Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A final solution to the endless Ford V8 comments

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

  • A final solution to the endless Ford V8 comments

    After being told for the one millionth time that I had a Ford engine in my GT Hawk, I decided to mock this flyer up to hand on to any curious bystanders. Needless to say I'll be taking a handful of these with me over to the Boca Concours. If you want it for yourself, just download it to your computer's desktop.

    It's accurate! It's efficient! It's not impolite!


    Click image for larger version  Name:	Studebaker vs. Ford V8 Flyer.jpg Views:	0 Size:	98.0 KB ID:	1816747

    Last edited by Stude Shoo-wop!; 01-12-2020, 03:56 PM.
    Jake Robinson Kaywell: Shoo-wops and doo-wops galore to the background of some fine Studes. I'm eager and ready to go!

    1962 GT Hawk - "Daisy-Mae" - she came dressed to kill in etherial green with a charming turquoise inside. I'm hopelessly in love!

  • #2
    Good Handout!

    The ONLY thing that would make that better would be a TOP Views, showing how narrow those Fords really are.

    Click image for larger version  Name:	1966_Ford_Mustang_289.JPG Views:	0 Size:	162.0 KB ID:	1816756 Click image for larger version  Name:	63VC2751 Blue Cloth Cruiser7.jpg Views:	0 Size:	124.6 KB ID:	1816759
    Last edited by StudeRich; 01-12-2020, 04:36 PM.
    StudeRich
    Second Generation Stude Driver,
    Proud '54 Starliner Owner

    Comment


    • #3
      I generally refer people to the location of the distributor.

      The only addition to your flyer would be Studebaker's installation of the GM 283 V8 (McKinnon) in 1965-66 models produced in Canada.

      If they were already set up for Ford engines, they wouldn't have gone to the extra trouble of switching over to GM.
      Andy
      62 GT

      Comment


      • #4
        In 1973 we were headed from San Diego to Southbend for the Studebaker meet. We stopped in Missouri to fill up the truck and I checked the oil. Station attendent insisted that the engine was a Cadillac engine not a Studebaker. After some discussion decided to give up on educating him.
        David L

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Andy R. View Post
          I generally refer people to the location of the distributor.

          The only addition to your flyer would be Studebaker's installation of the GM 283 V8 (McKinnon) in 1965-66 models produced in Canada.

          If they were already set up for Ford engines, they wouldn't have gone to the extra trouble of switching over to GM.
          Yes...The much smaller engine "footprint" of the Ford SB, the distributor location and the hold down methods for the valve covers are easy to spot differences. That may not deter those that know what they know, however, from telling you what you have.
          Dick Steinkamp
          Bellingham, WA

          Comment


          • #6
            Jake, a flier like that, is a very good idea! I will make a couple suggestions, hoping you won't mind, too much? I notice you've shown bore & stroke specifications, for both the Stude 232" and Ford 289". Perhaps it would be helpful to include a little more information? Even another page, if so required. How Studebaker increased the bore, of its 232" to 3.5625" in '55, yielding a new displacement of 259". Then introduced a 3.625 stroke crank in '56. Creating the 289"s. Years ahead of the introduction of the Ford 289"! Then you could mention the different locations of the distributor, starter, & oil filter? There aren't any common components, shared by the two engines, as far as I know? If so, maybe that would be a good opening statement?

            Mark
            Last edited by S2Deluxe; 01-12-2020, 07:35 PM.
            sigpic

            S2Deluxe = (5H - C3).

            Comment


            • #7
              I made an updated version of the flyer after taking stock of everyone's input. I thought it was integral to keep everything on one page for the sake of brevity, therefore, it is packed as possible.



              Click image for larger version  Name:	FINAL Studebaker vs. Ford V8 Flyer.jpg Views:	0 Size:	109.6 KB ID:	1816784


              Last edited by Stude Shoo-wop!; 01-12-2020, 07:53 PM.
              Jake Robinson Kaywell: Shoo-wops and doo-wops galore to the background of some fine Studes. I'm eager and ready to go!

              1962 GT Hawk - "Daisy-Mae" - she came dressed to kill in etherial green with a charming turquoise inside. I'm hopelessly in love!

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Stude Shoo-wop! View Post
                I made an updated version of the flyer after taking stock of everyone's input. I thought it was integral to keep everything on one page for the sake of brevity, therefore, it is packed as possible.
                That's a definite improvement! Still, it seems to me that, there is enough room? To squeeze in, the 3 - 9/16" bore, and 3 - 5/8" stroke specifications. Of the Stude 289", right after you state those for the Ford. Those are the most relevant specifications!

                Mark


                sigpic

                S2Deluxe = (5H - C3).

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by S2Deluxe View Post
                  There aren't any common components, shared by the two engines, as far as I know? If so, maybe that would be a good opening statement?

                  Mark
                  Unless you change things from factory spec. My once 289, now roughly 298 is using a Ford small block 260-302 starter. But, it is on the oposite side of the engine from the Ford, stock location for Studebaker; just mounted upside down.

                  sigpic

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I always referenced the distributor location, and the exhaust manifolds. Studes have siamesed middle ports.
                    The only difference between death and taxes is that death does not grow worse every time Congress convenes. - Will Rogers

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by bensherb View Post

                      Unless you change things from factory spec. My once 289, now roughly 298 is using a Ford small block 260-302 starter. But, it is on the oposite side of the engine from the Ford, stock location for Studebaker; just mounted upside down.
                      Ok then, a Ford starter will work mounted upside down, on a Stude. Does a Stude V8 starter, also work upside down, on a Ford 260 - 302? Gosh, maybe they are both Ford engines? Does the Ford starter use the same mounting bolts as a Stude starter, when it's in a Ford?

                      Mark
                      Last edited by S2Deluxe; 01-13-2020, 10:15 AM.
                      sigpic

                      S2Deluxe = (5H - C3).

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I usually say "my friends all original -56 Hawk (not Golden) has a 289, when did Ford's 289 come out?"
                        Easy enough...

                        sigpic

                        Josephine
                        -55
                        Champion V8
                        4d sedan

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I used to use a display board when I went to shows and I described the engine as "Studebaker-built." I also used that phrase when displaying the engine.
                          peter lee

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I usually say "my friends all original -56 Hawk (not Golden) has a 289, when did Ford's 289 come out?"
                            Easy enough...
                            That is good stuff right there.

                            The only difference between death and taxes is that death does not grow worse every time Congress convenes. - Will Rogers

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Well...…….when DID the Ford 289 come out?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X