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

Mini-tubs photo

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

  • Mini-tubs photo

    I wanted to post this picture just to show the wider tires under the 47-52 shell. This is far from a full-on race setup. In fact, outside of the Ford rearend its pretty much all Studebaker. Simple leaf springs and slapper bars. That is all Studebaker frame under there, along with an added support to act as the upper shock mount. The stock gas tank fits perfectly in between the narrower frame. (Just don't go any narrower than 11 inches.)



    The trunk floor and spare tire well was a big rusted mess anyway. New metal here, but the original wheel wells are just relocated in. The back seat supports are all there and the back seat will fit with no trouble. Because much of the stock floor moved inboard too, the body mount holes still lined up with the frame holes.



    (The Ford rear was not a must in my book like some figure. I just got a screamin deal on it to good to pass up.)

    Dan
    52 hardtop

  • #2
    How did you narrow the frame?
    Did you splice it?
    Are you running a roll bar and braces to stiffen the frame?
    Just curious.
    Looks nice under there...
    Jeff[8D]



    quote:Originally posted by Michidan

    I wanted to post this picture just to show the wider tires under the 47-52 shell. This is far from a full-on race setup. In fact, outside of the Ford rearend its pretty much all Studebaker. Simple leaf springs and slapper bars. That is all Studebaker frame under there, along with an added support to act as the upper shock mount. The stock gas tank fits perfectly in between the narrower frame. (Just don't go any narrower than 11 inches.)



    The trunk floor and spare tire well was a big rusted mess anyway. New metal here, but the original wheel wells are just relocated in. The back seat supports are all there and the back seat will fit with no trouble. Because much of the stock floor moved inboard too, the body mount holes still lined up with the frame holes.



    (The Ford rear was not a must in my book like some figure. I just got a screamin deal on it to good to pass up.)

    Dan
    52 hardtop
    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


    • #3
      Nice look []. Is that a '52 Starliner?



      Dick Steinkamp
      Bellingham, WA

      Comment


      • #4
        Yup, the Starliner. (That is such a cool name).

        The frame was just sectioned and welded back. I figured out how much more tire width I needed, doubled it, and hacked it out of the middle. Pretty simple. I only briefly considered a fancier 4 link or other such work. Realistically, this Stude will pull simple double duty as a bracket race car and occasionaly car show. I'm not going road racing. And a lot of guys go quicker than I will be going with leaf springs.

        I would be happy however to get an opinion on this original frame. It was in fine shape. I've read several mentions of 53 and up Champion frames being pretty thin. Was 52 thicker? It seemed pretty sturdy to me when I was cutting it up. Below is the frame bracing. I added one more brave over the rear not shown here. heavy angle iron for the top shock mount.



        Here is the piece you need to make with your floor. Remove what is in between the black lines.



        Rollbar is a good question. NHRA requires at 12.0 or quicker. My local track is now IHRA, and I think (not sure) the roll bar cutoff is 11.50 seconds. I was thinking around 12.0 for this car. Technically I don't need one. But I should probably do it. It would stiffen the body, to say nothing of the safety aspect. I need to decide now, it should be the next project if I am going to do it.

        Dan
        52 hardtop

        Comment


        • #5
          quote:Originally posted by Michidan
          It would stiffen the body, to say nothing of the safety aspect.
          Then there is the "cool" factor! [8D]



          Dick Steinkamp
          Bellingham, WA

          Comment


          • #6
            There is one uncool factor for a roll bar, and that is getting people into the back seat that I have spent so much time to preserve. You need to be a kid or a contortionist.
            I would love to see any pictures out there of 4 or 6 point roll bars in 47-52 Studebaker.

            Dan
            52 hardtop

            Comment


            • #7
              quote:Originally posted by Michidan
              NHRA requires at 12.0 or quicker.
              Looks like NHRA might be 11.5 also...

              http://www.nhra.com/tech_specs/ETQuickRef.html



              Dick Steinkamp
              Bellingham, WA

              Comment


              • #8
                Good link. Note 13.50 for convertibles, which makes perfect sense. Considering that the hardtop "convertible" body style used the convertible based flooring for rigidity, one has to wonder a little about the strength of this top in the event of a rollover. Maybe it would cave in?

                Dan
                52 hardtop

                Comment

                Working...
                X