Engine: engine swap 1960 lark

[Wheel nut]

What all do i need to put a small block chev in my 1960 lark going to use a turbo 350 transmission what exhaust manifolds do i use i know i can get front
motor mounts from studebaker international but what about a rear crossmember. might put a ford 9 inch rear end in it

[yeroldad]

My advise is don't do it. Chuv motors suck, in my humble opinion. And, by the time you buy, build, modify, fabricate, pay help, you are spending more money than it costs to buy or rebuild a Studebaker motor.

[Skip Lackie]

Have not done that swap, but I suspect your question is too general, too open-ended. There are plenty of Stude Larks running around with SBCs in them, so it obviously can be done. That said, most of the people who have done it enjoy the challenge of fabricating the needed parts. Some of our vendors carry some of the parts needed to make this rather common mod, but I suggest you focus down on one issue at time, like exhaust manifold interference or what's needed to fabricate a rear crossmember. BTW, most Dana 44 axles can easily handle the torque of most SBCs.

[Silver Hawk 59]

Everyone has an opinion. The fact is the swap is not difficult or expensive. Block hugger headers make the exhaust portion of the swap simple. The Chevrolet engines are lighter than the Studes and are much cheaper to buy. Parts, when needed, are easily obtained at any auto parts store and generally in-expensive. The Dana axles, as mentioned by Skip, are plenty strong for the added horsepower you'll get with the S.B.C.. The down side is that some folks will give you static for making the swap on a car they may never see... even though Studebaker installed Chevrolet engines in the later years in Canada, etc.. It's your car, build it the way you want!

[JoeHall]

In the mid 1980s when living in SoCal, I had a 1965 Daytona SS, with factory 283, FOM transmission and 3.07 rear end. I recall it as probably the sweetest Stude I ever owned, and Stude 289s have NOTHING on 283s, in terms of power, MPG, smoothness and reliability. I put about 25,000 trouble free miles on that car, but sold it because I had to cull the herd before being transferred elsewhere in the military. Sure wish I'd kept it.

So, IHMO a SBC is a nice swap into an earlier Stude, but I'd prefer another 65-66 Stude that came setup that way from the factory. Also, I'd want another 283, no need for anything bigger.

[bensherb]

As to a rear crossmember; both our '53 Coupe with a SBC and '62GT with 289 have the rear trans mount sitting right on top of the wing crossmember; but, they both have GM 700R/4L60 AOD transmissions. We originally had a TH350 in the '53 it needed a small piece of plate bolted to the wing to move the trans mounting point a couple inches forward of the wing. I think Larks have the wing; it's been a while since I had one? If not, a piece of square tube bolted from frame rail to frame rail should do; the holes should already be there.

[shanefausett]

Why not put something a little more modern in it? I put a 5.3 Gen 3 LS into mine with a 4L60E automatic transmission. It was a little work, but it sure is nice to have a modern powertrain. I had to put in a rack and pinion power steering as the Studebaker manual steering would not fit with what I had but that is another nice modern feature to have.