289 start up video

[53commander]

Here's a short video of the 289 running. Still working some bugs out but it's going well so far.

[StudeRich]

Sounds really good and LOOKS Great, but it definately will need a head torque and valve adjustment after break-in.

[53commander]

Sounds really good and LOOKS Great, but it definately will need a head torque and valve adjustment after break-in.

Thanks and yea I plan on doing a retorque and ajustment after its in the car. The engine sounds a bit more tappy in the video then it does in person, I think it's just the microphone on the camera.

[BobPalma]

'Sounds good! BP

[Pat Dilling]

Thanks for the inspiration! Really looks nice!

[JoeHall]

Looks like the rear motor/tranny mounts are installed backward. That may explain why the fan belt is so close to the lower radiator hose. Flip them around (left to right and right to left) and the engine will shift forward 1/2 to 3/4". As is, you're gonna need to "sleeve" the lower radiator hose with something. Otherwise, that slack side of the belt will flop around and chew a hole in the hose eventually. If you install the aforementioned mounts correctly, you probably won't need to sleeve the hose. Plus, the forward mounts will sit more squarely in place, instead of being tugged toward the rear.

[JoeHall]

Look at second #39 in the video and you will see about the forward mounts being tugged toward the rear. You definitely have the rear mounts installed backward.

[JoeHall]

As is, the rearward shift will also affect clearance for the rear of the tranny oil pan & bat wing (if you're running one), and drive shaft fit.

[53commander]

Looks like the rear motor/tranny mounts are installed backward. That may explain why the fan belt is so close to the lower radiator hose. Flip them around (left to right and right to left) and the engine will shift forward 1/2 to 3/4". As is, you're gonna need to "sleeve" the lower radiator hose with something. Otherwise, that slack side of the belt will flop around and chew a hole in the hose eventually. If you install the aforementioned mounts correctly, you probably won't need to sleeve the hose. Plus, the forward mounts will sit more squarely in place, instead of being tugged toward the rear.

I have tried the mounts both ways with no better luck when I first put the motor in. The mounts wont clear the trans the other way. I figured it was because it's a 289 in a 53 chassis but it was something I was going to tinker with later (one of the bugs I mentioned). Thanks for noticing it, funny you mentioned the lower hose too because I had plans to make a sleeve for it so the belt doesn't rub. The driveshaft and mount fits perfectly.

[StudeRich]

The 1953's with the Studebaker Automatic did not not use that Converter Housing OR those Motor Mounts, so I doubt the hole pattern in the crossmember is correct unless it is from a '56 and on Hawk.

[JoeHall]

I have tried the mounts both ways with no better luck when I first put the motor in. The mounts wont clear the trans the other way. I figured it was because it's a 289 in a 53 chassis but it was something I was going to tinker with later (one of the bugs I mentioned). Thanks for noticing it, funny you mentioned the lower hose too because I had plans to make a sleeve for it so the belt doesn't rub. The driveshaft and mount fits perfectly.

The reason I noticed the rear mounts is because I recently dealt with the same issue on a 63GT I picked up. I had noticed several peculiarities, fefore figuring out the problem: driveshaft almost too long to remove from the rear u'joint; tranny dipstick tube kissing the batwing; fan blade almost kissing the lower radiator hose (as yours); shift linkage bound up, and less clearance at firewall for distributor.
I looked in the 1959-64 Shop Manual and became really confused. Apparently those mounts are reversed (as yours are now) on six cylinders. They used the same picture (of the mounts on a six cylinder) in both the six & eight cylinder engine sections. In the Flightomatoc section, all pix are of a FOM behind a six cylinder. The only accurate picI found in the manual was on page 3, figure 2, in the ENGINE V8 section. After swapping those mounts around, all the above peculiarities disappeared. In your video, at the #2 second mark, the driveshaft mount is cock-eyed, shifted toward the rear. I am betting if the mounts are reversed, that mount will align itself as it should be.
I agree with Rich, probably not gonna get that tranny crossmember to clear the later FOM, but that is whole mother issue.

Just tryin to save you some grief

[53commander]

I am betting if the mounts are reversed, that mount will align itself as it should be.
I agree with Rich, probably not gonna get that tranny crossmember to clear the later FOM, but that is whole mother issue.

Just tryin to save you some grief

The mounts cannot be reversed as they hit the bell housing so the bolts don't line up. As StudeRich said it seems the crossmember is different.

[JoeHall]

I have no bout you will get all the bugs ironed out, and be tooling around in no time. Sometimes, there are a few challenges on swapping parts around on Studes, but overall, they are very versatile, as far as what is possible. I bet that 53 Is really gonna scat with the later, larger CId motor.