Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Article on R series engines in July TW

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

  • BobPalma
    replied
    Originally posted by jeryst

    In the July Co-Operator, there is a very good explanation of the differences between the R-series engines, so I had a couple of questions.

    Thanks for the feedback, Jerry. 'Glad you enjoyed Jim Pepper's entry therein. We sometimes take for granted, to our detriment, people knowing basic elements of Studebaker history that may be unknown to newer Stude enthusiasts!

    It says the the R-3 engine, with a supercharger and single 4-barrel carb put out 335 HP, but an R-4 with higher compression pistons, dual 4-barrels and no supercharger dropped to 280 HP. Does the removal of the supercharger really cause that much of a drop in HP in spite of the other performance modifications?

    YES

    How much HP does a supercharger add, with all other things being equal?

    That's pretty easy to determine.

    The 1957 289 engine with a single 2-bbl carb was rated at 210 HP. The 1957 Golden Hawk engine was virtually identical in every respect (i.e., "all other things equal") and was rated at 275 HP.

    So, in 1957, the additional horsepower attributed to the supercharger would be 65. Of course, there is speculation that the 275 figure was reported so the engine would have the same horsepower as the unsupercharged Packard 352 it replaced, so who knows for sure?

    It does make for an interesting bit of trivia: Unlike many high-performance cars produced more than one year, or with various engine options, every single Studebaker Golden Hawk built had a 275 horsepower engine over the model's three-year production run, despite that run using two entirely different engines!

    How does a 57 GH engine compare to the R-series engines? Does it fall in there somewhere, or is it more of an R-0 engine from which the others were improved?

    That's a difficult question to answer decisively. Many improvements and engineeering changes were made between the 1957 289 engine and the late-1962 289 engine from which the R-series engines were designed and built.

    Then, that late-1962 289 engine underwent considerable high-performance engineering work to produce the R-series engines. Heads, ignition system (dual-point distributor), camshaft, crankcase ventilation system, vibration dampener, etc., etc., were all specifically redesigned/refined for higher-performance. BP

    Leave a comment:


  • N8N
    replied
    as far as the '57 goes, it's along the lines of an R2 but has none of the oiling system improvements of the later cars, and also is limited by the 2bbl carb mounted in a pressure box rather than the more modern AFB on the R2. I think the R-series cams and valvesprings allowed for higher RPMs than the Golden HAwk engine.

    nate

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

    Leave a comment:


  • jeryst
    started a topic Article on R series engines in July TW

    Article on R series engines in July TW

    In the co-operator, there is a very good explanation of the differences between the R-series engines, so I had a couple of questions.

    It says the the R-3 engine, with a supercharger and single 4-barrel carb put out 355 HP, but an R-4 with higher compression pistons, dual 4-barrels and no supercharger dropped to 280 HP. Does the removal of the supercharger really cause that much of a drop in HP in spite of the other performance modifications?

    How much HP does a supercharger add, with all other things being equal?

    How does a 57 GH engine compare to the R-series engines? Does it fall in there somewhere, or is it more of an R-0 engine from which the others were improved?
Working...
X