1956 Flight Hawk on Minneapolis C/L

[TWChamp]

I don't know what these are going for so don't know if this is the right price, but it sure looks nice. I'd have to correct a couple things under the hood though.

https://minneapolis.craigslist.org/ank/cto/5159837483.html

[SN-60]

I don't know what it's worth either,......but what a nice little car!

[Jerry Forrester]

I'd have to correct a couple things under the hood though.

Yeah, me too. Like drop a 500 Caddy engine in there. :-)
Other than what's under the hood, it is a beautiful car though.

[aarrggh]

I`d get ridda that horrid paint scheme ...

[TWChamp]

Yeah, me too. Like drop a 500 Caddy engine in there. :-)
Other than what's under the hood, it is a beautiful car though.

No, No, No, the Champion is a fine engine and belongs there.
I'd put on the correct plug wires and hoses.

[swvalcon]

Jerry why waste your time with a old caddy when a LS will make twice the power with better mileage and less weight.

[jclary]

Well...I have had, and still own six cylinder Studebakers. They are quaint little utilitarian modes of transportation adequate for their era. But...you "Flight Hawk" folks will just have to forgive me...no car named Hawk, with its sleek aerodynamic visual "PROMISE/EXPECTATIONS" should have ever grunted off an assembly line with a six cylinder. (yep...he said that)

[hobiejack11]

swvalcon, I would suggest that you check out those "old" caddy 500s before you make such a statement, The 70 model 500 caddy is good for 550 ft/lbs torque and 505 hp and idles so smooth that you can't tell it is running. To get that kind of power out of a LS you would have to spend three or four times the money and it still wouldn't have the docile manners of the caddy. I think Jerry is right on with his engine choice.

[Scott]

No, No, No, the Champion is a fine engine and belongs there.
I'd put on the correct plug wires and hoses.

I completely agree. If you want a V8 in your hawk, buy one that way.

[SN-60]

I completely agree. If you want a V8 in your hawk, buy one that way.

Agreed X 2.....I owned a nice little '58 Silver Hawk 6.....You'll hardly ever find a tired, worn-out front end on a 6 cyl Hawk....And power steering?.....WHO NEEDS IT???

[candbstudebakers]

Someone changed the front side grilles to later egg crates.

[swvalcon]

Hobbiejack11. I know the 500's make good power. Make great truck motors and know a guy that reworked one and put it in a Grand Prix as a drag racer. But they are 45 years old and think I would go something newer with all the latest engine management systems on it. Check with Gm performance parts they make good power. I said nothing about cheap.

[GrumpyOne]

Well...I have had, and still own six cylinder Studebakers. They are quaint little utilitarian modes of transportation adequate for their era. But...you "Flight Hawk" folks will just have to forgive me...no car named Hawk, with its sleek aerodynamic visual "PROMISE/EXPECTATIONS" should have ever grunted off an assembly line with a six cylinder. (yep...he said that)

Heh... I'll even go one further. A nice 259 auto or stick will get the same MPG as a six and be a lot more fun to drive. My '56 Power Hawk has gotten me a few speeding tickets over the nearly fifty years that I've had the car. But of course that is my lone opinion...