PDA

View Full Version : 289 62 lark daytona questions



th12t33n
05-15-2007, 12:41 AM
Hello im in the process of purchseing a really nice 62 lark daytona from my father, it has a nice body id give it 8/9 outta 10, the interior id say is a 7/8 outa 10 (needing a dash cover) there is no rust whatsoever , and the engine looks / sounds amazeing. Ive always been a stude guy(im 24 now) and my father has been a stude lover his whole life (hes 56) hes always been an avid fan of the TSDC and turning wheels magazine.

My question is, im lookin for some performance mods, and ive looked around on the forums and noticed a few things here and there, but what ive noticed is not alot of people talk about the 62, with the 289. My question is should i super charge it(i sure whould like to), if so how hard whould if be to get a supercharger of that era(vs57?) and the mounting brackets, also what are some other things i could do to get some performance out of it, it already has dual 2 1/2 inch flowmasters, and a 4 barrel eddlebrock. (sorry if you guys have answered 100 of these posts already)

I know quite a bit about studes and there history, but im just not familiar with some of the more dependable power upgrades for the 289 (my dad has a 58 golden hawk with the same engine but supercharged and its sorta a competition thing between us to build the faster one) You guys might have actually seen it if you went to the national meet this year in southbend, it was the gunmetal gray golden hawk with the red mcculloch supercharger.

Thanks for your time and paitence(and for putting up with my 2am spelling)

Looking to build up my 62 lark daytona 289. any ideas?

StudeRich
05-15-2007, 03:25 AM
The reason most performance talk is about '63's is that the factory had performance upgrades in '63'-64. The '62's were just the beginning of the performance trend and were actually quite fast with 4 speed, 4 Brl. 289, TT rear etc. And being the same engine basically as '63, it should be just as fast stock as the std. engine '63's.

If it is not a four speed, I would change that. Changing the rear axle ratio to a lower one (higher numerically) 3.54 or 3.73 Twin Traction is an easy, cheap way to improve performance considerably. The biggest HP gains in the engine compartment will come from cyl. head mods. Porting, R3 valves, matched ports etc. Also a R2 1/2 Cam from Fairborn Studebaker and Pertronics Ignition. Traction bars will also be needed.
Many other mods are mentioned here in "search mode". Good luck beating Dad, he's got some years experience on you! [:0]

StudeRich
Studebakers Northwest
Ferndale, WA

studebaker-R2-4-me
05-15-2007, 07:41 AM
It's really nice to see a younger guy who's been bitten by the Studebaker Bug. Performance with a Studebaker, well I don't see the problem blowing the doors off your Dad's Goldenhawk. Your only setback is having a good job, no girlfriend (for a while), living at home, paying no rent,and a wide open wallet! My supercharged 289 cost me well over $8000 to have built and I am still not done. Finding the Lark water pump manifold along with other hard to find parts are the biggest setback. You probably will not be looking for originality in a '62 so any set up will do like even a carburetor box . Pay for your dad's Lark have some fun with the car and start accumulating all the pieces for the build up. Your dad's still young and you've got years to blow the doors off his car. BTW check out the Racing Studebaker's website. There are a lot of great performance post there.

1964 GT Hawk soon to be R2 Clone

th12t33n
05-15-2007, 08:29 AM
Thanks for your feedback guys, i know this is one of them questions that has probley been asked a million times but some times i guess its just better to ask your self and get your own answers and such. I really appreciate all the help you guys have taken the time to give me. Yes i live at home pay no rent have a wide open wallet i have a girlfriend who loves studes(any old car for that matter) just as much as me, and her wallets open to me to(teeheehee) Also i tend to over due projects that i attempt to complete so hopefully this one will be that way.

As for performance parts, I will start looking around for cams, and port work, new valves and such, Ill start looking around for which to get and from who. and get all accquire all the pieces for my build this fall probley (if not sooner) Expect to hear alot from me, ill be keeping updates with full pictures and the like.

Looking to build up my 62 lark daytona 289. any ideas?

Swifster
05-15-2007, 08:32 AM
Back in the day, really fast street cars were 13 second cars. Running with modified LSX engines on the street won't happen using a Studebaker engine. As long as your expectations are realistic, you'll be fine.

The same principles that are in play in building a small block Chevy or Ford will apply to a Studebaker. Bumping compression, improving the breathing will go along way. Ignition is based on fuel, spark and air. You can improve all of these areas on these cars to improve the performance.

If you have an automatic, swapping it for a Powershift trans will be an improvement. If you have a manual trans, get a 4-speed. The first improvement I'd make would be with the brakes. Minimally I'd try to source a complete disc brake set up or step up to Jim Turner's brake kit. Extra power becomes dangerous if you can't stop. Start here first.



---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom - Valrico, FL

1964 Studebaker Daytona

http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i280/Swifster/1965_Studebaker_Commander_front198x.jpg

John Kirchhoff
05-15-2007, 10:58 AM
You know what they say, "There ain't no replacement for displacement!"

Swifster
05-15-2007, 11:05 AM
quote:Originally posted by John Kirchhoff

You know what they say, "There ain't no replacement for displacement!"


This is absolutely true. Of course with older cars, even a small displacement car can be fun because of it's uniqueness. He won't see 5 to 25 Larks parked around him and the crowds it will attract should offset the power difference. That and he'll get to answer those age old questions;

'Who made Studebaker?'
'Ford made those engines, right?'
'Why don't you put a Chevy in it?'

Good luck with your project and have fun!

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom - Valrico, FL

1964 Studebaker Daytona

http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i280/Swifster/1965_Studebaker_Commander_front198x.jpg

th12t33n
05-15-2007, 03:05 PM
quote:
This is absolutely true. Of course with older cars, even a small displacement car can be fun because of it's uniqueness. He won't see 5 to 25 Larks parked around him and the crowds it will attract should

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
couldnt of said it better my self, i dont want to have a car that 20 other guys at the cruise have, i dont want what half the nation already has, i want something unique, something i can appreciate, a piece of history, i like studes, i member when my dad brought home the first one ive ever seen, old bulletnose 4 door i do believe suicide doors that i fell in love with big airplane lookin chrome grille. of course i was like 5-6 at that time and the damn thing was taller than me. Once again thanks for the feedback fellas, i think ive got the bug and its a lifetime thing, has been for got 18 years now. i have a whole new world opening up in front of me, god i love studes.. see ya at the international!

Looking to build up my 62 lark daytona 289. any ideas?

th12t33n
05-15-2007, 03:26 PM
PK 322 is the engine number stamp on the top, 1554641 is the other(after the 2nd 5 there is a 2 just above it, does anyone have any info about this specific engine.

Factory replacement or rebuild? me or my father havent been able to find much about this.

it has a full flow oil filter on the bottom right side of the engine as your sitting in the driver seat, we are assumeing this is a later 62 engine as well.

Roscomacaw
05-15-2007, 04:05 PM
It's a '64 vintage 289!:D

Miscreant adrift in
the BerStuda Triangle
http://images.andale.com/f2/115/106/906179/2006/12/7/truckonhill3.jpg

1957 Transtar 1/2ton
1960 Larkvertible V8
1958 Provincial wagon
1953 Commander coupe

th12t33n
05-15-2007, 04:27 PM
haha john thanks for the laugh.

anyone else have any input on the engine make? any info? i looked ont he TDC v8 identification chart and i couldnt find the engine number there.

Looking to build up my 62 lark daytona 289. any ideas?

th12t33n
05-15-2007, 04:28 PM
hold on is this a joke or something heh, not to sure what you mean, its a vintage 64, so its an engine from a 64 lark? not the original 289?

Looking to build up my 62 lark daytona 289. any ideas?

John Kirchhoff
05-15-2007, 04:30 PM
th12t33n, just remember that chicks dig guys with scars and Studes. If you don't have the former, you'll get them by tinkering on the latter.

Dick Steinkamp
05-15-2007, 04:35 PM
quote:Originally posted by th12t33n

hold on is this a joke or something heh, not to sure what you mean, its a vintage 64, so its an engine from a 64 lark? not the original 289?



Yes...it's a 1964 Studebaker 289...there is no way to tell if it is from a Hawk or a Lark. It is not the engine your '62 came with. You can confirm this by ordering the original production from the Studebaker National Museum. The engine serial number that the car was built with will be listed.

What is leading you to believe you need to rebuild the motor?





http://thenobot.org/images/s2d/s2d_01.jpg

N8N
05-15-2007, 05:01 PM
FWIW any differences between a late '62 engine and a '64 engine will be very minor. If the incorrect serial number doesn't bother you, it probably doesn't bother any of us either.

nate

--
55 Commander Starlight
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

th12t33n
05-15-2007, 06:41 PM
its not leading me to belive i need to rebuild, i was figureing it was a factory rebuilt, as in there was a problem with the motor that came in the car and could of possibly shipped them this... ive been searching around and i cant find any information on the pk stamp is there a page im overlooking>?

Looking to build up my 62 lark daytona 289. any ideas?

StudeRich
05-15-2007, 07:04 PM
This post I found with a "engine serial number" search of the Technical Forum.

http://www.studebakerdriversclub.com/sdc_forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=9198&SearchTerms=engine+serial+numbers

PK322 is a 1964 production engine, not a replacement engine. It is a '64 289 built Oct. 22, 1963.

[quote]Originally posted by th12t33n

ive been searching around and i cant find any information on the pk stamp is there a page im overlooking>?
[quote/]

StudeRich
Studebakers Northwest
Ferndale, WA

th12t33n
05-15-2007, 09:11 PM
thanks guys i guess im just a newbie to these forums and need to indulge myself in weeks of oldtimer knowledge before i start asking questions, heh thanks for all your help me and my dad appreciate it.

Looking to build up my 62 lark daytona 289. any ideas?