Other: 1957 Studebaker Shop manual

[Lynn]

Am I correct in assuming there is no 1957 Shop Manual?

All I can find as the 1956 Manual, with the 1957 Supplement.

Is that going to have all the info I need for a 1957 Golden Hawk engine and trans?

Thanks in advance.

[StudeRich]

The TWO of them will have helpful info but for installation sequence, Photos and correct PARTS the Chassis and Body Parts CATALOGS are even better.
I prefer to buy all 3, the whole works on CD ROM Disc. and print needed Pages, get em dirty and throw them away.

Studebaker Vendors are a better source for the RIGHT stuff than Book Sellers.

http://studebakervendors.com

[Buzzard]

Hi Lynn,
I have the 55-58 Studebaker and 57-58 Packard (Same book) Chassis Parts Catalog (and although not applicable to you) the 1957 Packard Clipper Supplement for my '57 Clipper
Wagon. I also have the 1956-1957 Studebaker Passenger Car Shop Manual and 53-58 Studebaker and 57-58 Packard Body Parts Catalog dated April 1958. These seem to be very comprehensive and probably all you need.
Bill
PS: They worked for restoring my '57 Clipper wagon.

[acolds]

If you want to look or copy the 1956 Studebaker shop manual and 1957 Packard Clipper supplement which covers the transmission and supercharged engine detail changes they are on Packardinfo along with the parts book. Keep I eye on Ebay you can find good price if you wait just beware of shipping charges

[Lynn]

Thanks.
Here is what I have going on. I already own a 53 Hardtop. It has the 232 with auto trans. I have the 1953 shop manual. car is rough, but all there. Engine runs, but leaks oil. Trans works but leaks even MORE fluid. Very messy. Really struggled with whether to rebuild that combo, but didn't like the idea of an under powered car.
I just bought a very rough, but running 57 Packard four door sedan. It has a good running complete supercharged 289 with the HD auto trans.
The car moves under its own power, but I don't think the trans has been tested at anything over lot driving it. I have a friend that has had a trans shop for 40 plus years that can rebuild the trans for me.
I plan to use the 57 engine and trans in the 53. I know I will need to modify the hood. Really like the idea of a 53 with Golden Hawk drive train.
I have been told that the 57 brakes (should be the same as a Golden Hawk) will retrofit on my 53. I believe the 57 brakes to be superior, and like the idea of all Studebaker parts.
Properly working drum brakes work just fine on a street car.
Other possible swap parts would be the rear axle (don't yet know if it is TT) and sway bars.
After I am done cannibalizing the 57, I will sell the body as a parts car. I really don't want to part it out. Just takes too much time.
Also plan to sell the complete 232 (and the auto trans if anyone wants it). It doesn't even smoke much, and idles very smoothly.

Figured I should get the 57 shop manual for the engine and trans.

I bought this on ebay: https://www.ebay.com/itm/Studebaker-...53.m2749.l2649

and this from Studebaker vendors: http://www.classicmanuals.net/CDpopup.php?item=cd05

If it doesn't serve the purpose for whatever reason, I can always pick up the books.

Lynn

Car will be here Thursday (on my birthday!). Really looking forward to this project. Have to go pick up my Opel GT engine parts and get that car back together before starting on the 53.

[BobPalma]

Am I correct in assuming there is no 1957 Shop Manual? YES

All I can find as the 1956 Manual, with the 1957 Supplement. That's all there is.

Is that going to have all the info I need for a 1957 Golden Hawk engine and trans? YES

Thanks in advance.

That should answer your original questions, Lynn. BP

[studegary]

Thanks.
Here is what I have going on. I already own a 53 Hardtop. It has the 232 with auto trans. I have the 1953 shop manual. car is rough, but all there. Engine runs, but leaks oil. Trans works but leaks even MORE fluid. Very messy. Really struggled with whether to rebuild that combo, but didn't like the idea of an under powered car.
I just bought a very rough, but running 57 Packard four door sedan. It has a good running complete supercharged 289 with the HD auto trans.
The car moves under its own power, but I don't think the trans has been tested at anything over lot driving it. I have a friend that has had a trans shop for 40 plus years that can rebuild the trans for me.
I plan to use the 57 engine and trans in the 53. I know I will need to modify the hood. Really like the idea of a 53 with Golden Hawk drive train.
I have been told that the 57 brakes (should be the same as a Golden Hawk) will retrofit on my 53. I believe the 57 brakes to be superior, and like the idea of all Studebaker parts.
Properly working drum brakes work just fine on a street car.
Other possible swap parts would be the rear axle (don't yet know if it is TT) and sway bars.
After I am done cannibalizing the 57, I will sell the body as a parts car. I really don't want to part it out. Just takes too much time.
Also plan to sell the complete 232 (and the auto trans if anyone wants it). It doesn't even smoke much, and idles very smoothly.

Figured I should get the 57 shop manual for the engine and trans.

I bought this on ebay: https://www.ebay.com/itm/Studebaker-...53.m2749.l2649

If it doesn't serve the purpose for whatever reason, I can always pick up the books.

Lynn

Car will be here Thursday (on my birthday!). Really looking forward to this project. Have to go pick up my Opel GT engine parts and get that car back together before starting on the 53.

I have owned several 1953 Commander Starliners. I put a 1957 Golden Hawk supercharged engine (same as 1957 Packard) in one. I have also installed complete drum brake systems from later V8 Studebakers and found them to be fine for normal usage.

[Mike Sal]

Just remember that the 53 has a different style transmission than the one in the '58. Don't lose any linkages when swapping the motors.
Mike Sal

[Lynn]

Thanks for all the info. That is why I got the whole Packard, just in case there were little parts here and there that I need. I will also have the drive shaft. That is one reason I wanted the shop manuals for both cars. I will have the luxury of having the cars sit side by side while I do the swap.
The 53 is a DG-200 I believe. The 57 is a Flight-O-Matic, correct? I was told by a very knowledgable member of this site, that the 57 trans is beefier with wider bands.

Two more questions:
1. Does the 57 tranny start out in 2nd gear by default?
2. If so, can it be modified when rebuilt to start in first without too much hassle?

[rockne10]

... the 57 trans is beefier ...

That is misinformation, but is irrelevant to your project. The DG200 is about as "beefy" as a transmission gets.

[RadioRoy]

You should also buy and read the chassis parts catalogs for both cars, so you can see the differences. The body parts catalogs are a good idea also. The money you spend on the parts catalogs will pay you back many times over by not making mistakes and/or buying the wrong parts.

- - - Updated - - -

Thanks for all the info. That is why I got the whole Packard, just in case there were little parts here and there that I need. I will also have the drive shaft. That is one reason I wanted the shop manuals for both cars. I will have the luxury of having the cars sit side by side while I do the swap.
The 53 is a DG-200 I believe. The 57 is a Flight-O-Matic, correct? I was told by a very knowledgable member of this site, that the 57 trans is beefier with wider bands.

Two more questions:
1. Does the 57 tranny start out in 2nd gear by default?
2. If so, can it be modified when rebuilt to start in first without too much hassle?

Yes and yes.

[bezhawk]

A band is weaker than a clutch pack in auto transmissions. Although the Detroit Gear trans is a good one, it is no match for a good FOM The Detroit Gear has three bands, whereas the FOM has two with the added clutch pack taking the better part of the shifting torque. Not only was the production cost less, it WAS more durable. Yes, it can be modified to start out in low (the FOM) and requires a different valve body and perferabley also a governor.
Since the drivetrain is already a matched unit it surely makes much more sense to keep the FOM matched to the engine going into the car. That way you don't need to dial indicate the bellhousing to the new engine. It has already been done at the factory. Also it being a short tailshaft FOM the driveshaft may already fit without modifiction. (I'm not certain of the length differences between the DG200 and the short FOM).

[Lynn]

Definitely using the FOM that is matched to the supercharged engine. I am guessing that, since both cars have the same wheelbase, if I use the FOM, I can probably use the driveshaft from the Packard. Even if I can't, there is a great driveshaft shop in town. I had one shortened and then rebalanced two years ago, and it was only $60.

Roy: I already have a hard copy of the 53 Parts Catalogue, and the CD I bought from the Studebaker vendors site has the parts catalogue for the 57. I edited that post. I was thinking the link from ebay was the CD, not just an owners manual.

Thanks for all your help guys. I will start a build thread when I start on this one. I am sure I will have plenty of questions.

Lynn

[Lynn]

Car was delivered today. I was shocked to see how complete the car is. Interior is shot but the body is all there; surface rust on the hood and top, and a couple rust holes, but mostly solid. Have not inspected underneath, but I was expecting a much rougher car. My buddy who is storing it for me until I can start the project is really bumed that I am cannibalizing this car. "Man, it is a complete running 57 supercharged Packard. How can you steal all the good parts from it?"
Four door 57 Packard Clipper just does not appeal to me. I will be sure to find a good home for the body as a parts car.

[jackb]

I have (or did have) a 57' Supplement that was a thin book with a pic of a GH on the cover. From South Bend 17 ?