Paxton Division of Studbaker Corp.

[JRoberts]

I found this ad on the H.A.M.B. Maybe it should have been in the Stove Huggers, but it is Studebaker related.

[Roscomacaw]

I think it belongs here, Joe! Having owned a '62 coupe for a time, I'd love to drive one with a Paxton on it. Wonder if there's any of these setups still around today? Wonder how they compared to the factory turbo setup?

[jlmccuan]

Isn't that the setup that used a belt that twisted a half turn to reverse the rotation so they could use the normal Paxton direction? As much trouble as we have with SC belts, I can't imagine it would be a good thing.

[BobPalma]

62% added horses? Wow! I hope the owners didn't exercise that option too frequently, or....

'Reminds me of an item in Hot Rod magazine's Q&A Tech Column decades ago.

Some guy wrote in and asked if the Tech Editor thought he could build his 312 Ford to wind up to 7,000 RPM.

The Tech Editor's answer? "Yep; once!"

'Pretty funny, I thought. BP

[PackardV8]

Andy Granatelli never met a superperlative he didn't love. Fortunately, he was able to back up most of them at Bonneville and Indianapolis.

The performance claims for Paxton-boosted horsepower increases unfortunately wasn't one of them. The Studebaker R1 had 240 horsepower. The Paxton-blown R2 had 289 horsepower. That's a 20% increase and that's real world of what a Paxton would do on a typical otherwise stock engine.

Your opinions and results may vary.

jack vines

[sals54]

Jack,
True on the Stude engine, but what about a Stude that had the flow capacity of Ch*vy's Power Pack heads??? I wonder if the additional breathing may have helped increase the output of the Paxton? Better breathing, faster rpm climb, higher rpm, more power? I know there's a limitation on the Paxton itself, but perhaps the Stude's limitations were simply manifested by the addition of the Paxton? How much power would a cammed Ch*vy 283 make with Power Pack heads and a Paxton??? Anyone wanna put one on a 65 Daytona and find out?? Again, just surmising out loud.

[studegary]

I think that 30-33 per cent HP increase is all that could be expected from any stock engine with the addition of a belt driven supercharger.

[PackardV8]

As Sal suggests, engines which breathe better benefit more from superchargers, but I can't remember any engine on which a Paxton produced a true 62% power increase.

The R3's 335hp minus say 15 horsepower for the extra cubic inches is a 33% increase over the R1 because the better breathing ports, valves and camshaft. (pretty much what Gary suggested.)

Because the Paxton was designed back in the 1940s, it has a relatively limited ability to produce boost at higher volumes of air. It is at its best on sub-300" engines.

For example, a Paxton would produce a higher percentage horsepower increase on a 224" than on the 304.5" with the same heads.

The ad posted earlier specifically referenced the Corvair, which was one of the most intake-flow-limited of any post-'49 engine design. If an engine has a restricted intake ability, past the choke point, a supercharger just raises boost pressure. In reality, boost pressure is a measure of work done without producing horsepower. It just raises the heat and an intercooler becomes necessary.

Turbocharged Indy engines breathe really well and consequently still made a lot of horsepower when limited to relatively low boost.

jack vines

[sals54]

Good call on the Indy car comparo, Jack. I just looked up the Indy car specs for turbo engines. 134 cu inches making 500 HP at a measly 12,000 RPMs. And lets realize that's in a 1500 lb car. But I'll bet I could get my 259 to spin that fast... well, if I could get a mechanical clutch to affix it to the turbine of jet engine, that is.

[SN-60]

The factory prototype Paxton supercharger for the Corvair had reversed rotation..... via a 'mirror image' scroll housing, different impeller, and possibly.. changes to the internal oil pump. (A rare item indeed!!)

[jlmccuan]

I made a long post concerning the basics of boosted airflows and the cfm limits of the SN scroll case, but it went off to nowhere. So I'll boil it down. Put a blowoff valve into your intake system. Set it at 1 psi. Then set it at 5 psi. I guarantee you will have increased performance at 5psi. The boost equals work not done is simplistic and misleading. Anytime the is a greater pressure differential there will be an increase in flow. Now, it is a diminishing returns equation. And certainly as the supercharger reaches it's cfm limit it takes more and more HP and inputs more heat.

As to belt driven superchargers, I think the stock beltdriven engines in several modern supercharged cars are capable of more than 33% increase in HP. Many diesel engines, for example, running Roots style blowers and derivatives. The Bonneville SSEi and Eaton equipped little Ford V8's come to mind.

[63t-cab]

WOW,if Ralph got wind of this " REALLY REALLY un-safe at any speed "

I found this ad on the H.A.M.B. Maybe it should have been in the Stove Huggers, but it is Studebaker related.

[PackardV8]

As to belt driven superchargers, I think the stock beltdriven engines in several modern supercharged cars are capable of more than 33% increase in HP. . . The Bonneville SSEi . . . come to mind.

The GM Series 1 L27 3.8 NA is rated at 170hp and the L67 supercharged at 205 and later 225 hp, a 21% and 33% increase respectively

The Gen II NA was 205 hp and the supercharged Bonneville SSEi at 270 hp, a 32% increase in HP.

jack vines

[jlmccuan]

Thanks, Jack. I was driving and reading the forum by text to speech and posted speech to text, so it was difficult to quote the exact numbers. A simple pulley change and eprom modification took that number up substantially. Remember the Shelby Series II used production supercharged aftercooled Aurora engines and took that way up. One of my biggest mistakes was not snatching up one of those engines when Shelby went belly up. They sold unused engines complete for $1500.00

[bezhawk]

Jim that 34 now smokes 'em thru 2nd rather easily now!