Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

1956-1958 Hot Rod Wagons

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by Swifster View Post
    Why would you have to severely chop the car up for a Packard engine? If these cars will accept a big block Chrysler or Chevy or even a 50's Hemi, what makes a Packard so much bigger? I would think sedans and wagons would have a larger engine compartment than a C/K...
    A C/K engine compartment WILL handle just about anything. (I had an early Chrysler Hemi 392 in a '58 Hawk) The sedan-wagon-Lark compartment is smaller, in every dimension really.

    Comment


    • #17
      If I'm not totally out of order I always thought -56 Golden Hawk's carries Packard V8's, where exactly is the shopping done; & is it THAT much less space because the wheel-base is shorter?
      Maby shorter but narrower?
      Lower?

      Comment


      • #18
        Nox, I don't think the engine compartment is any smaller. If you can cram a Chrysler 392 Hemi in a Lark, I think you could fit a Packard engine in a Studebaker sedan or wagon. JMHO... Of course the Hemi is W I D E. I don't know if the Packard is any longer. That's why I asked.
        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


        • #19
          I've seen a Pontiac 389 shoehorned into a Champ pickup. It oughta take the Packard

          Clark in San Diego | '63 Standard (F2) "Barney" | http://studeblogger.blogspot.com

          Comment


          • #20
            Packard V8's are quite long...at least 4" longer than a Stude V8. If someone really wanted to try this....the radiator, and probably the sheet metal around it would have to be moved well forward. Packard V8's also have an upper bellhousing cast integral with the engine block. God knows where THAT would end up...but no doubt the Studebaker firewall/floor would need modifications...then there's the extra weight! Anything can be done, but in a case like this...it really would be a step backwards...BIG TIME. And don't forget to modify Your Packard engine's oiling system with the adaption of an Oldsmobile oil pump so once the engine IS installed it will be able to actually run for a while without the hydraulic valve lifters collapsing. Today, Packard V8 engines are basically nostalgic 'money pits', simply because they were never fully developed before they were put into production. If SP had more time and money back then....................?

            Comment


            • #21
              Yes Swifster, I understood your idea & question, it wasn't you I directed the question to.

              So now I'm starting to wonder if all the Packards that runs the streets & roads in Sweden are just museum-stuff... or all have replaced their engines with 350 supermarket engines...?
              Yeah, probably...

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by SN-60 View Post
                Packard V8's are quite long...at least 4" longer than a Stude V8. If someone really wanted to try this....the radiator, and probably the sheet metal around it would have to be moved well forward. Packard V8's also have an upper bellhousing cast integral with the engine block. God knows where THAT would end up...but no doubt the Studebaker firewall/floor would need modifications...then there's the extra weight! Anything can be done, but in a case like this...it really would be a step backwards...BIG TIME. And don't forget to modify Your Packard engine's oiling system with the adaption of an Oldsmobile oil pump so once the engine IS installed it will be able to actually run for a while without the hydraulic valve lifters collapsing. Today, Packard V8 engines are basically nostalgic 'money pits', simply because they were never fully developed before they were put into production. If SP had more time and money back then....................?
                Lots of opinion above, but not necessarily facts.

                1. Yes, the Packard V8 is 4" longer than a Studebaker V8.
                2. Part of the bellhousing being on the block is a non-issue. The net length of the bellhousing is no longer than a typical V8 block. In fact the input shaft of the Packard V8 version of the T85 is shorter than that of the Studebaker version, so the net bell length is less.
                3. I make and sell the Oldsmobile oil pump conversion, but a professionally rebuild Packard V8 works just fine with a rebuilt and modified OEM pump.
                4. No, the Packard V8 doesn't cost that much more to build than a Studebaker V8. The fixes for the few problems are well known.

                jack vines
                PackardV8

                Comment


                • #23
                  Jack, what speed parts are available for these?
                  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


                  • #24
                    With 352 or 374 cid, you don't need no stink'in Speed Parts!
                    StudeRich
                    Second Generation Stude Driver,
                    Proud '54 Starliner Owner

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Rich, you can NEVER have too much horsepower...or torque.
                      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


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Studedude View Post
                        Mine was a '58.

                        I came out OK on the deal. Actually, my only disappointment was that I didn't get to play with it longer before it sold.

                        As it happened, a dealer friend of mine made me a reasonable offer, so I "wholesaled" to him. That saved me from painting it, and spending too much on it. And it elimated dealing with eBay, tire kickers, and malcontents.

                        He sold it in about a week, and it showed up on Craigslist about a month later. It's no longer there, so I assume it sold again.

                        Too bad a forum member didn't inquire, they could have made a good deal.

                        I don't know what my friend got for the car, or what it sold for on Craig'slist, but I 'spect it had to be approaching the 10K mark. For what it was, all that had been done to it, that would be a fair price if a fellow wanted to keep it and love it as his very own.
                        Thanks for the reply. I wasn't trying to be nosey, but my 56 Wagon will not stay with me for long after its done. I will be selling it to help complete my new house. That's the story on the 62 Convert and the 69 Grand Prix as well. When I have my house done, then it'll be time to keep some of the toys. For now, I'm happy with my Coupe as a keeper.
                        sals54

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by showbizkid View Post
                          I've seen a Pontiac 389 shoehorned into a Champ pickup. It oughta take the Packard

                          The 389 Pontiac is not that big, just today I brought home a rather nice 60 hawk with 79 Pontiac running setup, not a 389 but a 455, fits with lots of room to spare. will post some pictures tomorrow, still on the trailer now. here is a picture of it before I picked it up.



                          Last edited by candbstudebakers; 09-06-2013, 11:19 PM.
                          Candbstudebakers
                          Castro Valley,
                          California


                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Pontiacs are externally all the same size from 1955-1981. This includes the 287, 316, 347 and 370 engines before the 389 was introduced. Now there are differences in accessory drives, heads and intakes, but they were all the same size up until the 1981 265 and 301.
                            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


                            • #29
                              I have a few '56-'58 custom wagons to add here,
                              but only if I can somehow get them off my back-up drive.

                              I fear that the pics on my laptop may be gone forever,
                              as it no longer boots up...




                              StudeDave '57
                              StudeDave '57
                              US Navy (retired)

                              3rd Generation Stude owner/driver
                              SDC Member since 1985

                              past President
                              Whatcom County Chapter SDC
                              San Diego Chapter SDC

                              past Vice President
                              San Diego Chapter SDC
                              North Florida Chapter SDC

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                If this was a way to go, I found a company making adaptors to put a Chevy transmission on a Packard V8.
                                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

                                Working...
                                X