Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

West Coast R3 builder?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • SN-60
    replied
    Originally posted by Gunslinger View Post
    It's a little tougher to counterfeit the Mona Lisa...everyone knows where the original is, no matter how good a counterfeit another might be. No one will be fooled...and if they simply want a good copy to hang in their house, a copy will suffice as no one will mistake it for the original.

    I also never said new build R3 engines would be referred to as the real deal. That's why I mentioned identifiable casting number, date codes and serial numbers. There will always be those who will restamp engine blocks trying to make a counterfeit...ask the Corvette crowd. There are more big block Corvettes out there with "original" engines than Chevrolet ever built. The same goes for Mopar big-block and Hemi cars. Supposedly about 70-75% of sports memorabilia on the market today is counterfeit. As long as someone perceives money to be made, there will be counterfeiters. It takes due diligence on everyone's part to not be taken in by crooks in this or any other hobby.
    Very well said.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gunslinger
    replied
    It's a little tougher to counterfeit the Mona Lisa...everyone knows where the original is, no matter how good a counterfeit another might be. No one will be fooled...and if they simply want a good copy to hang in their house, a copy will suffice as no one will mistake it for the original.

    I also never said new build R3 engines would be referred to as the real deal. That's why I mentioned identifiable casting number, date codes and serial numbers. There will always be those who will restamp engine blocks trying to make a counterfeit...ask the Corvette crowd. There are more big block Corvettes out there with "original" engines than Chevrolet ever built. The same goes for Mopar big-block and Hemi cars. Supposedly about 70-75% of sports memorabilia on the market today is counterfeit. As long as someone perceives money to be made, there will be counterfeiters. It takes due diligence on everyone's part to not be taken in by crooks in this or any other hobby.

    Leave a comment:


  • SN-60
    replied
    Originally posted by Gunslinger View Post
    To stir the pot some more...and simply as a rhetorical exercise...let's say some enterprising soul with the technical and production ability plus money decided to obtain the technical drawings or reverse-engineered some Studebaker V8 blocks and cast a number of R3 engine blocks and heads. This would be with using modern production techniques. Let's say the only visible differences would be the engine casting numbers, serial numbers and date codes. We'll leave costs out of this just for the fun of it. The same goes for aluminum R3 heads using modern flow and casting techniques and tricks. New design camshafts as well.

    There are such companies doing that now with small-block Chevy engines, heads, cams, etc. They seem to be doing a good business for those wanting to build engines without resorting to dealing with GM for engines and accessories. Why can't this work for Studebaker performance guys? Again...we'll leave start-up costs and retail costs out of it.

    Would this upset the purists amongst Studebaker enthusiasts? Would a completely new R3/R4 engine made from new castings, modern design and production techniques, new hi-po cylinder heads, cams, pistons, connecting rods, etc., be any less a Studebaker engine other than who made it? I know Lionel Stone tried that with aluminum heads and intakes with varying degrees of success and people want to buy those products when they can be found even if they require bench work to make them operate properly.

    If someone wants a Paxton SN-60 rebuilt with new planetary balls made using the latest techniques for quality and consistency would that make the blower a genuine Studebaker? The same for parts such as wheel bearings, air and oil filters, fuel line, etc. We can take this to absurd degrees.

    When you get down to it, Avanti Motors did much the same thing. They took what was essentially mostly leftover Studebaker parts and added a different engine and other detail parts and the end result was still an Avanti...unless you're a purist.
    I certainly would fully support what you say above......AS LONG AS THESE 'NEW' STUDE V8's, VIRTUAL TWINS TO THE 'REAL DEAL', ARE NOT REFERRED TO AS THE 'REAL DEAL' !!!.......

    There's only ONE original 'Mona Lisa'.....should artists that create virtually EXACT copies of that famous painting refer to their wonderful copies as 'The Mona Lisa'?....Think about it!....SN-60

    Leave a comment:


  • PackardV8
    replied
    Never say never. Not that many years ago, the Chevrolet 409" was a failed-and-forgotten lump of a short-lived-dead-end engineering exercise. Today, it's possible to build an all-aluminum-all-aftermarket 611" version which makes twice the horsepower of the best OEM 409"s.

    jack vines

    Leave a comment:


  • Gunslinger
    replied
    To stir the pot some more...and simply as a rhetorical exercise...let's say some enterprising soul with the technical and production ability plus money decided to obtain the technical drawings or reverse-engineered some Studebaker V8 blocks and cast a number of R3 engine blocks and heads. This would be with using modern production techniques. Let's say the only visible differences would be the engine casting numbers, serial numbers and date codes. We'll leave costs out of this just for the fun of it. The same goes for aluminum R3 heads using modern flow and casting techniques and tricks. New design camshafts as well.

    There are such companies doing that now with small-block Chevy engines, heads, cams, etc. They seem to be doing a good business for those wanting to build engines without resorting to dealing with GM for engines and accessories. Why can't this work for Studebaker performance guys? Again...we'll leave start-up costs and retail costs out of it.

    Would this upset the purists amongst Studebaker enthusiasts? Would a completely new R3/R4 engine made from new castings, modern design and production techniques, new hi-po cylinder heads, cams, pistons, connecting rods, etc., be any less a Studebaker engine other than who made it? I know Lionel Stone tried that with aluminum heads and intakes with varying degrees of success and people want to buy those products when they can be found even if they require bench work to make them operate properly.

    If someone wants a Paxton SN-60 rebuilt with new planetary balls made using the latest techniques for quality and consistency would that make the blower a genuine Studebaker? The same for parts such as wheel bearings, air and oil filters, fuel line, etc. We can take this to absurd degrees.

    When you get down to it, Avanti Motors did much the same thing. They took what was essentially mostly leftover Studebaker parts and added a different engine and other detail parts and the end result was still an Avanti...unless you're a purist.

    Leave a comment:


  • showbizkid
    replied
    Originally posted by SN-60
    PLEASE work on changing your ways Jeff
    Thats enough. No member here should be telling other members how they should behave. It's unacceptable.

    We we are here to talk cars, in a civil and courteous manner. Let's get back to doing that.

    Leave a comment:


  • SN-60
    replied
    Originally posted by R3studee View Post
    Im saying its much better to build a normal Stude engine with aftermarket parts than to change anything on an original R3......saving them intact as possible for future generations(Not necessarily for any particular generation) as so few exist.

    I actually knew an old man, original R3 owner from Paxton, built the hell out of his R3 including fuel injection. Lost track of him as he prolly passed and the engine is who knows where now. Wanted to return that one back to stock......arghhh

    Im fine with replacing broken or missing parts in an R3 with aftermarket parts though, as its much better than bragging you have a block in storage and it never running again.




    Thanks for your interesting reply....and I completely agree with your assessment concerning surviving original R3-4 Studebaker/Paxton engines....and with your thoughts on building today's modified high performance Studebaker engines.

    OF COURSE when an original R3-4 engine needs overhaul modern parts have to be used, (i.e. pistons, pins ,insert bearings, timing gears, gaskets, seals, etc, etc.)

    It was another 'long time' Stude Forum poster who suggested that if modern internals were used in an original R3-4 then it wouldn't be an R3-4 any more....RIDICULOUS!...It's really sad some folks on this forum constantly 'grab at straws' simply to keep a debate going....(and how many times have we seen that ?????)

    MY issue, now, and in the past, is when some VERY TALENTED mechanic decides to modify 'standard' Studebaker heads (for example) for the purpose of installing R3 size valves.....There's ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WRONG with doing that....I think it's GREAT!...And it's entirely possible the final results may be superior to the original Granatelli part....................However, DON"T REFER TO THE RESULTING 'MODERN' HI-PO STUDE V8 AS AN R3 or an R4 ENGINE....because IT'S NOT...AND NEVER WILL BE!

    Thanks for reading this...........SN-60

    Leave a comment:


  • DEEPNHOCK
    replied
    Interesting comments.
    People with replacement knees, hips, and teeth bitching about aftermarket parts...

    Leave the originals alone, put them in museums.....
    and let the observers pine away looking at them....no touching..

    Take whatever junk is left, build the crap out of it, race it, and make noise and go fast.....
    and let the observers pine away looking at them....no touching...

    Then, write disparigingly about them on all the forums...
    Tis' the thing to do!

    Leave a comment:


  • R3studee
    replied
    Originally posted by SN-60 View Post
    R3studee.....You mentioned "Saving history for future generations"....can you please explain that statement?

    To me, it kind of sounds like you're saying THIS (our?) generation may as well skip being concerned with Studebaker history....and simply let future generations pick it up again and be concerned with it.

    Not trying to put words in your mouth, however, once again, would you please explain your thoughts to us?....Thanks!...SN-60
    Im saying its much better to build a normal Stude engine with aftermarket parts than to change anything on an original R3......saving them intact as possible for future generations(Not necessarily for any particular generation) as so few exist.

    I actually knew an old man, original R3 owner from Paxton, built the hell out of his R3 including fuel injection. Lost track of him as he prolly passed and the engine is who knows where now. Wanted to return that one back to stock......arghhh

    Im fine with replacing broken or missing parts in an R3 with aftermarket parts though, as its much better than bragging you have a block in storage and it never running again.

    Leave a comment:


  • SN-60
    replied
    R3studee.....You mentioned "Saving history for future generations"....can you please explain that statement?

    To me, it kind of sounds like you're saying THIS (our?) generation may as well skip being concerned with Studebaker history....and simply let future generations pick it up again and be concerned with it.

    Not trying to put words in your mouth, however, once again, would you please explain your thoughts to us?....Thanks!...SN-60

    Leave a comment:


  • bezhawk
    replied
    I don't know of anyone that could or would try to run a "real deal" R4 on the crap that passes for gas nowdays. I can rework the carbs to work much better on the street, and the changes are reversible. I don't know off hand if you mill of the tops of the pistons, whether the pistons will have enough meat to be strong enough. I have seen failures of the ForgeTrue pistons, where the skirt breaks also. Diamond Racing pistons is one of the last domestically made forged piston manufacturers. much tougher than cast. No, I did not do the build on B61, but over saw the restoration of that engine, and had final say on the parts, and cam choice. I was busy with three simultaneous restorations at that time, and DID do everything else including body, paint, wiring, frame, suspension you name it. I can sew, but don't do seats. I can do anything else related to a restoration including transmissions, and now even small parts plating. Engine building machinery like new modern boring and honeing equipment can run into 100s of thousands of dollars. Only a very few shops have any engine equipment, and it is very old stuff, that can't be as accurate as newer computer controlled machines. I don't trust the aptitude of almost any machine shop, so one that has been around a long time and invests in new equipment, and training is one that gets my business.
    Last edited by bezhawk; 07-16-2017, 01:46 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • R3studee
    replied
    Originally posted by bezhawk View Post
    Car looks amazing Brad, great job! I would trust you with one of my cars any day........

    For what its worth, I agree with you that your engine is still an R3 all the way, just modified out of necessity that's all. As long as the owners are honest with the next buyer, you did the world a favor by keeping another one of those "unobtainium engines" alive and kickin. Did you rebuild it yourself? Machine work too?

    I would have done exactly the same thing, unless of course the original parts were still available somewhere. Last time I checked, they werent too easy to locate, lol. If someone has the deep pockets though, any Stude V8 block with minimal core shift can go faster than an R3 when "built", so I would go that route (and I already have) while saving history for future generations.

    In fact, I am faced with a similar dilemma. I have a totally original R4 (B76 I think) and it needs a rebuild. Those damn pistons are boat anchors with their compression ratio, so I have considered shaving off the domes and getting it to run on pump gas. I could keep it an R4 that way or even change the induction system to R3 and have a much faster motor as lets face it, the R4 was designed for air conditioning.....not racing. I just cant come around to changing it so far as its original down to the air cleaner.

    Maybe I should just sell it as I will never use an engine with that high of compression anyway.

    Leave a comment:


  • Stunt
    replied
    I was under the impression it is a .68 OD, so that is why I used the 600 with the 3.92 rear.
    It's possible they've used different gear ratios at different times, but currently, the Tremec website shows 500's having .68 O/D ratio, and 600's being available with either .64 or .82.
    http://www.tremec.com/menu.php?m=103

    Leave a comment:


  • bezhawk
    replied
    Another R3 I had a hand in....http://bezautoalchemy.com/r3-avanti-...to-life-again/

    Leave a comment:


  • bezhawk
    replied
    Originally posted by Stunt View Post
    Bez, you're right, cases are the same. I was under the impression that the 600 was a 6-speed transmission, and bigger, but it's just a [ATTACH=CONFIG]65652[/ATTACH]gearing difference, and the 600 gearing does seem better. Though I wish there was an O/D gear available that was more like .70. But nonetheless, seems like a pretty good way to go. Do you remember offhand which O/D ratio you guys chose for the customer's car with the 3.92 rear end? I'm assuming the .64 rather than the .82. What engine was in there, and did you drive it at freeway speeds?
    I was under the impression it is a .68 OD, so that is why I used the 600 with the 3.92 rear. Made custom billet supercharger mount, and R3 airbox. My ported heads, and R2+ cam. .040 over full dish pistons. will move out smartly and leave sticky black tire marks as long as you keep your foot in it.Click image for larger version

Name:	brackets.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	109.4 KB
ID:	1715615
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X