Hot Rods 308 Hudson 6 for Early RODS ???

While true that NASCAR wouldn't allow headers, Hudson did have their 7X "severe usage" exhaust manifold. This manifold itself externally looked like the standard item except the front three and rear three cylinders were internally seperated with a center divider and then a collector elbow kept the exhaust split to start out in two pipes. The rules then stated that a six cylinder car could not run twice pipes past the rear axle so Hudson welded up a beautifully blended head pipe to bring these two pipes into one. If you ever get a chance to see one of these, take a minute to study it.

Talk to an old Hudson oval racer and they will tell you they were often passed on the straightaways but got their position back by going around that same car or multiple cars ON THE OUTSIDE in the banked corners. THAT is where the Hudson chassis with its extremely low center of gravity really gave the Hornet as much of an advantage as did that high chrome alloy torquing big six cylinder with the two WA-1 carburetors!

 

Not a problem, I'll help anybody I can run the Hudson.

One item that hasn't been discussed, and has been a huge problem for me - transmissions.

If anyone is going to use one of these engines in a rod or build one up for stepdown use - you'd better be aware of some transmission issues and options.

If one can deal with the Hydramatic, there is your best option. This traditional movement has spurred some renewed interest in those old tank transmissions for good reason, they are tough pieces of artillery when properly worked. There are as many Dual-Range Hydramatic equipped Hudsons out there to be found as standards. I know nothing about the rebuilding or setting up of those transmissions - I'm a clutch guy. However, the prospect of a manual valve body and a Hydro-Stick type shifter is very appealing. The downfalls are sheer weight and finding knowledgable help if something is awry.

The Hudson standard transmissions are just not up to severe use. They are not up to enhanced torque outputs of any kind. The oil-bath, cork lined clutch is surprizingly tough. Tough enough to have twisted the input shaft on a few Hudson transmissions for me, and I've never clutch-dumped any of them. I haven't had a problem with the internals of the T-86 Borg or its earlier single lever counterpart - its the input shafts. They are 1.00" in diameter with 6 coarsely cut splines. By the time you measure the root face of the splines, you're twisting less than 0.750" of shaft. The heat treatment of the shaft is in question, but then we'd likely be choosing whether we wanted the shaft to twist or just break outright.

Wanting to run a Hudson standard transmission is my own personal hangup. I haven't really fixed that problem and am using some of my economic interlude to scheme on a fix. More than likely modifying a Jeep-type T-86 larger diameter input shaft and cluster gear-set. If I can scheme a fix with no more $$$ outlay than a more sensible transmission, I would consider it a success.

Sensible options would include one of two adapters available to marry the Hudson engine up to GM bellhousings and transmission types.

1.) Contact Dany Spring http://www.k-gap.com/ . The transmission adapter is not on his catalog, but he makes a simple one that should be considered for a high-rpm build. It consists of a heavy aluminum plate that uses the original Hudson steel flywheel to adapt to GM automatics. It also uses a high-torque modern Mopar-type starter. The reason this adapter is preferred for high rpm use is that it does not lengthen the crank assembly by the use of a crank hub spacer. There have been GM manual transmission installs on his plate, but used a custom flywheel. I don't have the specifics on the flywheel, but I'm sure Dany would share that info if you inquired about his adapter.

2.) Wilcap http://www.wilcap.com/hudson.html#308350MT They have ready to run packages that adapt the Hudson to GM type transmissions of both types. The only drawback for me is the design requiring a crank spacer. Hudson crank assemblies just don't need to be any longer. I really don't see a way to avoid it with their automatic adapter and flexplate arrangement, but the converter helps dampen the crank anyway. I'd really discuss the prospect of a non hub-adapted flywheel with them for a manual install, as they are in that business anyway.

Hud

 

Slightly off topic but there is a 54 superjet for sale within 15 miles of my house. It has a hydro and it definately would make a great ride for someone. If I didn't have my Aero that Jet would have a Rocket or Pontiac in it. If anyone is interested pm me and I'll drive out and get the number for you to call.

 

If you are in Texas, you are amongst some of my favorite Hudson people in the world. If you aren't one of them already and just having fun with me?

I have the patterns for the adapter you mention and made them for a while. I lost my foundry connection (they quit small jobs) and haven't been able to get another deal worked up. The adapter I made could be drilled and used on any Hudson exhaust manifold, so you could left-handedly adapt to "severe useage".

My main issue with the exhaust is not the adapter, but the exhaust manifold itself. Not even the true 7x exhaust manifold cures the repetitive problem I saw with 308 blocks. Cracked in the exhaust seat of either #3 or #4 - or both! The center exhaust arrangement is very restrictive at the manifold and causes those valves to retain entirely too much heat. That is something the adapter alone won't solve. If the exhaust valve seats weren't cracked, the valve guides and valves on those cylinders were always in much worse shape. I still run the stock exhaust on my Super Wasp w/308 and H-145 2 barrel. However, the heat flapper is gone and as much material as I could remove from 3&4 exhaust manifold was taken out. Kaiser/Continental engines have an even worse problem in the same area, due to the exhaust manifold restriction at 3&4.

Pictures of the 7x exhaust adapter.

 

I have an aquaintence that has a ford Coupster body on a home made frame, powered by a Desoto 251 with dual carbs, home made header magaphone exhaust and some basic internal mods. Hooked to the rear end through a GM 350 Hydamatic.

Had a short ride in it through some Nebraska Cornfields and the think flat out flies. Dased on that ride I woudl think either of the Hudson engines would be more than adequate and have a bit different visual aspect than the usual v8.

http://www430.pair.com/p15d24/mopar_forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=697&d=1167532071

This Desoto Powered roadster has also bounced around to a couple different owners in upstate NY

 

Hud, I had a Hudson Super Six 262 from 1950. I was quite impressed as a kid.

SO, when I found out there was a BIGGER flatty AND they'd won big in NASCAR, I thought: "More torque than THIS 262?"

 

OutThere & Hudsonator, THANKS for explaining the mysterious 7X difference. And THESE were OKAY with NASCAR?

 

Hud said: "The oil-bath, cork lined clutch is surprizingly tough. Tough enough to have twisted the input shaft on a few Hudson transmissions for me, and I've never clutch-dumped any of them."

You answered a BIG question that was always in the back of my mind about the fluid-cushioned ("Hudsonite"!) clutch!

 

"My economy went south in '06 and hasn't recovered yet-" Hudsonator

Hey M___,

Rick here with the 42 Commodore coupe straight eight project. I'm in the same boat as you-stopped. Hopefully will be able to get back on that hotrodded 254 eight soon. It's sitting up at Danny's in Springfield for a little fresh machining and lower end work. But, right now it's just a paperweight in his shop till the economy at my house picks up, too. As we talked about over at the other site, this isn't gonna be an axle twister but rather a 'peppier-than-stock' with improved breathing and carberation. Not looking good for my centrifugal supercharging hopes but who nows. Hope to see in Pigeon Forge this year!

Rick-Kingston Springs

 

Consider my interest "piqued" I have both a '53 308 and a '50 262. (53 Hornet 4dr, 50 Pacemaker Brougham). Sometime in the future I would be very interested in building a jalopy with that 262, this being said I am also interested in the transmission issues, and taking care of them. Do you have access to a machine shop? If not, I'm a toolmaker, and would be interested in trying to do whatever I would be able to (within reason of course), to work through this. Only thing I don't have access to is heat treating -- we send that out..... PM me, if interested. I have no actual experience with the Hudson, and you have really thought this thru, so I can understand if dont need my help.

 

Hudsonator, I have not been active in the Hudson scene for a couple of decades since the politics of the HET club went very sour.
I had heard that a 7X-style adaptor had been cast for the stock exhaust manifold but never saw it until your post - thanks. I don't understand its purpose other than to expand the gases into two pipes once past the bottleneck at the former heat riser if one removes that. This will do nothing to solve the problem you mention at the exhaust valves.

The problem with the Hornet motor is that the engineers had not planned in advance to go to this bore size when designing the original 232 and 262 six cylinders which included a water passage between #3 and 4 center cylinders. To increase the bore for the Hornet the center cylinders are siamesed, losing the water passage. That wouldn't be super critical EXCEPT that the exhaust valves of these two cylinders are immediately next to each other and thus these two have major cooling problems in the Hornet and as Hudsonator notes, they burn valves, crack seats, and wear out and prematurely fail valve guides.

One could cast more of these 7X style adaptors but IMHO they are kind of impractical as running twice pipes through the stepdown chassis is TIGHT at best (been there, done that, fought the rattles). Casting the full main real 7X manifold and real 7X elbow means big bucks in patterns, foundry and machining with limited market, and that leaves U-weld-it header kits.

I drove a 262 milled head Twin H, full 7X exhaust manifold, full length twice pipes, hydro, '53 Super Wasp brougham very mild custom for 120,000 miles out of southern Calif. before moving to TX. I currently cast hipo exh manifs for the successor NASCAR champ to Hudson, the Chrysler 300.

 

One quick comment on oil filled cork clutches like Hudson's used from 1912 (as I recall) through 1954 (on the big cars - the little Jet had a dry clutch).

If any of you wrench on some of the biggest and baddest fork lifts that the industrial or military fields have to offer, YOU KNOW that many of those beasts run CORK CLUTCHES running in oil. When the oil is forced out of the cork by the pressure plate engagement, the torque that can be overcome is INCREDIBLE! Those are full discs of cork. Hudson used something more like thin bottle corks pressed through a steel clutch disc and machined to spec - it was a labor intensive process then and still is today for restorers. "Hudsonite" clutch oil has been reproduced and is readily available from a hobby supplier.

 

Still-Out-There. I really appreciate what you are saying here. It is ALL an engineering, then RUSH-to-market issue.

Therefore, Hudson -- which was in a VERY tight spot financially after the public romance with the '48 step-down design faded -- did NOT have a hell of a lot of choices. They had to pull stops, do the 308 (fine in passenger cars, tolerably problematic in racing), HOPE to hit a marketing homerun.

They DID hit a homerun, but the problem came when the racing success did NOT automatically (as hoped) spill over to the senior Hudson models NOR the new (later) Jet.

When you look at the HISTORY of Hudson (1909 to 1954, officially; '55-'57 Hash), it was not a bad ride FOR AN INDEPENDENT!!! At least, the racing successes let Hudson go out in a blaze of INDEPENDENT GLORY!!!!!!!!!! YEAH!

 

Hudsons were great cars! I saved one from the scrap yard about 15 years ago and did a full resto on it. The motor was stuck and I thought about droping a chevy motor into it but after researching it I decided to attempt a rebuild of the 308 with its high compression aluminum head and twin carbs. I am glad I stuck it out because it is an awsome motor. Disassembly was tough as most of the head bolts were stuck in the aluminum head and after breaking off most of the heads and drilling out the remainder of the bolts I got the head off. The head was trash, corroded too bad between the cylinders. Had to overbore .040 real tough block, high nickle content.
Egge machine buith me pistons and supplied most of the other engine parts. I found a 262 iron head and ran it for a while until I found a good aluminum head. This motor ran great with plenty of power and torque for a flathead. I was impressed and real glad I did not swap the chevy motor. My trans was a Borg Warner automatic and I rebuilt it and found it to be strong and reliable. There was a fire at the Hydromatic factory in 54 and some of the 54's had Hydros and some had Borg warners.
These cars ran so good on the Nascar circut through 1954 they won more races than everyone else put together. It was not there power as the OHV's were faster but there step down unibody-subframe design that enabled them to go through the corners without slowing down like the other makes had to do. It was a great car my 54 Hudson club coupe and one of the ones that got away. Wish I could keep them all.

 

Jesus, IndianMark! You GUYSjuts keep coming on with more GREAT HuDSON stuff!

BTW, did you know that -- at that time -- only Borg-Warner and Packard had a lock-up torque converter? So, you put a B/W in your Hudson (if I understand what you said), though Hudson had given in (like other independents) and was buying automatics from GM. If so, awesome -- AND good performance!

 

How do I ID if I have a B/W or a Hydra in my 53. Haven't looked yet, I just want to know some telltale signs when I go to remove the engine/tranny.

 

I'm pretty certain the hydro plant burned in '54 so all '53 Hudsons with automatics are GM 4speed Hydramatics. Hudson specified their own gear set by the way to match the torque and HP curves of their engines. Ike Smith, drag racer, would tell you that the Pontiac gear set was preferable for the drag strip, if he were still alive - just a tip for you racers - because the gear spacing was better. The Hudson set had a BIG drop between 2nd and 3rd.

If you own a '54, the shift quadrant on the column reads "Hydra-Matic" under the printed numbers and the Borg does not and the Borg is a 3speed, not a 4speed.

 

Unshined2, wow, gret to see another Hudson aficionado on here. MINE was '50 STD w. fluid-cushoined cluthch, SO . . . I think Hudsonator and other wuld know better than I about the automatics. But (unless I misread), IndianMark said: There was a fire at the Hydromatic factory in 54 and some of the 54's had Hydros and some had Borg Warners.

SO, If yours is a '53, sounds as though it would've still been a GM Hydromatic. Any time I have swappped engines, etc., I always look to SEE ifthere are signs of a previous swap or significant work. If I suspected something, THEN, I slow way down and start checking details a TON more.

E.g., I SHOULD have check details before I assumed a 440 could go in easily for a 400! I'll leave THOSE painful details for another time (I got 'er IN there, but it took 3 weekeneds and 19 mods!!! F---. Hi-block, LO-block, ya know? LOL (Well, I can laugh NOW 'cause it's been YEARS ago!).

 

The GM hydramatic plant burned in 1953...hence Cadillacs and Oldsmobiles got Dynaflow transmissions and Pontiacs got the Powerglide. This lasted for part of 1953. I think the '54's went back to their regular transmissions.

 

Hey Rick,

I've thought about your Hudson 8 project alot and wondered what had become of it. I sure hate to hear the reason for the slowdown, but can completely identify. Come on over to the Red Boiling Springs AACA show on Sept 12th, we'll be there with our Hudson and can finally talk in person rather than on the phone. Its a good show, the best AACA show in the state of Tennessee.

StillOutThere,
Nice Wasp! My neighbor has kept that calendar shot of your Wasp all these years. Says its his dream Hudson - should be a point of pride for you to know somebody held on to your pick that long!

Spot on with the 308. The original patterns were never intended to have a bore that large. Not only is each cylinder pair siamesed, but the cylinder wall is siamesed with the valve port bowls! Its amazing that they succeeded with as little cracking as they did for 60 years. A good set of headers to relieve some of the exhaust heat really helps. I've never seen a cracked 262 block. A testament to the cooling that should have been present on the 308 - along with a 4.00" bore!

I know nothing about the Hyrdo or Borg Warner automatics. This thread is benefitting me with some info in that department - which I hope keeps coming.

Hud

 

Yep! Been fascinating facts, guys. The REASON I like this kind of thread is that so many people in the current generation have barely HEARD of most of the independents, and MANY jump to the conclusion they were INFERIOR -- hence, why they died out. In fact, most companies surviving WWII were very good and strong companies; they just couldn't stand alone much longer, as the Big Three began, more & more, to dominate the industry.

TOO BAD George Mason's plan didn't work out, so there'd have been a Big FOURTH conglomerate, with Hudson, Nash, Stude & Packard (I'd throw in Willys & IH, too!).

 

Geez... I always thought that was Pontiac...

 

I'll stand corrected then on the GM Hydro plant burning actually in '53 and now I may be wrong but with Hudson sales lagging in '53 I believe they had enough inventory already in plant of hydros that no '53 Huds got Borg Warner automatics and it is my recollection that there were not a lot of '54 Hudsons that got the B-W either because Hudson sales continued to slip. None of the Hudson Jet automatics were B-W.

 

Flathead sixes rule! In the early years of NASCAR, the flathead six dominated.

Plymouth made a good showing beginning in 1950, winning the most prestigious race on the circuit (Darlington) and three other short-track races, finishing second in the manufacturers championship.

By 1951 Hudson began to flex its muscle and, together with the dependable little Plymouths won 14 of 41 races.

1952 ended up being the year of the flathead with Hudson & Plymouth racking up 30 victories in 34 races!

In '53 Hudson won 22 of 37 races and in '54 they won 17 of 37.

I've always found it interesting that many of the early Plymouth drivers (Leon Sales, Herb Thomas, Bub King, Jack Smith among others) switched over to the Hudsons beginning in '51 and '52.

 

Three CRITICAL factors about the 308 Hudson Hornet engine in order of importance:

The exhaust situation has already been discussed and they do need that breathing and the siamesed cylinders and cojoined center exhaust valves tend to burn and crack seats. I don't believe the following have been noted in this thread....

First Hornets are particularly hard on timing chains and the more cam you give them, the worse the situation gets. Performance drops off rapidly as slack increases in the chain so buy the best chain and gears available in the market place and when you can "rock" any lash in that chain on the crankshaft pulley, you are losing response. Maintain a tight chain if you want a runnin' Hudson six.

Next, Hornet 308s and the 262 and 232 were built with a brass gear driven off the camshaft that drives the oil pump on the lower right side center of the block. The distributor is ALSO driven out of the center off the top of the same gear. (A few early engines had a steel gear.) This is great in that if this gear breaks you lose both oil pressure and ignition at the same time and can not destroy your engine. However, this brass gear goes a LONG time wearing out and during that time that Hornet that you are looking to perform has what I will call "lost" timing because of the ongoing wear in the teeth. The camshaft timing and the ignition timing can "float" in the wear of this brass gear. The gear is easily replaced by dropping the oil pump, driving out a pin and swadging a new pin to hold it on. Buy a quality brass gear! The wear on this gear is fairly easily checked by the lash you feel in the rotor of the distributor. A bit of that is the distributor shaft drive tang into the gear. The entire rest is the brass gear to the camshaft gear! Many of these brass gears are worn to RAZOR BLADE teeth when they come out of the engine. If you are driving a Hudmotor, check this lash now or you may strip this gear today.

The third critical factor is balancing the Twin H-Power. If you are running Twin H, you MUST purchase a Uni-Sync for balancing carburetor air flow. Hudson went to the trouble of putting a balance tube on that intake manifold to help when the mechanics did not do their job but oh what a difference when YOU do the job yourself. Life is really all a balancing act, isn't it?

 

Folks, you could try googling 'Frank Kleinig Hudson'. Bit of history there.

 

Spoogie, before we Goggle him, was HE the owner of Hudson Dept. Stores in Detroit, the biggest financial backer of the car, in 1909?

 

NO Kleinig didn't own Hudson's Dept Store! J.L. Hudson owned Hudson's Dept. Store! Surprised? J.L. Hudson was a financier who lent his name to the new motor car company in 1908 when it was formed by a group of automotive engineers. Other than that, Mr. Hudson was no motorhead.

Now, go look up Kleing like Spoggie asked us too. There is much to learn!

 

The 7x type cam that was known at the "chain stretcher" is history. The last 3 digits of its casting are "742". There is a 742A cam that was redesigned with gentler ramps - but wasn't the performer the chain stretcher was.

The Clifford reproductions of the 7x and Super 7x, were very tough on chains just like the Hudson production models because they were exact cam lobe-pattern copies.

There has been some re-development of Hudson cams in the past decade. Even the Clifford cams offered now have been reworked to acceptable ramp velocities These days you can have your performance and not over-stress the chain. You can get a Cloyes double roller chain and some dandy cam profiles from Randy Maas at 21st Century Hudson.
http://www.21stcenturyhudson.net/

I noticed the Clifford cams had also been redesigned a little as well. You have to contact Larry @ Clifford to get the lowdown on those.

All the other points brought up by StillOutThere, are still issues to be reckoned with.

Hud

 

Spoogie, as Steve Martin used to say back in the late '70s: "WELL, EXCUSE MEEEEE!!!" I guess I'll go look up the b------ ("fellow") you mentioned. Sheesh, did somebody piss in your flower bed, er what?