Announcement

Collapse

Get more Tips, Specs and Technical Data!

Did you know... this Forum is a service of the Studebaker Drivers Club? For more technical tips, specifications, history and tech data, visit the Tech Tips page at the SDC Homepage: www.studebakerdriversclub.com/tips.asp
See more
See less

Avanti engine info

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

  • Avanti engine info

    JDP Maryland

  • #2
    I don't know the Stude engine well enough to comment on that section, but the Chevy part is not factual. (I wonder how much of the Stude part is true?)



    ALL small block Chevy blocks built at the time of the original Jet Thrust Studebaker motors had 2 bolt mains. 4 bolt mains didn't begin until much later.

    ALL SBC blocks (of the same CID) were the same casting prior to machining. There were no "high nickel" or thicker wall blocks for the HP motors. In fact, many 283 blocks (3.875" bore) would bore to the 327 bore (4").

    There is no such thing as "light weight" Chevy heads in that era. In fact, the same head was used on a 375 HP Corvette 327 as was used in a 300 HP Caprice.

    ALL small block Chevy's at that time had forged cranks. (OTOH, the switch by all manufacturers to cast cranks in the mid to late 60's was because they were better. Here's a blub on the Pontiac switch...



    http://www.pontiacpower.com/Three%20...conversion.htm

    The high performance small blocks (365 and 375 HP 327's) were special in several ways...high performance cam, high rise aluminum intake (or Rochester Fuel Injection), dual point distributor, etc. About the same "special" as a Jet Thrust engine vs a regular 289.

    I'm not defending the Chevy motor here, but when an article starts out with so many errors, I tend not to believe the rest of it. It's all "interesting data", but how much is true?






    Dick Steinkamp
    Bellingham, WA
    Dick Steinkamp
    Bellingham, WA

    Comment


    • #3
      The Studebaker data comes from a SAE paper and the parts numbers listed are correct. I suspect he was just weak on mouse motor history.


      JDP
      Arnold Md.
      Studebaker On The Net
      http://stude.com
      My Ebay Items
      http://www.stude.com/EBAY/

      64 GT hawk
      63 R2 4 speed GT Hawk (Black)
      63 R2 4 speed GT Hawk (Black) #2
      63 Avanti R1
      63 Daytona convert
      63 Lark 2 door
      62 Lark 2 door
      60 Hawk
      59 3E truck
      52 Starlight
      52 Starliner
      51 Commander

      JDP Maryland

      Comment


      • #4
        quote:Originally posted by JDP

        The Studebaker data comes from a SAE paper and the parts numbers listed are correct. I suspect he was just weak on mouse motor history.
        Could be...but for me, it's like someone describing how Studebaker used Ford 289 engines and that they are still made in Canada, etc, then going on to give me "information" on another subject. I'd tend to put it all in the BS category...right or wrong.


        Dick Steinkamp
        Bellingham, WA
        Dick Steinkamp
        Bellingham, WA

        Comment


        • #5
          I don't know about any of Chevy-Stude stuff, but I'd have to think that a forged crank is "tougher" than a cast crank. Maybe not stronger, but better able to handle harsh conditions. The reason I believe this is that Chrysler used forged cranks on their 225 and 318 industrial engines(I have both) while using cast cranks on auto and light truck engines of the same year. That pretty well rules out possible differences in production costs, tooling and such. Besides, stiffer and stronger isn't always better. Look at a fishing pole.

          Comment


          • #6
            I don't know Chevy stuff either (don't care to.[}]), but the Stude facts persented here are on the mark.

            Miscreant adrift in
            the BerStuda Triangle


            1957 Transtar 1/2ton
            1960 Larkvertible V8
            1958 Provincial wagon
            1953 Commander coupe

            No deceptive flags to prove I'm patriotic - no biblical BS to impress - just ME and Studebakers - as it should be.

            Comment


            • #7
              Dick, I think you are tossing the baby out with the bath water. If Studebob or me misspoke on a Chevy's bore for example, I'd hate to think you'd automatically not trust a Studebaker post by us.


              JDP
              Arnold Md.
              Studebaker On The Net
              http://stude.com
              My Ebay Items
              http://www.stude.com/EBAY/

              64 GT hawk
              63 R2 4 speed GT Hawk (Black)
              63 R2 4 speed GT Hawk (Black) #2
              63 Avanti R1
              63 Daytona convert
              63 Lark 2 door
              62 Lark 2 door
              60 Hawk
              59 3E truck
              52 Starlight
              52 Starliner
              51 Commander

              JDP Maryland

              Comment


              • #8
                quote:Originally posted by JDP

                Dick, I think you are tossing the baby out with the bath water. If Studebob or me misspoke on a Chevy's bore for example, I'd hate to think you'd automatically not trust a Studebaker post by us.
                Yea...I think I made too big a deal out of this already.

                I guess if I knew the author, it would make a big difference. If I knew it was written by a Studebaker "expert" (you, Biggs, Palma, Duane, etc.) I'd trust the Studebaker information presented (and just give you a ration about the Chevy info [}].

                As it stands, I can't help but think the author may know as little about Studebakers as he does about Chevys. As someone who doesn't know the history of the Jet Thrust engines, how could I accept only SOME of the information...and how would I decide which parts were accurate? Sort of like reading one of the many eBay ads posted here that are chock full of Studebaker "myths", but probably also contain some truth. I don't take the time to try to sort out the facts from fiction on those (maybe I should). I just chuckle and move on.

                I think (as a group...me included) we are quick to jump on mis-information that is out there about Studebakers. We've all heard the stories at car shows and swap meets and even seen the articles in major car magazines that misrepresent Studebakers and help create the "urban legends" we all find at the least amusing and at most make us angry. Because of that, I would hope we'd be especially careful about "facts" on other makes. We don't want to give those brand X guys any more ammo


                Dick Steinkamp
                Bellingham, WA
                Dick Steinkamp
                Bellingham, WA

                Comment


                • #9
                  You were correct to point out the Chevy errors that I would have missed. I was just commenting that the Studebaker stuff was accurate. I recall in my NPR interview that I stated incorrectly that the Avanti still held the record for a sedan, when in fact it I was told it lost it. I think the guy was quoting Chevy history from limited knowledge and you correctly set us straight, just as I was corrected.


                  JDP
                  Arnold Md.
                  Studebaker On The Net
                  http://stude.com
                  My Ebay Items
                  http://www.stude.com/EBAY/

                  64 GT hawk
                  63 R2 4 speed GT Hawk (Black)
                  63 R2 4 speed GT Hawk (Black) #2
                  63 Avanti R1
                  63 Daytona convert
                  63 Lark 2 door
                  62 Lark 2 door
                  60 Hawk
                  59 3E truck
                  52 Starlight
                  52 Starliner
                  51 Commander

                  JDP Maryland

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Which issue of "Jet Thrust News" is the article from? Who wrote it?
                    The material starts with a quotation mark. Where does the quote end?
                    Mike M.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      It was all quoted, for the other info as to date and the rest, I cut and pasted it from one of the back issues here:

                      http:/stude.com/JTN


                      JDP
                      Arnold Md.
                      Studebaker On The Net
                      http://stude.com
                      My Ebay Items
                      http://www.stude.com/EBAY/

                      64 GT hawk
                      63 R2 4 speed GT Hawk (Black)
                      63 R2 4 speed GT Hawk (Black) #2
                      63 Avanti R1
                      63 Daytona convert
                      63 Lark 2 door
                      63 Lark 2 door #2
                      62 Lark 2 door
                      60 Hawk
                      59 3E truck
                      52 Starliner
                      51 Commander

                      JDP Maryland

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        The Jet Thrust Article was compiled by Jim Pepper, who I would consider an extemely knowledgeable individual on Studebaker R-series engines. Remember, Jim is the high performance advisor for the Studebaker Co-Operator.

                        Eric
                        '63 R2-Lark (barely surviving)
                        '49 2R-5 Truck (orginal survivor)
                        Eric DeRosa

                        \'49 2R-5 (original Survivor)
                        \'63 R2 Lark (the money-pit-mobile)
                        \'60 Lark Convertible (project in waiting)

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Jim Pepper is as good as there ever has been on Studebaker V8s. If he says something about it, it is gospel.

                          However, he doesn't seem to know much about the Chevy V8. Thus, as do we all, he needs to be careful about stating as fact in print the detritus which goes around anywhere car guys gather. If one does not know it from experience or from a reputable reference source, don't put it in print. Once in print and on the internet, it never goes away, but just keeps being quoted and passed around.

                          thnx, jv.

                          PackardV8
                          PackardV8

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            As far as I know, everything about the Stude is correct except the two items below on the carbs. The R 1 carb might be less CFM than the R 2 but when I contacted Carter with all the numbers I could find on all the parts of the carb several years ago, they told me they needed one more set of numbers which I could not find to give an exact number but the CFM was between 600 and 635.

                            The other is the floats on the R 2. All I've ever seen had an aluminum "X" inside to reinforce them, not foam filled. That doesn't mean maybe some were not foam filled but I've not seen any.

                            Ted

                            [quote]

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              As far as I know, everything about the Stude is correct except the two items below on the carbs. The R 1 carb might be less CFM than the R 2 but when I contacted Carter with all the numbers I could find on all the parts of the carb several years ago, they told me they needed one more set of numbers which I could not find to give an exact number but the CFM was between 600 and 635.

                              The other is the floats on the R 2. All I've ever seen had an aluminum "X" inside to reinforce them, not foam filled. That doesn't mean maybe some were not foam filled but I've not seen any.

                              Ted

                              [quote]

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X