Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: frame thickness

  1. #1
    Champion Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Oakbank Manitoba
    Posts
    4

    Smile frame thickness

    Hi there first post for me . I would like to know if there is a different size thickness in frame of a 61 or 62 hawk and how much work to install in a 53/2dr.ht. ? Thanks in advance Rick.

  2. #2
    Golden Hawk Member StudeRich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Ferndale, WA, USA.
    Posts
    28,779
    Hello Richard, welcome to the SDC and to the SDC Forum!

    It may take you a while to learn to navigate all the neat options on the SDC Website and on the Forum, but you will enjoy "hanging out" here.
    One of these is the Search Engine up in the upper Right corner, there have been several recent posts from Members doing exactly that!

    Yes from a 53 "K" Body to a '62 "K" body is the best option.
    Starting in 1962 the Frames were 11 Ga. so it would be best to use the '62 for the "Hardtop" Frame as well as the 11 Gauge Frame Rails.

    Of course ANY Body off of the Frame job is not for the light of heart.

    UPDATED 08/10/17
    Last edited by StudeRich; 08-10-2017 at 03:03 PM.
    StudeRich
    Second Generation Stude Driver,
    Proud '54 Starliner Owner




  3. #3
    President Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Chatsworth, CA, USA.
    Posts
    1,459
    Rich, OP wants to install a 61 or 62 frame under a '53.
    Howard - Los Angeles chapter SDC
    '53 Commander Starliner (Finally running and driving, but still in process)
    '56 Golden Hawk (3 speed/overdrive - Running, but not yet driving)

  4. #4
    President Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    3,675
    Howard, That is what I am doing right now. Putting a 62 GT Hawk frame under a 53K body. The 62 frame is .110" and the 53 frame was .074". It is pretty straight forward, but he will have to change to later torque boxes and a 1 piece drive shaft. The torque boxes are probably shot from that wet and cold north anyway.

  5. #5
    Speedster Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Endicott, NY, USA.
    Posts
    388
    re: 61 frame under a 53.
    You'll need some mounting hardware under the A post to connect to the bat wing that was not on a 53.
    Will there be problems with the one piece drive shaft being close to the floor?
    Are the rear bumper bolt bracket holes in the frame in the same place on both frames?
    Bill

  6. #6
    Golden Hawk Member StudeRich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Ferndale, WA, USA.
    Posts
    28,779
    Quote Originally Posted by brngarage View Post
    Rich, OP wants to install a 61 or 62 frame under a '53.
    Right Howard, I got all tangled up in that '61-'62 statement and ignored the '53 part, Duh!

    I'll try to fix it, thanks.

  7. #7
    Silver Hawk Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Spokane, WA, USA.
    Posts
    8,272
    JMHO, but I don't like the one-piece late driveshaft in the early tunnel. Since the OP will have the center bearing support bracket from his '53 frame, why not install it in the '62 frame?

    jack vines
    PackardV8

  8. #8
    Champion Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Oakbank Manitoba
    Posts
    4
    So Thank you all for the Warm welcome I look forward to many more forum request and input in the future. So what I`m looking for is a little information between a 61 and 62 hawk frame to fit under a 53 ht. I would like know if there is a thickness difference between the two 61/62 also is there a difference in suspension and brakes between the two? Also which one you would recommend for this project ? The drive train I have selected 5.3 700r4 with a 8.8 diff. and so I think the stock frame for the 53 would be a little weak and I have a line on a 61 hawk frame or possibly a 62. Which one would you suggest the better of the two? Richard

  9. #9
    Golden Hawk Member StudeRich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Ferndale, WA, USA.
    Posts
    28,779
    Post Number 2 answers that completely.

    That 8.8 Diff. is no better than the Dana 44 that would be in the '62 Hawk, and it may have Twin Traction.
    Moser Flanged Axles are available for the 44.
    Modifying the track is lot of work and expensive.

    All Suspension and Brakes for the most part from 1954 to 1966 is the same, with finned drums on '56 to '66 289 & 283 Cars.

  10. #10
    Champion Member retrostude's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    lake Stevens, WA
    Posts
    9
    [QUOTE=StudeRich;1068714]Post Number 2 answers that completely.

    That 8.8 Diff. is no better than the Dana 44 that would be in the '62 Hawk, and it may have Twin Traction.
    Moser Flanged Axles are available for the 44.
    Modifying the track is lot of work and expensive.

    All Suspension and Brakes for the most part from 1954 to 1966 is the same, with finned drums on '56 to '66 289 & 283 Cars.[/QUOTE

    Hi Richard... Rear leafs ARE different. The GT Hawk leaf is shorter in front of the axle than on a 54, the front mount moved back. Just finishing up a modified 62 chassis for my 54.

    Also note that a 95-01 Explorer 8.8 rear axle (3.73 is most common) is a posi, and comes with 11 inch discs. I'd agree that a flanged axle posi Dana 44 is probably as good, and I'd use one on a stock resto, but I priced out the rebuild/axle upgrade/brake upgrade and went with an 8.8. Plus it narrows easily. Left axle insert is just under 3" shorter than right, so shorten the left housing and install 2 rights. You do have to change the spring pad locations whether using as is or narrowing. Also the Explorer rear sway bar is stout, and I think fairly easy to incorporate.

    I wound up going with tri bar 4 link suspension with coilovers but dropping an 8.8 onto leafs is an easy mod. I could have saved months. Yes I'm sticking with Stude power.


    -John Deprey

  11. #11
    Speedster Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    waukesha, wisconsin, USA.
    Posts
    419
    [QUOTE=retrostude;1137965]
    Quote Originally Posted by StudeRich View Post
    Post Number 2 answers that completely.

    That 8.8 Diff. is no better than the Dana 44 that would be in the '62 Hawk, and it may have Twin Traction.
    Moser Flanged Axles are available for the 44.
    Modifying the track is lot of work and expensive.

    All Suspension and Brakes for the most part from 1954 to 1966 is the same, with finned drums on '56 to '66 289 & 283 Cars.[/QUOTE

    Hi Richard... Rear leafs ARE different. The GT Hawk leaf is shorter in front of the axle than on a 54, the front mount moved back. Just finishing up a modified 62 chassis for my 54.

    Also note that a 95-01 Explorer 8.8 rear axle (3.73 is most common) is a posi, and comes with 11 inch discs. I'd agree that a flanged axle posi Dana 44 is probably as good, and I'd use one on a stock resto, but I priced out the rebuild/axle upgrade/brake upgrade and went with an 8.8. Plus it narrows easily. Left axle insert is just under 3" shorter than right, so shorten the left housing and install 2 rights. You do have to change the spring pad locations whether using as is or narrowing. Also the Explorer rear sway bar is stout, and I think fairly easy to incorporate.

    I wound up going with tri bar 4 link suspension with coilovers but dropping an 8.8 onto leafs is an easy mod. I could have saved months. Yes I'm sticking with Stude power.


    -John Deprey
    The Stude Dana 44 has the pinion offset 1" to the right of the axle centerline. Your 8.8 should be built the same. By the way, the Ford 8.8 is a near copy of the GM 12 bolt. The 8.8 ring gear is bigger and the assembly stronger than a 8.5" Dana 44. The Dana is still a good axle assembly especially the later Avanti II units with 30 spline axles and 2.750 tubes.
    james r pepper

  12. #12
    Silver Hawk Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Spokane, WA, USA.
    Posts
    8,272
    FWIW, I've never broken a Dana 44 housing or gearset behind a Stude V8. There are one or two here who have, but only after subjecting those sixty-year-old parts to hundreds of full-throttle drag strip starts.

    But yes, flanged axles should be included in the price of upgrading the Dana 44 versus swapping in the Ford 8.8.

    And yes, it's nice to get the rear disc brakes for free, but I'd never be able to cost-justify adding them to a Dana 44. The rear wheels of an Avanti are barely still touching the pavement on a full hard stop. The last thing it needs is more rear brake. On a C/K, the rear wheels carry a bit more weight, but again rear discs aren't really required.

    jack vines
    PackardV8

  13. #13
    President Member bensherb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Tracy / Goleta Ca.
    Posts
    1,017
    Quote Originally Posted by PackardV8 View Post

    And yes, it's nice to get the rear disc brakes for free, but I'd never be able to cost-justify adding them to a Dana 44. The rear wheels of an Avanti are barely still touching the pavement on a full hard stop. The last thing it needs is more rear brake. On a C/K, the rear wheels carry a bit more weight, but again rear discs aren't really required.

    jack vines
    Adding rear disk brakes to a Dana 44 is super easy and cheap. It'll just cost the price of a piece of 3/8" steel plate and a couple Mustang calipers, rotors and hoses; $75 at a wrecker, (get all the bolts and lug bolts too while you're at it). It will also cost a little of your time, drilling holes in the plate and bolting it all together.

    Mustang disk brake pads are 1/8th the cost of Stude brake shoes. The difference pays for the Mustang parts. It still costs your time; not needing to adjust brake shoes every few hundred miles more than pays for that.
    Last edited by bensherb; 12-10-2018 at 02:52 PM.

  14. #14
    President Member SScopelli's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,432
    Quote Originally Posted by bensherb View Post
    Adding rear disk brakes to a Dana 44 is super easy and cheap. It'll just cost the price of a piece of 3/8" steel plate and a couple Mustang calipers, rotors and hoses; $75 at a wrecker, (get all the bolts and lug bolts too while you're at it). It will also cost a little of your time, drilling holes in the plate and bolting it all together.

    Mustang disk brake pads are 1/8th the cost of Stude brake shoes. The difference pays for the Mustang parts. It still costs your time; not needing to adjust brake shoes every few hundred miles more than pays for that.

    A thread on using the 04 mustang brakes on the Dana tapered axles..

    http://forum.studebakerdriversclub.c...ake-Conversion

  15. #15
    President Member bensherb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Tracy / Goleta Ca.
    Posts
    1,017
    Quote Originally Posted by SScopelli View Post
    A thread on using the 04 mustang brakes on the Dana tapered axles..

    http://forum.studebakerdriversclub.c...ake-Conversion
    I did pretty much the same thing but didn't use the stock Mustang housing mount. I just made my own from a 3/8" plate.

  16. #16
    Champion Member retrostude's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    lake Stevens, WA
    Posts
    9
    While perusing the big '53/54 book the other night I found a statement that the frames were thickened to .090" in 1958, and .119" in '62. So the '61 would also be thinner than the '62. However the '61 frame may be much more similar to the '53s, might be easy to use. When did the rear leaf location shift rearward, was that 62?


    Quote Originally Posted by Crusty Rusty View Post
    Hi there first post for me . I would like to know if there is a different size thickness in frame of a 61 or 62 hawk and how much work to install in a 53/2dr.ht. ? Thanks in advance Rick.

  17. #17
    President Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    3,675
    It was in 58.

  18. #18
    President Member swvalcon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    princeton mn
    Posts
    3,062
    The 62-64 frames are thicker but all depends on what you plan to do with the car. I would think just normal driving any of the frames would work with a 5.3. it's lighted to start with. Now if you are the kind of guy that always has your foot in it because you can I wouldn't use any of them without some beefing up or a aftermarket frame.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •