-
-
Wow, Bob! That's some Horsepower per Cubic Inch to be calculated from the figures quoted in the article:
Boy, that must've had the Chevy and Chrysler guys quaking in their boots, trying to muster even one HP per Cu In, much less the 1.09 HP per cubic inch the above quotation figures out to be!
And coupled to the "Proven" Ultramatic Drive to boot! Helluva deal...but I guess it doesn't say what it proved, either!
Great stuff! 
BP
We've got to quit saying, "How stupid can you be?" Too many people are taking it as a challenge. 
G. K. Chesterton: This triangle of truisms, of father, mother, and child, cannot be destroyed; it can only destroy those civilizations which disregard it. -
Russ is owner of Canadian Studebaker and Trent Hill Auto Parts. He has an excellent website with lots of Stude parts and is a pleasure to deal with - fair and quick.
There are some questionable "facts" in the article: s/b 58 Packard Hawk, question Packard Hawk fish look, weight of Packard engine ~= Studebaker 1957-8 289 engine + supercharger, supercharged R series of Hawks were faster, and GTs were assembled in Hamilton.Comment
-
We'll stipulate he is a great guy and a credit to the hobby. It is to be hoped someone who's a personal friend will gently educate him (and the writer) on fact-checking their information. When incorrect info gets out into the etheric, it's there forever.Russ is owner of Canadian Studebaker and Trent Hill Auto Parts. He has an excellent website with lots of Stude parts and is a pleasure to deal with - fair and quick.
jack vinesPackardV8Comment
-
Thank you for visiting the SDC Forum, a service of the Studebaker Drivers Club, Inc., an International non-profit organization dedicated to the promotion and preservation of Studebaker automobiles.
Our Forum is free to use, but in order to join the discussion boards you will first need to register.
Read our Policies and Terms Of Service here.
Comment