Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Daytona delusions

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

  • drpreposterous
    replied
    Well said!

    Leave a comment:


  • 1966Daytona
    replied
    Originally posted by drpreposterous View Post
    It's been several years since I had the privilege of owning and driving a wonderful '60 Lark. it was my first, and thus far, only Stude. After foolishly selling it, I find myself more and more wanting the Stude experience again. But unlike many of you, I haven't put in time and effort under hoods and on creepers in my life. I'm a darn good nurse, just not a wrench man, and at my age (59) unlikely to change that.

    That, of course, makes the prospect of owning a Stude without racing to the poorhouse a dubious enterprise. But the itch wants scratching. (1) Is it crazy to figure my local shop (which admirably kept my '60 in shape), would be able to help me keep an SBC powered Daytona going?

    https://duluth.craigslist.org/cto/d/...745639486.html

    I've heard countless times, that rodded cars make for difficult maintenance. Then again, McKinnon small blocks were quite a smooth fit for '65-66 Lark types. If I were to get this Daytona, I'd ditch the side pipes and put the bumpers back on, among other things. (2) While conceding that an SBC drivetrain detracts from the full Stude experience, I've been telling myself the familiarity of the drive train might actually aid my guys at the shop. Am I kidding myself? The mike is yours...
    I've had that itch since I was a kid riding in my grandpa's Lark and his TransStars along with his Detroit Diesel and flatbed; only took a few decades to finally scratch it haha. re: the bolded/numbered areas: (1) Having a slight misfire in the 283 and doing as much as I could on my own after browsing forums, a local shop sorted the issue out. They said that they have had Studes there in the past but the GM motor is certainly easier as far as getting parts (that they're willing to put their labor warranty behind and not having to find NOS or McGyver something made for another car) but also the comfort level of their techs. He said the majority of his techs are car guys and a SBC is something they're pretty familiar with. (2)'Full Stude experience' depends on the driver and their relation to Studes. My grandpa had other makes' motors in his pickups, didn't detract from the experience. My tie to Studebaker is a sentimental one for how it shaped my family and the memories associated with them in relation to my family. While I certainly appreciate the engineering and design, that is second to the sentimental value; call it a ChevyBaker, sacrilege (haha, everyone's been really nice actually), I call it rolling childhood memories.

    Leave a comment:


  • Likes2Laff
    replied
    Looks like fun!

    Leave a comment:


  • drpreposterous
    replied
    Thanks, everyone! Sharp replies, one and all!

    Leave a comment:


  • jpepper
    replied
    Originally posted by drpreposterous View Post
    From the seller:

    I purchased the car from a 90yr old WWW 2 veteran who had bad diabetes and was unable to pass his last dmv eye test.From what he told me he was friends with the guy who did the build who passed away soon after it was finished.His widow sold it to him.The motor is a 71(I have not run the #s)do not know the yr of the trans or the 9" I was told it had a 4:11and the veteran had a 3:50 installed.He offered me the 4:11 ring&pinion but I had no use for them.

    The car has the stock door pillar/body supports.It doesn't have a custom bellhousing structural replacement crossmember.Sorry.The trans has a custom tailshaft crossmember.Thanks
    The 3.50 rear gear is about the perfect cruise and performance compromise. It sounds like the center section of the crossmember was cut out. A little fabrication will cure that. A 71 350 will have 8.5:1 compression with hard exhaust seats for unleaded fuel. Block hugger headers will fit the chassis and a 2 1/2" exhaust system is possible thereby eliminating the side pipes. Not a bad car.

    Leave a comment:


  • drpreposterous
    replied
    From the seller:

    I purchased the car from a 90yr old WWW 2 veteran who had bad diabetes and was unable to pass his last dmv eye test.From what he told me he was friends with the guy who did the build who passed away soon after it was finished.His widow sold it to him.The motor is a 71(I have not run the #s)do not know the yr of the trans or the 9" I was told it had a 4:11and the veteran had a 3:50 installed.He offered me the 4:11 ring&pinion but I had no use for them.

    The car has the stock door pillar/body supports.It doesn't have a custom bellhousing structural replacement crossmember.Sorry.The trans has a custom tailshaft crossmember.Thanks

    Leave a comment:


  • thunderations
    replied
    I'll just chime in as an owner and driver of an original SBC 1966 Daytona. The Mckinon engine is lighter then the Studebaker V8 making the steering and handling much nicer. Parts are mostly available at any auto parts store on a Sunday afternoon if you do happen to need a replacement.
    If you're OK with less then 200 HP it will probably run forever and give you great service, as is.
    If you want to fly the little Studebaker, a SBC can be built to over 1000 hp now days. Somewhere in the middle can be done without breaking the bank and provide a lot of fun.
    Please remember that increased HP requires better brakes and good suspension. Adding a bigger front anti-sway bar would be recommended and adding a rear anti-sway bar would be an improvement.
    Transmission choices behind the SBC are nearly endless from AOD's, various other automatics and 3,4,5 and 6 speed sticks that can be bolted on.
    Speaking of "bolting on", there are numerous cosmetic and performance items that are readily available for the SBC.

    Leave a comment:


  • 70Avanti2
    replied
    The ad does not mention the rear axle ratio. Find that out be for you go any further. Is it set up as a drag car or a road car?

    Leave a comment:


  • drpreposterous
    replied
    JP! Wow!
    Thoughtful, incisive replies...
    Thanks, and Happy Holidays, Studisans!

    Leave a comment:


  • jpepper
    replied
    Hear is the instructions that go with the crossmember photos.
    Tip of the Month
    Engine Swap Crossmember
    Installing a Smallblock Chevrolet engine in a Lark type chassis is a popular swap. Studebaker made it easy by engineering bolt in mounting stands used in 65/66. The 65/66 transmission crossmember easily can be made to accommodate any matching GM transmission. An interference problem occurs with the bellhousing area crossmember when using a GM transmission. The exhaust hump runs into the transmission case preventing installation. Many people just leave it off. That is a problem because that crossmember also doubles as the mount for the base of the door pillar. Without it you will never maintain proper door adjustment. It is a mandatory structural component of the car. I have seen vehicles where the builder cut out the center section leaving the ends to bolt the pillar base to. That is better than none at all but still not ridged enough. Neighbor and SDC member Butch Pearson’s 60 Lark with a 350/350 was such a car with no crossmember at all. He located an NOS crossmember and I went to work. I had a front frame section saved from a junk Lark. I first bolted the crossmember to the frame and then welded a piece of light angle iron on top of the rails in order to maintain alignment and width. I then cut the center of the crossmember out flush with the inside of the frame rail with a Sawzall. I fabricated a dropped center section using
    1” X 3” X 1/8” rectangular tubing and ¼” thick end plates. This was welded in place on three sides then removed to finish weld the top area. Installed in Butch’s car the door pillar will have the proper support, the turbo 350 transmission clears, and the exhaust is routed above the dropped section. This took about $20.00 worth of steel and a few hours of work. It is worth the effort. The doors will open and close properly and the car will be much tighter driving down the road. See the photos.

    Leave a comment:


  • jpepper
    replied
    Originally posted by drpreposterous View Post
    It's been several years since I had the privilege of owning and driving a wonderful '60 Lark. it was my first, and thus far, only Stude. After foolishly selling it, I find myself more and more wanting the Stude experience again. But unlike many of you, I haven't put in time and effort under hoods and on creepers in my life. I'm a darn good nurse, just not a wrench man, and at my age (59) unlikely to change that.

    That, of course, makes the prospect of owning a Stude without racing to the poorhouse a dubious enterprise. But the itch wants scratching. Is it crazy to figure my local shop (which admirably kept my '60 in shape), would be able to help me keep an SBC powered Daytona going?

    https://duluth.craigslist.org/cto/d/...745639486.html

    I've heard countless times, that rodded cars make for difficult maintenance. Then again, McKinnon small blocks were quite a smooth fit for '65-66 Lark types. If I were to get this Daytona, I'd ditch the side pipes and put the bumpers back on, among other things. While conceding that an SBC drivetrain detracts from the full Stude experience, I've been telling myself the familiarity of the drive train might actually aid my guys at the shop. Am I kidding myself? The mike is yours...
    It looks like a nice car. There are a few details you should pay attention to. The engine installation looks sanitary. A TH 350 interferes with the original transmission crossmember. Many guys just remove it. The crossmember also bolts to the base of the body "A" pillar. It is necessary to maintaining door alignment. It needs to be in place and modified to work with the trans. (see photos) The power brake hose is plumbed to the carburetor base. It should come off a fitting screwed into the back of the intake. A PCV should be plumbed from the left valve cover to the base of the carburetor.
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • studegary
    replied
    Originally posted by candbstudebakers View Post
    Gary it is a 62 lark daytona no master under the car.
    Of course you are correct, Bob. I looked at what is now in the car, not stock, and thought of the 1960 that he originally discussed. I guess that my fingers were working faster than my brain.

    Leave a comment:


  • candbstudebakers
    replied
    Gary it is a 62 lark daytona no master under the car.

    Leave a comment:


  • studegary
    replied
    The car looks okay, but I doubt that it would fulfill your desire to bring back your previos Studebaker experience.

    When checking with your shop, it is more important to check with them about things that are different from newer cars, like the king pin front suspension, rather than the SBC engine.

    I am a little concerned with the brake conversion including moving the master cylinder from the frame to the firewall. Check out that the firewall was properly reinforced to handle this, etc.

    Personally, for your desire, I would suggest a V8, AT, 1959-1961 Lark in reasonably good condition. They are out there. In fact, there is one currently for sale in another thread here (1961).

    Leave a comment:


  • 52-fan
    replied
    That looks like a nice ride, but like Bob said, you will have to look it over and decide. If the builder did it right you will have a fun car. One of our chapter members has a similarly equipped car that he drives all over.
    BTW I agree about the side pipes.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X