Four speed in a Hawk?

[cstude1]

Will any Studebaker four speed bolt to a 1960 Hawk bell housing with a T-85? I have both four speed trans/patterns available.
Thanks,
Chuck Collins

[StudeRich]

Hi Chuck; NO !! Only a late '62-'64 Ford case T-10 will fit! It's the one with the more square pattern, the '61 to early '62 Chevy. case has the lower right hand mounting bolt way out to the right.

That car should have a T-86 (with 6 bolt top cover), don't know about a T-85 (side cover trans.)that's a H.D. '57-'58 Golden Hawk or Pres. Classic "Y" body tranny./housing.

If it is a housing for an early T-85, some are different BOLT PATTERN than late model T-86E long tail trannys like the '60V-C SHOULD have.

Rich.

quote:Originally posted by cstude1

Will any Studebaker four speed bolt to a 1960 Hawk bell housing with a T-85? I have both four speed trans/patterns available.
Thanks, Chuck Collins

StudeRich
Studebakers Northwest
Ferndale, WA

[Jessie J.]

quote:Originally posted by StudeRich

..... the '61 to early '62 Chevy. case has the lower right hand mounting bolt way out to the right.

Although it has been years since I swapped mine, the above does not sound like a correct discription of the "Chevy" trans bolt pattern, which as I recall has the trans ears on an almost square pattern.
The "classic" GM pattern as was used on the Saginaw''s and Muncie's.
(See 'em all the time on e-Bay)

My swap was somewhat different in that I installed a '62 Studebaker 4 speed tranny behind the 283 in my '65 Cruiser, by using a Chevy bellhousing. I also had to shorten the Stude input shaft.

[StudeRich]

Jessie; That would be why it looked different, I think '65-'66's used a Chevy. case Borg Warner T-86 Tranny and matching Bellhousing, just the opposite of what Chuck has...a '60 Hawk with a Studebaker T-85/86 trans.! Whatever the ChevyBaker's were does not matter, we have a '60 Hawk here.

You must have used a EARLY '62 and '61 Stude. CHEVY. case T-10 to fit a ChevyBaker!

quote:Originally posted by Jessie J.


My swap was somewhat different in that I installed a '62 Studebaker 4 speed tranny behind the 283 in my '65 Cruiser, by using a Chevy bellhousing. I also had to shorten the Stude input shaft.

StudeRich
Studebakers Northwest
Ferndale, WA

[Jessie J.]

I 've been having some dial-up problems so let me try this again.

quote:Originally posted by StudeRich

..... the '61 to early '62 Chevy. case has the lower right hand mounting bolt way out to the right.

Lots of Muncie's and Saginaw's are being displayed on e-Bay, the bolt pattern is the same as was used for the '61-'62 Studebaker 4 speed (only) bell housings. The lower right bolt hole is located about 1" out from being a horizontal rectangle
The T-86 3 speed used a different pattern, shared with some Ford products.

What I have never yet been able to establish with any certainty is the situation with the '63-'64 4 speed bell housings.
It is often stated that these have a "Ford" bolt pattern.
And of course the T-86 3 speed is also described as having a "Ford" pattern.
So does the '63-'64 4 speed have the same "Ford" bolt pattern as the '63-'64 T-86 3 speed bell housing? Are they the same housing?

Does the '63-'64 "Ford" patterned T-86 bell housing use the same bolt pattern as the earlier T-86 bells?

What "Ford" pattern 4 speed trans will bolt up to a '63-'64 T-86 bell housing?

Not just blowing wind here, as I have a '64 Daytona with the T-86 3 speed o/d and would like to install a 4 speed, but am uncertain of which combos are workable.
Wish I could just find one of those "Chevy" patterned bell housings, sure would simplify things and expand my options.

My old swap was somewhat different in that I installed a '62 Studebaker 4 speed tranny behind the 283 in my '65 Cruiser, by using a Chevy bell housing. I also had to shorten the Stude input shaft.

StudeRich,my '65 Cruiser came with a FOM, when it "went South", I pulled the "CHEVY case" 4 speed out of a '62 Daytona parts car that I had, and sourced a Chevy bell housing, flywheel and cluch assembly from my Chevy friends.
As you can see by my above added questions, my only present concern is with what transmissions will fit the various Stude bell housings used from 1964 back. Hope this is clearer.

[1956 Hawk]

Not 100% sure about this but I'll try my best. The T86 has a small square bolt pattern that isn't close to any 4 speed. The T85 I think uses the same bolt pattern as the "Ford pattern" 4 speed which is a tall rectangular pattern. The early Studebaker T10 uses the wide rectangular "Chevy pattern".

David

[StudeRich]

It is way simplier than you make it sound. The parts book shows the same '59-'64 T-86 Bellhousing used for '63-'64 T-10 4 speeds (also late '62) AND they are a little off rectangle FORD pattern, but NOT WAY out to the right Chevy patterned ones, as used on '61-'early '62!



StudeRich
Studebakers Northwest
Ferndale, WA

[Jessie J.]

Thanks, it sounds like the late '62-'64 "Ford" pattern T-10 Studebaker 4 speed ought to bolt right up to my present T-86 bell housing......Of course this cannot help but leaving to me wonder if a much easier to find Ford 4 speed might be an easy adaption.

[StudeRich]

Well if you do buy a Ford T-10, you will still have to change the input shaft, and finding a Studebaker long nose input shaft, is harder to find than a '63-'64 Stude. T-10!

StudeRich
Studebakers Northwest
Ferndale, WA

[PackardV8]

Greetings, All,

FWIW, having driven them all over the many years of Studebaker ownership, if my goal was street/highway driving, I wouldn't pay the current going price to convert a T86 overdrive to a T10.

On the other hand, if money isn't too tight, and it isn't a resoration, don't go for a T10, but go all the way to a T5. It really isn't more expensive and it a much better daily driver.

IMHO, other than running in the Pure Stock Muscle Car drags, the T10 was pretty much a technological dead end.

PackardV8

[N8N]

yes and no. The T-10 is still stronger than most of the newer 5-speeds made up until just a few years ago (Tremec TKO series etc.) Look at the factory torque ratings on the various transmissions. A T5 is probably fine for normal street driving, but I would be a little nervous if I were planning on, say, road-racing it behind a Stude engine. I'm not sure why this is, several other contemporary 4-speeds were just as strong or stronger (Muncie "rock crusher," Ford toploader, etc.)

nate

--
55 Commander Starlight

http://members.cox.net/njnagel

[Jessie J.]

I like the way my T-86 o/d and 3.73 rear combination operates.......until the need arises to drop back down into first gear, then the party is over. The lack of syncromesh on first gear is what really shows up the age and outdated design of these old 3 speeds.
This wasn't much of a problem on the relatively flat roads that I drove on while I lived in Michigan, but down here in the hills of Kentucky, I'm constantly encountering low speed turns on upgrades and intersections, and a transmission that is unwilling to shift back down into first gear without coming to a virtually complete stop, or requires careful "double clutching" and still produces "gear clash" really does not contribute much to my driving pleasure.
So my inquiries into a 4 speed has little to do with pursuit of "performance" or strength benefits, just to get better all around drivability.
I think one of the modern T-5s is probably what I will need to install to get the flexibility that I'm seeking.

[PackardV8]

Greetings, N8N,

With the great numbers of Studes participating in closed course road racing, your concerns as to the strength of the T5 are well taken
Actually, I want to be riding in the first Studebaker which breaks a late-model world-class T5.[]

The real answer for a true-blue Studebaker rodder is one of the old Tom Beatty conversions which puts the R11 overdrive from the T85 behind a T10. It does require a new crossmember and a shorter driveshaft, but a great way to get syncro low and overdrive top and still be all Studebaker parts. Alan has one for sale for some time, but so far, no CASO has wanted it $600 worth.

thnx, jv.



PackardV8

[N8N]

quote:With the great numbers of Studes participating in closed course road racing, your concerns as to the strength of the T5 are well taken
Actually, I want to be riding in the first Studebaker which breaks a late-model world-class T5.

Hey, if I ever get my act together I might just try it :P

I know a guy that managed to tear up either a T-10 or Toploader (I forget which) and that was just behind a wussy little Windsor-block Ford engine

nate

--
55 Commander Starlight

http://members.cox.net/njnagel

[PackardV8]

Hi, N8N,

All in good Stude fun. Guarantee he didn't break a Ford toploader with a wuss Windsor, even if he dropped the block on it.

There are all varieties of T5, some designed to go behind weak 4-cyls in light cars. Others, a bit stronger, for V6s. The late model V8 Mustang versions are pert nigh bulletproof. I know of one right now in a 427" Vette.

Horses for courses. FWIW, I have tried to round-track both the Lark and the C-body, with limited success. The C-body has held hundreds of records at Bonneville and the Lark on the drag strip. Very few successful road race cars with 58% of the weight on the front wheels. We have one member doing well on the road courses, but even he will admit to being somewhat at a disadvantage.

thnx, jv.



PackardV8