Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Dakota Frame/running gear under C Cab truck

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

  • Mrs K Corbin
    replied
    I'm thinking of using the cowl and seating area from a 98-01 Dakota as well, just to keep from having to do a bunch of electrical work.

    Leave a comment:


  • tsenecal
    replied
    There is an M5 build on the Studebaker truck talk site. It has been swapped to a ford explorer frame, with a chevy engine. The work is done very well, and there are some good ideas for anybody considering a frame swap. There is a lot of information, and photos, to back up the process.

    Leave a comment:


  • JLB
    replied
    No sir I do not know the name of the guy . It was at least 4-5 years ago, and once I made a purchase, I discarded his information. I do recall that I found him through Craig's List. He was not particular about what he converted, so you might try a Craig's List search, for Studebaker, IH, Dodge etc.
    A friend of mine might recall the town in E. Kentucky.............I'll check with him and see if he remembers.
    John

    Leave a comment:


  • Mrs K Corbin
    replied
    JLB: you wouldn't happen to know who that was do you? I'd like to see a build thread of a dakota done exactly the same way with a 2R5 as the cab of choice while keeping the modern stuff in there.

    Leave a comment:


  • JLB
    replied
    Several years ago, I was interested in doing a conversion like what is being discussed here. I found a guy in eastern Kentucky, as I recall, that did many of these conversions on many different makes. What made his conversion different, is that he retained the floorboard and firewall of the donor vehicle, by carefully cutting, and then removing what was left of the donor cab.
    What was remaining was the donor ,late model frame running gear, floor board and firewall and all of the parts that are attached to the floorboard, and firewall. Seats, heat/AC/Defrost, steering etc.. He then would cut and mate the older cab to fit what was left of the donor vehicle and weld it all back together.

    Leave a comment:


  • thom
    replied
    Mine looked pretty much like the one in the above picture except it was a darker green. It had the 240 Black Diamond six and three speed column shifted transmission. It was geared stump puller low so I avoided interstate highway travel. I should have updated to a later model 9 inch Ford rearend with higher gears. The current owner has it on a late model 2wd Chevy or GMC full size truck chassis with a Chevy V8 and automatic. It is now dark green with black fenders and looks great, except it sits a little tall for my taste.
    I like the split rear windows on these and the hood latches that can be released from either side or release both sides at once and set the hood off without turning a single bolt. Tough old trucks.

    Leave a comment:


  • PackardV8
    replied
    Originally posted by thom View Post
    I sold a solid '50 IHC half-ton pick up a couple of years before I got my Studebaker. I wish I had it back, I would find another Dakota chassis and swap one under it.
    Just goes to show someone likes them. I owned a couple of those early '50s L110 Cornbinders and could never fall in love with they way they looked or the way they drove; but solid, I'd give them that.



    jack vines

    Leave a comment:


  • thom
    replied
    Thinking back on it I remember the Dakota cab being a lot heavier when we removed it than the Studebaker cab was when we moved it from the original frame to the Dakota. Same with the Dakota bed and the Studebaker bed but the Dakota was a long bed. Three of us lifted and carried the Studebaker cab, minus the seat, with no problem. I think we had four when we did the bed. I sold a solid '50 IHC half-ton pick up a couple of years before I got my Studebaker. I wish I had it back, I would find another Dakota chassis and swap one under it.

    Leave a comment:


  • PackardV8
    replied
    Originally posted by doublepaddle View Post
    It may have trouble pulling with the heavy Stude body on it.
    FWIW, that's not going to be a problem; the Stude body is quite light, as is the basic sheet metal for the Dakota. What makes the Dakota heavier is all the stuff the Stude doesn't have; side guard door beams, seat belts, jump seats, sound deadening insulation, power windows, AC, PS, radio, tilt wheel, carpeting, et al.

    jack vines

    Leave a comment:


  • thom
    replied
    All of my hands-on experience has been with '87-mid 90s Dakota frames so I can't say about ones as new as a 2002 but I don't imagine they changed much. The newer ones with anti-lock brakes might be a pain in the butt unless you really want anti-lock or four wheel disc brakes. The ones I am familiar with are made in two major sections then welded together under the cab. And the factory welds I have seen are not very impressive, probably done by robots. If the length needs to be changed, like it did on my '87, simply grind the factory welds, slide the frame apart, cut the amount needed off of the REAR section, slide the frame back together(keeping it straight) and reweld it. The welds on mine look a lot better than the factory welds did! I believe Dodge had one front section for all their 2wd trucks and then used whatever rear section was needed for the cab style and bed length truck they were building. If you shorten a frame at least most driveshaft shops can shorten a driveshaft but if you need a longer driveshaft they have to make you a new one, which costs more, I'm sure. I DON'T want to encourage anyone with a car to do a full frame swap though. Trucks seem to work out well but I have seen very few, if any car frame swaps that I thought looked good. I have seen several fixable cars end up being parted out or scrapped after a frame swap went bad.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mrs K Corbin
    replied
    The quad cab is too long, and the V6 is not what you need.

    AND Dont even think about putting a Dakota under that Automatic Transtar of yours.
    The Transtar with Automatic is too Rare IMHO>

    I'm thinking of Doing it to a 6cy Standard truck.

    Leave a comment:


  • doublepaddle
    replied
    I have a 2002 Dakota quad cab with the V6 engine. I have now 195,000 miles on engine and it is still running strong. Treated right and oil changes every 3-4,000. Problem with the engine is it has poor power when accelerating with AC on. It may have trouble pulling with the heavy Stude body on it. Lacks power under strain.

    Leave a comment:


  • thom
    replied
    If you can find a regular cab, short bed, I believe the length is perfect for the C-cab cab and bed. You will have to saw off 6-8 inches (IIRC) of the rear frame rails so the Studebaker bed will sit down over the Dodge frame. Quick work with a Sawz-all, and then the front can be modified to attach a piece of the Studebaker frame to the front so the original Studebaker front bumper can be reused. That's what I did. I love the way mine rides and drives. The Dakota had power rack & pinion steering and of course disc brakes in front. I did find that reusing the Dakota gas tank was a problem as it had a big hump built in it and I would have either had to drop it lower in the chassis, so it would have hung down lower than I liked, or raise the bed floor to clear it. So I switched to a 90s Ford Ranger plastic tank. They are flat on top and it worked great. I still raise the bed floor 1 1/2 inches just to get the cab and bed to sir where I wanted them, but it is not noticeable unless you look at the rear of the bed floor when the tailgate is open. One other thing I did was make two "wedges" to change the angle at which the steering rack mounted to the frame crossmember. I reused the original steering column an steering wheel in mine by sawing the column off above the worn out steering box and then putting a bearing in the tube where the shaft came through. In order to connect the shaft to the steering rack I need to adjust the angle so the wedges kicked the rack down a few degrees so the two lined up better and the u-joint could do it's job. My chassis came with 2.90:1 gears in the rear diff and they are working out great with my 4.3 and 400 TH automatic. Plenty of power and averaging 18 MPG. I would recommend the Dakota chassis swap to anyone with an old truck cab and bed and a chassis that is too far gone to be saved. I have seen Dodges, Internationals, Fords, Hudsons, Chevrolets, GMCs, Studebakers, you name it, on them, all work well. Personally, I would use an S10 under a Chevy or GMC though. Good luck with yours. If you have any questions that I might can answer or want to see some pics, let me know. Good day.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mrs K Corbin
    replied
    yeah, I was thinking of using a 98 Dakota with a V8 if i could find one.

    Leave a comment:


  • thom
    replied
    The Dakota that I got for a chassis donor had a 3.9 V6 in it that had issues I didn't want to deal with and I like Chevy 4.3s.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X