines transplanted into new bodies that Studebaker couldnt buy time to do themselves, but not clones. Then we can call the partial R-3 just that ....a partial R-3. Either a B block with a variety of parts or a normal 289 bored out with real heads, headers, etc. And finally we should reserve the word clone for reproduction engines, which are as a matter of fact the only real clone engines due to their complete lack of authenticity concerning factory built parts (especially the absence of "B" blocks).

TOMMO
11-04-2009, 03:13 PM
Thanks for the nice words guys...whether we agree on everything or not. I also agree with all of you that a real R3 AVANTI is one of only nine...period. Then come the real R-3 engines, followed by what JDP said as the bare block "B" engines with a variety of possible piece combinations and lastly the complete reproduction version which are a very cool and affordable alternative but in NO WAY , shape or form an R-3.....just a cool clone. I own an original R-3 Avanti as I said earlier and dont want to confuse or detract from its value as the Holy Grail which it really is, but the engine that resides inside the engine compartment is the same as other REAL R-3 engines that I own, of which are correct down to the R-3 carb.

My suggestion is to call the real B engines that were paxton or owner installed, transplants. I thinks its the perfect word as they are real engines transplanted into new bodies that Studebaker couldnt buy time to do themselves, but not clones. Then we can call the partial R-3 just that ....a partial R-3. Either a B block with a variety of parts or a normal 289 bored out with real heads, headers, etc. And finally we should reserve the word clone for reproduction engines, which are as a matter of fact the only real clone engines due to their complete lack of authenticity concerning factory built parts (especially the absence of "B" blocks).

TOMMO
11-04-2009, 03:30 PM
Wow I had no idea that Paxton was responsible for the powershift linkage. Are you sure? I know Paxton had nothing to do with the building of the powershift transmission itself, at least not in manufacturing. Were they planning on using it without a floorshift until paxton ordered them? And how did 4000 os so avantis come with powershifts from studebaker if paxton bought them? Maybe Studebaker authorized them to submit drawings but Im sure Studebaker paid the bill and pulled the punches. Keep in mind as well that egbert wanted to "revamp" the companies image to a more sporty , performance look and feel, and quite possibly wanted 1/4 to 1/2 of the automatics to be floorshifts. Also remember that Studebaker thought they would buil more than 69,555 cars in 1963 hence the abundance of NOS parts we have all enjoyed. They also made more than 1/2 the cars in only 3.5 months of 1964 that they did in 1963. In 1964 they made 36,967 cars in little over 3 months which could easily have reached 110,000 cars for 1964 if you multiply using a conservative 10 month calender year to compensate fo the usual strong 1st quarter sale figures from Sept thru Dec. I do know that the heads, intake manifolds and headers were studebaker built and the blueprints for them still exist. These components were designed for the up and coming 340 inch studeee motor. A few prototype 340 mills were built and also still exist. I have heard, but cannot prove, that Studebaker also had a stroker crank for the 340 to max it out to 427 cubes, but again cannot substantiate this. Tom

JDP
11-04-2009, 03:42 PM
quote:Originally posted by TOMMO

Wow I had no idea that Paxton was responsible for the powershift linkage. Are you sure? I know Paxton had nothing to do with the building of the powershift transmission itself, at least not in manufacturing. Were they planning on using it without a floorshift until paxton ordered them? And how did 4000 os so avantis come with powershifts from studebaker if paxton bought them? Maybe Studebaker authorized them to submit drawings but Im sure Studebaker paid the bill and pulled the punches. Keep in mind as well that egbert wanted to "revamp" the companies image to a more sporty , performance look and feel, and quite possibly wanted 1/4 to 1/2 of the automatics to be floorshifts. Also remember that Studebaker thought they would buil more than 69,555 cars in 1963 hence the abundance of NOS parts we have all enjoyed. They also made more than 1/2 the cars in only 3.5 months of 1964 that they did in 1963. In 1964 they made 36,967 cars in little over 3 months which could easily have reached 110,000 cars for 1964 if you multiply using a conservative 10 month calender year to compensate fo the usual strong 1st quarter sale figures from Sept thru Dec. I do know that the heads, intake manifolds and headers were studebaker built and the blueprints for them still exist. These components were designed for the up and coming 340 inch studeee motor. A few prototype 340 mills were built and also still exist. I have heard, but cannot prove, that Studebaker also had a stroker crank for the 340 to max it out to 427 cubes, but again cannot substantiate this. Tom


The 427 stroker would put the rods though the sides of the block and be way to long a stroke for the bore, so that a myth. As to the 340 "big block" I had a chance to buy one for a couple of hundred bucks in 1964 and passed.

JDP/Maryland

JDP
11-04-2009, 03:43 PM
quote:Originally posted by TOMMO

Wow I had no idea that Paxton was responsible for the powershift linkage. Are you sure? I know Paxton had nothing to do with the building of the powershift transmission itself, at least not in manufacturing. Were they planning on using it without a floorshift until paxton ordered them? And how did 4000 os so avantis come with powershifts from studebaker if paxton bought them? Maybe Studebaker authorized them to submit drawings but Im sure Studebaker paid the bill and pulled the punches. Keep in mind as well that egbert wanted to "revamp" the companies image to a more sporty , performance look and feel, and quite possibly wanted 1/4 to 1/2 of the automatics to be floorshifts. Also remember that Studebaker thought they would buil more than 69,555 cars in 1963 hence the abundance of NOS parts we have all enjoyed. They also made more than 1/2 the cars in only 3.5 months of 1964 that they did in 1963. In 1964 they made 36,967 cars in little over 3 months which could easily have reached 110,000 cars for 1964 if you multiply using a conservative 10 month calender year to compensate fo the usual strong 1st quarter sale figures from Sept thru Dec. I do know that the heads, intake manifolds and headers were studebaker built and the blueprints for them still exist. These components were designed for the up and coming 340 inch studeee motor. A few prototype 340 mills were built and also still exist. I have heard, but cannot prove, that Studebaker also had a stroker crank for the 340 to max it out to 427 cubes, but again cannot substantiate this. Tom


The 427 stroker would put the rods though the sides of the block and be way to long a stroke for the bore, so that a myth. As to the 340 "big block" I had a chance to buy one for a couple of hundred bucks in 1964 and passed.

JDP/Maryland

PackardV8
11-04-2009, 03:48 PM
Seems pretty simple to most of us

Just call it what it is

1. It's either a complete and original R3-equipped Avanti or it isn't.
2. It's either a complete and original R3 engine or it isn't.
3. Anything else is a non-original combination of parts. Please just describe what it is, i.e.:
an Avanti which now has an engine with some R3 parts
an R2 Avanti with an R3 airbox on it
or whatever it actually and truthfully is.

The sellers and the wannabees who try to fudge the facts just show their own basic lack of understanding of what they've got or what they're selling or their basic dishonesty, whichever. BTW, if one is unsure of the pedigree of the vehicle or engine, just ask someone who knows - don't guess or invent.

thnx, jack vines

PackardV8

JDP
11-04-2009, 04:04 PM
quote:Originally posted by PackardV8

Seems pretty simple to most of us

Just call it what it is


thnx, jack vines

PackardV8


The same goes for any car. i.e., this "100% original factory restoration" GT Hawk. Stunning car, but I could take off a dozen authenticity points just from the pictures.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/_W0QQitemZ380174362358

JDP/Maryland

TOMMO
11-04-2009, 04:06 PM
I agree Jack, as its basically what i just said. Only a real engine put into a car outside of the factory IS A TRANSPLANTED engine...not a cloned engine and this is extremely important to those of us that own the real cars or the real engines or both .

Swifster
11-04-2009, 04:59 PM
quote:Originally posted by TOMMO

I agree Jack, as its basically what i just said. Only a real engine put into a car outside of the factory IS A TRANSPLANTED engine...not a cloned engine and this is extremely important to those of us that own the real cars or the real engines or both .


The clone portion of the conversation over the Avanti still holds true. Put an R3 engine in an R2 car is a copy or an R3 Avanti. It's a clone. If I can make an exact duplicate of a Hemicuda starting with a base Barracuda, it's a clone, a copy. If I make an exact duplicate of one of the 9 R3 Avanti's or of Nelson's Commander, it's a clone. No one said 'BOO' about the engine or questioned what it was. But that Avanti is not one of the cherished 9 and it's not worth what those 9 cars are. Those 9 have provenance.

You want a good example of transplant? George Krem's Challenger. The was bought new, the engine was bought new and transplanted at the time. Not 40+ years later to make a buck. Paperwork matters. Those with paperwork are worth more than cars without.

Clone - 2. transitive verb make copy of something: to produce an exact or near copy of an object or product.

IF you were able to make an R3 with the correct parts starting with a standard block, R1 block or R2 block, then the engine would be a clone. Heck, if I had the heads, I'd be happy with that (I may not pay $25K for one, but I'd be happy).

I would like an R3 drag car. There would be no other term for the car than clone unless Nelson Bove leaves me in his will.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom - Mulberry, FL

1964 Studebaker Daytona - 289 4V, 4-Speed (Cost To Date: $2125.60)

1964 Studebaker Commander 170-1V, 3-speed w/OD (Cost to Date: $623.67)

http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i280/Swifster/The%20Daytona%20File/Avatar%20Size/01-01-05TheStartingPoint.jpg http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i280/Swifster/The%20Daytona%20File/Avatar%20Size/07-17-07FrontClipRemoved.jpg http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i280/Swifster/The%20Daytona%20File/Avatar%20Size/08-06-29.jpg

JBOYLE
11-04-2009, 05:14 PM
Hey I don't disagree with what's been said here by the R-3 experts.
But also, Swifster is correct in terms of general useage of the word "Clone".

Trying to be more correct here is a laudable thing and helps keep the record straight for Stude fans who will be the keepers of Studebaker history.
But once you're off this forum, I'm afraid you'll be swimming upstream.

63 Avanti R1 2788
1914 Stutz Bearcat
(George Barris replica)

Washington State

PackardV8
11-04-2009, 05:28 PM
quote:A few prototype 340 mills were built and also still exist. I have heard, but cannot prove, that Studebaker also had a stroker crank for the 340 to max it out to 427 cubes, but again cannot substantiate this. Tom

quote:
The 427 stroker would put the rods though the sides of the block and be way to long a stroke for the bore, so that a myth.

As usual, JDP is correct. As they say on NPR, "Let's do the numbers."
With the 3.875" bore attributed to the near-mythical 340" engine, it would require a 4.600" stroke to result in a 427" engine. Not going to happen.

However, if we wanted imagine what could be, the Studebaker V8 block has more room between bore centers than does the SBC, so a 4.160" bore is theoretically possible as is a 4.000" stroke, which would give 434". Again, never gonna happen, but if we all wished hard enough . . .

thnx, jack vines

thnx jack vines

PackardV8

41 Frank
11-04-2009, 05:40 PM
Even the word "clone" has started to fall out of favor with the old car crowd. Probably because there is a stigma attached to it. They are now starting to call them "Tribute" cars. But nothing changes, it is still a clone.:D

TOMMO
11-04-2009, 05:55 PM
If the plain brown wrapper is a transplant, there all transplants.If the newer transplants are all clones, the wrapper is a clone. George put his engine in, not Paxton. It wouldnt matter if Paxton did it or not.

My factory R-3 is one of nine...period.

My second avanti has a real R-3 with extensive documentation from granatelli (although he only sold the engine, did not install it)it is a transplanted R-3.

My 53 coupe also has a real R-3 engine transplant...is that a clone of a car that never existed? or is it a 53 coupe with a transplanted R-3? See the confusion?

I also have a 4th engine that is built to R-3 specs and not a real block and has small port heads. It is a CLONED engine.

Maybe we need to specify cloned car or cloned engine. They are different animals and need to be seperated.

Is my cloned engine the same as a real B engine? NOT!

The red car on ebay is a total clone. Cloned car and cloned engine. The white one is a cloned car with a transplanted engine.

While everyones opinion is important, show me a guy who owns a real one and likes it called a copy as stated above. Lets ask George Krem, Nelson, doerschlag or any one of the boys who own em if we should call these rare and valuable pieces copies. If I have offended anyone who does not own one, talk to me down the road if you ever plunk down $25,000 for an engine alone and want us to call your motor a clone.

Laemmle
11-04-2009, 06:10 PM
IMHO a true R-3 car (like the one owned by the late Carl Lange now his son) is one that rolled off the line at South Bend with an R-3 reposing under the hood, period.

Anyone could (back in the day) pull an R-1 block from a plane jane Avanti and claim it's an R-3. Hogwash.....not only the engine but what about all the other parts that make it a true factory assembled automobile.....suspension, axle, tack, A-frame busings....the list is extensive....a clone for whatever reason is a car with parts now installed that were not with it when it was born.

Even the PBW came with a standard 289 until George and Bob pulled it and stuffed the R-3 in under the hood.

How many clones of the car Christine (from gone in 60 seconds)are on the street? They may have that big FoMoCo block under the hood....but that does not make it a true factory assembled automobile.

Jessie J.
11-04-2009, 06:29 PM
Other than certain coveted serial number stampings, all late full-flow block castings were identical. As far as actual performance it really doesn't matter whether the basic block began as a 259 2 bbl, or an actual R-3, the difference only consisting of sonic-checking for core shift, and if found acceptable, bored out an additional .093".
R-3 (and R-4) cylinder heads however are a different story, having several significant design and casting differences from any other 'regular' Studebaker V-8 head. These are the R-3 parts that are rare, and when, or if, ever offered for sale, extremely expensive.
(anyone got a set of factory R-3 heads they would like to sell for cheap? :)
Everything else that makes up a real R-3 (or R-4) is either still quite available or not too far outside of practical fabrication or machining.

The rarity and the price of real R-3 heads has led to many attempts at reworking 'standard' heads to 'R-3 specs.' some even reworking the casting numbers to conceal the fact that their so-called 'R-3 heads' are nothing more than over-sized valves installed into 'ported' (and perhaps 'welded' up) 'standard' heads.
Sorry folks, but no such home brewed 'R-3 head' is the real thing, nor would it be acceptable for competing in the Pure Stock Muscle Car Drags, or most classes of racing. It is true, that some of these homegrown 'R-3' heads will outflow the genuine articles, and this is the problem, the heads so extensively modified, do not accurately represent anything that was ever factory available. (If such practice were acceptable our 'stock' Studes, would have to compete against other 'stock' engines that could employ their highly developed 'race design' heads)
Wish there were more real R-3 heads, but there are not.
Big cubic inches are NOT the solution to more Studebaker performance, as the heads we are saddled with do not even adequately feed an all out 289.


JJ/Kentucky

Swifster
11-04-2009, 06:56 PM
quote:Originally posted by TOMMO

If the plain brown wrapper is a transplant, there all transplants.If the newer transplants are all clones, the wrapper is a clone. George put his engine in, not Paxton. It wouldnt matter if Paxton did it or not.

My factory R-3 is one of nine...period.

My second avanti has a real R-3 with extensive documentation from granatelli (although he only sold the engine, did not install it)it is a transplanted R-3.

My 53 coupe also has a real R-3 engine transplant...is that a clone of a car that never existed? or is it a 53 coupe with a transplanted R-3? See the confusion?



Your second Avanti is a clone of a real R3 Avanti (your one of nine). Your '53 has had an engine swap, regardless of the engine. No different than putting a Buick Nailhead in a '32 Ford Roadster. Your other engine built to R3 specs isn't an R3. That's like building a 427 to L88 specs. It still doesn't make it an L88.

And to be clear, the 'one of nine R3 Avanti' will always be worth far more than the clone. If I buy a '69 Chevelle SS that came with a 396, and installed a 427 and put Yenko badges all over it, it's still a clone even if the engine came from a real Yenko or other COPO Chevelle.

Now if you want to call George's Challenger a clone, you could make that arguement. You can call it a engine swap, a transplant, whatever. Except that I'm sure George probably has the original purchase receipt for the car from the dealership, the receipt for the engine and just about everything dated 1964 or 1965. This car has a documented history. If the second Avanti has the documentation of the engine swap from 1964, I put it in the same class as George's Avanti. If it was done by a shop recently with a documented engine, the documentation doesn't go far enough. The value of the car is strictly tied to that engine and not the car itself.

There have been a few cars to go thru the auction with the engine that was swapped by the dealer at or near purchase time that brought big money because the history could be documented. There's a big difference between a 1965 GTO with a 421 that was documented in 1965 vs a car built in 2009 or 2008. You could make the arguement that doing this swap now kills some of the value if it was done at the expense of a well optioned R2 Avanti.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom - Mulberry, FL

1964 Studebaker Daytona - 289 4V, 4-Speed (Cost To Date: $2125.60)

1964 Studebaker Commander 170-1V, 3-speed w/OD (Cost to Date: $623.67)

http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i280/Swifster/The%20Daytona%20File/Avatar%20Size/01-01-05TheStartingPoint.jpg http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i280/Swifster/The%20Daytona%20File/Avatar%20Size/07-17-07FrontClipRemoved.jpg http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i280/Swifster/The%20Daytona%20File/Avatar%20Size/08-06-29.jpg

StudebakerGeorge
11-04-2009, 07:14 PM
Jack is right, the rest is just name twisting.
This thread and this forum is really beginning to stink like Corvette...

StudebakerGeorge

bams50
11-04-2009, 07:42 PM
Sorry, I disagree:) What a great, informative thread from my seat! Tommo's original post was riveting to me, and the ensuing discussion by some of the marque's top minds is a joy to read to those of us who are nearly Studebaker-illiterate, but whose passion for them rivals that of most anyone[^] I love the evolution of these discussions and descriptions to arrive at a correct set of terms. I offer my sincere thanks to the brains of the Stude world for allowing me to continue to learn[8D]

One more thing: It was I who started the R3 for sale thread. I did so in the hopes of this type of discussion, and in no way did I presume to infer that the cars were legit, or that any descriptive terms were accurate; I figured that anyone in the market to spend R3 Avanti money would certainly investigate and verify the descriptions of said vehicles. Thanks again!

Robert (Bob) Andrews- on the IoMT (Island of Misfit Toys)
Parish, central NY 13131
http://www.patrioticon.org/images/flag1-1.gif
GOD BLESS AMERICA

grobb284
11-04-2009, 07:55 PM
It sounds as though perceived value is to exclusivity, not real value to performance, quality, or a measurable entity. Playground rules, my marbles are more rare than yours. That's why Corvettes owners chase the numbers and documentation, which is what this is becoming.





1963 Studebaker Avanti: LS1 motor and T-56 transmission have been moved rearward, set up as a two seat coupe with independent rear suspension.

TOMMO
11-04-2009, 08:05 PM
Thanks for the input swifster, but I already know my engines, how to title them and what effects their value.

My point is my 53 coupe has REAL R-3 engine in it and the darn thing is not a clone. Nor is the R-3 in my second Avanti.


While they are not factory installed engines nor are they valued anywhere near the 10 original factory cars, they ARE FACTORY BUILT ENGINES AND NOT CLONES! They are transplants.

And I obviously know my 4th engine is a clone as stated in my earlier posts..... my 4th engine IS A CLONE. Clones are copies, real engines are not.

And if you take that 427 and make a clone Yenko....you have a cloned car but you still have a real 427 turbo jet if thats what you started with. There are hemi cuda clones with new crate hemis and there are hemi cuda clones with ultra rare date coded 1970 hemis and while both are clone cars one has a REAL, BONAFIED hemi which is a holy grail motor transplanted into another car.Anyone with 10,000 can buy a new hemi from mopar, only a few real hemis exist from 1970. There is a huge difference.


Using the word clone to describe all R-3 engines sitting in cars is an error in description and that is my only point. Save the clone term for fake engines....which seem to be popping up everywhere.


Funny how not one guy who owns a legite R-3 calls it a clone, only the guys who wish they did are the experts.


All you R3 owners out there ....enjoy your Studebaker built real R-3 engines, factory installed or not. We know they are the real deal regardless of what the closet experts say.

Dick Steinkamp
11-04-2009, 08:11 PM
quote:Originally posted by TOMMO



Using the word clone to describe all R-3 engines sitting in cars is an error in description and that is my only point.


To my knowledge, no one has done that in this thread. In fact, I have never heard it done on this forum.

Who are you arguing with?



Dick Steinkamp
Bellingham, WA

http://i706.photobucket.com/albums/ww63/dstnkmp/stude-2-1.jpg

TOMMO
11-04-2009, 08:15 PM
Bams, what a nice way to put things. Not because you agree or disagree with me, but because you got the jist of the post....it was to inform those who are looking for information or to re educate those who maybe picked up some urban legend (like me with the studebaker big block 427 prototype...I heard the rumor but could never prove it and JDP has convinced me it was false) My intent was never to incite a negative thread, but rather preserve the dignity of the Real R-3 engines that were sold after the demise of Studebaker and now reside in "donor" bodies. Cloned cars but real engines. That really was my whole point. Regardless of any of our opinions, a REAL R-3 engine will always be a REAL R-3 engine, no matter where it calls home. Great conversation guys.

studefan
11-04-2009, 08:17 PM
I started to read every post from the top but started to skim the rest as they were all in agreement and consistent with my thinking.

As evident in the posts, there is little to no confusion over the definition of "clone".

Your 1 of 9 Avanti is the real deal (meaning a factory produced car).

Your transplanted R3 engine in the Avanti is a clone of the original. There is no debate on this as the definition is widely used throughout the hobby.

Your R3 engine transplanted into anything else is a modified car.

George Krem's R3 PBW is a clone. Transplanted the day after or 30 years later doesn't matter (I am sure George would agree with this).

TOMMO, all of your vehicles are awesome and you should be very proud of them. But, let's call them what they are.

Johnnywiffer
11-04-2009, 08:26 PM
I understand this is a very fervent, well written thread and most responses are very well written, too. But could we have some commas and spacing, please? Maybe even some [u]EMPHASIS</u>?

The next time someone wants to write a 9 inch page full of text, [u]PULEASE</u> put some spacing between those LOOOONG, fervent, well written paragraphs.

Us old codgers need to rest our eyes, once in a while. [8D]

John

Update: Thanx! [:o)]

TOMMO
11-04-2009, 08:27 PM
I agree with you about the car being a clone, Studefan. I am only talking about the engines. You can have a clone engine in a clone car or a real engine in a clone car. The car is a clone either way , but the ENGINE (repeat engine) is not a clone. Please understand the point..real R-3 engines are not clones, they are real r-3 engines that were leftovers from Studebaker. A clone engine would not have been built by Studebaker. A clone engine is a copy while a real engine is the real deal. I think Ill be saying the word clone in my sleep tonight. At least we had an interesting thread today, as of late the forum has had some cobwebs IMHO. Thanks guys ...your all a classy bunch of guys (again IMHO)

Swifster
11-04-2009, 08:29 PM
quote:Originally posted by TOMMO

Thanks for the input swifster, but I already know my engines, how to title them and what effects their value.

My point is my 53 coupe has REAL R-3 engine in it and the darn thing is not a clone. Nor is the R-3 in my second Avanti.


While they are not factory installed engines nor are they valued anywhere near the 10 original factory cars, they ARE FACTORY BUILT ENGINES AND NOT CLONES! They are transplants.


The point everyone is making is that the term clone refers to the car, not the engine. I'm not saying your R3's aren't the real deal (and one is enough for anyone so ship one down here :D), just that the car is a clone. It's a recreation of the original 9. I've never really used the term clone to label an engine, though I guess it could be done. I'm looking at the car as a whole.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom - Mulberry, FL

1964 Studebaker Daytona - 289 4V, 4-Speed (Cost To Date: $2125.60)

1964 Studebaker Commander 170-1V, 3-speed w/OD (Cost to Date: $623.67)

http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i280/Swifster/The%20Daytona%20File/Avatar%20Size/01-01-05TheStartingPoint.jpg http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i280/Swifster/The%20Daytona%20File/Avatar%20Size/07-17-07FrontClipRemoved.jpg http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i280/Swifster/The%20Daytona%20File/Avatar%20Size/08-06-29.jpg

TOMMO
11-04-2009, 08:30 PM
Sorry Johnywiffer, I tried to put spacing in my first thread (as that drives me nuts too) but I screwed it up.


Look mom, I learned something today.

8E45E
11-04-2009, 08:44 PM
There are no gray areas here!![^] There were 9 Avanti's and 1 Lark-type that left the Studebaker factory; all documented and accounted for.

As well, many R3's were sold over the counter and mail order from Paxton Products to be 'field installed'. I know of two sold that way, one to Myles Walker, and the other to Barry Brace, a local member of our chapter who still has his receipts from Paxton Products. Of course there are many others that were sold strapped to a pallet as well.

Craig

StudebakerGeorge
11-04-2009, 09:04 PM
Forget three R 3's...I got a R10.
Not a clone or a transplant.
Beat THAT, Tommo...
.

StudebakerGeorge

TOMMO
11-04-2009, 09:21 PM
George,you are the man! Do my three R-3s equal an R9? Shucks It still doesnt equal an R10.

okc63avanti
11-04-2009, 09:48 PM
I'm calling my engine mod an R 2-1/2 or an R 2+. My R1 has been bored 0.060", heads are being ported , pistons changed to forged hypereutectic ones, Paxton SN-60, R3 cam and R3 headers and a Tremec TKO 5-speed to get power to the wheels.

I like to think this is more akin to cosmetic surgery on someone's trophy wife vs a clone. At the end of the day she will look good and will be one hell of a ride!

<div align="left">John</div id="left">

<div align="left">'63 Avanti, R1, Auto, AC, PW (unrestored)</div id="left">
http://i429.photobucket.com/albums/qq16/okc63avanti/63StudebakerAvanti-1.jpg

nels
11-04-2009, 09:59 PM
OK, here's a new wrinkle: why wouldn't the nine factory built R3 Avantis also be called clones? They were cloned copies of the Bonneville R3 record cars. Your car, Tom, is an almost perfect replica as it is even the same color as the #9 car that set the rcords. Now think about that awhile.

studebakersteve
11-04-2009, 10:18 PM
My Challenger was 6yl.I took an R2 block,bored it to a R3,R2+cam,R2 heads modified to R3,Looks like an R3,runs close to an R3,but I make no bones about it,it's a clone.Steve Doerschlag

studefan
11-04-2009, 10:20 PM
Already did nels. The answer is they are factory built. Still pretty straight forward and clear definition, I believe.

nels
11-04-2009, 10:25 PM
Just trying to shake things up a little.



quote:Originally posted by studefan

Already did nels. The answer is they are factory built. Still pretty straight forward and clear definition, I believe.

nels
11-04-2009, 10:31 PM
Its funny but if George's Plain Brown Wrapper is a clone then there are already clones of that car out there so now we have clones of clones.

Milaca
11-04-2009, 10:36 PM
Clowns? Did somebody say clowns? I hate clowns, I can't sleep at night because they give me nightmares. [:o)]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3473/3939471781_afa477b3ae_t.jpg
[b]Brent's rootbeer racer.
MN iron ore...it does your body good.

jlmccuan
11-04-2009, 11:34 PM
I don't know what will work in a big inch Stude, but I have a 434" SBC. So I know that one can be done.

Jim
Often in error, never in doubt
http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x98/jlmccuan/Avanti/AvantiSignature.jpghttp://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x98/jlmccuan/Avanti/DSCF4389.jpghttp://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x98/jlmccuan/Avanti/Logo/RabidSnailSignature.jpg
____1966 Avanti II RQA 0088_______________1963 Avanti R2 63R3152____________Rabid Snail Racing

candbstudebakers
11-05-2009, 02:00 AM
How can the 62 GT in JP'S post have an early engine and a 63 Vin??? some one is cheating, I don't think the fake wires with the spinner was even out in 62-63?..Bob

Bob Peterson / C & B Studebakers

Castro Valley, CA
canbstudebakers-
http://i691.photobucket.com/albums/vv271/canbstudebakers/CedarRapids210.jpg

barnlark
11-05-2009, 08:01 AM
Didn't someone show the 1963 accessory catalog with those wheel covers recently? After spending 40K on a GT restoration, you'd think he'd have the correct year figured out. If he's the 2nd owner, you'd think the title work wouldn't have too many chances to be confused. I guess that's why they have a feedback score on eBay. ;)
I'd like to see the purchase order. Thank goodness for those for most authenticity questions.

Michidan
11-05-2009, 09:21 AM
This is a cool read for me because my interest is in the older years, not the R engine years. I had no idea so many R-3 engines (118 you say?) were factory built...I only knew that not many R-3 cars were built.
Jboyle says it best. This thread helps educate a few like me, but off forum, and especially when sale prices start to get discussed, there will be those that make confusing statements.

http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g293/loraxdan66/signature3.jpg
www.studebakerhardtop.com

53k
11-05-2009, 12:01 PM
quote:Originally posted by TOMMO

This is not meant as an antagonistic post as we seem to be getting along lately but I cant take the misinformation anymore! There seem to be a huge amount of people on this board offering erroneous information that has been picked up here and there concerning the R3 engine. .... What happened to B1 through B37 which should have gone into production cars before B38? Ill tell you what happened....they were bought by Paxton when Studebaker died and sent back to California in STUDEBAKER crates to be resold as REAL, AUTHENTIC, studebaker replacement engines. Nothing more and nothing less. ...
This is a fascinating, informative thread. I have snipped much of the original post, but this part highlighted in red caught my eye. I had never heard this, but I can somewhat substantiate it by the fact that the R-3 and R-4 engines I brought back from England (Ireland) were in fact sent to Birmingham England from Paxton, Santa
Monica, California. I don't know exactly when because the original purchaser never gave me copies of the documentation, but it was most likely some time in 1964. Issue 147 (Summer/Fall) 2009 of Avanti Magazine (AOAI) has a very nice article by Chuck Sydoryk (Forum member) who bought my R-3 engine. A picture in the article shows the shipping label on one of the crates.
Chuck's article, describing the installation of the R-3 in his '63 Avanti, sort of introduces a new dimension to the "clone" discussion. When he first bought the engine I was a little unhappy that he was putting it in to a '63. However, I think what he did is great. He spent big bucks to exactly replicate an authentic Granatelli conversion just as it would have been done in the period shortly after Studebaker shut down in South Bend.
Food for thought.



Paul Johnson, Wild and Wonderful West Virginia. '64 Daytona Wagonaire, '64 Daytona convertible, '53 Commander Starliner, Museum R-4 engine, '62 Gravely Model L, '72 Gravely Model 430

http://www.frontiernet.net/~thejohnsons/Forum%20signature%20pix/Copy%20of%20broken%20circle.jpghttp://www.frontiernet.net/~thejohnsons/Forum%20signature%20pix/Copy%20of%201-1-08%20002.jpghttp://www.frontiernet.net/~thejohnsons/Forum%20signature%20pix/Copy%20of%201-1-08%20004.jpghttp://www.frontiernet.net/~thejohnsons/Forum%20signature%20pix/Copy%20of%201-1-08%20006.jpg

TOMMO
11-05-2009, 12:57 PM
Cool addition to the thread Paul(53k), all these little pieces help put the puzzle together. Unfortunately, most of the records from Paxton have been destroyed and many questions can only be answered through memory, experiences or paper trails. Any info, however small, concerning our holy grail motors should be shared so if nothing else, we can ponder its validity and relevance.

PackardV8
11-05-2009, 01:18 PM
This thread has taken on a life of its own.

Too bad the Paxton post-'64 R3 and R4 installations weren't better documented. If a buyer had the money Paxton would build anything. I remember at least two SoCal Avantis in which they installed R4 engines. One of these was drag-raced and and the owner blew up and junked two R4 engines before having an Oldsmobile 425" installed.

I know of one Paxton employee who used a lot of leftover R-series parts in a '63 GT Hawk he ran at Bonneville.

I do have one question for TOMMO.
quote:The earliest engines were all 299 cubic inches, Can you document more than one 299" engine? All the info I have indicates the only R3 299" was the prototype hand built by Paxton and run at Bonneville before R3 production began. This 299" had a square bore and stroke at 3.625", via a .0625" larger bore. The production R3 and R4 all had the .0930" larger bore size to reach the 5-liter class limit for Bonneville. Always willing to learn, but AFAIK, there were never any others, certainly no production numbered R3 299"s.

thnx, jack vines



PackardV8

Johnjb
11-05-2009, 01:23 PM
Same as putting a Hemi in a 318 Cuda.

Swifster
11-05-2009, 02:38 PM
quote:Originally posted by Johnjb

Same as putting a Hemi in a 318 Cuda.


That was my point...

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom - Mulberry, FL

1964 Studebaker Daytona - 289 4V, 4-Speed (Cost To Date: $2125.60)

1964 Studebaker Commander 170-1V, 3-speed w/OD (Cost to Date: $623.67)

http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i280/Swifster/The%20Daytona%20File/Avatar%20Size/01-01-05TheStartingPoint.jpg http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i280/Swifster/The%20Daytona%20File/Avatar%20Size/07-17-07FrontClipRemoved.jpg http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i280/Swifster/The%20Daytona%20File/Avatar%20Size/08-06-29.jpg

mbstude
11-05-2009, 05:23 PM
There's a nice Avanti in Florida with a 299 C.I. R3 engine. The owner once told me it was the 5th R3 engine built.

Matthew Burnette
Hazlehurst, GA

nels
11-05-2009, 06:35 PM
Actually, most of the Oct 63 runs were done with 304.5 engines, however, I think the #3 R4 conv may have been a 299 unit. I had that engine in the 70's, I think it was B9. I think the 299's were run in 1962 to set some of the initial records and were in an Avanti or Avantis (?). The early engines also used reworked standard heads prior to the R3/R4 head casting introduction. I know B14 was a 304.5 engine run in #2 and I believe #1 was also a 304.5.

Roscomacaw
11-05-2009, 07:00 PM
Packard V8 writes: "One of these was drag-raced and and the owner blew up and junked two R4 engines before having an Oldsmobile 425" installed."

Whoa! This perked my ears up! For years I've heard about - but haven't pursued - an inoperative Avanti that's supposedly within 30 miles of me that sports a big Olds engine and that the owner has kept the "special factory" Stude engine that "blew up".
Maybe I should go and pester my reliable informant for more details![:0][:p]


http://imagehost.vendio.com/a/30906179/aview/58_Avatar.jpg
1957 Transtar 1/2ton
1963 Cruiser
1960 Larkvertible V8
1958 Provincial wagon
1953 Commander coupe
1957 President two door

PackardV8
11-05-2009, 07:55 PM
Thanks to those who shared the above info. It would be good to have a permanent listing of the confirmed existence of these unique engines. Would the Jet Thrust Registry be the best place to document these standard head 299" R-series engines with B-serial numbers? I've never seen one, so I'd suggest listing only those which have actually been verified by measuring a 3.625" bore.

The reason for this is I can't count the "real R3"s which have turned out to be just a 289" or in one case a 259". I don't know of any attempts to defraud by re-stamping a standard block. Thus far, these were just unknowing/wishful-thinking sellers/owners. But with this info about there having been "several" 299" R3s with standard heads, and all the hoopla and high prices for R3s recently, a re-stamped block with standard heads will surface for sale any day now. You heard it here first;)

thnx, jack vines

PackardV8

nels
11-05-2009, 09:29 PM
Jack, the 299 R4 I referred to had the late cylinder heads. I don't know the numbers for the early 299's run in '62.
I believe the JTN registry is pretty much up to date on the engines but when anything turns up, it is good to check the registry in case it is a missing #.



quote:Originally posted by PackardV8

Thanks to those who shared the above info. It would be good to have a permanent listing of the confirmed existence of these unique engines. Would the Jet Thrust Registry be the best place to document these standard head 299" R-series engines with B-serial numbers? I've never seen one, so I'd suggest listing only those which have actually been verified by measuring a 3.625" bore.

The reason for this is I can't count the "real R3"s which have turned out to be just a 289" or in one case a 259". I don't know of any attempts to defraud by re-stamping a standard block. Thus far, these were just unknowing/wishful-thinking sellers/owners. But with this info about there having been "several" 299" R3s with standard heads, and all the hoopla and high prices for R3s recently, a re-stamped block with standard heads will surface for sale any day now. You heard it here first;)

thnx, jack vines

PackardV8

Jessie J.
11-05-2009, 09:53 PM
quote:Originally posted by Mr.Biggs

Packard V8 writes: "One of these was drag-raced and and the owner blew up and junked two R4 engines before having an Oldsmobile 425" installed."

Whoa! This perked my ears up! For years I've heard about - but haven't pursued - an inoperative Avanti that's supposedly within 30 miles of me that sports a big Olds engine and that the owner has kept the "special factory" Stude engine that "blew up".
Maybe I should go and pester my reliable informant for more details![:0][:p]
http://imagehost.vendio.com/a/30906179/aview/58_Avatar.jpg
1957 Transtar 1/2ton
1963 Cruiser
1960 Larkvertible V8
1958 Provincial wagon
1953 Commander coupe
1957 President two door


Hmmmm, I am setting here looking at my 1968 copy of Peterson's 'Complete Book of Engine Swapping'. On page 140 (not numbered) is an Avanti with a late big block Olds swapped in___sitting on the floor along side is the R-4 that was removed.
Acording to the subsequent (1969) 'Complete Book of Engine Swapping' Herbert and Meeks had performed this swap on several Avanti's. Updated swap methods are detailed on pages 94-97 of the '69 Book.
Back to the point, it seems unlikely that there would have been more than one R-4 engined Avanti that underwent this particular swap.
The one you are writing about is quite likely to be the same one appearing in that 1968 engine swapping article.
I was quite fascinated with this back then, as I worked at Oldsmobile (Fisher Body Div.) and could easily obtain brand new Olds engines dirt cheap.
(My daily 'go to work' driver was a '65 Cruiser with a worn out 283)

Roscomacaw
11-05-2009, 10:01 PM
I'm gonna lean on my source of this lead. I hadn't nagged him about the car in years. He's seen it with his own eyes and he's a very believable sort.
I did inquire as to whether or not the car or engine was available when he first told me about it and his reply was that the owner was not looking to sell. Of course, time changes things. It'd be fun to score something like that.;)

http://imagehost.vendio.com/a/30906179/aview/58_Avatar.jpg
1957 Transtar 1/2ton
1963 Cruiser
1960 Larkvertible V8
1958 Provincial wagon
1953 Commander coupe
1957 President two door

HNCadet
11-05-2009, 11:56 PM
quote:Chuck's article, describing the installation of the R-3 in his '63 Avanti, sort of introduces a new dimension to the "clone" discussion. When he first bought the engine I was a little unhappy that he was putting it in to a '63. However, I think what he did is great. He spent big bucks to exactly replicate an authentic Granatelli conversion just as it would have been done in the period shortly after Studebaker shut down in South Bend.
Food for thought.

Thanks Paul, this car has been more fun than any other I've done in the past. In reviewing the history of B92, it was purchased with the intent of going into Avanti 64R5516 before it was crashed and after spending some 40 yrs in a crate or on a display stand, I thought it deserved to be reunited with it's original intent.

The B92 R3 Avanti(I will NEVER refer to it as a clone)was built to be typical of it's intended Granatelli Conversion. It was researched from one of Nel's cars, an original Granatelli conversion. He allowed me to visit his collection, take pictures, notes and provided me with ongoing support throughout it's restoration(Thanks, Nels). It has the NOS B92 R3 engine, a NOS Flanged Dana44/TT rear axle(a rarer find than the R3), the front suspension mod(solid upper/inners) R3 air cleaner in the scoop, the R3 gauge package and the optional Paxton Products gauge group. The body mounts with the front shimmed a bit higher to clear that R3 air box and transistorized ignition located in the front scoop

When you own or acquire an R3 engine, especially a NOS R3, you become the caretaker of Studebaker History. The engine was opened, documented and reassembled by Myer's Studebaker. It is a Crown Jewel, but it needed a proper setting. Although it was originally intended to go in a '64 Avanti, my personal preference was the '63 body style and why not.........I was introduced to the Avanti in late '62 by Andy Granatelli's Bonneville runs.....for me, there was no other choice.

With all the discussion about what's a "real" R3, lets not forget the First R3's were built by the Granatelli's and copied by the factory a year later, so which is the original? I've spoken to Andy and VJ trying to get some sense of total numbers actually converted by Grancor, but still haven't gotten that estimate......I'll continue to work that question.

In terms of total R3/4 series engines, looking at the Jet Thrust Data the total number of documented engines today stands at ~105, but that number includes ~14 R4's, a couple of Skybolt 6's and several short blocks and R3's with R2 heads. The latest addition was I believe Nels find of B12. Additionally a significant number of engines are marked as "Blown" or the data so old as to be of questionable value. So if you have an R3/R4 engine today and it's installed in a running vehicle, you own some of the rarest performance vehicles of the pre-muscle car era and I could never refer to any of them as clones or replicas. Everyone of those powerplants was built with the intention of being assembled into a High Performance Studebaker vehicle, unfortunately fate stepped in and instead gave us the opportunity to build our R3/4 cars as we desired ........it only really matters to a few collectors as to the lineage of the vehicle and the Market WILL determine the real value of the car, not a discussion group on the internet. If you drive that car and enjoy it, then that's all that matters. Afterall, it's a REAL R3:D

Alan
11-06-2009, 12:16 AM
Just got to stir the pot, Jack that Oldsmobile powered Avanti was owned by Bob Patton it was 455 CI. And the only Avanti that set records was the 229 car driven by Bill Burke and it had a .040" over 224. All of the records under the auspiciousness of the USAC were payed for with $150,000 from Studebaker.

Bob Caser
11-06-2009, 01:37 AM
Very interesting thread.

In July of 1965 I had just moved to California with a 64 Avanti and found Vince Granatelli, Andy's son, in a single bay Shell gas station in Santa Monica installing R3 or R4 motors in Avantis.
He had done several R3 and R4 conversions at the time .
To do a complete conversion including the suspension and other tricks he was asking for $2,500. This was a large amount of money, as the worth of a Avanti in the blue book , at that time was about $2,500.

Was he building transplants or clones ?

In my opinion he was offering higher performance to those who wanted it. At that point in time I do not believe anyone knew how many factory R3 cars were built or even cared.

The reason there were only 9 built was because they did not sell, no different than L88 Corvette's or 427 Cobra's, etc.
They were not a good value for the money.

In car collecting it always comes around to what is it worth.

Enjoy what you have, factory built and installed or built by the factories supplier Paxton products,and installed whenever in time.
They are rare pieces.

Oh, the $2,500 that Vince was asking did not seem like a good value to me at the time, so I used that money as a down payment for a 289 Cobra.

Still have my Avanti, and just returned from Las Vegas after attending my 40th SEMA show.

Bob Caser



mrbobinc

black56hawk
11-06-2009, 01:51 AM
quote:Originally posted by PackardV8

I remember at least two SoCal Avantis in which they installed R4 engines. One of these was drag-raced and and the owner blew up and junked two R4 engines before having an Oldsmobile 425" installed.

thnx, jack vines
PackardV8


http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f10/413coronet/avantiolds.jpg

Bob Caser
11-06-2009, 02:11 AM
The engine transplant of the 63 Gold Avanti was done at Herbert and Meeks, a well known shop in Southern California.

This particular car came up for sale in Sun Valley,Ca, shortly after it was completed.
The R4 motor was probably left for scrap, because it was not offered as part of the deal.
Who knew, 40 odd years later that we would be discussing this topic .

mrbobinc

64Avanti
11-06-2009, 03:45 AM
Did all of the factory R3 Avanti's have the modified suspension (no not just the old style bushings on the upper control arm)?

Since some of the suspension parts are not available unless they were with SASCO's parts not identified you can't produce a clone of a R3 Avanti.

I suspect that a large number of the R3 engines that Paxton built after the fact were not ported as required by the Studebaker drawings. I have seen some of them and an engine with the unported heads will produce between 25 and 40 hp less than the ported heads. Some of the very last engines didn't have R3 rods.

If it is a real R3 engine then it is a real R3 engine. If we had real R3 heads available then we could have reproduction R3's. If it is a look alike then call it a look alike, a mock R3 or an R2+.



David L

64Avanti
11-06-2009, 03:51 AM
I remember seeing an R4 engine in a hot rod. It was in one the Hot Rods Engine Swap books. Maybe it was the engine mentioned above.

David L

DEEPNHOCK
11-06-2009, 08:50 AM
I stayed out of this because I am not an expert on the subject...
But...
There is a difference between being one 'of the nine' factory assembled production line Avanti's and a later dealer installed, or later owner installed R3 (or R4) setups.
And saying that is not belittleing the heritage, or provenance of them in the least.
Sure, it is an R3 (or R4) powered Avanti.
A 'real' R3, or R4.....engine.
Sure, it might be a Granatelli assembled R3 (or R4) Avanti.
But call it like it is.
As far as Studebaker heritage purist interests go...
There were only nine factory assembled production line Avanti's with R3 (or R4?) powerplants.
Personally?
I think the notation that 'my Avanti' was 'Granatelli built' adds value.
And a 'dealer installed' monicker is nothing to be sneezed at.
It's a badge of honor... Just a different battle ribbon to wear on your chest...
But...
Then, the talk about 'clones', when spoken in a demeaning manner is belittling.
If someone recreated a rare avanti and spent thousands of dollaers doing that, it should be commended, and not looked down on as 'just' a clone (or 'just' a tribute car).
The only excuse for an attitude like that is if it were being promoted as a 'factory built' R3 (or R4?) Avanti.
Just call it what it really is and be darned proud of it.
I can reserach stuff until I am blue in the face, and all it makes me is a smarter smurf.
Not a slam on anything other than attitude (and this is not directed at anyone in particular)..
We need to reflect on our Studattitudes...
We are all only here on this infested ball of a planet for a short time.
Let's enjoy the commeraderrie and not split hairs ad nauseum.

Question...
Would you dump the clutch at 5 grand and power shift a 'real' R3 Avanti?
Would you do that to a clone R3 Avanti?

I respect the 'No' answer for historical reasons.
(I will always remember the 'You betcha' answer on the clone Avanti;)).

I also will remember the comments made by a supposed 'real' R3 owner made to, and about, an R3 'clone' Avanti....
(and that is NOT what this club is all about).

I love all Studebakers....even the clones.
Can't say the same for all the owners;)[:0][8)]:D
Jeff[8D]



quote:Originally posted by HNCadet

[quote]&lt;snip&gt;
The B92 R3 Avanti(I will NEVER refer to it as a clone)was built to be typical of it's intended Granatelli Conversion. &lt;snip&gt;
Everyone of those powerplants was built with the intention of being assembled into a High Performance Studebaker vehicle, unfortunately fate stepped in and instead gave us the opportunity to build our R3/4 cars as we desired ........it only really matters to a few collectors as to the lineage of the vehicle and the Market WILL determine the real value of the car, not a discussion group on the internet. If you drive that car and enjoy it, then that's all that matters. Afterall, it's a REAL R3:D

8E45E
11-06-2009, 09:27 AM
quote:Originally posted by DEEPNHOCK
And a 'dealer installed' monicker is nothing to be sneezed at.
It's a badge of honor... Just a different battle ribbon to wear on your chest...


Today, Ford has its SVO catalog and Chrysler has had its "Direct Connection" high-performance parts catalogs for many years. Did Studebaker ever have any such similar catalog for hi-performance parts promoting over-the-counter sales at the dealer's?

If they did, I'd like one!:D

Craig

StudeMichael
11-06-2009, 10:22 AM
After having messeed with the high performance Studebaker stuff like R2, R4 cars and wringing out 400 plus horsepower from a 289 I have decided it is a huge waste of money. If you are going to modify anything from the way it left South Bend, why chase down factory parts to make your clone when you can stuff an LS2 with 400 horses to start with for a few thousand dollars? Not to say I wouldn't love to have a crate R3 or R4 in a late model anything Stude, but the whole deal of cloning engines is just way too expensive for what you end up with. My 2 cents. You are either going fast or being a museum keeper in the end.

comatus
11-06-2009, 11:07 AM
This is what you call "dangerous fun."

I own a genuine Myer R-Two-and-a-Half--so speak with some authority!

David, I reckon you the first to bring up R3 suspension, so often overlooked. It's easier to "clone" than installing or building up an R3 engine, and makes for quite a change--especially if you've finally broken in the kid a the lubritorium to count zerks, and get to watch his face when suddenly there's a few missing.

Avanti's long nose makes for quite a sensation of yaw in cornering, and the R3 uppers limit this dramatically. Rebound is snappier too, which makes for a much, er, firmer ride. Jon Myer easily talked me out of hard polypropylene suspension bushings (by mentioning body cracks), and years later I still agree with him. The ride is just firm enough after the conversion, so unless one is going through rubber bushings at an alarming rate, that little bit of softness (all that's left, actually) is welcome--especially if tires are a lower profile than stock, or there's, like, air in them, rare for boulevardiers.

There's more to an R3 than the engine (not to take a thing away from that engine). A mere R3 suspension upgrade on an otherwise R1 car is rewarding and worthwhile for spirited driving.

Alan
11-06-2009, 11:21 AM
Dave, This is the car you are thinking about, it is the Burke Brothers 39 Ford.

http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g171/artcloud/06_13_0.jpg

Swifster
11-06-2009, 01:21 PM
I don't think anyone was demeaning a 'cloned' R3 Avanti. A 'cloned' R3 Avanti will still be worth more (typically) than any R2 Avanti. The discussion, and that of the Ebay cars wasn't to say they don't have value, but come on. A real R3 Avanti and Nelson's Commander and if found, the R4 cars, will always be top dog in terms of value. Anything with all it documentation falls in just behind it.

But all the 'transplant cars' have all their value tied up to that big hunk of iron between the frame rails. No more and no less. To a guy building a car, they are targets if he wants a R3 in his car.

Financially, it would be stupid to buy an R3 Avanti and strip the engine out of it. The same would be true of Nelson's Commander, George's Challenger, etc. But I could see those two Avanti's (if the engines are legit), or the '63 Avanti bought just to pull the engine. If the R3 raffle is limited to 139 engines, and 10 are factory installed, that leaves 129. Take away George's and other documented cars with 'history's' and now you many be down to 120. When you figure in attrition, what is the number down to now? Everyone has their idea of the perfect car, and a '63 Avanti may not be it (and please, I'm only using this as an example, I'm not saying it should be torn apart).

Now, it seems to me there was a rumor that one of those 9 Avanti's was raped of it's engine to have it installed in a Challenger or Commander a few years ago. Was there any truth to this? If it was done, THAT guy deserves to have his man card removed...

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom - Mulberry, FL

1964 Studebaker Daytona - 289 4V, 4-Speed (Cost To Date: $2125.60)

1964 Studebaker Commander 170-1V, 3-speed w/OD (Cost to Date: $623.67)

http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i280/Swifster/The%20Daytona%20File/Avatar%20Size/01-01-05TheStartingPoint.jpg http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i280/Swifster/The%20Daytona%20File/Avatar%20Size/07-17-07FrontClipRemoved.jpg http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i280/Swifster/The%20Daytona%20File/Avatar%20Size/08-06-29.jpg

PackardV8
11-06-2009, 01:22 PM
Hi, comatus,

Since the search function is working for me today, how about a detailed description of what Meyer did to your car's suspension?

thnx, jack vines

PackardV8

53k
11-06-2009, 02:43 PM
quote:Originally posted by Swifster

I don't think anyone was demeaning a 'cloned' R3 Avanti. A 'cloned' R3 Avanti will still be worth more (typically) than any R2 Avanti. The discussion, and that of the Ebay cars wasn't to say they don't have value, but come on. A real R3 Avanti and Nelson's Commander and if found, the R4 cars, will always be top dog in terms of value. Anything with all it documentation falls in just behind it.
But all the 'transplant cars' have all their value tied up to that big hunk of iron between the frame rails. No more and no less. To a guy building a car, they are targets if he wants a R3 in his car.
Financially, it would be stupid to buy an R3 Avanti and strip the engine out of it. The same would be true of Nelson's Commander, George's Challenger, etc. But I could see those two Avanti's (if the engines are legit), or the '63 Avanti bought just to pull the engine. If the R3 raffle is limited to 139 engines, and 10 are factory installed, that leaves 129. Take away George's and other documented cars with 'history's' and now you many be down to 120. When you figure in attrition, what is the number down to now? Everyone has their idea of the perfect car, and a '63 Avanti may not be it (and please, I'm only using this as an example, I'm not saying it should be torn apart).
Now, it seems to me there was a rumor that one of those 9 Avanti's was raped of it's engine to have it installed in a Challenger or Commander a few years ago. Was there any truth to this? If it was done, THAT guy deserves to have his man card removed...
More than a rumor. One of the nine got put in a triple black Daytona convertible that Ed Reynolds built up many years ago (4-speed, Halibrands, etc.). I don't know whether Ed pulled the engine or just acquired it. When he sold the car he ran a full page ad in TW. I saw the car at one of the '80s South Bend Meet, but have never heard any more of it.



Paul Johnson, Wild and Wonderful West Virginia. '64 Daytona Wagonaire, '64 Daytona convertible, '53 Commander Starliner, Museum R-4 engine, '62 Gravely Model L, '72 Gravely Model 430

http://www.frontiernet.net/~thejohnsons/Forum%20signature%20pix/Copy%20of%20broken%20circle.jpghttp://www.frontiernet.net/~thejohnsons/Forum%20signature%20pix/Copy%20of%201-1-08%20002.jpghttp://www.frontiernet.net/~thejohnsons/Forum%20signature%20pix/Copy%20of%201-1-08%20004.jpghttp://www.frontiernet.net/~thejohnsons/Forum%20signature%20pix/Copy%20of%201-1-08%20006.jpg

Swifster
11-06-2009, 04:37 PM
quote:Originally posted by 53k

More than a rumor. One of the nine got put in a triple black Daytona convertible that Ed Reynolds built up many years ago (4-speed, Halibrands, etc.). I don't know whether Ed pulled the engine or just acquired it. When he sold the car he ran a full page ad in TW. I saw the car at one of the '80s South Bend Meet, but have never heard any more of it.


Sorry if this offends, but that would be the work of a jacka$$ regardless of who it was. Hopefully like Nelson's Commander, car and engine will be reunited at some point.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom - Mulberry, FL

1964 Studebaker Daytona - 289 4V, 4-Speed (Cost To Date: $2125.60)

1964 Studebaker Commander 170-1V, 3-speed w/OD (Cost to Date: $623.67)

http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i280/Swifster/The%20Daytona%20File/Avatar%20Size/01-01-05TheStartingPoint.jpg http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i280/Swifster/The%20Daytona%20File/Avatar%20Size/07-17-07FrontClipRemoved.jpg http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i280/Swifster/The%20Daytona%20File/Avatar%20Size/08-06-29.jpg

HNCadet
11-06-2009, 08:24 PM
quote:I also will remember the comments made by a supposed 'real' R3 owner made to, and about, an R3 'clone' Avanti....
(and that is NOT what this club is all about).

I love all Studebakers....even the clones.
Can't say the same for all the owners
Jeff[?]

Whoa there, Jeff.........there was absolutely NO INTENT of demeaning any other Avanti or Avanti owner whether cloned or not.........the comment was specifically tied to my car. I fully respect what others have done to enhance there cars. You obviously don't know me, or you wouldn't have taken my comment in that connotation and I'm somewhat embarrassed that my comment could taken in that context. So I see the need to improve my writing skills. My apologies to any of you who were offended.


On another subject I also enjoyed StudeMichael's comment on throwing a 400hp LS2 in an Avanti..........doing that too! My wife's Avanti has LS motor in it and although not done yet, it's been a wholly different type of project......a lot more difficult than the R3 car with a same level of research and dollars........Oh, and no, I wouldn't rev the R3 to 5K and dump the clutch, but I have scared myself twice now with that car......the Bias ply tires and grooved Interstates here in San Diego do not mix well, especially if you're displaying authoritative power to the local rice rocket brigade. The R3 is not a trailer queen, I've decided to enjoy it while I can and show when I can.

bams50
11-06-2009, 09:07 PM
Dang, Jeff, that does seem a little harsh. I thought you'd come back and edit it, but I guess not...

I'm sure you didn't mean that how it sounded; but I can't imagine how you could have a problem with anything that anyone has said herehttp://www.mysmiley.net/imgs/smile/confused/confused0024.gif This has been one of the best, most informative discussions ever on this, or any other, forum. I've copied and pasted all the educational information into my computer for future reference, and am thankful for it all.

In this thread we have gotten to see the 'elites'- the most knowledgeable and experienced in the Stude world- discuss this topic publicly for all our benefit. I know the urge is strong for some of us less-knowledgeable to want to be a part of a high-end discussion, but when we can't, why not just sit back and learn- and enjoy? Seems a lot better than trying to fabricate some kind of fault that never occured...[|)]

Again I say, thank you to all that have given freely- and for free![:p]- all the great info here. THAT is what this club is "all about"[^]

Robert (Bob) Andrews- on the IoMT (Island of Misfit Toys)
Parish, central NY 13131
http://www.patrioticon.org/images/flag1-1.gif
GOD BLESS AMERICA

mbstude
11-06-2009, 09:09 PM
I don't think Jeff is referring to anyone here.

Matthew Burnette
Hazlehurst, GA

HNCadet
11-06-2009, 09:40 PM
quote:Still have my Avanti, and just returned from Las Vegas after attending my 40th SEMA show.

Bob Caser

Hmmmmmm........4oth SEMA show? That'd make you, 46 right?


FWIW, Bob & I grew up about 15 miles apart from each other, and now some 45 yrs later, we find ourselves on the 'other' side of the country.........hmmmmmm about 15 miles apart and he has the most beautiful "almost completely" restored Turquoise '64 Avanti that he's owned since the fall of '63. Oh and his "daily" driver............... a Cobra.

Come'on Bob when are you going to finish your Avanti up? I'll make you a deal, the first Saturday you get your Avanti done, I'll drive mine up and meet you @ Car's & Coffee [^]

ROADRACELARK
11-06-2009, 09:41 PM
WOW!!![:0] After reading all this, I'm glad my car just has an old "rag-tag" R-2.;) Still a blast to drive and wring it out without being afraid of scattering a rare piece of history down the track.[}:)]

Dan Miller
Atlanta, GA

[img=left]http://static.flickr.com/57/228744729_7aff5f0118_m.jpg[/img=left]
Road Racers turn left AND right.

Bob Caser
11-06-2009, 10:01 PM
quote:Originally posted by HNCadet


quote:Still have my Avanti, and just returned from Las Vegas after attending my 40th SEMA show.

Bob Caser

Hmmmmmm........4oth SEMA show? That'd make you, 46 right?


FWIW, Bob & I grew up about 15 miles apart from each other, and now some 45 yrs later, we find ourselves on the 'other' side of the country.........hmmmmmm about 15 miles apart and he has the most beautiful "almost completely" restored Turquoise '64 Avanti that he's owned since the fall of '63. Oh and his "daily" driver............... a Cobra.

Come'on Bob when are you going to finish your Avanti up? I'll make you a deal, the first Saturday you get your Avanti done, I'll drive mine up and meet you @ Car's & Coffee [^]


mrbobinc

Thank you for your compliments on my age and my Turquoise Avanti.
At the moment I am working to finish my Black Avanti as a daily driver. I accept your offer and will meet you at Cars and Coffee in the future.

Chicken Hawk
11-06-2009, 10:18 PM
Geez, what a long thread. I'm going to have to look in more often to keep up. Whether it's a clone, transplant, etc., doesn't matter much to me as long as it's Studebaker. I've heard several things in the past 46 years, mostly in the mid 1960's and I'm not sure about all of them but am sure about some such as having cranks with longer strokes, ported and polished heads, offering electric fuel pumps, fuel pressure regulators, air shocks, etc. Even heard rumors about roller cams. Also heard rumors about the 342 block being taken out to 4" along with a 4 1/4" stroke for that 427".

As we know, the R 3 and R 4 engines were planned to use for Bonneville in the 5 liter class which is 305". The 342 block was 3.875" bore with the 3.625" stroke. Supposedly they planned to go for the 6 liter class which is 366" and to do this they came up with a 3.875" stroke to come out at 365.5".

What might have been if they could have hung on another few years.

Ted

nels
11-06-2009, 11:10 PM
I thought that a 427 Stude was a possibiliy. A little under square but not too much. Didn't someone mention that the block could have gone a little over 4 inch bore? If so, I wonder what the final capacity could have been?

R2Andrea
11-06-2009, 11:29 PM
Burried somewhere I have some notes to the effect that the V8 block could be taken out to a 4.00" bore and 4.00" stroke without changing the pattern equipment for the exterior of the block. It is unclear if this ment a standard 4.00" bore for production , or for the maximum overbore on a 343" block. When I have time to convert my block blueprints to CAD drawings It will make it much easier to see how big things could be made bore and stroke wise. By the way, the 343 was earmarked for 1965 production.


R2Andy

Swifster
11-07-2009, 12:00 AM
quote:Originally posted by R2Andy

Burried somewhere I have some notes to the effect that the V8 block could be taken out to a 4.00" bore and 4.00" stroke without changing the pattern equipment for the exterior of the block. It is unclear if this ment a standard 4.00" bore for production , or for the maximum overbore on a 343" block. When I have time to convert my block blueprints to CAD drawings It will make it much easier to see how big things could be made bore and stroke wise. By the way, the 343 was earmarked for 1965 production.


Hmmm. CAD drawings of the block... Anything with cranks and rods?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom - Mulberry, FL

1964 Studebaker Daytona - 289 4V, 4-Speed (Cost To Date: $2125.60)

1964 Studebaker Commander 170-1V, 3-speed w/OD (Cost to Date: $623.67)

http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i280/Swifster/The%20Daytona%20File/Avatar%20Size/01-01-05TheStartingPoint.jpg http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i280/Swifster/The%20Daytona%20File/Avatar%20Size/07-17-07FrontClipRemoved.jpg http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i280/Swifster/The%20Daytona%20File/Avatar%20Size/08-06-29.jpg

PackardV8
11-07-2009, 12:28 AM
This thread has gotten so long ya'll have forgotten we covered this in page one.


quote:With the 3.875" bore attributed to the near-mythical 340" engine, it would require a 4.600" stroke to result in a 427" engine. Not going to happen.

However, if we wanted imagine what could be, the Studebaker V8 block has more room between bore centers than does the SBC which can go up to a 4.160" bore, so it is theoretically possible, as is a 4.000" stroke, which would give 434". Again, never gonna happen, but if we all wished hard enough . . .

thnx, jack vines


PackardV8

64Avanti
11-07-2009, 12:34 AM
Alan, yes that is the car.

Ok I will explain a little more about the R3 suspension. It was more than just one of the old upper A-arms from the early 50's. The inner pivot point was lowered 1", the king pin, spindle and lower knuckle were also different. I in fact designed a new lower knuckle that would accomplish some of what Studebaker was attempting to accomplish before I knew that those parts were different on the R3 cars or at least some of them.

So Tommo it would be interesting if you could take a picture of the front suspension of your factory R3 Avanti so that we can see if your car has the different parts on it along with the frame modification to lower the inner pivot point.

David L

HNCadet
11-07-2009, 10:39 AM
In reviewing my notes taken with owners of some of the factory cars and a Bonneville car, the 9 factory cars did not have that front mod, only Granatelli's Bonneville cars and Egbert's were the cars I found with that lowered upper/inner and spindle. So did we have a sub-section of planned mods?

I know Nels was putting together a modified spindle based on some drawings he got out of the archives........did you finalize that spindle design Nels?

On my #90 car it was too far modified to tell what front design it ran at Bonneville in '63(front suspension cross member completely cutout). It sports a Ford tranverse spring front suspension, tilted back at an 18 degree angle......it'll go straight as an arrow at 250mph(which it did)but the turning radius is half the diameter of the earth.

r5duecento
11-24-2015, 10:40 PM
I know this is kind of late to respond to this thread, but I just came across it and wanted to correct an error.

All EX serial numbered engines are NOT in fact REAL R-3 engines. All of the engines in the prototype Avantis were EX serial numbered engines and none of them were R-3's, at least not to start with, as the R-3 engine was probably not even thought of at that point in time. In fact, I doubt if any EX engine was originally an R-3. All of the EX engines that I am aware of that are R-3's were modified from "standard" Avanti engines by the Granatelli's, most, if not all during the R-3 development stage.

DEEPNHOCK
11-24-2015, 10:51 PM
Hey... It's never too late to reply. What's six years, anyways?:!::!!::rolleyes:


I know this is kind of late to respond to this thread, but I just came across it and wanted to correct an error.

All EX serial numbered engines are NOT in fact REAL R-3 engines. All of the engines in the prototype Avantis were EX serial numbered engines and none of them were R-3's, at least not to start with, as the R-3 engine was probably not even thought of at that point in time. In fact, I doubt if any EX engine was originally an R-3. All of the EX engines that I am aware of that are R-3's were modified from "standard" Avanti engines by the Granatelli's, most, if not all during the R-3 development stage.

8E45E
11-24-2015, 11:56 PM
I know this is kind of late to respond to this thread, but I just came across it and wanted to correct an error.

Nothing wrong with taking the time to correct it.

How is your car's restoration coming along?

Craig

Alan
11-25-2015, 12:05 AM
Jeff, r5, There is Rich Bennett, owner of the Due Cento. He has studied the R3,4,5 stuff more than anyone. Nice to see you drop in every once and a while Rich. I saw that at Paxton, Joe had pallets of bare blocks, some with numbers stamped on them, some not. I watched Joe stamp B48 and B112.

studeron
11-25-2015, 03:26 PM
clone r4 avanti. or real? drag racing at acto NJ. in 1963 the people that had the car seamed more the knowledgeable. any info?

studegary
11-25-2015, 04:16 PM
clone r4 avanti. or real? drag racing at acto NJ. in 1963 the people that had the car seamed more the knowledgeable. any info?

The R3 did not become an option until "...on or about August 1, 1963." This is per Studebaker Sales Letter 161 dated 6/10/63. This would be at the beginning of 1964 Avanti model production. I did not find anything similar for an R4 (not that it does not exist, just that I do not see it). I can't imagine that the R4 was offered prior to the R3.

I would call the car you describe a clone, or something simiiar, because no R4s were originally installed in Avantis at the South Bend factory.

R3 challenger
11-25-2015, 06:39 PM
An earlier post mentioned the risk to an R3 that might occur by "dropping the clutch at 5,000 rpm". I'd like to assure everyone that we practice safety first at the Pure Stock Drags by dropping the clutch on the Wrapper's R3 at only 3000 rpm. <GGG>

Whatever we want to call the Wrapper is fine with me, as long as it keeps beating the Brand-Xs at the drags.

Thanks for an interesting discussion.

George

11SecAvanti
11-26-2015, 05:23 PM
A most interesting discussion and enjoyed the information discussed. The "A" block motor and heads @ 299 set the land speed records and the later 304.5 motor is general viewed as the R-3. Yet the factory used the accomplishments of the "A" 299 bore with ported standard heads as the R-3 motor in advertisements. So the factory was establishing this motor as R-3 IMO. Wonder if the pistons were standard .060" over or a special order set? Suspect the cam also would be either the 288 R-3 or again a special grind with special springs. Would like to learn what they did to the short block and heads to make the hp to run such high mph,s. The blower also IMO would have to have some "secrets."

On crank strokes I know of one that is a 4" stroke and one at yes 4.250" stroke. The 3.625 standard stroke stude is the stroke Nascar cup engines use. But studes were first. LOL

nels
11-26-2015, 05:56 PM
A most interesting discussion and enjoyed the information discussed. The "A" block motor and heads @ 299 set the land speed records and the later 304.5 motor is general viewed as the R-3. Yet the factory used the accomplishments of the "A" 299 bore with ported standard heads as the R-3 motor in advertisements. So the factory was establishing this motor as R-3 IMO. Wonder if the pistons were standard .060" over or a special order set? Suspect the cam also would be either the 288 R-3 or again a special grind with special springs. Would like to learn what they did to the short block and heads to make the hp to run such high mph,s. The blower also IMO would have to have some "secrets."

On crank strokes I know of one that is a 4" stroke and one at yes 4.250" stroke. The 3.625 standard stroke stude is the stroke Nascar cup engines use. But studes were first. LOL

I think the A block motor was probably the early engines with reworked standard heads? But, I can't say for sure. I have seen more than one 299 with a B number. As for pistons on the 299 engines, they were also the Forgedtrue.

64Avanti
11-27-2015, 12:58 AM
There are a number of words that have been used to mean different things in regards to Studebakers. For example the word clone means copy. Many have called the R3 exhaust manifolds the we made, Lionel Stone made and John Erb makes clones. These are not copies because they were not copied from anything. They were and are made from the original Studebaker tooling! Therefore they are not clones. You can call them reproductions but not clones.

As far as the Avanti's that have had R3 engines installed why not just call them R3 Avanti's and the factory R3 Avanti's can be called "Factory R3 Avanti's" or "Factory Production R3 Avanti's." I can understand that those who own one of the 9 Factory R3 Avanti's wanting to distinguish their cars from the ones that had R3 engines installed after the fact. It is a mater of pride and perhaps money someday.

PackardV8
11-27-2015, 01:10 AM
The 3.625 standard stroke stude is the stroke Nascar cup engines use. But studes were first. LOL

Good discussion, but NASCAR engines have been in the range of 3.25" for several years now.

64Avanti
11-27-2015, 01:31 AM
Looks like the time stamps are a little off! It is 10:30 Pacific time and look at the time stamp.

jpepper
11-28-2015, 08:05 PM
This is an interesting read. In September of 1969 I spun a bearing in one of my R2's. Rather than build another R2 I called Paxton. I bought B-110 in fall of 1969. It was delivered to me in Wisconsin on Dec 5th (my 19th birthday) 1969. At the time Joe Granatelli told me he no longer had any R3 heads, camshafts, or press fit rods. He told me not to worry because the R3 cam was not very good especially the 288 version. He said a properly prepared R2 head worked as good or better than an R3 casting. He offered to rework my R2 castings but I could not afford it. (I was a teenager working for $2 an hour). He told me that on a dragstrip test an early R3 ran better with an R2 cam in it than with an R3 grind. I put the engine in my 63 Lark, got it running, Made a few easy passes at the strip, and went in the Army. The car did not run again until 1983. It was soon evident that something was wrong with the engine. the Paxton employee that assembled the rods to the pistons did not seat the clamp bolts properly. Two came loose and grooved two cylinder walls. I am in the process of rebuilding B-110 using a 1964 R1 block that sonic checks thick enough. I'll let you know when it goes together. The plan is to build a set of heads for the engine that Joe described to me in 1969.

Jim