Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

R-3 engines are transplants, not clones!

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

  • R-3 engines are transplants, not clones!

    This is not meant as an antagonistic post as we seem to be getting along lately but I cant take the misinformation anymore! There seem to be a huge amount of people on this board offering erroneous information that has been picked up here and there concerning the R3 engine. If your not sure of something, say so, as the info can be passed on as truth.
    First off, all A,B, and EX serial numbered engines are in fact REAL "R-3" engines. They are not clones, never were, never will be. The only ones in question would be the very last 4 or 5 engines that were pieced together (with genuine, BRAND NEW, studebaker built parts) at Paxton products. The earliest engines were all 299 cubic inches, quickly changing to 304.5 that most of us associate with the R-3. ALL the Bonneville records (worlds fastest car in 1964) were broken with 299 engines, not the 304.5 version as used in the 10 factory cars. There was even an R-3 259 at bonneville and the engine exists today with a bad cylinder or two (John Hora used to own it).


    Many people on this board are calling these "B" series engines clones and that is ridiculous. Do you really think Studebaker offered these to the public and made them on a one by one basis? Of course not , this was a huge company, producing 69,555 cars in 1963 and double that just 4 years earlier. Studebaker produced roughly 1800 supercharged Avantis, yet they planned on making only 9 R-3 engines to sell to the public....please. It was in fact quite the opposite. While most of the exact records from daily operations at Paxton were conveniently lost in a fire, we know the majority of the 118 REAL R-3 engines were built,crated and sitting in South bend waiting to be put into factory cars (Avantis,Daytonas, Commmanders,cruisers,challengers.....even pick up trucks if ordered as they did build 3 factory R-2 champ trucks)I have been in manufacturing for 18 years and there is no way in hell you made these engines a few at a time. The heads, intake manifolds, headers, air boxes, connecting rods, pistons and even the valve covers were all R-3 specific and needed to be manufactured in the hundreds at the bare minimum. The blocks were then sonic tested and only 1 in 12 had the wall thickness to survive the .093 overbore. After that, all the components (every screw,gasket,etc)had to be shipped clear across the nation to their performance division "Paxton Products" to be hand ported, polished,balanced and assembled. Then back on the train to make the long,slow rail trip back to Indiana. Can you imagine the massive delays if this was done a few at a time? Paxton Products, although an official Studebaker company did not make the heads, headers, etc., they assembled,machined,tested and sometimes provided field engineering as they really were part of Studebaker but not in a manufacturing sense.


    To avoid making these costly delays even worse , Studebaker ran larger amounts of these engines at a time and eventually virtually all of the R-3 engines were cradled snuggly inside the familiar confines of South Bend. The sad irony is all this finally became real in the final weeks of Studbakers existance....hence the reason why the nine R-3 cars were at the end of the line with the VERY LAST Avanti built being an R-3!!!!


    The production serial numbers tell us this is true as well. I own 3 real R-3 engines, one being in a factory R-3 Avanti. The proof is in the fact that I own B-24 which was bought from Paxton after Studebaker died, yet my factory R-3 is serial # B-38. How could B38 come before B24 even though B24 is a clone engine to some of you people? They were made in order and Stubaker grabbed which ever one was easiest to grab with a forklift and then put there own serial number after the B number . In the case of R5546 the engine reads r-3, B38 k309. What happened to B1 through B37 which should have gone into production cars before B38? Ill tell you what happened....they were bought by Paxton when Studebaker died and sent back to California in STUDEBAKER crates to be resold as REAL, AUTHENTIC, studebaker re

  • #2
    quote:Originally posted by TOMMO
    Snip
    First off, all A,B, and EX serial numbered engines are in fact REAL "R-3" engines. They are not clones, never were, never will be.
    Snip
    Tom

    1. No question a real complete "B" engine is not a clone engine, but dropping it in a Avanti a few years ago does not make a production "R3 Avanti"
    2. A old, bare, "B" block built with who knows what, does not make a R3 engine.
    The rest I agree with, but none of that changes the fact that the nine production R3's are at the top of the food chain. The Bonneville record cars should be very close to that level IMHO. What category to put them in is not for me to decide. Perhaps special engineering cars, and certainly valuable historically.

    JDP/Maryland
    JDP Maryland

    Comment


    • #3
      Well said and well written.

      Comment


      • #4
        I agree with most of what you nicely state. The clone part, in my interpretation, is the Avanti that was not originally equipped with an R3 engine being represented as an R3 Avanti. The R3 engine is a true R3 and not a clone engine. The Avanti is a true Avanti. The R3 placed in this car does not make an authentic R3 Avanti. It is an Avanti that has had an authentic R3 engine transplanted into it. To me, the only true and authentic R3 Avantis are the nine built by Studebaker.

        Gary L.
        Wappinger, NY

        SDC member since 1968
        Studebaker enthusiast much longer
        Gary L.
        Wappinger, NY

        SDC member since 1968
        Studebaker enthusiast much longer

        Comment


        • #5
          Thank you Tom, that was very good, informative and CORRECT info on the much fabled and misunderstood 1964 R3 Jet Thrust Studebaker Engines!

          All of this, myself and many others (some Forum Members) like my X-South Bay Area Calif. neighbor (near Santa Monica) and friend Jon Myer already knew.

          The only thing I was not aware of (still not positive about) is not important anyway, and that is your statement about the Studebaker Automotive Sales Corp. rather than the Paxton Products Division of Studebaker having contracted the R3 headers, Heads etc. to be made.
          Hey, they got made, that's all that matters! [^]

          You will recall that employees of Paxton have stated that Andy had those thousands of Power Shift linkage and shifter parts made, and the Co. he was President of, SOLD them to Studebaker Corp. enough to put a P/S in every '64 built and still have plenty of spares!

          Maybe I missed something, but I thought we were all just saying that the ebay car is in NO WAY a REAL Studebaker Authorized R3 car, not even aftermarket, after Plant closure or anything but a clone, as you said. That is really about IT! [:0]

          And please understand, I am not trying to start an argument here, only stating what I believe to be true, having 47 years of experience with the cars and working for Studebaker dealers, and my memory stands to be corrected, that's fine no hard feelings.

          By the way I have known John Hora, since I sold him parts for his Wagonaire from the Parts dept. of Frost & French Studebaker on Western Ave. in L.A. in 1970 and know of his R3 Avanti and his Bonneville speed run car.

          StudeRich
          StudeRich
          Second Generation Stude Driver,
          Proud '54 Starliner Owner

          Comment


          • #6
            Thanks for the nice words guys...whether we agree on everything or not. I also agree with all of you that a real R3 AVANTI is one of only nine...period. Then come the real R-3 engines, followed by what JDP said as the bare block "B" engines with a variety of possible piece combinations and lastly the complete reproduction version which are a very cool and affordable alternative but in NO WAY , shape or form an R-3.....just a cool clone. I own an original R-3 Avanti as I said earlier and dont want to confuse or detract from its value as the Holy Grail which it really is, but the engine that resides inside the engine compartment is the same as other REAL R-3 engines that I own, of which are correct down to the R-3 carb.

            My suggestion is to call the real B engines that were paxton or owner installed, transplants. I thinks its the perfect word as they are real engines transplanted into new bodies that Studebaker couldnt buy time to do themselves, but not clones. Then we can call the partial R-3 just that ....a partial R-3. Either a B block with a variety of parts or a normal 289 bored out with real heads, headers, etc. And finally we should reserve the word clone for reproduction engines, which are as a matter of fact the only real clone engines due to their complete lack of authenticity concerning factory built parts (especially the absence of "B" blocks).

            Comment


            • #7
              Thanks for the nice words guys...whether we agree on everything or not. I also agree with all of you that a real R3 AVANTI is one of only nine...period. Then come the real R-3 engines, followed by what JDP said as the bare block "B" engines with a variety of possible piece combinations and lastly the complete reproduction version which are a very cool and affordable alternative but in NO WAY , shape or form an R-3.....just a cool clone. I own an original R-3 Avanti as I said earlier and dont want to confuse or detract from its value as the Holy Grail which it really is, but the engine that resides inside the engine compartment is the same as other REAL R-3 engines that I own, of which are correct down to the R-3 carb.

              My suggestion is to call the real B engines that were paxton or owner installed, transplants. I thinks its the perfect word as they are real engines transplanted into new bodies that Studebaker couldnt buy time to do themselves, but not clones. Then we can call the partial R-3 just that ....a partial R-3. Either a B block with a variety of parts or a normal 289 bored out with real heads, headers, etc. And finally we should reserve the word clone for reproduction engines, which are as a matter of fact the only real clone engines due to their complete lack of authenticity concerning factory built parts (especially the absence of "B" blocks).

              Comment


              • #8
                Wow I had no idea that Paxton was responsible for the powershift linkage. Are you sure? I know Paxton had nothing to do with the building of the powershift transmission itself, at least not in manufacturing. Were they planning on using it without a floorshift until paxton ordered them? And how did 4000 os so avantis come with powershifts from studebaker if paxton bought them? Maybe Studebaker authorized them to submit drawings but Im sure Studebaker paid the bill and pulled the punches. Keep in mind as well that egbert wanted to "revamp" the companies image to a more sporty , performance look and feel, and quite possibly wanted 1/4 to 1/2 of the automatics to be floorshifts. Also remember that Studebaker thought they would buil more than 69,555 cars in 1963 hence the abundance of NOS parts we have all enjoyed. They also made more than 1/2 the cars in only 3.5 months of 1964 that they did in 1963. In 1964 they made 36,967 cars in little over 3 months which could easily have reached 110,000 cars for 1964 if you multiply using a conservative 10 month calender year to compensate fo the usual strong 1st quarter sale figures from Sept thru Dec. I do know that the heads, intake manifolds and headers were studebaker built and the blueprints for them still exist. These components were designed for the up and coming 340 inch studeee motor. A few prototype 340 mills were built and also still exist. I have heard, but cannot prove, that Studebaker also had a stroker crank for the 340 to max it out to 427 cubes, but again cannot substantiate this. Tom

                Comment


                • #9
                  quote:Originally posted by TOMMO

                  Wow I had no idea that Paxton was responsible for the powershift linkage. Are you sure? I know Paxton had nothing to do with the building of the powershift transmission itself, at least not in manufacturing. Were they planning on using it without a floorshift until paxton ordered them? And how did 4000 os so avantis come with powershifts from studebaker if paxton bought them? Maybe Studebaker authorized them to submit drawings but Im sure Studebaker paid the bill and pulled the punches. Keep in mind as well that egbert wanted to "revamp" the companies image to a more sporty , performance look and feel, and quite possibly wanted 1/4 to 1/2 of the automatics to be floorshifts. Also remember that Studebaker thought they would buil more than 69,555 cars in 1963 hence the abundance of NOS parts we have all enjoyed. They also made more than 1/2 the cars in only 3.5 months of 1964 that they did in 1963. In 1964 they made 36,967 cars in little over 3 months which could easily have reached 110,000 cars for 1964 if you multiply using a conservative 10 month calender year to compensate fo the usual strong 1st quarter sale figures from Sept thru Dec. I do know that the heads, intake manifolds and headers were studebaker built and the blueprints for them still exist. These components were designed for the up and coming 340 inch studeee motor. A few prototype 340 mills were built and also still exist. I have heard, but cannot prove, that Studebaker also had a stroker crank for the 340 to max it out to 427 cubes, but again cannot substantiate this. Tom
                  The 427 stroker would put the rods though the sides of the block and be way to long a stroke for the bore, so that a myth. As to the 340 "big block" I had a chance to buy one for a couple of hundred bucks in 1964 and passed.

                  JDP/Maryland
                  JDP Maryland

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    quote:Originally posted by TOMMO

                    Wow I had no idea that Paxton was responsible for the powershift linkage. Are you sure? I know Paxton had nothing to do with the building of the powershift transmission itself, at least not in manufacturing. Were they planning on using it without a floorshift until paxton ordered them? And how did 4000 os so avantis come with powershifts from studebaker if paxton bought them? Maybe Studebaker authorized them to submit drawings but Im sure Studebaker paid the bill and pulled the punches. Keep in mind as well that egbert wanted to "revamp" the companies image to a more sporty , performance look and feel, and quite possibly wanted 1/4 to 1/2 of the automatics to be floorshifts. Also remember that Studebaker thought they would buil more than 69,555 cars in 1963 hence the abundance of NOS parts we have all enjoyed. They also made more than 1/2 the cars in only 3.5 months of 1964 that they did in 1963. In 1964 they made 36,967 cars in little over 3 months which could easily have reached 110,000 cars for 1964 if you multiply using a conservative 10 month calender year to compensate fo the usual strong 1st quarter sale figures from Sept thru Dec. I do know that the heads, intake manifolds and headers were studebaker built and the blueprints for them still exist. These components were designed for the up and coming 340 inch studeee motor. A few prototype 340 mills were built and also still exist. I have heard, but cannot prove, that Studebaker also had a stroker crank for the 340 to max it out to 427 cubes, but again cannot substantiate this. Tom
                    The 427 stroker would put the rods though the sides of the block and be way to long a stroke for the bore, so that a myth. As to the 340 "big block" I had a chance to buy one for a couple of hundred bucks in 1964 and passed.

                    JDP/Maryland
                    JDP Maryland

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Seems pretty simple to most of us

                      Just call it what it is

                      1. It's either a complete and original R3-equipped Avanti or it isn't.
                      2. It's either a complete and original R3 engine or it isn't.
                      3. Anything else is a non-original combination of parts. Please just describe what it is, i.e.:
                      an Avanti which now has an engine with some R3 parts
                      an R2 Avanti with an R3 airbox on it
                      or whatever it actually and truthfully is.

                      The sellers and the wannabees who try to fudge the facts just show their own basic lack of understanding of what they've got or what they're selling or their basic dishonesty, whichever. BTW, if one is unsure of the pedigree of the vehicle or engine, just ask someone who knows - don't guess or invent.

                      thnx, jack vines

                      PackardV8
                      PackardV8

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        quote:Originally posted by PackardV8

                        Seems pretty simple to most of us

                        Just call it what it is


                        thnx, jack vines

                        PackardV8
                        The same goes for any car. i.e., this "100% original factory restoration" GT Hawk. Stunning car, but I could take off a dozen authenticity points just from the pictures.

                        http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/_W0QQitemZ380174362358

                        JDP/Maryland
                        JDP Maryland

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I agree Jack, as its basically what i just said. Only a real engine put into a car outside of the factory IS A TRANSPLANTED engine...not a cloned engine and this is extremely important to those of us that own the real cars or the real engines or both .

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            quote:Originally posted by TOMMO

                            I agree Jack, as its basically what i just said. Only a real engine put into a car outside of the factory IS A TRANSPLANTED engine...not a cloned engine and this is extremely important to those of us that own the real cars or the real engines or both .
                            The clone portion of the conversation over the Avanti still holds true. Put an R3 engine in an R2 car is a copy or an R3 Avanti. It's a clone. If I can make an exact duplicate of a Hemicuda starting with a base Barracuda, it's a clone, a copy. If I make an exact duplicate of one of the 9 R3 Avanti's or of Nelson's Commander, it's a clone. No one said 'BOO' about the engine or questioned what it was. But that Avanti is not one of the cherished 9 and it's not worth what those 9 cars are. Those 9 have provenance.

                            You want a good example of transplant? George Krem's Challenger. The was bought new, the engine was bought new and transplanted at the time. Not 40+ years later to make a buck. Paperwork matters. Those with paperwork are worth more than cars without.

                            Clone - 2. transitive verb make copy of something: to produce an exact or near copy of an object or product.

                            IF you were able to make an R3 with the correct parts starting with a standard block, R1 block or R2 block, then the engine would be a clone. Heck, if I had the heads, I'd be happy with that (I may not pay $25K for one, but I'd be happy).

                            I would like an R3 drag car. There would be no other term for the car than clone unless Nelson Bove leaves me in his will.


                            ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            Tom - Mulberry, FL

                            1964 Studebaker Daytona - 289 4V, 4-Speed (Cost To Date: $2125.60)

                            1964 Studebaker Commander 170-1V, 3-speed w/OD (Cost to Date: $623.67)

                            Tom - Bradenton, FL

                            1964 Studebaker Daytona - 289 4V, 4-Speed (Cost To Date: $2514.10)
                            1964 Studebaker Commander - 170 1V, 3-Speed w/OD

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Hey I don't disagree with what's been said here by the R-3 experts.
                              But also, Swifster is correct in terms of general useage of the word "Clone".

                              Trying to be more correct here is a laudable thing and helps keep the record straight for Stude fans who will be the keepers of Studebaker history.
                              But once you're off this forum, I'm afraid you'll be swimming upstream.

                              63 Avanti R1 2788
                              1914 Stutz Bearcat
                              (George Barris replica)

                              Washington State
                              63 Avanti R1 2788
                              1914 Stutz Bearcat
                              (George Barris replica)

                              Washington State

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X