Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Weigh in on whether or not "Disaffected Musings" should "restomod" a Gran Turismo Hawk

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

  • Weigh in on whether or not "Disaffected Musings" should "restomod" a Gran Turismo Hawk

    My opinion is it's OK to upgrade older Studebakers with more modern STUDEBAKER components, but I am rabidly opposed to putting (for example) a GM engine in a Studebaker.
    If that is done, the "heart" has been removed from the Studebaker, especially when the Studebaker V-8 was one of the VERY BEST V-8s of the era.

    Weigh in with your comments HERE: https://disaffectedmusings.com/2019/...urity-of-cars/

  • #2
    There was no talk of changing engines.....just fuel injecting it. Which I am all for.
    Bez Auto Alchemy
    573-318-8948
    http://bezautoalchemy.com


    "Don't believe every internet quote" Abe Lincoln

    Comment


    • #3
      I can make an argument both ways. I do not believe it is acceptable to modify a very nice clean example of any old car. There are many beaters out there to build your hot rod from. That being said, It is neat to see an old car the functions like a nearly new vehicle in all ways. The Studebaker V8 was/is a very stout engine but some features of its design date to the pre-war years. The GM LS/LT series engines are superior in all ways. They even borrow some Studebaker design features like the stroke length. Your car, build it how you want but please do not destroy a clean original car doing so.
      james r pepper

      Comment


      • #4
        I have EFI'd two GT Hawks and agree it is one of the best restomods you can do to a Studebaker V8, to make it more drivable under today's conditions; road speeds, gas available, etc. But do not expect any significant gain in performance or MPG. Also, the ESC (electronic spark control) feature, available on some EFI setups, usually at extra charge, is over rated. There is nothing wrong with the OEM timing and advance curve, and ESC will gain nothing in terms of performance or MPG, despite the theoretical advantages that, "looks good on paper". But Pertronix is a good idea, if you are lazy about maintaining points & condenser.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by JoeHall View Post
          I have EFI'd two GT Hawks and agree it is one of the best restomods you can do to a Studebaker V8, to make it more drivable under today's conditions; road speeds, gas available, etc. But do not expect any significant gain in performance or MPG. Also, the ESC (electronic spark control) feature, available on some EFI setups, usually at extra charge, is over rated. There is nothing wrong with the OEM timing and advance curve, and ESC will gain nothing in terms of performance or MPG, despite the theoretical advantages that, "looks good on paper". But Pertronix is a good idea, if you are lazy about maintaining points & condenser.
          Apparently some of you folks haven't been looking at the fuel and timing curves on my SBC engine in my 83 Avanti. It's the older Holley HP setup and there is no way a points and condenser or pertronix is going to initiate or build a timing curve like the ECM to keep the engine running at optimum conditions.

          Does it matter, a fair bit, I set the engine up initially with the HP setup and an electronic distributor (no ECM control) and was never happy with the results. Added the Holley dissy that the ECM could use and it was a totally different car. It just ran better and quicker.

          The curves came out way different than I would have expected - could I have done better with a chassis dyno, absolutely but that ain't cheap either and things change with weather conditions, etc.

          I'm not sure why folks would go with $1000+ FI setup and limit the units ability to function.

          Probably just like politics and religion, no right answers but a ton of opinions - of which I guilty also.

          Bob

          Comment


          • #6
            I agree with JPepper If it's a nice stock all original leave it that way. If it's a rust bucket or a junk yard reject do what you want with it. Chop it, Channel it, Hot rod it, Drag car it, swap out the motor if there even is one. Your car your money and time go for it.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by sweetolbob View Post

              Apparently some of you folks haven't been looking at the fuel and timing curves on my SBC engine in my 83 Avanti. It's the older Holley HP setup and there is no way a points and condenser or pertronix is going to initiate or build a timing curve like the ECM to keep the engine running at optimum conditions.

              Does it matter, a fair bit, I set the engine up initially with the HP setup and an electronic distributor (no ECM control) and was never happy with the results. Added the Holley dissy that the ECM could use and it was a totally different car. It just ran better and quicker.

              The curves came out way different than I would have expected - could I have done better with a chassis dyno, absolutely but that ain't cheap either and things change with weather conditions, etc.

              I'm not sure why folks would go with $1000+ FI setup and limit the units ability to function.

              Probably just like politics and religion, no right answers but a ton of opinions - of which I guilty also.

              Bob
              Maybe apples to oranges with Stude V8 and SBC. The Studes's timing and advance curve are not, "built" by points and ignition, rather by Studebaker engineers, who used the flyweights and vacuum advance to achieve their goals. On paper, the ECU will respond in miliseconds and make everything happen more timely and overall better, but it is negligible in practical ap, in terms of performance and MPG. At least, that has been my experience. Similar to the injectors and atomization which, again, is not superior in any way to a good carb. What EFI will do, and do well, is eliminate vapor lock, and the need for frequent tinkering. But that's about it.

              After nearly 70,000 miles, combined, on two GT Hawks with EFI, I have came to understand what they do and what they don't do. I love mine, and will not go back to a carb on those GTs, but will never go to EFI on the 56J. I love its' Holley Street Demon, which would be hard to improve on, same as its ignition with Pertronix.

              I encourage anyone considering EFI to give it a try, but they're more likely to be satisfied, if given realistic expectations. Also, if money is an issue, cut cost by passing on ESC. On the other hand, be sure to install a fuel return line, no matter what advertisements say. Fuel return is the secret to heat transfer, which plays a major part in eliminating vapor lock.
              Last edited by JoeHall; 12-03-2019, 11:35 AM.

              Comment


              • #8
                I am a believer that an owner should be able to do what they want with their car. I have owned original, restored and restomod Studebakers. The one exception is when dealing with an extremely rare car and a '62-'64 Hawk does not fall into this category. Adding something like EFI for drivability makes sense to me and it can be reversed in the future if so desired.
                Gary L.
                Wappinger, NY

                SDC member since 1968
                Studebaker enthusiast much longer

                Comment


                • #9
                  My first impression, as always, is that there is not a single post-war Studebaker model that is rare enough, or special enough to consider it's stock survival, as somehow sacrosanct. Then it gets down to how a particular car has survived for the last 50-70 years. IMHO for that a car has survived in reasonable, #3 condition, or better, it is just a ill-conceived move to destroy it's historical value. For this old time collector, altering it does not stand up to scrutiny when cost, downtime and final value become part of the equation. For me some pre-war cars are a whole different ballgame. In other words resto-rodding a 1963 GT is a great deal different then altering a 1931 President Four Season roadster.

                  If the owners target group, for approval, is the resto-mod fans, there is nothing I, or anyone else, can say that is going to alter an owner's mind. But I would like to point out that there is a huge and growing part of the hobby who loves to see an original car. The audience for an original car is going to be different and maybe more appreciative then street rodders. They tend to appreciate what the car is and the story of how it survived. It's a great deal different the having people trying to critique your vision for the car, or the quality of work that went into it's alteration.

                  Bill

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I'm a diehard purist, when it comes to my own stuff and while judging certain classes of vehicles at shows. While we have a responsibility to ensure the purity of certain classes of vehicle and can dictate to a degree what is and isn't authentic, based on published factory and production line specifics, there is still a bit of Grey area where Studebaker is concerned that makes saying "never" all most impossible to say. It is a well known fact that Studebaker would go to great lengths to sell a vehicle. Even modify the vehicle in question to meet the buyers requested items. Most all of these aberrations are well documented.

                    I've seen and owned several of these colorful modified examples and I can respect and enjoy their aberrations and distinctiveness just as well as I can respect and enjoy any aberrations and distinctiveness an owner wishes to instill in his/her vehicle. Doesn't matter if the vehicle started out as a rust bucket, or one of the most solid and worthy original vehicles extant.

                    That said, and fact aside, one should never try and dictate to another the standards by which that individual sees fit to apply to his/her property. Heed the old adage, "Your car, your time, your money". Put another way, "Build it the best you can, what ever way you want and can afford to".

                    Come join the SDC. We accept all our members and their vehicles regardless of age, race, color, creed, religious beliefs and assuredly modifications.

                    Bo
                    Bo

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      To whom it may concern -

                      Your car, do as you wish to it.
                      The only caveat, however you build it, just finish it.

                      Mike

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I had hoped that, "Your car, do as you wish," YCDAYW would have worked out better like CASO..

                        Can't stop engine swaps, chops, forced patina, ratting, or other personal touches.. Its just who we are.

                        If you have a factory "Hertz Rental" Mustang and decide to "Corvette Summer" customize it, be my guest, although, personally, I will think you should have your head examined.

                        If its a 6cyl any day Mustang. pufft.. "Nice car.." and "Good job..'

                        If you have that car that has a particular, and "truly" rare quality or "pedigree" about it, and want to to do a full custom, pass it along to a purist and find a plane jane and start chopping..

                        I just say use some common sense what car you do it to. Does every GT demanded to be pure and a concourse elite? Heck no..

                        I sill enjoy options, expressions, and yeah, this engine sucks and I want to drive it every day at 90mph, so engine swap it is.

                        What is really funny is, do you think for one moment the guy drawing the concept of this car, or the guy putting this car together even gave a second thought to the tour de elegance as the 100,000 car rolled past them?

                        Honestly, If all I saw were 100 pt cars at every show I'd stay home and watch my cat sleep.

                        Funny how we over think or arm chair quarterback this stuff.

                        So if that is a question, Yes! Restomod a GT...

                        Not like it hasn't all ready been done before, by the way.

                        I Love this restomod..

                        My problem is, Id be so comfortable, I'd fall asleep on a long drive.



                        Last edited by SScopelli; 12-03-2019, 02:14 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by swvalcon View Post
                          I agree with JPepper If it's a nice stock all original leave it that way. If it's a rust bucket or a junk yard reject do what you want with it.
                          I wouldn't think this would be news, but those that want to modify and/or customize a car look for the most complete and rust free example they can afford...just as restorers do. If you think you are going to talk either party into starting with junk when they can afford better, you're not being very realistic.
                          Dick Steinkamp
                          Bellingham, WA

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Hallabutt View Post
                            ...But I would like to point out that there is a huge and growing part of the hobby who loves to see an original car.
                            I'd have to say the opposite. I see the hobby going more towards modified cars. Some maybe subtly with drive train upgrades, AC, wheels/tires, more comfortable interiors, paint colors, etc. But lots of not so subtle ones too. The ones kept original (and appreciated as such) seem to be the high dollar rare cars.

                            Dick Steinkamp
                            Bellingham, WA

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by JoeHall View Post

                              Maybe apples to oranges with Stude V8 and SBC. The Studes's timing and advance curve are not, "built" by points and ignition, rather by Studebaker engineers, who used the flyweights and vacuum advance to achieve their goals. On paper, the ECU will respond in miliseconds and make everything happen more timely and overall better, but it is negligible in practical ap, in terms of performance and MPG. At least, that has been my experience. Similar to the injectors and atomization which, again, is not superior in any way to a good carb. What EFI will do, and do well, is eliminate vapor lock, and the need for frequent tinkering. But that's about it.

                              After nearly 70,000 miles, combined, on two GT Hawks with EFI, I have came to understand what they do and what they don't do. I love mine, and will not go back to a carb on those GTs, but will never go to EFI on the 56J. I love its' Holley Street Demon, which would be hard to improve on, same as its ignition with Pertronix.

                              I encourage anyone considering EFI to give it a try, but they're more likely to be satisfied, if given realistic expectations. Also, if money is an issue, cut cost by passing on ESC. On the other hand, be sure to install a fuel return line, no matter what advertisements say. Fuel return is the secret to heat transfer, which plays a major part in eliminating vapor lock.
                              Joe

                              All engines are designed and built by engineers, I think GM had a few in that era also, and in these earlier times the best they could do is forecast what events will happen at any time in the internals of the engine. They used what information they had at the time as valves opened/closed, pistons moved and the plugs fired to forecast optimum conditions. Pretty common stuff among all engines remembering SBC's were 1955 vintage. They had little control of outside influences like fuel, air temp, altitude among many.

                              Not to say your engines don't run well, I'll bet they do but they burn more/less fuel than necessary at times and while running well are not generally optimum. I use in my defense the engines of today against the engines of the 60's.

                              Apples and oranges, comparing 1950's to the 20th century! Possibly but we all know that internal combustion is becoming a more precise science and as the ability to control it improves both economy and performance improve.

                              Therefore my belief that not taking advantage of a known improvement in technology like timing control is specious at best. I would never spend my dollars on FI without timing control.

                              As I said earlier, just like politics and religion, no winner ever. But IAC, I continue to admire what you do and contribute to the forum but will continue to disagree with you on this issue.

                              I now take my leave of the discussion as I have presented my viewpoint.

                              Bob

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X