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

2x4 intake manifold

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

  • 2x4 intake manifold

    Do any of the vendors make a 2x4 intake manifold for Stude 289? I was just curious more so than wanting one. The R-4 set up has always interested me.

    My Studes:
    1.1947 Commander 14A-C3
    2.1948 Champion 2 door sedan
    3.1950 Champion 2 door sedan
    4.1959 Lark 2 door post
    5.1964 Stude challenger 2 door

  • #2
    Dave Thibeault does, but I imagine a single 4-barrel, or else a 2x2 or 3x2 would be more than enough carb for even a "warm" 289; I'm guessing even the smallest 4bbl carbs you could find would be overkill.

    nate

    --
    55 Commander Starlight
    62 Daytona hardtop
    http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel
    --
    55 Commander Starlight
    http://members.cox.net/njnagel

    Comment


    • #3
      Thats what i think too Nate. Sooo many people make that mistake of too much cam & carb. I was just curious if they were available.

      My Studes:
      1.1947 Commander 14A-C3
      2.1948 Champion 2 door sedan
      3.1950 Champion 2 door sedan
      4.1959 Lark 2 door post
      5.1964 Stude challenger 2 door

      Comment


      • #4
        I still learning a lot about Studes, so pardon me asking. With the R4 being a 2X4 set up, was this over carbed, or did the more radical cam make up for this? I realize there were very few of these made, but wasn't there an additional 40 to 50 HP with this set up from an R1? Just asking.

        ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Tom - Sterling Heights, MI

        Ancient Chinese Proverb: "Injection is nice, but I'd rather be blown!"

        1964 Studebaker Daytona - Laguna Blue, Original 4-Spd. Car, Power Steering, Disc Brakes, Bucket Seats, Tinted Glass, Climatizer Ventilation System, AM Radio (136,989 Miles)
        Tom - Bradenton, FL

        1964 Studebaker Daytona - 289 4V, 4-Speed (Cost To Date: $2514.10)
        1964 Studebaker Commander - 170 1V, 3-Speed w/OD

        Comment


        • #5
          I have an aluminum medium rise Detroit Racing 2 X 4 that was converted to Stude use from a Cad manifold. It uses the old small bore 4 bbls from the fifties. So there are ones out there that probably could be converted to for a Studes that would not over carb the engine.

          Dan White
          64 R1 GT
          64 R2 GT
          Dan White
          64 R1 GT
          64 R2 GT
          58 C Cab
          57 Broadmoor (Marvin)

          Comment


          • #6
            Hi Tom, The r4 had about 40 more horses than the r1 The r2 and r3 were both more powerful than the r4. The 304.5 was ok performance wise with the r4 package but some carb problems existed but wasnt severely over carbed.

            My Studes:
            1.1947 Commander 14A-C3
            2.1948 Champion 2 door sedan
            3.1950 Champion 2 door sedan
            4.1959 Lark 2 door post
            5.1964 Stude challenger 2 door

            Comment


            • #7
              I've always thought Studebaker was expecting the R4 to be hotter than it turned out to be since no car company tries to go backwards "in series" Ex: GTO Ram Air Ram Air IV etc. it got hotter with each #! So did Stude until the R4 which went backwards. Still a really cool set up though!

              My Studes:
              1.1947 Commander 14A-C3
              2.1948 Champion 2 door sedan
              3.1950 Champion 2 door sedan
              4.1959 Lark 2 door post
              5.1964 Stude challenger 2 door

              Comment


              • #8
                I thought the power went R1, R2, R4, R3? The R4 was brought out specifically for non-blown drag race purposes? I am not sure where I read this, it has been some time ago. Obviously the R3 and R4 numbers should have been swapped.

                Dan White
                64 R1 GT
                64 R2 GT
                Dan White
                64 R1 GT
                64 R2 GT
                58 C Cab
                57 Broadmoor (Marvin)

                Comment


                • #9
                  Dan You may very well be right.I do know for sure that the R3 hp ratings were already out when the magazines started road testing the R4 but that doesnt neccesarily mean anything.

                  My Studes:
                  1.1947 Commander 14A-C3
                  2.1948 Champion 2 door sedan
                  3.1950 Champion 2 door sedan
                  4.1959 Lark 2 door post
                  5.1964 Stude challenger 2 door

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Well, The R4 made most of it's HP at a pretty high RPM, and it had special heads to go with that manifold.
                    You could get a Tbolt manifold and put dual 450cfm AFB's on it and keep the secondaries closed and it would drive all right on the street, but the cost would be nutty...
                    Jeff[8D]




                    quote:Originally posted by N8N

                    Dave Thibeault does, but I imagine a single 4-barrel, or else a 2x2 or 3x2 would be more than enough carb for even a "warm" 289; I'm guessing even the smallest 4bbl carbs you could find would be overkill.

                    nate

                    --
                    55 Commander Starlight
                    62 Daytona hardtop
                    http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel
                    DEEPNHOCK at Cox.net
                    '37 Coupe Express
                    '37 Coupe Express Trailer
                    '61 Hawk
                    http://community.webshots.com/user/deepnhock
                    HTIH (Hope The Info Helps)

                    Jeff


                    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain



                    Note: SDC# 070190 (and earlier...)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      [quote]Originally posted by Dan White

                      I thought the power went R1, R2, R4, R3?


                      Not quite.
                      R1 240 HP
                      R2 289 HP
                      R3 335 HP
                      R4 280 HP
                      Gary L.
                      Wappinger, NY

                      SDC member since 1968
                      Studebaker enthusiast much longer

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Those are the exact hp ratings i show as well Gary. Which gets me back to my point that i believe they thought the R-4 was going to be hotter than it was. I bet they were surprised when it didnt put out at least R-2 power. Oh well back to the drawing board hmm i mean super charger!

                        My Studes:
                        1.1947 Commander 14A-C3
                        2.1948 Champion 2 door sedan
                        3.1950 Champion 2 door sedan
                        4.1959 Lark 2 door post
                        5.1964 Stude challenger 2 door

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Somewhere in one of my books or magazines I remember that there was some controversy concerning the R4 HP/torque ratings. Apparently Studebaker would not provide the NHRA certain info for it to be classified for whatever division an R4 Lark would race in, it would therefore be forced to race in an open unlimited category. Anyone else remember this?

                          Dan White
                          64 R1 GT
                          64 R2 GT
                          Dan White
                          64 R1 GT
                          64 R2 GT
                          58 C Cab
                          57 Broadmoor (Marvin)

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            quote:Originally posted by N8N

                            Dave Thibeault does, but I imagine a single 4-barrel, or else a 2x2 or 3x2 would be more than enough carb for even a "warm" 289; I'm guessing even the smallest 4bbl carbs you could find would be overkill.

                            nate

                            --
                            55 Commander Starlight
                            62 Daytona hardtop
                            http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel
                            The'd have to be tiny, but factory dual quad Chevrolet 283's ran pretty good, so it must be doable. I doubt if there would be any performance gain over a properly spec'd and set up single 4 barrel, but it sure would look neat! []

                            -Dick-
                            Dick Steinkamp
                            Bellingham, WA

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              In the beginning of R series engine production, Studebaker did not release horsepower figures. I believe that it was about November 1963 (in 1964 production) before Studebaker released the horsepower figures that I posted earlier in this thread.
                              Gary L.
                              Wappinger, NY

                              SDC member since 1968
                              Studebaker enthusiast much longer

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X