Can anyone tell me if the '47-'52 Studebaker ch***is is the same or similar enough to the '53-'55 ch***is that it too will accommodate an early Cadillac V8 ala Frick & Tappett's "Studillac" conversions?
Generally, Studebaker front suspensions are grouped 1951 up through 1964 or so. That is a conventional upper/lower "A" arm style with coli springs, upright and spindle/king pin. Prior to '51 ('47 thru '50), some models, maybe all, I am not sure, used a transverse leaf spring for the lower control arm. I know that to be the case on Champion models, not sure what Commander and Land Cruiser designs utilized. So, I suppose the answer depends on what design is under your project vehicle. While I suppose the transverse leaf design could be beefed a bit, my opinion is that if it is in a lighter model (Champion) it is not as suited to a significantly heavier engine. A Commander or Land Cruiser, on the other hand, had the 245 cube flat 6 which is no lightweight itself.
Thanks. I'm looking at a '50 Champion, so it sounds like the front suspension might not be well suited to a Cadillac V8.
The studillac did not become popular until Stude came out with V-8 models. Then it was nearly a bolt in as the Stude block and the Cadillac block were designed by the same group of engineers. Where you run into a problem putting any V-8 into a stude is the center steer and drag link setup that they used, often people set the engine high in the ch***is for clearance either on the drag link or the center pivot in the ch***is cross member. Just for information the later suspension from the Lowey (sp?) is almost a bolt in for the earlier champs and commanders. Almost being the operative word here. If you can find the suspension intact it can be done with a little finagling.
Great information, PnB. I appreciate it. I must admit, though, it's looking like a hopped up version of the later 185 cubic inch six would be a better swap.
Um...I believe the suspension was changed in 53..! From the "planar" to the more conventional short upper/long lower control arm design in 53 and to continue till the end of Studebaker (includes the Avanti). So NO, the pre 53 IS DIFFERENT thAn 53 and later. Will it hold up to the Cad's weight, probably, but it's not a good handling suspension. I'd look to a front clip swap myself. The internet is a vast place, look it up. Mike
This is only a guess but they may have changed the steering etc. in 1951 to make room for the new V8. I say this because other companies had to redesign their engine compartments when they switched from a straight six to a V8. Cars that came with a V8, or had one available as optional equipment are usually easier to swap engines in.
There was also a brake change somewhere in there. Once the V8 came into play the brakes got a lot bigger.
Sorry, but I has to respectfully disagree with my HAMB Friend, PnB, on this one....at least in part. The front suspension/frame configuration on a pre-'51 Studebaker is nothing like the '51-up and would NOT accept the later parts...... Perhaps he meant you could swap Commander/President parts (bigger brakes, mostly) onto a '51-up Champ frame...and I would agree with that. Spanning 50 years I have owned 4 Studebaker "Lowey" coupes, currently a '56 Sky Hawk. I recently trial fitted a '63 Caddy 390 into the engine bay. Things are close in some spots, but the only actual interference I had was with a power steering tube on the steering gear box, a huge contraption in '56, and there is a fairly easy fix for that. Otherwise, I took care to locate the centerline of the crankshaft in the same place as the original Stude V8 and with manifolds in place, it cleared both the drag link and the center bellcrank. Now, I also have a 315 Dodge and 354 Chrysler hemis which are also candidates for the Stude and I am anxious to trial fit those and see what issues may arise. That will have to wait a few months as things stand right now, but it should be interesting. The hard part will come in choosing, should they all fit.
Tin - Actually, the brakes didn't get larger till 55, then again in about 62 or 63. The whole frame, steering, suspension, etc. changed in 53 and stayed the same with only minor changes till....the end. The Saginaw steering box was a big improvement over the Ross box in about 63, along with a minor caster change in the spindle casting. Mike
Sorry, but this is incorrect. 1951 was the major change in front suspension. If you do the research you suggest, you will find this to be true.
Ok, let's further muddle things up here. This ad in the HAMB cl***ifieds appears to show a conventional, coil-spring suspension having come from under a Champ. Then you've got this quote: Which would seem to indicate that the last year for the "Planar" (transverse leaf) front suspension was 1949. And then there's the fact that starting in 1951 the Champs and Commanders started sharing a ch***is. Clear as mud it is.
I did a little checking and found this http://pillers-r.tripod.com/studebaker/articles5.htm Apparently the new coil spring suspension debuted in 1950. Were they smart enough to redesign the engine compartment for V8 power while they were at it.
If your going to think about adding a new Study frame,go at lest to a 1954,the 53 had less bracing,54 fixed the flex prob of 53 frame,the sub was actuly pretty nice working set up,but a upgrade to disk is nice now days.
Apparently I am partially in error as to the exact year Studebaker went to coil springs. However, the steering gear/linkage pictured in the HAMB Cl***ified ad for the '50 Champion parts is not the same as later versions. I will still maintain that suspension and steering linkage is common to all 1951 and later Studebaker models. The main difference in '51-up is the steering box...drag link, center bellcrank style steering linkage. Exactly like the '49 thru '54 Chevy p***enger car in design, though not dimensions. It appears Studebaker did a one year only design in their 1950 transition to coil springs and redesigned the front end components for 1951 up.
They also changed from steel control arm bushings to rubber, in 1952 I think. The old steel bushings can be fitted to newer cars to tighten up the suspension.
I read something about that today. It said the '51 cars and the very late R3s used steel, and all the others rubber, which did not hold up as well.
I am restoring a '53 Woodill Wildfire that has a home-built ch***is with a "50 Champion sub-frame grafted on, so I've done a lot of research on this. Studebaker started making major changes to their front suspension and steering in 49 and these varied between Champions and Commanders. In 1950 the Champion introduced coil springs with tubular shocks, 9" brakes and four bolt hubs. The Commander used the buggy spring with an upper control arm and Houdaille shocks, 5 lug hubs and an 11" brake. The big studes's used the 11" brake in front from at least 1949. I found that I could use the '50 Commander king pins and hubs, they bolt to the Champion control arms using Champion bushings. The steering arm and lower knuckle were the same for Champion and Commander. Steering in the '50 is really crude and differs between Champ. and Comm. In '51 Studebaker changed things again, the Commander became a coil spring front suspension. At some point in here the big front brakes changed from the complicated "internal" adjusting mechanism to a more traditional method. Minor changes occurred until '53-'55 when further changes came about for the Loewy ch***is, and only brakes differed between the models. Wheel bearings changed in '56.
This is great info. So it sounds like I could get big brakes and five-lug wheels by switching to Commander spindles. I wonder if the Commander rear axle would be a bolt-in as well. For the record, my thinking has shifted to finding a '55 Champion 186 cubic inch flathead six, splitting the exhaust, and bolting on a Cathcart head and Offenhauser 2x1 intake. But better brakes are always welcome.
The Jalopy Journal
