Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sway Bar Adapter Plates

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

  • Frame / Springs: Sway Bar Adapter Plates

    Why is there a difference in sway bar to frame front adapter plates between the Hawk and '63-64 Lark as noted in the green pages of the '59-64 parts book? I have the Hawk pieces but am now looking at adding a bar to a Daytona HT.

  • #2
    Well...without trying to be a smart a**, because the Stude engineers thought there should be..!?

    Why they thought that...who knows.
    Why they thought a lot of things..who knows.

    Actually, with all of the right parts, any of the methods will attach a Stude bar to a Stude frame/control arms.
    OR...you can do as many of us have done, come up with your own method to adapt a later model GM/Ford/Chrysler bar to the Stude.

    Mike

    Comment


    • #3
      In 1962, the wheelbase of Lark models was increased 1/2" by moving the rear spring center bolt rearward by 1/2". The adapter plates for Lark types only was to move the bar upper mounting surface rearward by about 1/2" to compensate.

      Another thought: We always refer to "Sway Bars" but shouldn't we think "Anti-Sway Bars?"

      Comment


      • #4
        How about "Anti-Roll Bars"?

        Comment


        • #5
          If you have any Sway Bar or Traction Bar questions, big Dave Thibeault can probably help out. I saw him last week at the Swap Meet in SB and he was talking fluent "sway/traction bar" with many folks there. He lives in Maynard, Mass. His phone # is listed as: 978 / 897 - 3158.
          StudeBakerHarv
          * 1950 Champion Starlight Coupe (Cathcart Stg 4 Engine)
          * 1971 Avanti II (RQB-1659).

          Comment


          • #6
            Thanks for the responses. It makes sense that a thicker plate was used to move the bar rearward that 1/2".

            Comment


            • #7
              Don Jeffers
              How about "Anti-Roll Bars"?


              ....and down the semantic rabbit hole we go .

              I had it out with a woman that raced on the dragstrip on Yahoo about this many years back. Somehow I got roll bar(such as the one that goes behind your head in the Avanti, that keeps the roof from caving in upon rollover), mixed up with an anti roll bar in her Mustang(which can also be coined as a sway bar) that she upgraded in the rear of her car. The anti roll bar she was referring to was designed to keep the rear of the car from twisting upon launch. It functions in a similar matter to our traction bars, but is part of the rear sway bar setup on the late model Mustangs.

              Most of the Studes and the late model Mustangs should have a sway bar, or anti roll bar in the front. That keeps the car planted around corners. The Studes (which I believe is optional, and not on my Lark, save for that JT torsion bar setup) and the Mustangs have a rear sway bar, but the Mustang guys usually call that an anti roll bar, which keeps the rear from twisting when launching the car hard. The function for most of us in that respect goes to the traction bars if we don't have the rear sway bar, which keeps the wheel hop to a minimum.

              Here's a little more on the Mustang's anti roll bars .....

              http://www.musclemustangfastfords.co...ion/index.html

              Personally I'd rather just stick to the term sway bars(which I know is NOT a roll bar), it makes for few less headaches, lol.....
              1964 Studebaker Commander R2 clone
              1963 Studebaker Daytona Hardtop with no engine or transmission
              1950 Studebaker 2R5 w/170 six cylinder and 3spd OD
              1955 Studebaker Commander Hardtop w/289 and 3spd OD and Megasquirt port fuel injection(among other things)

              Comment


              • #8
                Sorry I asked the question! I am a oval track guy.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Roll Bar, Sway Bar, WHAT Bar?

                  I find it interesting, that of all the names the Front and Rear STABILIZER BARS were called here, NONE were correct!
                  StudeRich
                  Second Generation Stude Driver,
                  Proud '54 Starliner Owner

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    What thickness did the factory use for the adapter plates for the "rear stabilizer bar" on the '63-64 Lark?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I crawled under the back of my '64 R-1 Cruiser this morning. Adapters are 4 1/2" X 1 3/4" X 5/8" thick. The hole pattern is offset by about 3/4" The 3/8" X 24 threads are tapped into the plate - two 3/4" long bolts from the top to fasten the adapter plate to the frame, and two to fasten the bushing bracket to the adapter plate - thus 4 tapped holes total per adapter.
                      Hawks used through bolts and the Chassis Book correctly notes a quantity of 4 bolts total. Although for F-Y-J-L-P Bodies it states a quantity of 4 bolts and lock washers, a total of 8 would be required. Ref. Chassis Parts Catalog, Jet Thrust Equipment (Green) section, group 1525 - Rear Stabilizer.
                      I have installed these Lark type set-ups before and the adapters on my Cruiser are precisely like the adapters I had in my hand at the time.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Thanks for that information. Can you clarify the direction of the approx. 3/4" offset?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I was really hoping you weren't going to ask me that...since the plates were installed with the offset toward the front of the car, not the rear. This seems counter to my original explanation that the plate was to compensate for the 1/2" wheelbase increase. Considering the angle of the frame mounting surface, the thickness of the adapter plate, and the offset, it almost tends to lower the pivot point rather than move it forward or back. These plates could be reversed, but it seems unlikely someone would have done that on purpose. The bar is quite close to the muffler hanger straps as is, so it seems a little suspicious.
                          Back in the 1980s, I removed a rear stabilizer bar complete from a friend's '63 Jet Thrust Daytona Hardtop (back then you would part out a R-2 4-speed car if it was rusty) and re-installed it on another '63 Daytona. My excuse is I can't remember which direction of the offset since I just re-installed as it was removed.
                          I hope some other Jet Thrust Lark type owner can confirm the offset.
                          Last edited by Studebakercenteroforegon; 05-16-2011, 02:51 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Thanks for your help. If no-one else chimes in, I'll have to spend some time on my knees when I'm in Springfield.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              The July 1963 Car Life Magazine has a road test of a R-2 Wagonaire. On page 26, there is a picture of the rear stabilizer bar, and while the adapter plate is somewhat hidden by the Traction Bar (or, Radius Rod as preferred by StudeRich) it is clear that the offset is to the front as it is on my R-1 Cruiser.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X