Engine: Bypass vs full flow

[afgarcia86]

Long story short after finding out our 63 289 is not original we are going to do a hybrid rebuild of our engine using the best parts from the two engines we have. The 62 bypass and the 63 full flow. The 62 had amazing compression readings and only 45,000 original miles. However I am hoping we can easily convert it to full flow to hide the fact that it's a 62 engine and make the 63 seem more original. Any thoughts or suggestions are welcome.

[DEEPNHOCK]

The block is different on a full flow engine.

You could take your partial flow block and convert it to full flow, but that would require disassembly for the modification.
From your OP, I take it cost is a factor.
If so, then just run the partial flow as it sets.
It's still a good engine.

[PackardV8]

Long story short after finding out our 63 289 is not original we are going to do a hybrid rebuild of our engine using the best parts from the two engines we have. The 62 bypass and the 63 full flow. The 62 had amazing compression readings and only 45,000 original miles. However I am hoping we can easily convert it to full flow to hide the fact that it's a 62 engine and make the 63 seem more original. Any thoughts or suggestions are welcome.

I, like Jeff, are interpreting this to mean you don't want to do a rebuild of the '62 short block. That's going to conflict with your desire to have the engine compartment appear to be an original '63, as the bypass filter will be obvious.

So, no it's not that easy to convert a '62 block to full flow. Has been done, can be done, but once into it that far, it's just easier to rebuild the '63.

Running the '62 engine while taking your time to rebuild the '63 would be my recommendation.

jack vines

[Skybolt]

One thing can be done that will make what you have seem sort of 63 and not first off apparent it's a 62 block.

Remove the oil filter stand on the front top of the block and use the 63 block off plate. Make the full flow modification to the partial flow block and run a remote filter mounted to the inner side, engine bay, of the fender.

http://www.studebaker-info.org/Fulflo/fullflo.html

Someone first looking in the engine bay will assume it's a later block because of lack of partial flow filter or it's a partial flow and you are not using a filter. Once they see a filter in the engine bay they will assume you just liked to use a remote filter for ease of changing. If one does not know Studebakers and their differences then what does it matter.

[studegary]

One thing can be done that will make what you have seem sort of 63 and not first off apparent it's a 62 block.

Remove the oil filter stand on the front top of the block and use the 63 block off plate. Make the full flow modification to the partial flow block and run a remote filter mounted to the inner side, engine bay, of the fender.

This is sort of along the lines of what I was thinking.
One word of caution - If you block off the standpipe location, be sure to use rocker arm covers with fill/vent caps. Otherwise your engine will neither be able to vent nor get any oil into it.
I would not bother to add a remote oil filter. Just change your oil every 1000-3000 miles, depending on usage.

[Skybolt]

This is sort of along the lines of what I was thinking.
One word of caution - If you block off the standpipe location, be sure to use rocker arm covers with fill/vent caps. Otherwise your engine will neither be able to vent nor get any oil into it.
I would not bother to add a remote oil filter. Just change your oil every 1000-3000 miles, depending on usage.

I thought he would be using those as he was going to make it look like a 63, but good point not to miss.

[Dick Steinkamp]

One thing can be done that will make what you have seem sort of 63 and not first off apparent it's a 62 block.

Remove the oil filter stand on the front top of the block and use the 63 block off plate. Make the full flow modification to the partial flow block and run a remote filter mounted to the inner side, engine bay, of the fender.

http://www.studebaker-info.org/Fulflo/fullflo.html

Someone first looking in the engine bay will assume it's a later block because of lack of partial flow filter or it's a partial flow and you are not using a filter. Once they see a filter in the engine bay they will assume you just liked to use a remote filter for ease of changing. If one does not know Studebakers and their differences then what does it matter.

The engine in my 63 Wagonaire is a 1960 259. I did "dress it" to resemble how the original 63 motor would have looked. It doesn't matter to me if it is a full flow filter, partial flow filter, or no filter...and I wouldn't think to most except those that put several thousand miles a year on their Stude. There are some advantages to the earlier blocks when the tooling was fresher.

[GThawkwind]

The engine in my 63 Wagonaire is a 1960 259. I did "dress it" to resemble how the original 63 motor would have looked. It doesn't matter to me if it is a full flow filter, partial flow filter, or no filter...and I wouldn't think to most except those that put several thousand miles a year on their Stude. There are some advantages to the earlier blocks when the tooling was fresher.

I heard that the earliest blocks were the strongest because the tooling was fresh.

[afgarcia86]

Thanks for the info guys. I have passed the thread along to my father to look over. @Dick, that's a great looking engine!

[afgarcia86]

So we are totally digging the idea of dressing the engine to resemble a 63 engine. We are open to the idea of running the remote filter, has anyone used a kit with there Studebaker? I am looking at something like this http://m.summitracing.com/parts/trd-...FUMV7AodviQAhA.

We are also open to not running a filter at all but that makes us a little nervous unless you guys tell me different.

Thanks in advance!

[Corvanti]

even though i've mentioned elsewhere that, with proper maintenance, the oil filter isn't always necessary, i wouldn't think of not having a partial/full filter if so equipped. the '62 engine will still not "look" like a '63 if you use a remote filter.

[SScopelli]

So we are totally digging the idea of dressing the engine to resemble a 63 engine. We are open to the idea of running the remote filter, has anyone used a kit with there Studebaker? I am looking at something like this http://m.summitracing.com/parts/trd-...FUMV7AodviQAhA.

We are also open to not running a filter at all but that makes us a little nervous unless you guys tell me different.

Thanks in advance!

I've checked out your pictures of your restoration. Good job and looks great going forward..


Here is a link to mine..

http://s1286.photobucket.com/user/R2Whistler/library/R1%20Lark/08%20QuickTime

So now I'm scratching my head wondering if it was to much eggnog I drank last week..

But you want to put a 62 block in lieu of the 63 full flow because the 63 was not original anyway, and you want to make the 62 look like a full flow?

The extent of work you're doing on your Hawk please don't skimp on the power-plant.

The cost of rebuilding your 63 is pennies compared to the cost of the frame off you are doing.

There were a few improvements made to 63 engines that will take days to explain, but here is one



This is a picture of the rocker shafts. The one on top is the 63 and newer with a smaller hole, the bigger hole is 62 and older. This limited the flood of oil in the valve covers.. The heads on the 63 had bigger drain hols from the head back to the pan as well..

Also that remote oil filter and making the 62 a full flow has never set well with me.
The oil galleys in the engine for the lifters are pretty big.

The volume of oil might be restricted by the remote filter and you may not get the oil pressure needed for another 45,000 miles. If anything leave it off..

Here is the way its been done in the past. It is quite a bit of work to do and you might want to put that effort into rebuilding the full flow.

http://www.studebaker-info.org/Fulflo/fullflo.html

Lots of help here on getting an engine rebuilt and I'd hate seeing you scratch the paint on a fender when you have to swap that 62 back with the 63 you should have rebuilt..

Finally, I'm amazed no one has asked what you're going to do with the full flow block, as there are many that will take it off your hands

My 2 cents..

[afgarcia86]

Thanks for the advice SScopelli, after giving it some thought we are going to look into having the 63 block machined. We were thinking it would be easier to interchange parts and build a strong hybrid block that would save us a little time and money. However we are realizing that there are huge differences between the two blocks. We are racing to get the car ready for my wedding in May. Thanks for the kid words.

ps: Your project is going great, what did you use for the undercoat? I see you painted the bottom the same color as the paint. Since our car is going to be white we were thinking of doing the undercoat in black, but your car is the second I have seen on here that has the same undercoat as car color. Even though I think its going to get dirty easily I think I am going to need to convince my father to do the same.

[rkapteyn]

I heard that the earliest blocks were the strongest because the tooling was fresh.

The tooling was pretty old by 1962.
When they made the full flow blocks they started with fresh tooling.
The rumor that you quoted was that the 1955 blocks were the best for large overbore because there would have been less core shift with the fresh tooling .
Robert Kapteyn

[SScopelli]

Thanks.. Happy to provide a bit of insight.

May is pretty aggressive, but you look like you have a crew working hard at it.

Hopefully you will enjoy it for years to come, but if you did decide to sell, it will be better to keep the correct year block with it as well.
Every Stude enthusiast that comes to look at my car always looks for the filter.

I used a Bed liner that is "Tint"-able such as Sherwin-Williams UL-1000. I think it is a MOPAR (sic) thing for the bottom to be the same color. But with the black "X" frame I just thought it looked cool. I was tempted to bring to a real bed liner company, but I'd rather the fun.

If you go this route, ask the paint shoppe for just the tint to match your paint and mix with bed liner.

If it is not going to be in salt, and you already have it to bear metal, paint the bottom with a primer like PPG's DP-40lf. You can also toss a clear coat on top of the primer and leave it primer color. That looks cool as well.

I'm scared to say this car will probably be a trailer Queen, but the durability of the bed liner will allow undercarriage cleaning while on a lift.