65-66 engines and period speed equipment

[Scott]

We all love things about the Studebaker engines and most of us (I think) like to see them dressed up occasionally. So why do we see so little done with the 283s? I never see a vintage set up with dual carbs, or fuel injection (if it worked on a late 50s Chevy wouldn't it work on a later 283?) or anything. I've seen a lot of crate motors thrown in, of course, but I just don't understand why the 65-66 engines are always, always treated like they don't even exist. With all the possibilities borrowed from GM, why is this? Anyone have interesting pictures? You mean in 1966 nobody did anything like guys were doing a few years earlier with GM cars with 283s?

OK. I feel better now.

[StudeRich]

No, I guess they were considered Grandma's grocery getter plain-O Sedans! No need to go any faster.

Only one semi-sporty Model, no 4 Speeds, no Factory Superchargers, not even a Hardtop!

It would have been so easy for someone to put in a 300 HP 327 and 4 Speed

[clonelark]

283s can be made to run just like the 289, but it is so easy to swap for more Cubic inches. Swap a good set of heads, good cam, a Victor intake and a set of headers, some low gears, and some tires to stick to the pavement. You could easily be in the 13s.

[JRoberts]

My Cruiser has its original 283. We have warmed it up a bit with a 4bbl carb on a period correct Chevy intake. It has been bored .30 over and has a mild cam and tubular headers. I have no idea what kind of horsepower it puts out but it cruises the interstate at 75 mph with plenty of power left. It isn't going to blister a quarter mile, but that is not what it is used for. I also am running Porter Mufflers which make it sound great as well. The idea of 3 deuces is constantly in the back of my mind, but it time now to look at the body work that needs to be done. By-the-way, I drove it from southeast North Carolina to Dover and back without a hitch.

[Flashback]

WHY? Because they ain't no challange. You can buy any an everything for them from the corner grocery store. And they jus ain't Stude.

[rkapteyn]

That is why they were called "belly button" motors.
Everybody has one.

[DEEPNHOCK]

(opinion)

Shame on you guys....
It is a Studebaker engine. Sold by Studebaker, installed by Studebaker, warrantied by Studebaker.
Studebaker bought a lot of products from a lot of vendors.
Budd, Dana, Borg Warner, etc.
Those companies sold a lot of parts to other manufacturers.
Studebaker did not sell their cars as "the exciting new 1965 Studebaker Cruiser with the Dana differential!"
They sold it as a 1965 Studebaker....period.
Your Studebigotry is not becoming to our hobby.
You are as bad as the Avanti types that dismiss all '65 and up Avanti's as 'Non Studebaker'.

This attitude is not going to help our hobby, nor will it help our club...
Nor will it help you, except amongst that narrow vision slice of the humanity.
Rant over.....
Let's have fun with our hobby, and not segregate it.

[2R5]

(opinion)

Shame on you guys....
It is a Studebaker engine. Sold by Studebaker, installed by Studebaker, warrantied by Studebaker.
Studebaker bought a lot of products from a lot of vendors.
Budd, Dana, Borg Warner, etc.
Those companies sold a lot of parts to other manufacturers.
Studebaker did not sell their cars as "the exciting new 1965 Studebaker Cruiser with the Dana differential!"
They sold it as a 1965 Studebaker....period.
Your Studebigotry is not becoming to our hobby.
You are as bad as the Avanti types that dismiss all '65 and up Avanti's as 'Non Studebaker'.

This attitude is not going to help our hobby, nor will it help our club...
Nor will it help you, except amongst that narrow vision slice of the humanity.
Rant over.....
Let's have fun with our hobby, and not segregate it.

Well put Jeff ....by the way my '66s built sheet says its engine came from Strudebaker , the serial number verifys that

[SN-60]

There's no doubt old time Studebaker employees shed many tears when a brand 'X' engine had to be obtained and installed into a Studebaker frame....but under the circumstances, what other choice did they have? Stop building the cars completely? I've always liked the 283, it's a very reliable engine.

[jpepper]

The 283 in 65/66 Studebakers is not a standard pedestrian engine. All mundane chevy passenger car 2bbl 283's used cast cranks, small rods, and small valved heads. The McKinnon engines used forged cranks, the better 327 rods, 4V heads, and HD timing set. It was basically a HD truck engine. It shared a few parts like the crank and rods with the 58 -61 Corvette engine. I never measured the cylinder wall thickness on one of these but earlier HD blocks could be bored .125" making it 301 CI. It was called a 302 in the Z-28 when GM dropped a 283 crank in a 327 block. I have always had a desire to put a period correct 327 in a 66 sedan with a 4-speed. Add in HD suspension, traction bars, disc brakes, a tach, and Avanti powered fender emblems and you would have a Superlark. This could have been done in 1966.

Jim

[DEEPNHOCK]

Not to sound like a dissenter...
But would you (or anyone else) please provide any, and all, evidence that the Chevrolet McKinnon Foundry supplied (to Studebaker) engine has any upgrades over any other Chevrolet engine.
Several here have checked the casting numbers, and there was nothing found to elevate the Studebaker supplied engine over the run of the mill Chevrolet engine.
Many here would love to hear about factual information to prove the engine to be more than a stock 'off the shelf' Chevrolet offering.

The 283 in 65/66 Studebakers is not a standard pedestrian engine. All mundane chevy passenger car 2bbl 283's used cast cranks, small rods, and small valved heads. The McKinnon engines used forged cranks, the better 327 rods, 4V heads, and HD timing set. It was basically a HD truck engine. It shared a few parts like the crank and rods with the 58 -61 Corvette engine. I never measured the cylinder wall thickness on one of these but earlier HD blocks could be bored .125" making it 301 CI. It was called a 302 in the Z-28 when GM dropped a 283 crank in a 327 block. I have always had a desire to put a period correct 327 in a 66 sedan with a 4-speed. Add in HD suspension, traction bars, disc brakes, a tach, and Avanti powered fender emblems and you would have a Superlark. This could have been done in 1966.

Jim

[Scott]

I know the 283 may not be as interesting as the Studebaker engines (not even to me), but I'm just disappointed that given all the interesting things people used to do to GM cars with 283s hardly anyone ever thought of doing the same to one in a Studebaker. My father has had several 1957 Chevrolets with fuel injection and I've kidded with him, "why not put that in my Studebaker?" Even though the FI was crude by today's standards, you have to admit it would get attention opening the hood of a 66 Daytona and seeing that!!

Grandma's car. Yeah, probably. All the more reason...

[Studeous]

This is a very interesting topic to me. I've herd industrial motor and heavier rods (Weight is the enemy or heavy duty?). This is the first time I've heard Steel crank and different valves. I hope so, because I have a 65 sitting on a stand. I think a period a correct 4 barrel and intake or go a little further with an Orange whirrly thing would be BOSS!

[studegary]

(opinion)

Shame on you guys....
It is a Studebaker engine. Sold by Studebaker, installed by Studebaker, warrantied by Studebaker.
Studebaker bought a lot of products from a lot of vendors.
Budd, Dana, Borg Warner, etc.
Those companies sold a lot of parts to other manufacturers.
Studebaker did not sell their cars as "the exciting new 1965 Studebaker Cruiser with the Dana differential!"
They sold it as a 1965 Studebaker....period.
Your Studebigotry is not becoming to our hobby.
You are as bad as the Avanti types that dismiss all '65 and up Avanti's as 'Non Studebaker'.

This attitude is not going to help our hobby, nor will it help our club...
Nor will it help you, except amongst that narrow vision slice of the humanity.
Rant over.....
Let's have fun with our hobby, and not segregate it.

In general, I agree with you.
When sold new in a Studebaker, the GM produced engine is by definition a Studebaker engine (no matter where it was sourced from) just like the Studebaker engine in a 1956 Golden Hawk that was sourced from Packard.

I often use the post-Studebaker term when referring to later Avantis. To me, it is not meant to be negative, just a way to distinguish those that are not 1963-1964 models. How else can they be characterized? Avanti II only applies to 1965 to mid-1983 model Avantis.
I have owned both Studebaker and post Studebaker Avantis.
I just noticed that you used the term "Non Studebaker" rather than post Studebaker. I guess that there is a difference in connotation there.

[SN-60]

This is a very interesting topic to me. I've herd industrial motor and heavier rods (Weight is the enemy or heavy duty?). This is the first time I've heard Steel crank and different valves. I hope so, because I have a 65 sitting on a stand. I think a period a correct 4 barrel and intake or go a little further with an Orange whirrly thing would be BOSS!

Here's a 'Polished Whirly Thing' on a genuine 283CI Chevy!