PDA

View Full Version : hood springs - 1966



Scott
09-06-2005, 01:25 PM
I have a 1966 Cruiser that I am working on. Yesterday I noticed that the pin (Studebaker called it a dovetail) at the front of the hood that goes into the latching mechanism does not have the large spring and cap that's usually part of the assembly. Its purpose is to pop the hood up when the latch is released. Without the spring, of course, I have to pull the hood up (it does pop up a tiny amount, though).

Well, I checked the chassis manual and everything except 1964-1966 Lark types show the spring as part of the assembly. Is there really NOT supposed to be a spring there? I used to have a 1964 Daytona, but I can't remember if it had that spring or not.

It's kind of wierd to think that Studebaker would use it as part of the assembly for older Larks, but drop it in the 1964-1966 models. Comments?

gordr
09-06-2005, 05:57 PM
You know, I think they DID in fact make them without that spring. Why, I don't know, unless there were maybe other changes to the latch mechanism that rendered the coil spring redundant.

Gord Richmond, within Weasel range of the Alberta Badlands

MarkC
09-06-2005, 06:20 PM
The shop manual has a picture of the 64 hood latch pin and it doesn't have the spring. My early 64 production South-Bend Daytona did not come with the spring, but a late 64 production Hamilton built Commander I had did come with it. So, I can't tell you with authority when and where they were consistently fitted. (I never found not having it to be a big deal, however.)

MarkC

MarkC, 64 Y8
Working in Spokane, WA

65cruiser
09-06-2005, 06:35 PM
My 65 does not have the spring. I have no reason to believe that it's not completely original.

________________________
Mark Anderson
http://home.alltel.net/anderm
1965 Studebaker Cruiser

Scott
09-06-2005, 09:56 PM
You're right! The manual shows the pin without the spring. I thought maybe mine was missing because the hood doesn't pop up much at all (maybe 1/8 inch). My '64 Daytona's hood always popped up more than that, so I must have something rubbing on the hood or rear springs or something.

I do wonder though, what the difference between the 1963 and 1964 hoods are that made them get rid of that spring. I think the 1963 hoods had rods in back and didn't need a prop rod - just like the 1964-1966 models. Only the shape of the hood was different as far as I can see.