Interesting old Paxton (Studebaker) documents- warning, about 600KB

[53k]

JDP's thread about getting another Avanti and finding some old Avanti documents with it got me to looking in the folder I kept about '63 Avanti R-2307 (the car listed in a 1969 ad in John's car).
This must be one of the first FAQs- Paxton answering general questions about their superchargers-
page 1


page 2


Paxton applications and price list (the original owner had mailed Paxton for information about repairing or replacing the supercharger on his car)
page 1


page 2

[jlmccuan]

Interesting that Paxton felt 11:1 compression was suitable for supercharging. I've found similar results in other makes by utilizing increased cam overlap, but prevailing Studebaker authorities advise otherwise.

BTW, do you have these documents in a higher resolution or pdf format?

[PackardV8]

Interesting that Paxton felt 11:1 compression was suitable for supercharging.

Andy would tell any buyer with cash or good credit anything he wanted to hear. The idea that the Paxton would produce 10 pounds of boost on a full size V8 is a out-right lie and the fact it won't will be attested to by anyone who has ever owned one. His claims it will produce 66% more horsepower is another huge lie. The Studebaker R1 makes 240 horsepower and the R2 makes 290. That's the reality of a Paxton and that's 20.8% more horsepower. Of course, Andy sold STP and many people believed it was magic too.

jack vines

[N8N]

yes, "by the numbers" supercharging at 10 PSI would *theoretically* provide about 68% increase in power... assuming 100% VE and also *no* heating of the intake charge. We know that that doesn't happen in real life...

nate

[jlmccuan]

Good point, Jack. Lots of folks play fast and loose with numbers. In fact, 87.63% of statistics are made up on the spot. But 10 lbs of boost would yield approx 66% more gross HP, with 100% volumetric efficiency, before subtracting frictional losses, the HP required to drive the SC, etc, etc. So the info is largely correct. It just has a lot of "yeah buts" attached.

[PackardV8]

It just has a lot of "yeah buts" attached.

No buts. Andy was flat out lying. He didn't promise theoretical horsepower increases. He promised a 40 to 60% reduction in quarter-mile elapsed times. Never, ever in this world gonna happen. The good R1 does a quarter mile in 13.8 and the best R3s do the quarter mile in 12.6 seconds and that's an 8.7% decrease in quarter mile times.

Our best R1 turns a 98 MPH quarter mile and the best R2s were around 110 MPH. That's a 12.2% increase in horsepower.

That's the real world Paxton horsepower production.



jack vines

[StudeRich]

Well what about the fact that Studebakers most likely used the street supercharger, the better performance promised maybe is had with a better breathing brand X using the "Competition" Supercharger. Do we know what differences that entailed?

Remember they are promoting these for fire breathing Pontiacs, Chevies and Fords and all, not so much Studebakers.

[Bob Andrews]

Very cool, Jim, thanks for posting it!

[53k]

Interesting that Paxton felt 11:1 compression was suitable for supercharging. I've found similar results in other makes by utilizing increased cam overlap, but prevailing Studebaker authorities advise otherwise.

BTW, do you have these documents in a higher resolution or pdf format?

I can re-scan them in pdf or I can send them in 7.2mp jpg (about 2 MB each page). Send me a private message with your email address if you would like copies.

[PackardV8]

First, the bottom line - the Studebaker world would be dull indeed without the Paxton legacy and without Andy, Vince and Joe Granatelli. I'll try to just appreciate them for their accomplishments. I apologize for pointing out the patently overstated advertising claims. Those were different times and different standards were applied to supercharger advertising and to cigarette advertising.

Well what about the fact that Studebakers most likely used the street supercharger, the better performance promised maybe is had with a better breathing brand X using the "Competition" Supercharger. Do we know what differences that entailed?

Remember they are promoting these for fire breathing Pontiacs, Chevies and Fords and all, not so much Studebakers.

First, nowhere in the brochure does the copy say the promised 66% increase is for the competition model only or on BrandX only. Also, the brochure devotes an entire paragraph to using the standard production Paxtons used on Studebakers, the Avanti and the Bonneville records and accomplishments thereof as the bedrock of proof around which all the other claims are founded.

The brochure also clearly states the Standard supercharger only makes 5-6 pounds of boost. As to using the Standard supercharger on larger displacement, better breathing engines, boost pressure is the measure of how much work done by the supercharger didn't make it inside the engine at any given time. The larger displacement and freer breathing the engine, the less boost a Paxton can make. It was designed for a 239" flathead Ford. It is simply too small to provide much boost on larger OHV engines.

"The Competition models can produce up to a maximum of 8-12 pounds of boost, are sold without warranty,". There was a very good reason for there being no warranty. I know a guy who was a Paxton employee and Stude owner who in 1965 tried to race a GT Hawk at Bonneville using a Competition supercharger. He said that on the long course, he never saw above 10# of boost. To even get that much boost the belts had to be tightened with a turnbuckle to the point the ball drive unit and bearings had the life expectancy of a snowflake in August. Even with access to inside help and parts at cost, he couldn't afford to keep running it. Every wonder why more Competition units aren't seen today? The few Competition units which were sold usually died trying.

Again, love Paxton and Andy! The Studebaker fraternity owes them much.

jack vines

[Felix Benet]

Jack such cynacisism.....for shame!:-)

First, the bottom line - the Studebaker world would be dull indeed without the Paxton legacy and without Andy, Vince and Joe Granatelli. I'll try to just appreciate them for their accomplishments. I apologize for pointing out the patently overstated advertising claims. Those were different times and different standards were applied to supercharger advertising and to cigarette advertising.



First, nowhere in the brochure does the copy say the promised 66% increase is for the competition model only or on BrandX only. Also, the brochure devotes an entire paragraph to using the standard production Paxtons used on Studebakers, the Avanti and the Bonneville records and accomplishments thereof as the bedrock of proof around which all the other claims are founded.

The brochure also clearly states the Standard supercharger only makes 5-6 pounds of boost. As to using the Standard supercharger on larger displacement, better breathing engines, boost pressure is the measure of how much work done by the supercharger didn't make it inside the engine at any given time. The larger displacement and freer breathing the engine, the less boost a Paxton can make. It was designed for a 239" flathead Ford. It is simply too small to provide much boost on larger OHV engines.

"The Competition models can produce up to a maximum of 8-12 pounds of boost, are sold without warranty,". There was a very good reason for there being no warranty. I know a guy who was a Paxton employee and Stude owner who in 1965 tried to race a GT Hawk at Bonneville using a Competition supercharger. He said that on the long course, he never saw above 10# of boost. To even get that much boost the belts had to be tightened with a turnbuckle to the point the ball drive unit and bearings had the life expectancy of a snowflake in August. Even with access to inside help and parts at cost, he couldn't afford to keep running it. Every wonder why more Competition units aren't seen today? The few Competition units which were sold usually died trying.

Again, love Paxton and Andy! The Studebaker fraternity owes them much.

jack vines