What modern chassis to use?

As some of you know I will have a 50 studebaker bussiness coupe this coming weekend.

I like to put it on a modern chassie, from what I have read it has a 113 inch wheel base. I like it to be a chevy chassie because I already have a 95 Lt1 and 6speed trans from a wreaked TA I already have but like to know all opions anyway. I have seen where some have use s10 chassies but they are 5in shorter or longer than what I need.

Thanks Jim

[Swifster]

No offense, and this is coming from a hot rodder type, but modify what you have. The process will actually be easier. Chopping frames should only be done by someone who knows what they're doing. Fatman Fabrications and others sell well thought out conversions and clips that will make this job a lot easier. If you really feel the need to get another frame, call Art Morrison and by one of theirs.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom - Valrico, FL

1964 Studebaker Daytona - 289 4V, 4-Speed (Cost To Date: $1755.45)

[Swifster]

No offense, and this is coming from a hot rodder type, but modify what you have. The process will actually be easier. Chopping frames should only be done by someone who knows what they're doing. Fatman Fabrications and others sell well thought out conversions and clips that will make this job a lot easier. If you really feel the need to get another frame, call Art Morrison and by one of theirs.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom - Valrico, FL

1964 Studebaker Daytona - 289 4V, 4-Speed (Cost To Date: $1755.45)

[gordr]

Contrarian that I am: this is coming from a "keep it stock" kind of guy.

Jim, I have seen a number of "post-war body" Studes put on an S10 frame, and it seems like a reasonable choice. Given the rust issues in that car, there's a good chance your frame is compromised, too. Get the long-wheelbase S10 frame, and shorten it to suit. Not too hard, and certainly no more work than trying to weld some kind of clip into a rusty Stude frame, especially a Champion frame that was never intended to resist the stresses of several hundred horsepower.

If the car were a '51, be it Champion or Commander, you would have many options to upgrade the suspension and brakes, while keeping it mostly Studebaker. But a '50 Champion is a one-year-only suspension design, and there just isn't much you can do to beef it up.

BTW, one other alternative: if your frame is still sound, you could think about stripping all the front suspension components off the frame rails, and then setting the rails down on top of the K-member from a car in the Aspen-Volare clan. The K-member is fairly flat on top, and you can simply set the frame rails on top of it, and weld them into place. But you'd still have to upgrade the rear axle. The S10 swap is one-stop shopping, as it were.

Gord Richmond, within Weasel range of the Alberta Badlands

[gordr]

Contrarian that I am: this is coming from a "keep it stock" kind of guy.

Jim, I have seen a number of "post-war body" Studes put on an S10 frame, and it seems like a reasonable choice. Given the rust issues in that car, there's a good chance your frame is compromised, too. Get the long-wheelbase S10 frame, and shorten it to suit. Not too hard, and certainly no more work than trying to weld some kind of clip into a rusty Stude frame, especially a Champion frame that was never intended to resist the stresses of several hundred horsepower.

If the car were a '51, be it Champion or Commander, you would have many options to upgrade the suspension and brakes, while keeping it mostly Studebaker. But a '50 Champion is a one-year-only suspension design, and there just isn't much you can do to beef it up.

BTW, one other alternative: if your frame is still sound, you could think about stripping all the front suspension components off the frame rails, and then setting the rails down on top of the K-member from a car in the Aspen-Volare clan. The K-member is fairly flat on top, and you can simply set the frame rails on top of it, and weld them into place. But you'd still have to upgrade the rear axle. The S10 swap is one-stop shopping, as it were.

Gord Richmond, within Weasel range of the Alberta Badlands

[jap901]

Thank you for your very help full replys.

[jap901]

Thank you for your very help full replys.

[rockne10]

If it were 115' wheelbase you could channel it and drop it on a Caprice Police Cruiser.[:0] Still would require much fabrication.[V]

[rockne10]

If it were 115' wheelbase you could channel it and drop it on a Caprice Police Cruiser.[:0] Still would require much fabrication.[V]

[Canadoug]

interested to know what might work also work for a 59-60 lark

[Canadoug]

interested to know what might work also work for a 59-60 lark

[Canadoug]

delete one ' work ' oops

[Canadoug]

delete one ' work ' oops

[gordr]

quote:Originally posted by Canadoug

interested to know what might work also work for a 59-60 lark

Well, given that Larks are not too different size-wise from the '50 and '51s, you could probably fit one of those bodies on an S10 chassis as well. But there is a lot less reason to do so. The Lark frames, even on six cylinder cars, are built of sterner stuff than the '50 Champion frame, and the front suspension and rear axle are likewise stronger.

You can readily upgrade the Lark chassis and brakes while keeping it all genuine Studebaker, or by using proven adaptors like the Turner brake kits. Bigger brakes, stronger springs, traction bars, and heavy-duty anti-sway bars are all there, available, and you can upgrade them all at once, or piecemeal, as finances permit.

About the only thing a frame swap gets you in a Lark is the availability of in-box power steering as opposed to the linkage-type used by Studebaker.

On a '50 Champion, the frame swap makes sense if one is building a hot rod with big horsepower. On a Lark model, the frame is up to the job, and the existing suspension and axle can be readily upgraded at less time and expense than the frame swap would entail.

Figure out what you want the finished car to be able to do, then take the easiest and cheapest route to that end result. A few simple modifications, well-executed, are likely to yield good results, and give you a car that is pleasing to drive. Attempt to do too much, without a complete plan, and you risk getting discouraged and abandoning the project unfinished.

Gord Richmond, within Weasel range of the Alberta Badlands

[gordr]

quote:Originally posted by Canadoug

interested to know what might work also work for a 59-60 lark

Well, given that Larks are not too different size-wise from the '50 and '51s, you could probably fit one of those bodies on an S10 chassis as well. But there is a lot less reason to do so. The Lark frames, even on six cylinder cars, are built of sterner stuff than the '50 Champion frame, and the front suspension and rear axle are likewise stronger.

You can readily upgrade the Lark chassis and brakes while keeping it all genuine Studebaker, or by using proven adaptors like the Turner brake kits. Bigger brakes, stronger springs, traction bars, and heavy-duty anti-sway bars are all there, available, and you can upgrade them all at once, or piecemeal, as finances permit.

About the only thing a frame swap gets you in a Lark is the availability of in-box power steering as opposed to the linkage-type used by Studebaker.

On a '50 Champion, the frame swap makes sense if one is building a hot rod with big horsepower. On a Lark model, the frame is up to the job, and the existing suspension and axle can be readily upgraded at less time and expense than the frame swap would entail.

Figure out what you want the finished car to be able to do, then take the easiest and cheapest route to that end result. A few simple modifications, well-executed, are likely to yield good results, and give you a car that is pleasing to drive. Attempt to do too much, without a complete plan, and you risk getting discouraged and abandoning the project unfinished.

Gord Richmond, within Weasel range of the Alberta Badlands