All Activity

Just letting folks know there’s a second very simple option!

Sure, you can do that, but why add that to the driving task when a simple change in the valve body makes it automatic? He's already having the transmission beefed up for more power, so the valve body will already be out anyway.

Hello Friends,. Anyone have a digital file of the 2 page wiring diagram for the 63 Avanti?? Thanks KEITH

No need to open the trans to keep the lockup functioning…. A simple on/off toggle switch will do the job… Did this to my ‘83 Avanti ‘everyday driver’ about 15 years ago when I ‘deep sixed’ the computer system.

The transmission lock up converter is controlled by the ECU that you are removing. The transmission shop can make a modification to the valve body to fix this while they are working on it.

We need to remember here that when the Studebaker V8 was initially designed, future horsepower increases were to come from compression ratio increases….. not from a large expansion in cubic inches…. The engineers felt that high octane and ultra high octane gasoline would be available forever……. Studebaker V8 engines, considering their limited cubic inch capacity, were built considerably stronger than other period engines…. Designers of the Stude V8 were expecting compression ratio increases over 12 to 1…..possibly as high as 14 to 1 !

“Lower earth orbit”?… quite an exaggeration…. but I think what you’re saying is that Studebaker lessened the compression ratio on the R2 for warranty concerns… which I suspect myself! ( Once again….. has anyone actually heard of a stock Avanti R1 engine, which a standard Paxton ball drive supercharger had been installed on, failing?)

Didn’t Studebaker state there was no warranty on an R3 engine…and it had 9.75:1 CR? And the R3 was Granatelli developed. They must have expected a combination of a supercharger and R1 heads to grenade on a regular basis and send parts into lower earth orbit. That would have made for some really bad publicity and lawsuits.

I’d like to repeat this question…. Since a ‘as new’ Avanti R2 supercharged engine (9-1 comp) was rated by Studebaker at 289 horsepower….What would Stude have rated the horsepower to be if that same engine had an additional 1 1/4 point higher static compression?

RQB3263/81/305/700R4 WOW WOW WOW .......YOU BEEN CHANNELING ME FOR MONTHS NOW .. AND YOU DECISIONS ARE EXACTLY WHAT I WILL DO WHEN MY 305 RETIRES.... PERFECT ... PLEASE KEEP IN TOUCH HERE AS I WANT TO ... I WILL PROBABLY GO WITH A BULEPRINT 350 BUT CAST IRON HEADS FROM A 92 ROADMASTER /CAPRICE...NOW I JUST HAVE TO OUTLIVE MY 305 ... HUMMMMMM

Thanks. JB

1 and 2 are kind of humorous for us older folks, but also true. I friend told me that my 185 OHV6 Champ was pinging, but I could barely hear it once he pointed it out. Which begs the question: With modern engines having knock sensors, is there a way to add one to a Stude to have a warning light or something?

Yes, a great time to rid yourself of the ‘Computer Command Control’ system … Go with an Edelbrock carb and the earlier vacuum advance distrib!

All good thoughts (I got a kick out of getting your hearing checked!!) Here is food for thought…, If Studebaker did drop the compression ratio on R2’s due to warranty concerns, and that would be understandable,…What would they have rated the horsepower of a 10.25 compression ratio R2? The R2 we all know and love was factory rated at 289HP.

Release The Hounds.... The Blueprint 350 / 341HP is on order (about 30 days out now). Old 305 has been pulled and set aside for later play... Transmission TR700R4 has been pulled and will be delivered to the transmission shop this Friday for rework and upgrade to support the HP of the new engine. The current game plan is to forgo the ECU. Currently going to clean and possibly repaint the engine compartment, rework the PS to include new hoses, replace control arm bushings, clean/scrub/degrease frame as much as possible to apply rust blocker and paint.....

Electronics suppliers and Amazon have mercury switches. They won’t look like the originals but will work.

It would be interesting to hear from anyone adding (or who has added) a supercharger to his R1 engine. It is tempting for me to do it too. Three caveats, though: 1) Have your hearing checked, 2) Install quieter mufflers so you can hear pinging, 3) Add racing or aviation gas to 93 octane gas -OR- use an octane booster (assuming that those work and aren't harmful) --Dwight

It sounds to me like you bought the wrong springs. And the mechanic who installed them didn't pay attention to the fact that the base of the springs were different from what was removed. So, you need to purchase the correct springs and have them installed to solve the problem. If you still have the old ones, then you can verify spring set #2 is correct before having them installed. If not, then you need to buy them from an Avanti Parts supplier for sure.

The original switch has failed as near as I can tell. What have you used to replace the mercury switch, which to my limited knowledge, are no longer available (NLA)? Thanks John

I'm relatively new to the Avanti gang, about one year, but I have noticed that my 1980 Avanti 2 windows do rattle somewhat. Dan over at nostalgic motor cars tells me there is something he calls an anti rattle gasket that can be installed to prevent just that. I'm just handy enough to be able to do that, but I haven't done so yet. As for the fit of the door, I found mine to be OK, the only problem being that the door glass is loose because of the aforementioned problem and I'm sure it would sound much better with the gasket, or whatever it is, installed. Further, the weather seal around the window in the door frame is worn out and could stand to be replaced, which would probably also improve the situation. As to whether the original Studebaker Avanti's are better then the Avanti 2s, my feelings are "it depends." The originals are generally more valuable. Until much later, they are the ones that will have the round headlights instead of the squares. It might be a bit more difficult to get parts for the Studebaker engines instead of the Chevrolet 350 cubic inch engines, the latter having been installed in Avanti 2s from about 1965 to 1985 (there are variants installed in the latter years). The original Studebakers are the only ones that are gonna have the Paxton superchargers, and good luck finding parts for those since Paxton went out of business quite some time ago. The 2s do not have the "snob appeal" (don't take it personally y'all, it's just an expression), but might be more suitable for daily driving. Your gas mileage will suck in any case, but the 2s have locking bucket seats with (anti whiplash) headrests, seat belts with shoulder harnesses, four way flashers; and probably some other stuff I can't thin of right now. Further, as I mentioned above, the Chevy 350 engines are ubiquitous, and parts for those engines are very easy to find. For me, the advantage of the 2s is that I feel free-er to make modifications to them for which I would be tarred and feathered by the Studebaker collector's community for doing to an original.

I agree that today’s sub par gasolines would probably be the big caveat here. Although, using the highest grade gasoline available, with a good brand of octane booster, might eliminate any pinging issue the driver may encounter. And this is with the assumption that any supercharged ‘63-‘64 Stude Avantis being driven today are strictly limited use automobiles!

Well, very sorry to hear that…. but thank you for sharing that information.

I am having a problem with the new front springs. They do not sit perfectly vertical.....At the top (the pocket of the frame) the spring is pushed to the side of the pocket resulting in major noise from metal on metal movement, whenever I hit a small bump. The opposite side of the pocket has about 1-1.5 inches of clearance. The shop that installed said that the top of the spring is centred in the pocket and then looked for solutions including rotating the springs, but indicated that it would only move the contact point to a different spot on the pocket. The base of the spring has a tangential end which may be causing it to slide to one side on the base support. Do I have the wrong base type for the application (should it be square)? Is there a base plate that could centre the base of the spring? Should I simply get a pair of springs from one of the vendors and replace these (new) ones? Would a new set of springs have the same problem? Enquiring minds and all that!

In my experience with several R2s, both back in the day and today, you will need to use gasoline of higher octane than the current 93 if using R1 heads with a blower. Going from 9.0:1 to 10.25:1 C.R. will increase the chance of pinging considerably (& increase power considerably too). You could add some racing or aviation gasoline to 93 octane. A while ago someone on the SDC Forum said that he was running 570 heads (R1 heads) with a blower successfully, but I suspect he was using something above 93 octane gas. Yours is an intriguing thought. As we know an R1 will beat an R2 up to 30-40 MPH, and that is partly (mostly?) due to the higher compression ratio of an R1. With the small number of miles most of us drive our cars today the additional cost of higher octane gas would be insignificant. BTW, an R3 has a 9.75:1 C.R., so gives us an indication of what happens when increasing the C.R. on a supercharged Stude. I had an R3 in the late 1960's and it required Sunoco 260 (which is NLA) or it would ping. (I can't address the ping resistance of an R1 head versus an R3 head, however.) As far as what happens when using insufficient octane gas in a Studebaker: A local '63 Avanti with an R4 engine experienced failure because the owner didn't buy only Sunoco 260 gas and ignored the pinging. R4s have a C.R. of 12:1 (but no blower). When the engine was pulled apart EVERY ring was broken and one or two cylinders needed to be sleeved. You must NOT ignore pinging. --Dwight