Frame / Springs: GT Hawk vs Golden Hawk

[LarkTruck]

Ok all you Hawk gurus, what, if any, are the differences between a GT Hawk and Golden Hawk frame?
Jim

[PackardV8]

What year GT? IIRC, the '64 was made of thicker gauge steel.

jack vines

[LarkTruck]

What year GT? IIRC, the '64 was made of thicker gauge steel.

jack vines

63 GT frame, are the body mounts the same as the G Hawk?
Jim

[JoeHall]

Excluding exports, !961 and earlier Hawks were 13 gage (.897"); 1962 and later was 11 gage (.1196"). The 1956 & 57 used two-piece drive shafts, so had an extra cross member for the carrier bearing. The rear springs were different dimensions, starting in 1958. In short, all years are probably inter changeable with only a few mods. I have swapped a GT frame under a 56J, and it came out nice. But I cannot imagine why anyone would want to go the other direction with an earlier, thinner frame under a GT.

[JEWELL]

What year GT? IIRC, the '64 was made of thicker gauge steel.

jack vines

Jack, because of the thicker gauge steel on the 64 Hawks are craked frames less an issue than on other model Hawks?

[rockne10]

I don't have a diagram of the GT frame but here's one of the '57 GH.

[SN-60]

To: Lark Truck,-------The frames will interchange......no doubt there may be differences in the body attachment brackets as the sub-floor body 'boxes' are different....but it shouldn't be too
hard to swap these minor brackets around as necessary.....Good luck!! (Also...The two-piece driveshaft center bearing crossmember would need to be added or deleted)

[Mike Van Veghten]

JoeHall wrote -
Excluding exports, !961 and earlier Hawks were 13 gage (.897"); 1962 and later was 11 gage (.1196").

Joe -
I think you might want to check your decimal point...!
A frame at over .800" would weigh a small ton...!

Mike

[JoeHall]

Sheesh, what a stickler for details, OK, OK its 0897" Those dimensions are from the 58-64 Shop Manual.

Another benefit of 1961(?) and later is that the factory began installing the reinforcement plates inside the frame for the upper control arm mount holes. No more "field fix" required when they broke, per their Service Bulletin. I have never seen a frame crack there with those plates installed, but have seen several 56Js cracked there.

[LarkTruck]

Thanks all, I am mostly concerned about the attaching points. I have a 57 GH to do a body/paint resto on. The ownwer has the GH chassis/drivetrain restored already. Too pretty to mess up. I want to mount the GH body on a 63 GT frame I have to do the bodywork/panel repair and alignment. I am more into Lark and Avanti resto, the Hawks are a grey area for this old fart.
Jim

[JoeHall]

Set the two frames side by side. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see the few mods that are needed. I do not recall mounts being n issue with the GT frame under the 56J. Biggest deal was the driveshaft carrier bearing cross member. If the 57 GH has power steering, the GT frame will need a dimple in the left top of the frame rail for the Saginaw box, but a well placed blow or two with a large, pall peen hammer will take of that.

[SN-60]

A friend of mine used a GT Hawk frame under a '55 President State Sedan years ago......No problem!

[candbstudebakers]

The 2 main things are the 2 piece drive shaft in the GH and the rear springs on the GT are longer, so if installing a GT frame be sure you get the GT springs.