Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why would Stude hang gas tank ('57 Hawk) from body on one side, frame on the other?

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

  • Fuel System: Why would Stude hang gas tank ('57 Hawk) from body on one side, frame on the other?

    Pretty much "per title", but as I was preparing (taking stock of hangars and bolts....) to mount my gas tank on my rebuilt '57 GHawk chassis, in prep for PLUMBING it, my "disassembly photos" confirmed that the right side of the tank hangs from a stanchion on the body, and the left side mounts on two hangers on the frame.
    1. WHY? (and they must have mounted the gas tank AFTER the body drop then? Seems so inefficient for assembly line process, unless they used a temporary "jig" until body installed?)

    2. my original tank was shot; "new" one came with hangars and bolts still intact; one set had a spring and rubber combination for damping, the other only bolts. The new tank was from a later Hawk; I had the bottom "feed tube" connection changed (during cook-out/ReNu coating) to a 3/8" fitting for my supercharger, and then putting in a return fuel line via my sending unit's connection). I can't remember what the 57-58 parts book calls for now (or what my '57 had, the spring or not), and 0F so NOT running out to the shop to look :-). But wonder what best-practice is, as both appeared unmolested. The spring seems like good idea... (on the body stanchion mount I THINK? Rubber body-pads on the two frame hangers?).

    Regardless, very curious why Stude engineers considered this mounting arrangement a "good idea" (nothing, USUALLY, is done for 'no reason'), and is-what-it-is, how do you guys mount a Hawk tank, both temporarily to keep the sucker in place before it is time for the body, AND 'permanently" in terms of the best-practice for springs or rubber damping at the mounting points?

    Thanks!
    Barry

  • #2
    I hope that's not the only thing you've asked that about. I know on my hawk I've hit a lot of things where it's[ What the hell where they thinking.]

    Comment


    • #3
      Speaking of what were they thinking, how about those retainer nuts on the windshield cowl, on many 53-64 C/K bodies. The 3-piece that runs outboard of, and between the wipers. I saw a GT once that someone had cut a section, about 4" x 4", out of the roof of the glove compartment, and neatly patched it back up. I figured out why when I went to remove those cowl pieces from another GT. LOL

      Comment


      • #4
        :-) Well, to be honest SWVALCON, in the privacy of my shop I've questioned those 1950's engineers heritage a few times, (a day sometimes?). And then I usually find out I'm the one being stupid, and admit what they did made sense. I'm the first-time Stude rebuilder... AND, as an engineer myself, in the earlier part of my career working with products or mfg, I had a reason for what I did. And if it was a GOOD reason, I could explain why and it went on into production (or the equipment for production of something). If a SCREW-UP, in some cases, someone smarter or more experienced than me caught the dumb mistake in a review, and corrected it before it got too far. I'd like to think the Studebaker engineers were as smart as their counterparts at 3M? And barring the decisions based on LACK OF FUNDING (and I've had a few of those!!!) or overturned by Marketing! (DITTO!!), like to give them the benefit of the doubt on production line/assembly design. They DID have more continuous years of experience making "wheeled vehicles" than anyone else on the planet at the time, after all... (That said, this one and those doggone cowl screws just seem DUMB). Thanks for reminding me of those Joe!!! I've GOT to put a big piece of tape on my dashboard that says "DO NOT INSTALL UNTIL COWL STRIPS IN PLACE" (that is the key, isn't it? I remember reading warnings about this problem!)
        Last edited by bsrosell; 12-29-2017, 04:22 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Yes, I have also fought with those cowl strips. Remember, these were not designed to be replaced in the average design life of the car.
          I have seen and owned Hawks with the gasoline tank hanging due to floor rust. Of course, these were cars that were over ten years old and over 100K miles on them - well past the design life.
          Gary L.
          Wappinger, NY

          SDC member since 1968
          Studebaker enthusiast much longer

          Comment


          • #6
            I've lost a tank on a '62 AND a '64 Ford Galaxie in years past because the tank length steel mounting straps rusted through. I'm not so sure the Studebaker design is any worse.

            Paul
            I finally have a Stude I can drive! (sort of)
            1962 GT Hawk, 4 speed, a/c

            Comment


            • #7
              Fuel tanks were hung that way so they wouldn't absorb the frame flex on uneven road surfaces. It was thought if they were mounted rigidly it might split the seams.
              So.....if I'm 'pre-approved' why do you want me to fill out an application?

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Dwain G. View Post
                Fuel tanks were hung that way so they wouldn't absorb the frame flex on uneven road surfaces. It was thought if they were mounted rigidly it might split the seams.
                Well there you go; some engineer DID have a reason for that 'strange' (and non-production line friendly?) design! Thanks Dwain!!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by JoeHall View Post
                  Speaking of what were they thinking, how about those retainer nuts on the windshield cowl, on many 53-64 C/K bodies. The 3-piece that runs outboard of, and between the wipers. I saw a GT once that someone had cut a section, about 4" x 4", out of the roof of the glove compartment, and neatly patched it back up. I figured out why when I went to remove those cowl pieces from another GT. LOL
                  Ok, I wondered why the top of my glove box had been cut away. Thanks, I hadn't thought of that.

                  As for fuel tank mounting; the tanks on both our early '53 starlite and '62 GT mount the same. I guess they thought it was a good way to do it.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by JoeHall View Post
                    Speaking of what were they thinking, how about those retainer nuts on the windshield cowl, on many 53-64 C/K bodies.
                    I thought that they went with barrel nuts at some point. Maybe one of our wise Studebaker gurus can tell us what year the engineers came to their senses. Rich???
                    Jerry Forrester
                    Forrester's Chrome
                    Douglasville, Georgia

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

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Dwain G. View Post
                      Fuel tanks were hung that way so they wouldn't absorb the frame flex on uneven road surfaces. It was thought if they were mounted rigidly it might split the seams.
                      It is the same basic engineering principle that calls for flexing motor mounts. That's the reason for the spring included in in the gas tank mounting. It is like a shock absorber to compensate for all the sloshing and vibrating. In the same manner, folks familiar with proper Air Compressor use, know not to rigid bolt an air compressor to a concrete floor without some kind of shock absorber flex material. A large tank mounted reciprocating air compressor pump without some kind of shock mount is like creating an impending catastrophic explosive disaster with life threatening results. Even my small 5hp upright 60 gallon shop compressor was left on it's shipping pallet, and not bolted down.

                      As for gas tanks...I don't know what the average tank weighs, but add a full tank of gasoline, and you have a relatively thin clam-shell crimped seam two piece tank with over a hundred pounds of sloshing explosive liquid. Think of some of the potholes you have encountered, and the potential "G" forces involved. Our Studebakers are over a half century old, I wonder how today's plastic fuel tanks will beholding up at that age?
                      John Clary
                      Greer, SC

                      SDC member since 1975

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Jerry Forrester View Post
                        I thought that they went with barrel nuts at some point. Maybe one of our wise Studebaker gurus can tell us what year the engineers came to their senses. Rich???
                        Curiously, my 62GT had barrel nuts, but the 63GT had stamped sheet metal nuts, with large washers included in the stamping. The barrel nuts make it easy to install the moldings by pressing them into place. But you need to practice on something else, because you only get one shot at installation on the car. If the barrels were not screwed on enough they'd still lock in place, but you'd have a floppy molding. In theory, I believe either are supposed to cave in and destroy themselves, in order to allow the molding to be pried off. But years ago I all but destroyed the moldings on the 62GT, trying to pry them off.

                        If I can find re-chromed moldings for the 63GT, I will remove the old ones the same way I have in the past: the nuts are removable from under the dash, but it takes several hours. Otherwise, they will just remain in place.

                        Question Jerry: do you have those moldings available, re-chromed???

                        Thanks,
                        Joe H
                        Last edited by JoeHall; 12-30-2017, 06:56 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by JoeHall View Post
                          Curiously, my 62GT had barrel nuts, but the 63GT had stamped sheet metal nuts, with large washers included in the stamping. The barrel nuts make it easy to install the moldings by pressing them into place. But you need to practice on something else, because you only get on shot at installing them on the car. If they barrels were not screwed on enough they'd still lock in place, but you'd have a floppy molding. In theory, I believe either are supposed to cave in and destroy themselves, in order to allow the molding its pried off. But years ago I all but destroyed the moldings on the 62GT, trying to pry them off. <br>
                          <br>
                          If I can find re-chromed moldings for the 63GT, I will remove the old ones the same way I have in the past: the nuts are removable from under the dash, but it takes several hours. Otherwise, they will just remain in place.<br>
                          <br>
                          Question Jerry: do you have those moldings available, re-chromed???<br>
                          <br>
                          Thanks,<br>
                          Joe H
                          I have a center section, that the chromers messed up. I should have them make it right, but it's been too long ago. Anyways, it's good enough for a driver, but it is wavy. You can have it for shipping. P.M. me
                          Last edited by bezhawk; 12-30-2017, 06:32 AM.
                          Bez Auto Alchemy
                          573-318-8948
                          http://bezautoalchemy.com


                          "Don't believe every internet quote" Abe Lincoln

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by jclary View Post
                            It is the same basic engineering principle that calls for flexing motor mounts. That's the reason for the spring included in in the gas tank mounting. It is like a shock absorber to compensate for all the sloshing and vibrating. In the same manner, folks familiar with proper Air Compressor use, know not to rigid bolt an air compressor to a concrete floor without some kind of shock absorber flex material. A large tank mounted reciprocating air compressor pump without some kind of shock mount is like creating an impending catastrophic explosive disaster with life threatening results. Even my small 5hp upright 60 gallon shop compressor was left on it's shipping pallet, and not bolted down.

                            As for gas tanks...I don't know what the average tank weighs, but add a full tank of gasoline, and you have a relatively thin clam-shell crimped seam two piece tank with over a hundred pounds of sloshing explosive liquid. Think of some of the potholes you have encountered, and the potential "G" forces involved. Our Studebakers are over a half century old, I wonder how today's plastic fuel tanks will beholding up at that age?
                            I have destroyed a steel tank by backing over something sharp. The only plastic tank that I have seen destroyed was on a car (not mine) where the exhaust had been pushed into the side of the tank and melted its way through.
                            Gary L.
                            Wappinger, NY

                            SDC member since 1968
                            Studebaker enthusiast much longer

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Like Dwain in # 7 and John in #11 stated, it all adds to 150lbs of liquid being thrown around behind the rear axle. Somewhere I have a Studebaker official engineering publication which states that so much of their engineering was based on the fact that in 1950 over 85% of the roads in America were unpaved. I don't know how much was unpaved in 1957 but I'll bet it wasn't all that much less as the interstates were just getting started. In my post of early travels in British Columbia you can clearly see that even our Trans Canada Highway had unpaved sections in 1958. While cleaning off the previously untouched underneath of my '57 Clipper Wagon, it was real evident of the oiling procedure used on gravel and dirt roads in the day, but I guess it did help slow the corrosion.
                              Bill

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X