PDA

View Full Version : S-10 Rumor?



GhostMuppet
06-29-2007, 05:31 AM
What is the word on the rumor that the S-10 series chassis by chevy/gm will "fit" under some Studebakers. Thus making it easy on the kid at Autozone to get you or your wife what is needed every now and then. Also gets you into a much larger "bolt on kits" market. My 63 Cruiser is a daily driver and all "original" studebaker stuff. The 52 Land Cruiser I grew up with, is now mine and I would like to update the powertrain and chassis and get this car back on the road in a condition that my lovely wife will drive without too much fear." Oh my God! The 63 doesn't have disc brakes with abs?!" "Well I not driving it."

DEEPNHOCK
06-29-2007, 08:03 AM
No rumor.
You can swap it under a Stude.
A lot of M series trucks have had this swap done.
Be prepared to stretch the frame, lengthen the driveshaft, modify the steering column, change all the body mounts, change the springs (front and rear), re-do the tailpipe(s), completely redo the wiring harness to match Stude to GM, build new bumper mounts (front and rear), get new wheels for correct 'set' in the wheel openings, re-do the dash for a/c outlets, re-plumb the fuel inlet, and then add a dozen things that I forget.
Couple of Saturdays and you're all done;)
Jeff[8D]
PS: BTW... The kid at AutoZone will be even more lost after you do the swap..
He won't have a clue...(BTDT a dozenteen times;))



quote:Originally posted by GhostMuppet

What is the word on the rumor that the S-10 series chassis by chevy/gm will "fit" under some Studebakers. Thus making it easy on the kid at Autozone to get you or your wife what is needed every now and then. Also gets you into a much larger "bolt on kits" market. My 63 Cruiser is a daily driver and all "original" studebaker stuff. The 52 Land Cruiser I grew up with, is now mine and I would like to update the powertrain and chassis and get this car back on the road in a condition that my lovely wife will drive without too much fear." Oh my God! The 63 doesn't have disc brakes with abs?!" "Well I not driving it."


http://i77.photobucket.com/albums/j54/deepnhock/Jeff%20Rice%20Studebaker%20Pictures/1937StudebakerCoupeExpressJeffRicee.jpg

DEEPNHOCK at Gmail.com
Brooklet, Georgia
'37 Coupe Express (never ending project)
'37 Coupe Express Trailer (project)
'61 Hawk (project)
http://community.webshots.com/user/deepnhock

Dick Steinkamp
06-29-2007, 10:07 AM
If your requirement is to please the kid at Autozone...you need a Toyota [:o)]

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

s2dwagon
06-29-2007, 10:59 AM
Sounds like an interesting swap. On the same vein, I was talking with Rene', TW vendor from Slick Street Stuff, and he said that he slid an 85 El Camino frame under a Conestoga wagon. Even though the Conestoga was 1/2" longer in wheel base @ 116.5", he said it fit well and that most of the mounting holes were even in the right places.

Scott

wagone
06-29-2007, 11:24 AM
"MOST OF THE MOUNTING HOLES WERE IN THE RIGHT PLACE"??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

wagone and the R2 avanti

Dick Steinkamp
06-29-2007, 11:42 AM
quote:Originally posted by wagone

"MOST OF THE MOUNTING HOLES WERE IN THE RIGHT PLACE"?


A pro like Rene can make a swap like this sound easy...and it may have been FOR HIM. There are far more failed swaps out there than completed ones. Even many of the completed ones end up looking funny and are actually dangerous to operate on the road. It's a BIG job requiring careful planning, a very high skill level, and tons of money.

It certainly can be done, but don't underestimate it. You can easily end up with a lot of money down the drain and two ruined vehicles.

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

PackardV8
06-29-2007, 12:11 PM
Greetings, All,

Please understand everyone should be encouraged to ask questions and to have opinions. However, this is something about which I feel strongly, coming from a fourth-generation Studebaker family, and having driven Studebakers for almost fifty years and done nearly every modification known to Studedom at one time or another. A new chassis is definitely not the easy or inexpensive path to reliability.

Having said that, if having all the modern conveniences of PS, PDB, AC, 12V alternator/audio accessories, and so on is the desired result, then an S10 or El Camino chassis might be one way to get them in something which still bears a faint resemblance to a Studebaker. It just is not easy, not inexpensive nor is it as reliable as one would hope. Trying to get all the modern stuff to fit and work in an alien Stude environment is akin to a heart transplant. Continued drugs (fiddling by expert mechanics) are always necessary:

I HAVE NEVER OWNED, DRIVEN, RIDDEN IN OR SEEN A MODIFIED STUDEBAKER WHICH WAS MORE RELIABLE THAN A NEW STUDEBAKER OR A PROFESSIONALLY REBUILT ORIGINAL.

(Yes, there are some very few Studebaker systems which are short-lived - just ask any 1956 Golden Hawk owner about the Packard Ultramatic. But then, every day, there is an S10 in every GM back shop with some problem.)

So, GhostMuppet, as always, your car, your money, do whatever you want with it. Just please, don't use the excuse a like-new post-WWII Studebaker on radial tires doesn't stop well enough for modern traffic - they do; or that you can't get parts at AutoZone - your daily driver is a Stude, so you know a new, well-maintained Stude won't let you down any more often than will an equivalent S-10.

thnx, jack vines.

P.S. if your wife is like mine, she won't EVER drive a Stude because it would confirm to everyone she married a weird dude like you.;)









PackardV8

gordr
06-29-2007, 12:16 PM
The S10 frame swap can be done on 2R and M series pickups, and on post-war body cars, say '47 to '52. It's not that it "fits" right out of the box; more that it is "close enough" that you can make it fit. You will still have to fabricate brackets and mounts.

Given that you have a '52 Landcruiser, the chassis is basically the same as your '63 Cruiser. That means you can add modern disc brakes with a Turner kit; you could add power steering, too, if you wish. IMHO, it would be cheaper and easier to upgrade the existing chassis than to do a chassis swap, even if you were to opt for an engine swap.

Gord Richmond, within Weasel range of the Alberta Badlands

John Kirchhoff
06-29-2007, 03:37 PM
"Most of the mounting holes were in the right place."

Maybe he was talking about the bolt holes in the wheels.

bradnree
06-29-2007, 04:32 PM
The Mopar sites have several examples of S-10 frames under the '47-'50 Dodge pickups. It requires 2" tubing lift of body above frame. Seat fits perfectly. Streetrodders have been doing it for years. Look up National Street Rod Association and GoodGuys. I just looked at an S-10 today for $550. Many of the Willys and '39 Studebaker conversions are on S-10's. Very reliable way to go and also have AC. The S-10 can be the magic bullet for a modern conversion. Yes, it does require work.................Brad

studeclunker
06-29-2007, 04:49 PM
Very well said, Packard!![^]

It never ceases to amaze me the predudice that people have over old cars. Once they've been properly rebuilt, you have as good or better a car as a new one. This hybirdizing, sorry Dick et all, is just plain silliness. These people use the very poor excuse of wanting engines that they can get parts from FLAPS for. Well, I have friends with new and newer cars that the FLAPS has to order or they must to to the ($$$$) dealer for.

I don't care what any so-called expert says, it's never a good idea to Bastardize a Studebaker!

Or any other marque for that matter.

Now, I'm probably going to get flamed for this, but truth be told and a spade is a spade.

For probably less money than a chassis swap (10-15k?), you could get that old Land Cruiser running and back on the road. As Packard8 so eloquently pointed out, your original chassis is more than adequate and can be augmented with whatever compatible options you wish to install.

By the by; this is one reason that people like myself are so upset as to the status of SASCO. The loss of any resource like that is bound to make the practical driveability of our beloved Studes that much more unatainable. Just the possibility of that priceless resource being lost is very worrisome to me.

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b18/Studeclunker/december%2006/HPIM0234.jpg http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b18/Studeclunker/56%20Parkview%20Wagon/56wagonleftfrontclipped-1.jpg
Home of the famous Mr. Ed!
Lotsa Larks!
K.I.S.S. Keep It Simple Studebaker!
Ron Smith
Where the heck is Lewiston, CA?

sbca96
06-29-2007, 05:25 PM
This spawned from a couple emails that were shooting back and forth
between myself and someone on this forum. He had heard that someone
had successfully swapped an S10 frame under a EARLY 50s Studebaker. I
told him that I didnt think it was worth while, since when it is all
said and done - its a TRUCK frame, which would need to be lowered for
use in a car, and if its not done right would create havoc.

Art Morrison makes a frame for the C/K body, which since Studebaker
used very similar frame under almost all models, could be adapted to
fit a number of cars. This frame uses a Corvette front suspension and
a 4 link rear suspension. It will basically update your car to a new
car mechanicals. Thats the way to go in MY mind for a clean install.
I would also bet the cost would be considerably cheaper in the end.

http://nelson-motorsports.com/111-1155_IMG_small.JPGhttp://nelson-motorsports.com/111-1159_IMG_small.JPGhttp://nelson-motorsports.com/111-1158_IMG_small.JPG

http://nelson-motorsports.com/studebaker.htm

Tom

'63 Avanti, zinc plated drilled & slotted 03 Mustang Cobra 13" front disc/98 GT rear brakes, 03 Cobra 17" wheels, GM alt, 97 Z28 leather seats, soon: 97 Z28 T-56 6-spd, Ported heads w/SST full flow valves, 'R3' 276 cam, Edelbrock AFB Carb, GM HEI distributor, 8.8mm plug wires

bradnree
06-29-2007, 09:24 PM
do a search for same on the internet....Here we are in the year 2007 and it is being done and very successfully...........Brad
quote:Originally posted by GhostMuppet

What is the word on the rumor that the S-10 series chassis by chevy/gm will "fit" under some Studebakers. Thus making it easy on the kid at Autozone to get you or your wife what is needed every now and then. Also gets you into a much larger "bolt on kits" market. My 63 Cruiser is a daily driver and all "original" studebaker stuff. The 52 Land Cruiser I grew up with, is now mine and I would like to update the powertrain and chassis and get this car back on the road in a condition that my lovely wife will drive without too much fear." Oh my God! The 63 doesn't have disc brakes with abs?!" "Well I not driving it."

stude-sled
06-30-2007, 10:48 AM
I am currently putting an S-10 chassis under a 1950 pickup. The S-10 pickups have three different wheelbases 109 inches for a standard cab short bed, 117 for standard cab long bed, and 122 for a ex-cab short bed. I used the 122 inch frame and cut it to match the Studes wheelbase. I started with a 99 S-10 that had been rolled, and a Stude that was so rusty nobody would ever try to save. This truck will be Stude only in looks but should be a good daily driver. The Stude was so rusty that I cut out the complete floor and firewall, and used the S-10 firewall and floors to fix the cab. The S-10 metal was left in its original location on the frame and the Stude cab was fit around it. The cab location is farther back on the frame in reference to the firewall (had to fill some gaps) but this gave me around 8 inches of extra leg room. This has NOT been expensive, but VERY time consuming. [img][/imp]

John Kirchhoff
06-30-2007, 11:59 AM
A very interesting thread with many different opinions, all valid. For you critics, just remember what they say, "opinions are like butts, everybody has one". And they're all different too!

Here's MY opinion, for what little it's worth. I think it's a shame to take a perfectly servicable Stude and chop it up, thinking the end result is going to be fantastic. In those cases, the result usually doesn't meet the expectations unless loads of money and time are thrown at it. I hope stude-sled will post some photos of what he's doing because I'm quite intrigued. No offense intended but rather praise, but he's pulling a Dr. Frankenstein, taking a bunch of dead parts and bringing them to life. I hope the result is successful considering the effort he's putting into it. Now for the in-between...I can see someone wanting to upgrade the pickup's solid front axle to independent front suspension IF the orginal configuration has caused them problems such as handling (safety), clearance (usability) or they just like to tinker. That is as long as their tinkering gets finished and doesn't turn a drivable truck into something that gets sent to the crusher. If someone out there swaps engines with a Yugo and replaces the front suspension with a Farmall tricycle front end and is happy with the results, well, that's their business and far be it from me to criticize. Sometimes I think folks jump in too deep and too quickly with modifications. If your Stude car's frame flexs too much, why not first consider reinforcing the existing frame with extra sidewall material, channel iron on the bottom, maybe a convertible style X brace and so on. That will likely be much quicker and less stressful than transplanting parts from other makes. The odds of your flexing problem being worse or the car unsafe to drive after you're through is much less likely than when transplanting front suspensions and frames.

studegary
07-01-2007, 08:34 PM
I have owned more than 50 Studebakers with stock front ends and three with a more modern front end. One car had a Mustang II front section installed and the two pickups had GM front clips installed (Camaro and Firebird). I have also owned stock Studebaker trucks. All of the vehicles still had at least most of their original frames. I see a big improvement in driving the trucks with independent front suspension, disc brakes and power steering. I know of Studebakers put on S10 and other frames. Some come out okay and some don't. To me, a front clip or sub frame is the better way to go.

Gary L.
Wappinger, NY

1959 DeLuxe pickup (restomod)

DEEPNHOCK
07-01-2007, 08:54 PM
I agree with what you are saying Gary...
Swapping stuff is not a cut and dried formula for success...
A lot of thought, skill, and execution are needed to make a swap work well... Most are just looking for an improvement on the cheap and think that a junkyard replacement will cost less than a quality rebuild of a stock Stude setup. Rarely, if ever does that end up to be true.... Shoot, the last two that I bought with 'clips' needed as much work to straighten them out as a good rebuild of a Stude front end would have taken. And I am no purist when it comes to making a vehicle 'better' if possible. I want my stuff to work right...period.
Jeff[8D]



quote:Originally posted by studegary

I have owned more than 50 Studebakers with stock front ends and three with a more modern front end. One car had a Mustang II front section installed and the two pickups had GM front clips installed (Camaro and Firebird). I have also owned stock Studebaker trucks. All of the vehicles still had at least most of their original frames. I see a big improvement in driving the trucks with independent front suspension, disc brakes and power steering. I know of Studebakers put on S10 and other frames. Some come out okay and some don't. To me, a front clip or sub frame is the better way to go.

Gary L.
Wappinger, NY

1959 DeLuxe pickup (restomod)

StudeRich
07-02-2007, 02:47 PM
Sounds like you need to tune-up and check brakes and steering on the Cruiser and re-educate Mrs. Ghost Muppet!


quote:Originally posted by GhostMuppet

I would like to update the powertrain and chassis and get this car back on the road in a condition that my lovely wife will drive without too much fear." Oh my God! The 63 doesn't have disc brakes with abs?!" "Well I not driving it."


StudeRich
Studebakers Northwest
Ferndale, WA