Engine: '57 Golden Hawk rebuild

[oilnsteel]

I am working on a 1957 Golden Hawk, and seeking advice from those more knowledgeable. There isn't anywhere around here to use its top speed potential, but I do see informal acceleration contests in its future. How would you build the engine? I do have some R1 parts around, and a wide variety of cyl. heads. I have a first gear start valve body for it's flightomatic, and also have a t85 OD available. The rear end is getting rebuilt too, so any ratio is an an option.
JT

[StudeRich]

The First thing you want to do to a'57 GH 289 is increase that Low 7.0 -7.5 Compression Ratio. Use the 1557570 Casting number '63-'64 259/289 & R1 Avanti Heads, but be sure you use the matching Rocker Arms, Shafts, Push Rods and all, for or from those heads.

Then comes the big question; do you want it to LOOK externally Stock looking?

An Original '57 GH has a very good value, and if you want to retain that, you might not want an R3 Air Box, a later Paxton Supercharger, an AFB Intake Manifold and Carb. and R3 Headers.

However a R2+ Cam, Avanti shallow Dish Pistons, a .060 overbore and Avanti Valve springs will not ever be seen.
Then also, how MANY Dollars $$ worth of performance would you like?

Here is a Great String of good performance examples and suggestions of just that, see Post #8 and #34 by PackardV8, Jack Vines. There are a whole LOT of Posts that you will want to read on this one!

https://forum.studebakerdriversclub....t-hp-to-expect

[64studeavanti]

As has been stated, an original 57 GH has good value for a Stude. So, why do you want to change anything? What problem(s) are you trying to solve? I would build it the way it came from the factory with original date coded parts if possible. It is unlikely that you would notice any additional HP gain in normal driving.

[jclary]

There's another very entertaining and informative thread here on the forum titled "289 Rebuild, what HP to expect?" (already mentioned)...I have not commented in that conversation, but have enjoyed reading the postings. We all come here with different perspectives and what amused me is that I would not have thought to ask "what HP to expect?" Instead, my concern would be more along the lines of, "How to assure its most dependable, durable, and smooth performance?" Really...In spite of my often excessive (unfounded) opinion of my own mechanical skills...I lack the intellectual capacity to sense (measure) such things as torque and power with the preciseness of a dynamometer.

Back in my teenage years, my 1928 Model A, with its performance built Olds J2 V8(?), was wild, loud, and a Terror (in more ways than one)! I thought I was "hot stuff," back then, but in retrospect...my Guardian Angel probably retired and handpicked his replacement when I sold that beast and joined the Air Force. But now, the same little cobbled together death trap today would probably get smoked by the average four-cylinder Camry or similar contemporary vehicle with their seemingly infinite speed efficient automatics.

Perhaps it is the wisdom of age (or simple fatigue)...but if I were to launch into a full restoration of a vintage relic, my goal would be to have it perform to the level of its original expectations, and do it reliably. I have a friend with a '54 Studebaker Coupe powered by a supercharged Hemi. Street legal, Frame twisting torque, and super G forces...but after all that money, time, and effort...I wouldn't be surprised if it hasn't left the building in years.

So, my suggestion is to make it right, dependable, smooth, and usable...so that if you wanted to get it out, go for a burger, drive to a gathering of Studebaker fans, or pick up your laundry...it will be a rewarding experience.

Of course...if you are one of the "Racing Studebakers" folks (Ted Harbit, Ed George, etc.)...ignore all I have posted above.

[oilnsteel]

Looks like I communicated poorly on this one. (late night post). I have no intention of doing anything to this car to interfere with its value or driveability. Any mods would would
be accomplished from over the Studebaker parts counter. The goal is to optimize the Hawk's acceleration capability.

Chuck Naugle once called me a "true believer". I drive Studes daily. To butcher this car would be sacrilege. The car will remain stock appearing as long as I am breathing.

StudeRich's advice on the heads is the kind of thing I am looking for. I've read the other posts, and will reread them. However each case is different. I have read that the R1
cam comes at the expense of low end torque. This is contraindicated for acceleration in my book.

Thanks,
JT

[PackardV8]

Yes, increase the compression and use the best pump gas.
Yes, use the R1 cam and valve springs.
Yes, use a Pertronix or similar electronic ignition.
Yes, if one want's maximum acceleration performance from a Studebaker, the T85 overdrive and a 3.90/4.10/4.27 TwinTraction would be the way to go.

jack vines

[tsenecal]

Just curious on the advice about the 1557570 heads. I wasn't aware that the valve train was different on these. I bought a set of the heads from a friend, and used them on my 289 (now 299) . I used the rockers and pushrods from the original heads, and so far it seems to run very well. Just wondering how much difference there was in the two setups.

[bezhawk]

Later rocker shafts had smaller oil holes so less flooding of the upper end during high speed operation. Other than that, there is very little difference. The lock screws on the rockers changed but that isn't an issue. The length of the pushrods changed but again, that won't keep you from using them.

[tsenecal]

Thanks bezhawk. I got the heads from my brother in law, that he had taken off of an old truck. Maybe I'll check with him and see if he happened to save the valve train. He doesn't throw much away, so he might have them. I used the 570 heads, and flat top pistons. The car runs very well, it takes off fast even with second gear start.