Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Supercharging

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

  • Chicken Hawk
    replied
    I can't say anything about the vacuum secondaries as I've never messed with a Holley. I have a pair of Holleys on the Avanti but they are mechanical.

    I did find out when we changed the Wrapper to an automatic this summer that it had a hesitation on launch. It was not the accelerator pump as it launched well at first but then hesitated. It had the single weight on each end of the vacuum plate that weighs 70 grams. Put the one in with double weights that are 102 grams and that fixed it.

    With the automatic it was flying open too quick and leaning out before the secondaries could feed it. With the four speed, the 70 gram worked fine.

    We thought it might ET better with the Powershift by getting better 60' times. Know the top speed will be lower but it appears the automatic may pull enough hp that the ET's will not be any better but we'll know in about three weeks.

    Ted

    quote:Originally posted by PackardV8

    Hi, Ted,

    Great to hear from you on this one. Since you have more experience with Paxton/McCulloch supercharged Studes than most anyone, what has been your experience with vacuum secondaries? You know the Carter/Edelbrock inside out, and naturally, these are airflow/vacuum controlled secondaries, but any experience with Holley?

    thnx, jack vines

    PackardV8

    Leave a comment:


  • N8N
    replied
    I would definitely swap to an R1/R2 cam to lower the effective compression at low speeds...

    I'm not sure which is more efficient but my gut tells me that an R2 with flattops and big chambers should be more efficient/less prone to detonation due to more squish area than the std. 289 with small chambers and dished pistons. True/false? anyone with real world experience?

    nate

    --
    55 Commander Starlight
    http://members.cox.net/njnagel

    Leave a comment:


  • PackardV8
    replied
    Who knows what goes on down under, but many of the export cars got 7.5 C.R. The stock US '62 GT was 8.5 C.R and the R2 was more than 9:1? He should actually be fine, with a lower than R2 C.R..

    thnx, jack vines

    PackardV8

    Leave a comment:


  • studegary
    replied
    If you are adding this supercharger to a previously stock compression ratio 1962 289, what will you use for fuel?

    Gary L.
    Wappinger, NY

    SDC member since 1968
    Studebaker enthusiast much longer

    Leave a comment:


  • PackardV8
    replied
    Hi, Ted,

    Great to hear from you on this one. Since you have more experience with Paxton/McCulloch supercharged Studes than most anyone, what has been your experience with vacuum secondaries? You know the Carter/Edelbrock inside out, and naturally, these are airflow/vacuum controlled secondaries, but any experience with Holley?

    thnx, jack vines

    PackardV8

    Leave a comment:


  • Chicken Hawk
    replied
    If you are planning to use an R 3 enclosure box on the carb with a top mounted supercharger like the R 2 Super Hawks, I don't think this will work as the box is too large and not enough room for the supercharger. You would have to use a side mounted supercharger to use the R 3 box.

    The other option is to do away with the R 3 box and use the Hawk carb bonnet. The top of your Holley carb and the new Edelbrock AFB carbs have a larger opening than the stock R 2 Hawk bonnet so there is another problem unless you can find an original AFB R 2 carb.

    Ted

    quote:Originally posted by Aussie Hawk

    'morning all,
    I'm intending to fit a Paxton s.c. to my '62 Hawk, I've got all the gear from Lionel Stone, but the GT came fitted with a 465 cfm Holley with vac secondaries. I know I'll need mech secondaries, so have been toying with the idea of converting it to mech secondaries by fabricating linkages etc. Do you guys have any suggestiions, for that job, or a better carb to use ? (I'm using a R3 plenum box).

    Matt
    Australia

    Leave a comment:


  • Aussie Hawk
    replied
    I got a second hand water pump manifold, R3 Plenum box, pulleys and brackets. All were OK. But I hear what you are saying, I've been stung here in OZ.

    Cheers
    Matt

    Leave a comment:


  • Swifster
    replied
    Matt, it may also depend on what you bought. I know a couple of the items that needed work were the water manifolds, intake manifolds, etc. Bracketry may not be a problem, but again, I've gotten my info second hand.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Tom - Mulberry, FL

    1964 Studebaker Daytona - 289 4V, 4-Speed (Cost To Date: $2125.60)

    Leave a comment:


  • Aussie Hawk
    replied
    Hey Tom,

    All the gear I got from LS seems to be OK,and the transaction and shipping went smoothly - when you are buy gear from the other side of the world that's pretty important. I'm a fitter and turner by trade, (I don't know what you call them in the US - it's an engineering qualification), and can spot bad castings or bad machining at twenty paces. Having said all that, I haven't tried to fit to the Hawk yet! But it all looks the OK.

    Cheers
    Matt
    Australia

    Leave a comment:


  • Swifster
    replied
    I don't have first hand knowledge, as I've never bought anything from LS, but the idea is that most of the LS stuff needs a LOT of messaging to fit/work. But in most cases he's the only game in town, so you either buy his stuff and do a LOT of work to make it usable, or you spend big money for the original stuff. I'll let others expand on this. Again, I haven't bought anything from him so from me it's just heresay.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Tom - Mulberry, FL

    1964 Studebaker Daytona - 289 4V, 4-Speed (Cost To Date: $2125.60)

    Leave a comment:


  • Aussie Hawk
    replied
    Thanks Jack, you have certainly given me plenty to investigate, I think staying with the Holley sounds like more trouble than it's worth !

    54-61-62: Can you elaborate on you comment, you now have me concerned !

    Matt
    Brisbane
    Australia

    Leave a comment:


  • PackardV8
    replied
    [u]http://web.archive.org/web/200708101...7.com/carb.htm

    Leave a comment:


  • 54-61-62
    replied
    quote:Originally posted by Aussie Hawk

    'morning all,
    I'm intending to fit a Paxton s.c. to my '62 Hawk, I've got all the gear from Lionel Stone, but the GT came fitted with a 465 cfm Holley with vac secondaries. I know I'll need mech secondaries, so have been toying with the idea of converting it to mech secondaries by fabricating linkages etc. Do you guys have any suggestiions, for that job, or a better carb to use ? (I'm using a R3 plenum box).

    Matt
    Australia
    If you got your setup from LS you probably will be spending some time to try to make it fit.

    Leave a comment:


  • Aussie Hawk
    started a topic Supercharging

    Supercharging

    'morning all,
    I'm intending to fit a Paxton s.c. to my '62 Hawk, I've got all the gear from Lionel Stone, but the GT came fitted with a 465 cfm Holley with vac secondaries. I know I'll need mech secondaries, so have been toying with the idea of converting it to mech secondaries by fabricating linkages etc. Do you guys have any suggestiions, for that job, or a better carb to use ? (I'm using a R3 plenum box).

    Matt
    Australia
Working...
X