PDA

View Full Version : R2 Avanti Production



jlmccuan
09-11-2008, 01:38 AM
Does anyone happen to have the production numbers for the Avanti in terms of R1 vs R2 cars?

Jim
http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x98/jlmccuan/Avanti/AvantiSignature.jpghttp://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x98/jlmccuan/Avanti/AvantiSigB.jpghttp://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x98/jlmccuan/Avanti/Logo/RabidSnailSignature.jpg
_________1966 Avanti II RQA 0088______________Rabid Snail Racing

Guido
09-11-2008, 06:26 AM
No, but if you are tracking them I have a late '64 R-2 with 4 speed. :D

http://thumb14.webshots.net/t/63/663/9/36/86/2567936860097493054TXiheL_th.jpgGuido Salvage - "Where rust is beautiful" and real Studebaker horsepower lives

See pictures here: http://community.webshots.com/user/GuidoSalvage

Hiding and preserving Studebakers in Richmond, Goochland & Louisa, Va.

Avantidon
09-11-2008, 07:43 AM
They are available and probably the best source is from Richard Quinn. I do have them but will not have time to look for them for the next 10 days or so due to Lancaster meet involvement.

Bob Langer
09-11-2008, 07:45 AM
From Turning Wheels articles by Fred Fox and the production figures courtesy of George Krem.

June,1992 for 1963 models.
R1 - 2,282
R2 - 1,552

October,1987 for 1964 models.
R1 - 519
R2 - 281
R3 - 9
R4 - 0






Bob Langer
Glenshaw,PA

http://i242.photobucket.com/albums/ff143/regnalbob/cropped-1.jpg

JBOYLE
09-11-2008, 11:01 AM
I didn't realize there were that many.
My quick math shows about 40% of 63s and 35% of 64s were R-2s.
Seems strange for a car to have that high of percentage of upgraded (and rather exotic with the supercharger) engines.

For fun it would be interesting to note the relative percentage of small vs big block (or higher hp versions...since I don't think the 427 "big blocks" didn't come out until '67) Corvettes of that period.

63 Avanti R1 2788
1914 Stutz Bearcat
(George Barris replica)

Washington State

wagone
09-11-2008, 12:20 PM
Big blocks were first available in Corvettes in the latter part of 1965 in 396 displacement--425 hp. Of the total of 23,564, 2157 were 396 c.i. In 1966 10,374 were 427 c.i. big blocks of both 390 and 425/450 hp version--about equally divided. In 1967 9707 427 c.i. Corvettes were sold. This figure includes in 1967 four versions of the 427 of which 20 were L88's (some 500 hp). In 1966 27,720 Corvettes were sold and in 1967 22,940. I've often wondered how many R2 Avantis were 4-speed. Are those numbers available? I recently did an INFORMAL survey of Avantis offered for sale in Turning Wheels and of some 150 (approximate) for sale over a number of years only about nine percent were 4-speed R2s. Of some 4600 then only about 450 were R2 4-speed.

wagone

JBOYLE
09-11-2008, 01:30 PM
Wagone
Going by your numbers, R-2 Avantis were a higher percentage of Avanti sales than the Big Blocks were of Corvette sales (at least in 1965-66...and probaly would have been in 67 if Corvette sales hadn't taken a dive from 28K to 23K).

So, perhaps the Avanti owners were more performance-oriented than Corvette owners?

63 Avanti R1 2788
1914 Stutz Bearcat
(George Barris replica)

Washington State

wagone
09-11-2008, 02:31 PM
Well, J Boyle............one shouldn't lose sight of the fact that Chevrolet built quite a number of high performance small blocks in those years as well. Small block Corvettes (327 c.i.) with 350, 365, and 375 hp advertised. It would be interesting to know the actual hp of the R2 and the three Corvette engines listed above. Elsewhere on this forum it has been stated that a stock R3 put 365 hp to the rear wheels. With transmission and final drive losses pegged at approximately 15 percent (4-speed; automatics will, of course, be somewhat higher) the flywheel net hp will be about 425. Pretty amazing for little old Studebaker in 1963. But an R2 is nothing like an R3. Granatelli did a lot for Studebaker performance-wise---too bad it didn't last. It has always seemed to me that with an updating to the core engineering of the Stude block molding a bore of at least 3 3/4 inches could have been easily obtained with the basic unchanged block casting. Who knows....maybe a four inch bore even. Oh, and by the way, those are not "my numbers"---they come from the National Corvette Restorers' Society--THE Corvette experts. And, if you want to add in the small block high performance numbers it is 24,464 for those three years--IF my addition is correct. This "high performance" is something over half of the three year production--something like 63 percent of total production (46,703 of 74,224 total---but my grade school math was learned MANY years ago :D:D:D:D).

wagone

studegary
09-11-2008, 02:53 PM
I don't know what the road test results were, but I owned a couple of R1 Avantis that I drove quite a bit as well as a 327 cubic inch/350 HP Corvette. I remember the Corvette as being noticeably quicker than the Avantis.

Gary L.
Wappinger, NY

SDC member since 1968
Studebaker enthusiast much longer

Gunslinger
09-11-2008, 03:03 PM
It really wouldn't be very surprising that a Corvette would be quicker. A contemporary base engine Corvette 327 was 250hp vs. 240hp R1 Avanti...add that to the Vette being somewhat lighter, a lighter engine, better front/rear weight distribution, independent suspension all the way around, I'd be surprised if the Vette wasn't quicker given equally capable drivers.


Poet...Mystic...Soldier of Fortune. As always...self-absorbed, adversarial, cocky and in general a malcontent.

MikeValent
09-11-2008, 04:21 PM
Just a note from someone who turned 21 in 1962, and bought an R2 (bought in summer '63, delivered as a 1964 in mid-fall).

The rap on the R1 was its relative lack of power when compared to the cars of its type and (high) price range. Look at the reviews on the McCullouch(sp?) historical site for comments on Stude's attempts to offset its smaller CID engine by supercharging as far back as 1957. And air conditioning in the early 1960's was still regarded as a luxury item even for a high-priced car.

I thought at the time that it was a pity the Avanti couldn't have used the small-block chevy engine. My brother had a small-block '62 Impala SS that would completely outperform my R2 at anything under 100mph. At any rate, I was one of the original buyers who had to make the choice between a/c and competitive performance and I chose to go with the blower. Without it the Avanti really was "a Lark in a gilded cage".


MikeV
Pompano Beach, FL
83 Avanti 377I

Guido
09-11-2008, 04:31 PM
Someone once told me they though there were on the order of 30 1964 R-2 Avanti's with 4 speed transmissions. However, with Bob reporting 281 R-2's built for the model year, that would equate 10.676% of production, which seems too low.



http://thumb14.webshots.net/t/63/663/9/36/86/2567936860097493054TXiheL_th.jpgGuido Salvage - "Where rust is beautiful" and real Studebaker horsepower lives

See pictures here: http://community.webshots.com/user/GuidoSalvage

Hiding and preserving Studebakers in Richmond, Goochland & Louisa, Va.

JBOYLE
09-11-2008, 04:53 PM
I'm not disputing the fact that the Vette would be faster and better handling, and certainly more of a sports car since the Avanti wasn't really designed as one.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that a heavy engine, frame, plus back seats would all weight and lower performance.

My comments were a reflection/surprise that Studebaker Avanti buyers weren't the "old foggys" most people think they were.
Thirty-five or forty percent of buyers going with the "hot" motor is a good number in anyone's book.

Especially for a non-sports car of the period.

63 Avanti R1 2788
1914 Stutz Bearcat
(George Barris replica)

Washington State

wagone
09-11-2008, 05:15 PM
Yes, the Avanti was lacking in acceleration compared to many Corvettes. The R2 was 200 pounds heavier than a 327 Corvette engine, was (the complete car) ten percent heavier than a Corvette, had all that weight (near 60 percent) over the front wheels, and lacked the i.r.s. All of which definitely hurt performance. Just about the only advantage the Avanti might have had was in aerodynamics. How truly stock it was (Granatelli was never one to shortchange himself as to an advantage, if at all possible) is subject to conjecture, but an R2 Avanti was clocked at 146 mph at Bonneville with FOUR people up. I would imagine that a Studebaker engine could be easily put together which would resemble an R2 but have mostly R3 internals. And some believe that an AFB can be sealed well enough to stand an R3's boost without an air box--so who knows. Granatelli stated in his book that an R2 Avanti was clocked at 159 mph at Bonneville--now I suspect that not many people are willing to believe that it was anywhere near stock. In any event Corvettes have (had, in the old days) the Cd of a brick--so top speed might well go to the Avanti--and possibly by a comfortable margin. Bottom line, though, as to acceleration, it certainly doesn't take a big block Corvette to beat an Avanti R2--and a solid lifter Corvette 327 (stock) could well embarass a stock R2 Avanti.

wagone

jlmccuan
09-11-2008, 06:39 PM
Thanks for the breakdown. That's the number 1 question I get. "How many did they make and how many had the SC" My guess was only off by couple hundred.


Jim
http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x98/jlmccuan/Avanti/AvantiSignature.jpghttp://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x98/jlmccuan/Avanti/AvantiSigB.jpghttp://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x98/jlmccuan/Avanti/Logo/RabidSnailSignature.jpg
_________1966 Avanti II RQA 0088______________Rabid Snail Racing

nels
09-11-2008, 07:30 PM
I guess I might as well chime in with a couple comments: I've been driving Studes a long time and many have been R1 and R2 cars. I'm old enough to remember the "old days" so to speak. The Corvette engine was pretty simple and straight forward and not much to go wrong. The ones that had been flogged seem to run better than the pristine adult owned variety. The Avantis fell into a similar catagory as far as looseness in the engine is concerned. The flogged cars, and there were VERY few of them, ran better than the pristine versions. The average Avanti R2 had a very big draw back with the blower. I believe from experience, most of the cars off the assembly line were lucky to see 3 lbs of boost. The production blowers were quickly assembled and to get 6 lbs of boost would have taken an extra half hour per unit to produce and time is money. They were supposed to have and were rated at 6 lbs of boost. Doubling the pressure makes a big diffrerence.
As for the Bonneville cars, they were stock engines. I'm sure they were the best of the best they had and were precisely tuned, but that is what one would expect. The R3 cars at Bonneville didn't even use the high output blower drives, just the conventional cast iron drive system. I know this to be a fact as I own several.
As for the hot Corvettes, I owned a 67 427 435 roadster and drove it for some time. It was very torquey so to speek, it seemed fast but not quick. It sort of reminded me of a high performance truck, I don't know how else to describe it. The other Corvette I owned was a 70 LS5 coupe with an automatic. It was the poorest excuse for a sports car I have ever driven. My old R1 Hawk, I know, would kill it in a zero to 100 race. I will say my Hawk was very well flogged and the Corvette probably never saw 100 mph in its life.

PackardV8
09-11-2008, 09:37 PM
FWIW, the R3 335hp rating was SAE flywheel horsepower, not rear wheel horsepower. The 1/4-mile times turned by Ted Harbit in the PBW when run through the formulas converting and ET to horsepower pretty much come out to be dead on the 335hp claimed by Studebaker. That Studebaker was more accurate in their horsepower ratings than the muscle cars against which they were competing should be enough for us. If there is a reputable source to the contrary, please share it.

thnx, jack vines

PackardV8