PDA

View Full Version : '62 Hawk eng. no.



johnesmonde
03-16-2005, 05:26 PM
Still trying to figure why my block is painted blue. The no. stamped on it is P51148. This does not match the engine nos. given for 1962 in my shop manual. Anyone got any ideas?
Thanks,
John

'62 Hawk
'30 Chev Coach

N8N
03-16-2005, 07:07 PM
I got lots of ideas, but the only good one is that your engine is a '57 engine and therefore would have been originally turquoise. :) Seriously, that serial no. tells me it's a '57 standard 289 (as opposed to a 259 or a 289 with a blower.)

nate

--
55 Commander Starlight
62 Daytona hardtop
http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel

johnesmonde
03-16-2005, 08:16 PM
That certainly would explain it Nate.Not the original engine for my '62 Hawk (not good news) but it is at least a Studebaker 289. I now have quite a few questions.
-How close is the '57 289 to the '62? My shop manual covers 59-64.
-Are the horsepower ratings the same with a 4bbl?
-How do I check to see what the transmission is? It could be different too.
-Does that mean that other parts -starter, fuel pump -should be from a '57?
-Would they still be solid lifters?

Is there any good news to this scenario?

John

'62 Hawk
'30 Chev Coach

N8N
03-16-2005, 08:22 PM
There are lots of subtle differences but if your Hawk is an early '62 you can make it look stock so only the most finicky enthusiast would notice. If your car is a late '62 then it should have a full flow block (only made mid-'62 to '64) which has some oiling system improvements, among other things.

I believe the '57 motor is rated at slightly less HP than '62 but not much.

As for the accessories - your '62 should have an Autolite generator, the '57 would have had a Delco. The Delco has a better reputation, actually. Not sure about the starter. Either would be directly interchangeable over the years, and not much to worry about. Carburetor would be a WCFB on both although I think the '57 might still have had the early tall manifold which I understand is actually preferable.

In any case I wouldn't worry about it too much, unless the lack of originality really bothers you. If the '57 engine is in good shape it should be very serviceable and you won't notice the difference to drive it.

good luck

nate

--
55 Commander Starlight
62 Daytona hardtop
http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel

johnesmonde
03-16-2005, 08:24 PM
Sorry , I do know the answer to the solid question, Sonny already said all Stude engines have solid lifters.
John

'62 Hawk
'30 Chev Coach

johnesmonde
03-16-2005, 08:30 PM
Thanks Nate! I feel better. I guess that was what a previous owner was doing- disguising it by painting the block black.
John

'62 Hawk
'30 Chev Coach

Roscomacaw
03-16-2005, 09:42 PM
Virtually indistinguishable - the 57 289 vs the 62 version. All parts will interchange save for some subtle differences between rockers and pushrods. Nothing to make a performance difference. The biggest visual que is the valve covers. The '57 would have 4-bolt covers and the 62 would use 2 bolts to a cover. Then there's the difference with the spark slinger as Nate mentioned.;)
In late 62 they changed the engine block to incorporate a "full-flow" oil filter where all the oil goes thru the filter before it goes to the oil galleries. Prior to that, a partial flo filter was an option - believe it or not![:0]

Miscreant at large.

johnesmonde
03-16-2005, 10:44 PM
The plot thickens Bob! My valve covers are 2-bolt. It looks like I need to gather all the part numbers I can find on manifolds,carb etc and check what collection of parts I have.
John

'62 Hawk
'30 Chev Coach

Roscomacaw
03-17-2005, 07:59 AM
Really no big mystery there. It's a matter of changing 4 bolts to go from 2-bolt covers to 4-bolt covers or vise versa.;)

Miscreant at large.

johnesmonde
03-17-2005, 07:23 PM
Thanks Bob!


'62 Hawk
'30 Chev Coach