Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 64

Thread: Max displacement for Stude V8??

  1. #1
    President Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Newark, DE
    Posts
    1,522

    Max displacement for Stude V8??

    I don't know if this has been covered, as most Studebaker performance engine ideas have been. Many V8s that came out in the '50s were modified through the 70s through boring and stroking the orginal design, e.g. Pontiac's V8 started as a 287 and finished up as a 455 (factory, bigger by after market mods). So what could Studebaker have pushed their block to? We all know of the 340 cu in. engine in development when Studebaker halted US production, but I am assuming the max displacement could have been quite bit more?
    Dan White
    64 R1 GT
    64 R2 GT
    58 C Cab
    57 Broadmoor (Marvin)

  2. #2
    Silver Hawk Member RadioRoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    5,195
    The story I heard is that there were two engineering choices/paths/philosophies in the late forties; design for increased bore and stroke in the future, or design for increased compression ratio in the future.

    Studebaker designed for increased compression in later models, but the super gasoline that was talked about never appeared.

    The other guys either designed for increased displacement, or had the money for second generation designs a few years later.
    RadioRoy, specializing in AM/FM conversions with auxiliary inputs for iPod/satellite/CD player. In the old car radio business since 1985.

    17A-S2 - 50 Commander convertible
    10G-C1 - 51 Champion starlight coupe
    10G-Q4 - 51 Champion business coupe
    4H-K5 - 53 Commander starliner hardtop
    5H-D5 - 54 Commander Conestoga wagon
    56B-D4 - 56 Commander station wagon
    60V-L6 - 60 Lark convertible

  3. #3
    Silver Hawk Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Spokane, WA, USA.
    Posts
    8,600
    The SBC can go to 427" and the Studebaker V8 is larger internally and externally. Taking the bore out to 4.125" would require relocating the head bolt holes and a new cylinder head design, but physically it could be done.

    Practically, without major core and machinery line rework, 340" to 360" would be about it.

    jack vines
    PackardV8

  4. #4
    Silver Hawk Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Spokane, WA, USA.
    Posts
    8,600
    Quote Originally Posted by RadioRoy View Post
    The story I heard is that there were two engineering choices/paths/philosophies in the late forties; design for increased bore and stroke in the future, or design for increased compression ratio in the future.

    Studebaker designed for increased compression in later models, but the super gasoline that was talked about never appeared.

    The other guys either designed for increased displacement, or had the money for second generation designs a few years later.
    The engines which were first-generation OHV8 design contemporaries of the Studebaker and their maximum production displacement:
    Cadillac - 390"
    Oldsmobile - 394"
    Chrysler - 392"

    See a pattern there?

    jack vines
    PackardV8

  5. #5
    President Member tsenecal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Elko NV
    Posts
    1,043
    I always wondered why they didn't use the packard V8 after they joined up. It would have matched some of the other car companys for cubes.

  6. #6
    Golden Hawk Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Wappingers Falls, New York, USA.
    Posts
    22,263
    Quote Originally Posted by tsenecal View Post
    I always wondered why they didn't use the packard V8 after they joined up. It would have matched some of the other car companys for cubes.
    As a minimum, it would have entailed relocating the entire Packard engine manufacturing line to South Bend. They were different starting from the initial block castings.
    Gary L.
    Wappinger, NY

    SDC member since 1968
    Studebaker enthusiast much longer

  7. #7
    Silver Hawk Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Sacramento, CA, USA.
    Posts
    5,503
    Quote Originally Posted by PackardV8 View Post
    The SBC can go to 427" and the Studebaker V8 is larger internally and externally. Taking the bore out to 4.125" would require relocating the head bolt holes and a new cylinder head design, but physically it could be done.

    Practically, without major core and machinery line rework, 340" to 360" would be about it.

    jack vines
    Jack, I've heard this talked about before. That the head bolts would have to be relocated. But would all the head bolts need to be moved? Ford 289s only have 4 bolts surrounding each of thier cylinders. Might it be possible to lose one of the head bolts per cylinder and still "get away" with it? Just wild guessing here. Personally, I've always been a fan of power added fun. Especially turbos. Dial in the amount of fun you want, or how much engine you want to grenade, and let it rip.
    But why would it not be possible to move a bolt or two and lose one per piston and see what happens? The larger cubic inches would not need the added compression and copper head gaskets could make up for the sealing.
    I've always been intrigued by the engineering of these sorts of engine tweaking fantasies, but never participated (other than head porting, head milling and turbos).
    Best answered by the expert...
    sals54

  8. #8
    President Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    4,674
    Oh boy...

    This is in fact NOT possible..!
    As proven by one of the guys on the Racing Site years ago. As I recall his blocks bore went to "about" 4.00" then water was struck! Last I heard, water and combustion do not play well together.

    You say put iron or steel liners in. Cool, here we go. Again BIG problem. This gentleman went about this task to its inevitable end and had liners installed in all eight cylinders. I recall mentioning that this would NOT work, and went thru a long explanation as to why. I was told that I was...full of it, as many of todays (and then) engines the deck and the cylinders were not connected. I explained that too. Still I was wrong..!

    Well wouldn't ya know it, but little by little we quit hearing about this big inch Stude engine...until it went away altogether..!

    You CANNOT...bore the cylinders into water, large enough to accept sleeves as the bottom of the block and the top of the block will no longer be connected..! Welding wont work, "tight/press" fits "might" work for about "one trip" at Bonneville or two passes at the drag strip.

    The ONLY...way this will work is like todays 500 inch, "billet" Hemi blocks that are used in Nitro Funny car and Top Fuel engines, high powered motorcycle engines and probably others that I'm not aware of...is to have LONG head studs that screw into bosses at the bottom of the block to hold the block together when the heads are bolted on..!
    The bottom of the Stude block is very thin. Not nearly enough material to screw long head studs into.

    So...unless anyone has a nose that can be "wiggled" and some magic conjured, or someone with a ton-o money to build a modern block...it ain't gonna happen.

    .060" = 3.622 bore dia. sure, .090" = 3.682 bore dia. MAYBE, .125" = 3.687 bore dia. not likely in most blocks, anything more...where are you getting your drugs?

    Mike

    P.s. - And for the power that most would "like" to make, five or six studs are a must. No one with any sense would built a monster like this and use only four studs around each cylinder to seal the heads to the block. Just asking for problems.
    Last edited by Mike Van Veghten; 06-16-2019 at 01:48 AM.

  9. #9
    President Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    South Bend,, In, USA.
    Posts
    1,237
    I'm running a engine bored to 3.750 for 320 ci.

  10. #10
    Golden Hawk Member DEEPNHOCK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Ocala, Florida, USA. Planet Earth
    Posts
    18,196
    Richard Poe is running (running) a naturally aspirated high compression 343 cid Stude engine right now.
    Digger Dave Molnar has a naturally aspirated 334 cid Stude engine.
    Crank stroke and bore size are the only major displacement difference

    (opinion)
    As to 'why' Studebaker did not upsize their engine?
    They made a massive investment (for them) on the automated engine machining center when they came out with their V8. They 'did' make as many displacement changes as possible while staying within that machines capability.
    The machine tied their hands from beginning to end. They were locked in from the foundry molds to the final assembly. The only way they could go bigger is to build a whole new large bore assembly production machine, and add the entire before and after process. That was never going to happen considering the board of directors decisions.
    But, On the bright side. Those decisions also brought the purchase of Paxton, and the addition of the Granatelli's to the mix. "If" a large bore engine had come along (say, the Packard engine line), then all we would have seen is a larger displacement engine...all stock...all dull.. all heavy..
    My opinion is the Paxton purchase brought more marketing excitement, some performance power options, and helped the 'image' of Studebaker.


    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...)

  11. #11
    President Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Little Rock Ar
    Posts
    1,425
    I cant wait for the next Engine Masters Challenge. a 341 inch Stude was entered but ign failed. some big HP numbers were given by Old engine designs 318 Poly, 272 "Y" block for instance but like Sals54, turbo's are great power adders. While still a working stiff i spent hours boring a junk Stude block to water, a 64 block. 7 cylinders were pronounced good, 8th hit water at .090 and would have been sleeved but health couldn't stand the strain. early retirement and the loss of the use of all that lovely machine shop equipment turned me to turbo's. oh well that big inch stuff will have to wait! Luck Doofus

  12. #12
    Golden Hawk Member DEEPNHOCK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Ocala, Florida, USA. Planet Earth
    Posts
    18,196
    Quote Originally Posted by doofus View Post
    I cant wait for the next Engine Masters Challenge. a 341 inch Stude was entered but ign failed. <snip>
    It is happening.
    The new rules package for the Hot Rod Magazine Engine Masters Challenge "Old Iron Class" limit the displacement to .065" max overbore from a factory OE displacement. No stroker cranks. The "Studebaker Power" team entry this year is going to be a .060" overbore of a 304cid displacement. Naturally aspirated, single carb.


    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...)

  13. #13
    Silver Hawk Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Sacramento, CA, USA.
    Posts
    5,503
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Van Veghten View Post
    Oh boy...

    This is in fact NOT possible..!
    As proven by one of the guys on the Racing Site years ago. As I recall his blocks bore went to "about" 4.00" then water was struck! Last I heard, water and combustion do not play well together.
    Mike

    P.s. - And for the power that most would "like" to make, five or six studs are a must. No one with any sense would built a monster like this and use only four studs around each cylinder to seal the heads to the block. Just asking for problems.
    Mike... this is why I ask the questions. I don't know all that was done to achieve some of the bigger cubes the guys are running. And I know that for some, this is beating a dead horse... having been investigated to the nth degree. I'm one of those on the outside, looking in when it comes to the machining/engineering side of things.
    My skills are limited in this area, but my curiosity is not.
    I remember a time back in the Dick Datson days when it was said that anything over 320" was not possible for a Stude V8. Someone obviously figured it out.
    sals54

  14. #14
    President Member BobWaitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Hopkins, MN, USA.
    Posts
    762
    You can go the other way, too. Our engine (also built by Digger Dave) is 182 cubic inches. It's a 232 block slightly bored with a 224 crank destroked from 2-13/16 to 2-1/2.

  15. #15
    Silver Hawk Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Spokane, WA, USA.
    Posts
    8,600
    Quote Originally Posted by DEEPNHOCK View Post
    The "Studebaker Power" team entry this year is going to be a .060" overbore of a 304cid displacement. Jeff
    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain
    When the 289" is bored .060", the displacement is 298.885". That was how the prototype R3s were created.

    The production R3s were overbored .093" for 304.5", so, if we're beginning with a 3.656" bore +.060", we're up to 3.716" bore for 314.5".

    That will require sonic testing. Many full-flow blocks won't take that much overbore.

    jack vines
    Last edited by PackardV8; 06-16-2019 at 12:27 PM.
    PackardV8

  16. #16
    Silver Hawk Member RadioRoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    5,195
    Quote Originally Posted by PackardV8 View Post
    The engines which were first-generation OHV8 design contemporaries of the Studebaker and their maximum production displacement:
    Cadillac - 390"
    Oldsmobile - 394"
    Chrysler - 392"

    See a pattern there?

    jack vines
    Jack, what were the displacements the first year they came out? Were they significantly larger than 232?
    RadioRoy, specializing in AM/FM conversions with auxiliary inputs for iPod/satellite/CD player. In the old car radio business since 1985.

    17A-S2 - 50 Commander convertible
    10G-C1 - 51 Champion starlight coupe
    10G-Q4 - 51 Champion business coupe
    4H-K5 - 53 Commander starliner hardtop
    5H-D5 - 54 Commander Conestoga wagon
    56B-D4 - 56 Commander station wagon
    60V-L6 - 60 Lark convertible

  17. #17
    Golden Hawk Member DEEPNHOCK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Ocala, Florida, USA. Planet Earth
    Posts
    18,196
    "Digger" Dave Molnar sonic tested the block he chose..

    Quote Originally Posted by PackardV8 View Post
    When the 289" is bored .060", the displacement is 298.885". That was how the prototype R3s were created. The production R3s were overbored .093" for 304.5", so, if we're beginning with a 3.656" bore +.060", we're up to 3.716" bore for 314.5". That will require sonic testing. Many full-flow blocks won't take that much overbore.
    jack vines
    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...)

  18. #18
    Silver Hawk Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Spokane, WA, USA.
    Posts
    8,600
    Quote Originally Posted by RadioRoy View Post
    Jack, what were the displacements the first year they came out? Were they significantly larger than 232?
    '49 Cadillac - 331" grew to 390" by '59
    '49 Oldsmobile - 303" grew to 394" by '59
    '51 Chrysler - 331" grew to 392" by '57

    So yes, the Studebaker V8 started small and stayed small.

    jack vines
    PackardV8

  19. #19
    Silver Hawk Member RadioRoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    5,195
    Another one of those "What were they thinking?" moments.

    Oops. I answered that in my first post.
    RadioRoy, specializing in AM/FM conversions with auxiliary inputs for iPod/satellite/CD player. In the old car radio business since 1985.

    17A-S2 - 50 Commander convertible
    10G-C1 - 51 Champion starlight coupe
    10G-Q4 - 51 Champion business coupe
    4H-K5 - 53 Commander starliner hardtop
    5H-D5 - 54 Commander Conestoga wagon
    56B-D4 - 56 Commander station wagon
    60V-L6 - 60 Lark convertible

  20. #20
    President Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    , , .
    Posts
    1,296
    I think the Chrysler hemi got a .5" taller block deck along the way to help incorporate the 392's .28" longer stroke.

  21. #21
    Silver Hawk Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Spokane, WA, USA.
    Posts
    8,600
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Timberlake View Post
    I think the Chrysler hemi got a .5" taller block deck along the way to help incorporate the 392's .28" longer stroke.
    Yes, for true; Cadillac went to 390" in 1959, but by 1963 the stylists wanted a lower hoodline, so the engineers shortened their block deck a full 1" and kept the same 390", so displacement is a matter of how much money the factory wants to spend on foundry cores and machining center changes.

    jack vines
    Last edited by PackardV8; 06-17-2019 at 11:13 PM.
    PackardV8

  22. #22
    President Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Westbrook, MN
    Posts
    886
    What Mike said!!!! The cylinder wall is thick but not infinitely so. .080 is the max. My Packard needed to be bored and they went .040 which increases displ to 296cid. I think their 304 was .080 over. The Stude V8 is square (bore essentially equal to stroke) If you were to increase displ. you'd need to mess with the stroke and you'd end up with an under square engine. Guess free advice is worth what you pay for it. formula: pi x 1/2 bore squared x stroke x number of cylinders = cid

  23. #23
    Silver Hawk Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Spokane, WA, USA.
    Posts
    8,600
    The following are offered only in the interest of accuracy.
    When we routinely work to .0005", giving and getting the dimensions is crucial.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeffry Cassel View Post
    The cylinder wall is thick but not infinitely so. .080 is the max.
    Yes, agree, there are limits, however, where they are is unknowable without professional sonic testing and sometimes that's not enough. Even after sonic testing, we once hit an internal rust pit hole at .060". More than .080" is not usually a problem, but it can be there.

    On the other hand, we regularly bore pre-full-flow blocks .117", for 308".
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeffry Cassel View Post
    I think their 304 was .080 over.
    No, the 304.5" is overbored .09375"
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeffry Cassel View Post
    The Stude V8 is square (bore essentially equal to stroke)
    The key word "essentially"; only when bored .060", does the 299" becomes square at 3.625"

    jack vines
    Last edited by PackardV8; 06-22-2019 at 10:56 AM.
    PackardV8

  24. #24
    Silver Hawk Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Trochu, Alberta , Canada.
    Posts
    5,608
    Regarding the pre-full flow blocks, is it possible to drill and/or otherwise modify one of those to accept a full-flow filter, possibly remote-mounted? I know I was able to do that with an early OHV six.
    Gord Richmond, within Weasel range of the Alberta Badlands

  25. #25
    Silver Hawk Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Spokane, WA, USA.
    Posts
    8,600
    Quote Originally Posted by gordr View Post
    Regarding the pre-full flow blocks, is it possible to drill and/or otherwise modify one of those to accept a full-flow filter, possibly remote-mounted? I know I was able to do that with an early OHV six.
    Yes, Gord, it's been done several times and someone may be able to provide you a link to the instructions.

    JMHO, but when beginning with a freshly cleaned and rebuilt engine, especially those with a closed PCV system, there's very little advantage to a full-flow filter system.

    Mike and I will probably have our debate again here. On pre-full-flow builds, where they're not being converted to full-flow, I find definite advantages to retaining the partial-flow/bypass filter system and he doesn't.

    jack vines
    PackardV8

  26. #26
    President Member swvalcon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    princeton mn
    Posts
    3,218
    Jack what can the cubic inch be stretched to with different pin height pistons and off set grinding of the crank and different rods or what ever it takes?

  27. #27
    Silver Hawk Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Spokane, WA, USA.
    Posts
    8,600
    Quote Originally Posted by swvalcon View Post
    Jack what can the cubic inch be stretched to with different pin height pistons and off set grinding of the crank and different rods or what ever it takes?
    Largest I've ever heard of was 340"; that's with a 3.68" bore and a 4" stroke. The durability at high horsepower stress is unknown, but should make for a torquer of a street engine.

    jack vines
    PackardV8

  28. #28
    Silver Hawk Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Trochu, Alberta , Canada.
    Posts
    5,608
    Thanks. yeah, doing that would not be high on my list of priorities, now.
    Gord Richmond, within Weasel range of the Alberta Badlands

  29. #29
    President Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Great Falls VA
    Posts
    3,495
    Quote Originally Posted by gordr View Post
    Regarding the pre-full flow blocks, is it possible to drill and/or otherwise modify one of those to accept a full-flow filter, possibly remote-mounted? I know I was able to do that with an early OHV six.
    Here are a few notes
    http://www.studebaker-info.org/rjtec....html#Fullflow
    64 GT Hawk (K7)
    1970 Avanti (R3)

  30. #30
    Golden Hawk Member mbstude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Gainesville, FL
    Posts
    14,959
    Jim McCuan was putting together a stroked, overbored Stude V8 which he claimed came out to 363”. As far as I know it has never ran, though.

  31. #31
    President Member shifter4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Daytona Beach, Florida, USA.
    Posts
    837
    [QUOTE=mbstude;1162505]Jim McCuan was putting together a stroked, overbored Stude V8 which he claimed came out to 363”. As far as I know it has never ran, though.[/QUOTE

    ( Matthew , I did not mean to quote you on this ). It was intended as a general reply to this Thread .

    Richard Poe's engine , per his postings , is 344 CID. It is at a bore of + .093 ( R3 / R4 size ) ,and
    has a 4" stroke crankshaft the he had made for himself . He runs it hard . He has posted much , both here
    on the SDC Forum , and over at the Racingstudebakers site .

    http://racingstudebakers.com/foo/vie...2367&start=210
    Bill H
    Daytona Beach
    SDC member since 1970
    Owner of The Skeeter Hawk .

  32. #32
    Silver Hawk Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Spokane, WA, USA.
    Posts
    8,600
    Quote Originally Posted by shifter4 View Post
    Richard Poe's engine , per his postings , is 344 CID. It is at a bore of + .093 ( R3 / R4 size ) ,and has a 4" stroke
    Those dimensions produce 335.749 CID.

    jack vines
    PackardV8

  33. #33
    President Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Corunna, MI USA
    Posts
    1,248
    Richard states (on Fri Sep 30, 2016 4:51 pm) "This block is the same bore, 3.701",
    but I sonic tested them, and had it blue printed. The thrust side of the bore is the critical dimension to watch out for. I try to keep it to .125". The bore may be a little bigger or smaller depending on the type of piston you use. Studebaker blocks are some times bored a little off so they may be thinner in spots, but seem to be machined much better than SBC blocks."

    Plugging this 3.701 (.1385 over) bore figure x a 4.00 stroke into the cu. in. calculator, I come up with 344.25323 cu. in.
    Last edited by Jessie J.; 06-23-2019 at 10:44 PM.

  34. #34
    President Member shifter4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Daytona Beach, Florida, USA.
    Posts
    837
    Quote Originally Posted by Jessie J. View Post
    Richard states (on Fri Sep 30, 2016 4:51 pm) "This block is the same bore, 3.701",
    but I sonic tested them, and had it blue printed. The thrust side of the bore is the critical dimension to watch out for. I try to keep it to .125". The bore may be a little bigger or smaller depending on the type of piston you use. Studebaker blocks are some times bored a little off so they may be thinner in spots, but seem to be machined much better than SBC blocks."

    Plugging this 3.701 (.1385 over) bore figure x a 4.00 stroke into the cu. in. calculator, I come up with 344.25323 cu. in.
    Thanks for clarifying .

    I failed to do the math in my previous post .
    I was reading some of the early posts on his engine , and did not do a thorough follow through .
    Very sorry to have caused any distress .
    Bill H
    Daytona Beach
    SDC member since 1970
    Owner of The Skeeter Hawk .

  35. #35
    Commander Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Sheboygan, WI
    Posts
    71
    I also had a 320" motor (same as post #9). .187" overbore to a full flow block. Ran it for a number of years, some all out runs. Sold it to a friend and he ran it for more years. Ended up breaking the crank, but never a problem with the bore.

  36. #36
    Speedster Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Nashville, Indiana, .
    Posts
    481
    Jessie, Bill,
    You are correct. I've done two engines this way and I know of two others that were also bored to 3.701 with no problems. I have hundreds of runs on this engine flat out reaching 6500rpms a couple times. It's a stick shift with 4.09 rear gears until I stripped the ring and pinion gears making a pass at the FS, FAST race in Michigan last fall. On all 1/4 mile runs it goes to 6000rpms. The car will do 11.20s and 118.6 mph. I have 60' times as fast as 1.51 and 0 to 60mph in the high 3 sec range.
    I have plans to build a bigger engine, but we will see if I ever get it done.
    Thanks,
    Richard
    The annual all Studebaker Nationals and Orphan Car Drag Race is Saturday May 27th 2017 9:00 am at Brown County Dragway in Bean Blossom, Indiana. "Studebaker Drag Racing you can't beat it" For more information contact Richard Poe

  37. #37
    President Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Corunna, MI USA
    Posts
    1,248
    Richard. I'd been wondering, and don't recall seeing it mentioned anywhere, do you employ hard block?

  38. #38
    Speedster Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Nashville, Indiana, .
    Posts
    481
    No I do not.
    Richard
    The annual all Studebaker Nationals and Orphan Car Drag Race is Saturday May 27th 2017 9:00 am at Brown County Dragway in Bean Blossom, Indiana. "Studebaker Drag Racing you can't beat it" For more information contact Richard Poe

  39. #39
    President Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Corunna, MI USA
    Posts
    1,248
    That's good to hear. There is still more untapped potential. 350 cu. in. doesn't look to be too far out of reach, and with better breathing too.

  40. #40
    President Member swvalcon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    princeton mn
    Posts
    3,218
    I would only use the block fill if a all out race only motor and then it's well worth the effort. I know the heads limit the flow but what is about the max rpm on a well built Stude before you have a big pile of scrap metal? We where running high 7000s and a few times hit 8000 on our 377 chev small block and only non stock lower end parts where rod bolts and pistons.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •