Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

dropped spindles

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

  • Front Axle / Front Suspension: dropped spindles

    Does anyone know where I can get dropped spindles for an Avanti/Hawk? I want to drop my front end by 1 1/2" to get back the early Avanti rake ... and I don't like other "solutions" (cut springs, etc.). Oh, and I've already taken out the coil spring spacers.

    Thanks.

  • #2
    Get out a mill, lathe, some material, go at it.

    You have several people asking for them..!

    Mike

    Comment


    • #3
      You probably won't like my solution, but I would junk that bellybutton Motor, install a Studebaker 289, (or Buick, Olds Caddy), remove the Frame to body Spacers and call it "Raked".
      StudeRich
      Second Generation Stude Driver,
      Proud '54 Starliner Owner
      SDC Member Since 1967

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by StudeRich View Post
        You probably won't like my solution, but I would junk that bellybutton Motor, install a Studebaker 289, (or Buick, Olds Caddy), remove the Frame to body Spacers and call it "Raked".
        Yeah, put a Studebaker engine in it. That'll drop the front end a couple inches.
        Jerry Forrester
        Forrester's Chrome
        Douglasville, Georgia

        See all of Buttercup's pictures at https://imgur.com/a/tBjGzTk

        Comment


        • #5
          It wasn't raised by the spindles, so I wouldn't try to drop it that way. The body was lifted. Bring the body back down on the frame and then clear up any interference issues, such as the air cleaner.
          Gary L.
          Wappinger, NY

          SDC member since 1968
          Studebaker enthusiast much longer

          Comment


          • #6
            You can also create the illusion by choosing larger tires for the rear and smaller on the front.
            There are many reasons the body needed to be raised to clear obstacles. Not sure there's any way to lower the body as the original Studebaker was.
            sigpic1966 Daytona (The First One)
            1950 Champion Convertible
            1950 Champion 4Dr
            1955 President 2 Dr Hardtop
            1957 Thunderbird

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by thunderations View Post
              You can also create the illusion by choosing larger tires for the rear and smaller on the front.
              There are many reasons the body needed to be raised to clear obstacles. Not sure there's any way to lower the body as the original Studebaker was.
              The main reason that it was raised was because Altman thought that his potential customers would prefer that look.
              Gary L.
              Wappinger, NY

              SDC member since 1968
              Studebaker enthusiast much longer

              Comment


              • #8
                Gary, how about the difference in overall height between the Studebaker motor and the small block chev. i think that height of intake / carb combination is the main difference. Lou Cote

                Comment


                • #9
                  I have a LS2 and it is low and light ... so no hood clearance problems with stock motor mount adapter plates. However, I loved the original Avanti front fenders and body rake so I removed the Avanti II fiberglass fender inserts and the coil springs inserts (and added front body shims) ... BUT ... the stock tire to fender relationship is still 1 1/2" too much. It seems that if someone has gone to the trouble of milling dropped spindles for a Stude, then I could solve my (visual) problems and not mess with the rest of the car. Other 60's cars have dropped spindles available ... maybe those fabricators could do a Stude?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Spring -

                    NO aftermarket manufacturer is going to engineer, tool up, manufacturer, test, market a product that will sell...MAYBE, 15 units..!

                    Mike

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Most of my life has been spent attempting to enjoy and maintain my vehicles just to keep them reasonably close to their engineered specifications as designed. Although I am a passionate and incurable tinkerer...I tend to avoid re-engineering certain components. Suspensions, being one of them. Especially, since I have little experience wrenching on them and thus, even less confidence that I would "get it right."

                      Perhaps I'm not understanding the "lowering" aspect of dropped spindles, but around here, as our former pleasant region continues to suffer the degradation of "Urban Sprawl," there is an annoying proliferation of "bipity bumpity" speed bumps. Like little colonies of toad stools...they seem to spring up overnight... Immediately to begin attempting to disembowel certain vehicles that seem to be engineered with reasonable ground clearance.

                      So my question is...do you lower the front to get a certain "rake" for appearance or performance? Or...can the same be achieved by simply raising the rear? There must be some sort of "ratio" (front to back) involved?
                      John Clary
                      Greer, SC

                      SDC member since 1975

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Considering the amount of work you have in your Avanti, why not just talk to Morrision, Fatman and the other suspects that make Studebaker replacement front suspension. That way you will be able to tailor the ride height and handling to your specific set of variables. I do agree that original rake looks right on the car when the filler strip is removed. Bob

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Jim Pearce has a 63 Avanti with a SBC and you wouldn't know it. The car is very well engineered and finished. He installed smaller crank pulleys and a few other tidbits to keep the rake.

                          Here's the link,
                          http://www.studebaker-info.org/avantiX1.html#r1229
                          64 GT Hawk (K7)
                          1970 Avanti (R3)

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by dynolou2 View Post
                            Gary, how about the difference in overall height between the Studebaker motor and the small block chev. i think that height of intake / carb combination is the main difference. Lou Cote
                            The SBC is shorter, narrower, lower and lighter than the Stude V8. When Brooks Stevens son began building Excalibers, he said using the SBC instead of the Stude R2 solved most of his engineering and packaging problems.

                            The main reason that it was raised was because Altman thought that his potential customers would prefer that look. Gary L.
                            X2 that Altman was quoted as feeling the original recipe rake was too extreme and thought possibly customers would buy a more conventional attitude.


                            jack vines
                            PackardV8

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I'm thinking the same thing can be accomplished be zeeing the lower A frame. This was an old hot rodders trick, long since forgotten. Roger Vest of Springfield, Ohio did it to a custom Avanti he built. Very drivable car. Besides, thinking that the king pins are forged for strength.
                              sigpic 1963 Studebaker Avanti: LS1 motor and T-56 transmission have been moved rearward, set up as a two seat coupe with independent rear suspension. Complex solutions for nonexistant problems.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X