Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

engine id

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Roscomacaw
    replied
    Actualy, you're short a digit with that number but it's close enough to assume those heads are for a 232. Read that: highly restricted breathing capabilities. Even Stude realized that with the introduction of the next generation V8 engines in '55. The 224 and 259 that debuted that year, got redesigned heads with vastly improved breathing to them. '55 also saw smaller lifters incorporated to cut the weight of the valve train down.
    All this noted, the 232 is not a slug for it's day. It was well-respected when it debuted. And save for a problem with the cams in the earliest editions, it served well for the four years Stude used it.[^]

    Miscreant at large.

    Leave a comment:


  • 61bone
    Guest replied
    the head casting no. is 52772

    where there's foo there's fire

    Leave a comment:


  • Roscomacaw
    replied
    That lower end's EASILY capable of the HP you mentioned! This is proven on a regular basis with a number of ass-kick Stude racers!
    Did you happen to notice if the piston tops were dished? If not, this would at least rule out a standard 289 version.
    The 232's heads had little bitty ports and valves. To a knowing eye, they're readily identifiable. How about the casting # that's right above the center exhaust port?[:I]

    Miscreant at large.

    Leave a comment:


  • 61bone
    Guest replied
    [^]here we go again. I got someone (my wife) to hold the dial indicator so it wouldn't move and here's what I got. The stroke measures out to 3.250. If this engine is actually a 54 that would indicate a 232, right? So, are there any indicators of the manufacturing date cast in the engine block like in the valley or under the bell housing? There aren't any I could find on the outside.
    Maybe I ought to replace the fake blower with a real one[]. The 7.50 comp ratio of the 232 is just about perfect for that. With 10 lbs of boost that would make the equivalent of about 450ci. Now, how good is the bottom end of this motor. Would it be up to 350 hp @ 5000? The 2" rods and 2.5" mains seem a little on the light side, but I don't have the width of them and that would have some bearing on it. [:I]
    Sorry I ask so many questions, I usually do my own research on these things but there is so little info to research I just have to ask someone who has actual experience with what I am doing.
    Thanks again guys.

    where there's foo there's fire

    Leave a comment:


  • studegary
    replied
    The stroke of Studebaker V8s ranged from 2.81 to 3.63 inches. Are you sure it is not 3.25 inches? That would be correct for a 1951 to 1954 V8.

    Leave a comment:


  • Roscomacaw
    replied
    Dwight,

    Surely - from time to time - one of these manifolds turns up. But your best bet is keeping a vigilant eye on ebay.
    There's an annual All-stude swap meet coming up in March at York PA and another one in South Bend in May. Then there's the annual internats which will be in Spokane WA this August. Always lots of vendors and guys bringing stuff from their garages to sell at these meets.

    Miscreant at large.

    Leave a comment:


  • 61bone
    Guest replied
    Thanks for all your help and advice guys. A little discrepancy there, but who knows what all has happened in the last 50 years. We will assume it is a 232/259 until proven otherwise. If anyone could put me on to a 2 or 3 deuce manifold it wwould be much appreciated. I will post some pictures of my T and the Foomobile soon. Thanks again
    Dwight

    where there's foo there's fire

    Leave a comment:


  • N8N
    replied
    Well... the lack of a fuel pump does not mean anything really, this engine may have an early timing cover (with no provision for a fuel pump) and a late oil filler tube (likewise) or even an oil filler tube blockoff plate, as used on the full flow engines (with breathers in the valve covers in that case, I hope) on the same engine, no big deal if the electric is working well. If not, you either need to swap your timing cover or your oil filler tube, whichever you prefer. May be a few other parts involved as well, depending on why the fuel pump was replaced with electric. Don't understand that stroke measurement, a 289 is 3-5/8" and a 259/232 is 3-1/4"; a 224 would be 2-13/16".

    If there is a provision for an oil filter it will be on the passenger side rear of the block. There may not be; there wasn't any up until mid-1962. There could also be a blockoff plate where the filter mount would go, might want to take a look. You are correct, the earlier engines used a Fram F4 bypass type filter mounted to the oil filler tube on the front of the engine, it got its feed from the little hole in the front of the driver's side head and returned the filtered oil into the little boss in the oil filler tube. That's for the last of the partial flow blocks, I'm not sure exactly the details of the filter mount for the earlier engines with the fuel pump mounted up on the filler tube. The oil filter was optional up until the introduction of the full flow block, before you start cussing out the previous owner

    good luck

    nate

    --
    62 Daytona hartop
    64 Daytona convertible (in boxes)
    http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel

    Leave a comment:


  • DEEPNHOCK
    replied
    No sweat!
    You have a later model long block in there, probably with an early timing cover and the old style fuel pump...long gone.
    I'd love to see pic's of that faked blower setup, just to see how they hooked up the housing and the belt drive...
    Until late '62, the oil filter was indeed an option.
    Keep on pluggin' away there. Sounds like a fun project.
    Jeff[8D]



    quote:Originally posted by 61bone

    This seems strange to me, but cut me some slack, I'm from out of town. There seems to be no provision for a fuel pump or oil filter for that matter. Been reading the next post and I kinda figured out that these motors have a separate oil filter ala Fxxx flathead, right? How do I plumb one in? This car has an electric pump mounted by the tank that is about 2"x5".(the pump not the tank)That's all there is.
    The stroke measured out to be 2.292" measured with a dial indicator.
    The head casting # are 52772 if that helps.
    Dwight


    where there's foo there's fire
    DEEPNHOCK@worldnet.att.net
    '61 Hawk
    '37 Coupe Express
    http://community.webshots.com/user/deepnhock

    Leave a comment:


  • 61bone
    Guest replied
    This seems strange to me, but cut me some slack, I'm from out of town. There seems to be no provision for a fuel pump or oil filter for that matter. Been reading the next post and I kinda figured out that these motors have a separate oil filter ala Fxxx flathead, right? How do I plumb one in? This car has an electric pump mounted by the tank that is about 2"x5".(the pump not the tank)That's all there is.
    The stroke measured out to be 2.292" measured with a dial indicator.
    The head casting # are 52772 if that helps.
    Dwight


    where there's foo there's fire

    Leave a comment:


  • studegary
    replied
    Does it have the original fuel pump or can you at least determine where the fuel pump was originally located? If the pump was top center, above the engine, it is a 1951-1954 233 cubic inch V8. If the pump is down low on the engine, it is a 224, 259, 289 or 304 cubic inch engine. Of course any of these could be changed by boring and/or changing internal components by now.

    Leave a comment:


  • Roscomacaw
    replied
    As Sonny says, replacement block. Obviously, whoever did the replacement didn't bother to transfer the engine #. Doesn't really matter save for helping to discern the displacement.
    As Sonny says, get a wooden dowel and measure the extremes of stroke thru a plug hole. (Turning the engine by hand, of course!) Also, if you peer into that spark plug hole and see dished pistons, there's a fair chance it's a 289. That would be a nice discovery![]

    Miscreant at large.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sonny
    replied
    quote:Originally posted by 61bone

    there wasn't much to clean, just paint . The only thing there is a small punch mark shaped like a three leaf clover. What next?
    Dwight

    where there's foo there's fire
    The cloverleaf tells you that it's a factory replacement engine Dwight. That means that it looks like you have to do the old "measure the stroke" trick. You can pull a plug and using a rod, turn the engine over, (with the coil wire out []), mark the rod at the the full extremes of piston travel, then measure the distance between the marks, that will give you a starting point. I have to check to see if I still have a list of casting numbers, but I think we can get you into a better ball park using the stroke and casting numbers.

    Sonny
    http://RacingStudebakers.com

    Leave a comment:


  • 61bone
    Guest replied
    there wasn't much to clean, just paint . The only thing there is a small punch mark shaped like a three leaf clover. What next?
    Dwight

    where there's foo there's fire

    Leave a comment:


  • Sonny
    replied
    quote:Originally posted by 61bone

    It's a chopped ,channeled 27 T coupe...... <SNIP>
    where there's foo there's fire
    I'll TAKE it! Man it sounds like a great little rod, I'm jealous. [:I] It's very unusual that it has a Stude engine in it too, but I'm impressed! It'll run like a bear for ya. If you have pictures of it you can put 'em up here, http://racingstudebakers.com/coppermine/index.php, if you'd like. I'd sure like to see it. Thanks Bone....

    Sonny
    http://RacingStudebakers.com

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X