Drive Line Angles

[Hawkowner]

I am working through the same problem after new American Racer wheels new radial tires. Hunter road force balanced tires and wheels. I have moved the vibiraton speed with different tires balances but not eliminated it . I have done extensive drive line and wheel vibiraton trouble shooting all over the country and drive line vib makes a difference noise and changes with speed.
I can see a slight bounce in the front end.
Just before storing the car for the summer. I found a bent rear hub and a out of round front brake drum. I suspect badly out of balance brake drums.
Disc brakes are coming.
Hawkowner

[wittsend]

After setting ride height with new springs, tires , etc... When parked on a flat level surface, I would put my angle finder on the carb flange of the intake and raise or lower the engine/trans at the trans mount until it's level. ...

I can't account for a Studebaker engine because my '64 Daytona came with a 283 McKinnon when I bought it. However, on a lot of engines the surface of the carb mount is not parallel to the crank centerline (and thus the trans output). The manifold carb mount surface can have a designed in tilt to compensate for engine tilt. Therefore the possibility exists that wrong reading might occur. That aspect should be confirmed before using the stated surface. I say this as a caution only given my lack of familiarity with Studebaker engines.

When I set my angles I used the trans output shaft's vertical face. On the rear end I used a short piece of pipe that fit the joint saddles and positioned it vertically using the pipe surface for the reading. In my case the trans was a 700R4 and perhaps not all trans output shafts extend that far out so I understand the limitation. My recollection was I had no more that 1 degree adjustability before the trans hit the tunnel or dropped onto the mount(no shims).

As to understanding the broke back driveshaft (I can't bend the lines but hopefully this helps):

Conventional: Trans output--/ -- shaft --/ -- rear end

Broke Back: Trans output--/ -- shaft -- \ -- rear end

[oilnsteel]

A Studebaker V8's carb mounting surface is not parallel to the crankshaft centerline.

Jim

[bensherb]

I haven't seen an engine yet that did have the carb on a paralell plane as the crank centerline. You don't seem to understand what I said.

Almost all carbs are meant to operate when sitting level, paralell to the ground. Get that right first. THEN, measure the angle of the trans output shaft. That will then give you the angle you need to match the rear axle to.

Neither my GT nor my dads '53 have any vibration at any speed. But I haven't run either over 90 mph. Typical freeway speed here is around 75. My '54 wagon is good to over 100, but it has a big block ford, c6 and 9". I've done many others the same way. I don't know if they vibrate at a given speed or not, if so it's not a lot, it's hard to tell when it only runs 8 seconds at a time but they were good for 140+. It's always worked for me.

[wittsend]

Thank you I better understand now. My focus was on the trans, shaft, rear end angles and I missed the aspect of getting the carb level - first. (note to self, eat breakfast first, read twice, then reply).

I will say with my '64 Daytona using a 350 Chevy (Edelbrock Intake) and a 700R4 trans I could in no way get the carb level even with the built in compensation of the intake manifold. I have the trans yoke about as close as I dare to the rather shallow shaft tunnel. I don't see dropping the engine as an option (as a means of reducing that angle) because the oil pan is already rather close to the center steering bellcrank. I just checked and the carb itself tilts back 3 degrees from level and the engine is in the 6-7 degree range from notes I have. That is the best I can get without significant trans and driveshaft tunnel modifications.

[Jerry Forrester]

Almost all carbs are meant to operate when sitting level, paralell to the ground.

I agree with all that and have almost always been able to get carb. level fore and aft and side to side when doing an engine swap.
BUT, I have often wondered how I was going to keep the carb. level when going up and down hills and keep the gas level in the carb. while making those sharp left turns on the 3/8 mile banked dirt track. (Tongue planted firmly in cheek.)

[bensherb]

Wittsend: Wow, that Lark must have a tiny tunnel. I didn't pay too much attention to it when I had my '61 Lark. The last C/K I put a 350 into, the damper was just high enough above the bellcrank to get a fan belt between them, but I could get the carb level. They must have a larger tunnel than the Lark; surprising.

[wittsend]

Here are several images:

First is a '66 Lark Type that came with a McKinnon engine originally. As one can see the engine tilts rearward significantly. I chose this over my engine to illustrate that it is a factory configuration though it is nearly identical to my '64 transplant using 65-66 mounts with a 350.

The second is the trans/driveshaft tunnel in my car. Note especially how shallow the driveshaft tunnel gets at about the point where the trans tunnel theoretically ends (and the yoke would be).

The third is the bottom side of my tailshaft/yoke/driveshaft tunnel. I have no more than 1/2" to 3/4" clearance from the outermost swing of the yoke to the tunnel underside. And, as the rear springs might compress they move the shaft closer to the tunnel.

How does this compare to the C/K?

[bensherb]

In the pic of the engine the angle doesn't look that bad, I wonder if the factory original Stude manifold might have had a different carb angle than the Chevy or maybe a wedge of some sort to compensate? I know with the Ford "FE" engines, there were different manifolds for different model cars in order to make things fit and keep the carb level.

From the pic of the trans tunnel it does appear the tunnel is very small. Even the tunnel in the early C/K is much larger and the later C/K tunnel is a bit bigger than it. I'm not sure, it may be an illusion due to the shape, but the fire wall may be a bit further forward on the lark too, forcing the engine a bit further forward and consequently higher too.

[alpayed]

You cannot achieve a normal configuration. I have tried with a 62GT and with my 60 Hawk. The 60 Hawk has a 2 piece shaft and even the short rear shaft hits the tunnel at the rear. So it runs broken back.
The alignment and phasing of a 2 piece shaft is even more critical as I have found with the 60 Hawk. The Ford302 and BTR transmission are so much shorter that a 1 piece shaft would need to be 4" diameter.
Keep in mind that the tunnel is offset 1" to the right hand side. Dana 44 has a 1"pinion offset to keep the axles the the same. LHD engines are offset 1/2" to the right so you have a 1/2" offset in the drive shaft also.
RHD engines are offset 1/2" to the left so you have a 1-1/2" offset in the drive shaft.
So it gets even more complicated. I plan view the shaft is conventional arrangement, transmission and pinion are parallel, in side view the arrangement is broken back.
Imagine looking along the driveshaft from the rear. The pinion points upward to the left and the transmission points upward to the right.
If the transmission and pinion were in the same line they would both point vertical when looking along the shaft.
This is why Studebaker put an offset in the yolks on the tailshaft. They are twisted to bring the universals back into phase.
Australian built Hawks were set up engine down 5 Deg and diff down 6 Deg. This allowed 1 Deg windup to run equal at operating speed.
If they are set up as designed they run well.
Drive shaft_fig3..pdf
This shows what i am describing.

Here is a 60 Hawk floor pan.
I think they are all roughly the same.
Allan

[JoeHall]

You cannot achieve a normal configuration. I have tried with a 62GT and with my 60 Hawk. The 60 Hawk has a 2 piece shaft and even the short rear shaft hits the tunnel at the rear. So it runs broken back.
The alignment and phasing of a 2 piece shaft is even more critical as I have found with the 60 Hawk. The Ford302 and BTR transmission are so much shorter that a 1 piece shaft would need to be 4" diameter.
Keep in mind that the tunnel is offset 1" to the right hand side. Dana 44 has a 1"pinion offset to keep the axles the the same. LHD engines are offset 1/2" to the right so you have a 1/2" offset in the drive shaft also.
RHD engines are offset 1/2" to the left so you have a 1-1/2" offset in the drive shaft.
So it gets even more complicated. I plan view the shaft is conventional arrangement, transmission and pinion are parallel, in side view the arrangement is broken back.
Imagine looking along the driveshaft from the rear. The pinion points upward to the left and the transmission points upward to the right.
If the transmission and pinion were in the same line they would both point vertical when looking along the shaft.
This is why Studebaker put an offset in the yolks on the tailshaft. They are twisted to bring the universals back into phase.
Australian built Hawks were set up engine down 5 Deg and diff down 6 Deg. This allowed 1 Deg windup to run equal at operating speed.
If they are set up as designed they run well.
[ATTACH]66303[/ATTACH]
This shows what i am describing.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]66304[/ATTACH]
Here is a 60 Hawk floor pan.
I think they are all roughly the same.
Allan

If you 60 Hawk has a 2-piece driveshaft, it must have been converted, using parts from a 57 or earlier C/K. The 1-piece shaft started in 58, unless they are different Down Under.

[bensherb]

Both my '62 GT hawk, and my dads '53 Coupe currently have one piece drive shafts. I know dads car has a level carb and correct drive shaft angles since I did it, the floor and firewall is factory un-altered. My GT is stock (for now) as far as I know. Since the trans (3 spd OD) came apart, It's making ungodly noises now, I'm going to change it to a GM OD auto and add disk brakes.

The biggest problem with using a Ford engine is that the oil pump is in the front (they're also longer). Even with the Mustang shallow pan and extended pickup that moves the bulk of the sump to the rear, it still has to sit at least a couple inches higher in front than a Chevy or Stude engine in order to clear the steering bellcrank.

[alpayed]

Here is a Ford bronco 5.0 in my 60 hawk. It would have been real easy with a carby. Look at the height of the intake manifold. It clears the hood by 3/4". No problem with bell crank clearance. Oil filter is in the original position no problems. starter is on the right side. Easy as pie.
Yes I did convert it to a 2 piece shaft, even kept the footwells.
I did shorten the sump as seen in the last pic. The Bronco sumps are at the rear with a long pickup and are bigger than a car. Still takes 7ltr. There is about 1" clear above nuts on top of bell crank. Oil filter can be seen on LHS.

[bensherb]

Yeah, I have a 4" filter and a 1" carb spacer on my hawk and it clears the hood too. The '53 hood is quite a bit lower though, with only about 2.5" from carb to hood with a V8 and 4 barrel carb.

[alpayed]

Sorry Wayne I didn't mean to hijack your thread.
Also there is a spacer about 3/8" thick which goes under the rear engine mount on the LHS of a LHD car.
On a RHC car it goes on the RHS. This is to make sure the engine is parallel as it is offset to the opposite side to the steering wheel.
If it is missing the engine will point downwards more than it should and will put the engine on an angle.
Allan