Stude V8 Swap?

[mfg]

Here’s some food for thought…..

Over the years many Studebaker Avantis have had Chevy engines swapped into them…. Has anyone ever heard of a Studebaker V8 being swapped into an Avanti ll?

Edited September 15, 2025 by mfg
Spell.

[aardvark]

I have to say, that would be counter intuitive. 

The Chev SB engine comes in soooo many combinations whereas the Studie Avanti only had 2 options, and both based on the 289.

To me, the Chev engine and its options are the superior choice.... to downgrade seems futile. to go. thru all the changes (motor mounts and multiple other changes) seems senseless. 

I say that and I currently own a stock '63' R2.... (but also a '02' model which is an LS1 based engine.)

[AG-R3]

Oh how I regret not doing that to my RQA.....

[mfg]

When the original Chevy 305 died in my ‘83 Avanti ‘everyday driver’ in 2010, (at 300,000 miles) I had a nice running Stude 289 and Powershift trans at my disposal.

I gave somewhat serious consideration to swapping in the Stude V8, as I had the correct engine frame brackets and other necessary items, however, I ultimately purchased a Chevy 305 ‘Goodwrench’ engine and installed that…. which is still running well at approximately 550,000 miles.

[aardvark]

Wow... Impressive mileage MFG.

I think You made a good choice, but many opted to go with the 350 for added power.

 

[mfg]

On 9/20/2025 at 12:29 AM, aardvark said:

Wow... Impressive mileage MFG.

I think You made a good choice, but many opted to go with the 350 for added power.

 

I got a good deal on the 305… When brand new it was installed in a street rod… but yanked out with about 1600 miles on it  because (like you mentioned) the rod owner went with a 350 for better performance.

[aardvark]

Only issues I ever had was soft came on a 305.  But if You've gone that far.. not a concern.

[mfg]

On 9/23/2025 at 3:14 PM, aardvark said:

Only issues I ever had was soft came on a 305.  But if You've gone that far.. not a concern.

I think the soft cam issue was rectified in 1988 (when GM reworked the small block Chevys… also improving the rear seal and one piece oil pan gasket… My 305 engine was purchased around 1994… but sat under a workbench for years after being pulled out of the street rod.

Edited October 13, 2025 by mfg

[aardvark]

Good, because that was a real problem that I actually got stuck with.

So why the question? Are You considering a 3rd swap?

[mfg]

1 hour ago, aardvark said:

Good, because that was a real problem that I actually got stuck with.

So why the question? Are You considering a 3rd swap?

Nope… not me…. I just wondered if any Avanti owner had ever attempted it…. after all, it would be somewhat a ‘natural’!

[aardvark]

I question the ''Natural''.

It's more like a confusion.

[mfg]

59 minutes ago, aardvark said:

I question the ''Natural''.

It's more like a confusion.

Well, can you think of any engine that would be easier to install into an Avanti ll chassis than a Studebaker V8?

( With the hypothetical assumption that an owner wanted to part company with the  factory installed Chevrolet engine)

[aardvark]

Point I was making is it being ''Natural" is not a way to describe it..Natural is back to a Chev SB.

And I have to think the installation would fit but a lot of small stuff would need addressed.

[mfg]

22 hours ago, aardvark said:

Point I was making is it being ''Natural" is not a way to describe it..Natural is back to a Chev SB.

And I have to think the installation would fit but a lot of small stuff would need addressed.

Let’s just say… More ‘natural’ than a 426 Chrysler Hemi !!!!!

[aardvark]

Ha!

[jccatwb]

I had a 1963 R2 and now have a 1980 with a 350 SBC. I really do not think that the later performs quite as well as the former.

[mfg]

1 hour ago, jccatwb said:

I had a 1963 R2 and now have a 1980 with a 350 SBC. I really do not think that the later performs quite as well as the former.

I’ve heard that before… I think part of the problem there is that the later Avanti ll’s were hamstrung with a really ‘tall’ rear axle ratio, which greatly hurt off the line performance.

[Mark L]

12 hours ago, mfg said:

I’ve heard that before… I think part of the problem there is that the later Avanti ll’s were hamstrung with a really ‘tall’ rear axle ratio, which greatly hurt off the line performance.

That, and all the emission controls.

[Skip Lackie]

On 12/29/2025 at 11:31 PM, Mark L said:

That, and all the emission controls.

True, but that depends on the model year.  [Edit: PCV] valves started in 1962 in California and nationwide in 1963. Various other systems were added in later years (usually more in Calif).  Probably the worst year was 1974, when the various systems (and things like revised ignition timing) really strangled horsepower.  The adoption of catalytic converters in 1975 allowed the manufacturers to remove some of that stuff -- but others (air injection pumps, etc) were added in subsequent years.

There's an interesting conflict/conundrum WRT our cars: Federal law prohibits the removal of any mandated emissions equipment -- but doesn't require the manufacturers to continue to keep such stuff available.  So some of us have had to completely remove emissions systems because the parts to fix it were NLA.  In addition (and probably most importantly), the EPA allows the states to exempt vehicles with historic/antique license plates from emissions inspection.  So if you have historic tags, you can pretty much modify your car any way you want.  (That said, some states require cars with antique/historic tags to be unmodified.  However, their ability to enforce such rules is pretty limited.)

Edited Saturday at 05:50 PM by Skip Lackie

[mfg]

1 hour ago, Skip Lackie said:

True, but that depends on the model year.  EGR valves started in 1962 in California and nationwide in 1963. Various other systems were added in later years (usually more in Calif).  Probably the worst year was 1974, when the various systems (and things like revised ignition timing) really strangled horsepower.  The adoption of catalytic converters in 1975 allowed the manufacturers to remove some of that stuff -- but others (air injection pumps, etc) were added in subsequent years.

There's an interesting conflict/conundrum WRT our cars: Federal law prohibits the removal of any mandated emissions equipment -- but doesn't require the manufacturers to continue to keep such stuff available.  So some of us have had to completely remove emissions systems because the parts to fix it were NLA.  In addition (and probably most importantly), the EPA allows the states to exempt vehicles with historic/antique license plates from emissions inspection.  So if you have historic tags, you can pretty much modify your car any way you want.

True…. VERY THANKFULLY!!!!!

[A0136]

2 hours ago, Skip Lackie said:

True, but that depends on the model year.  EGR valves started in 1962 in California and nationwide in 1963. Various other systems were added in later years (usually more in Calif).  Probably the worst year was 1974, when the various systems (and things like revised ignition timing) really strangled horsepower.  The adoption of catalytic converters in 1975 allowed the manufacturers to remove some of that stuff -- but others (air injection pumps, etc) were added in subsequent years.

There's an interesting conflict/conundrum WRT our cars: Federal law prohibits the removal of any mandated emissions equipment -- but doesn't require the manufacturers to continue to keep such stuff available.  So some of us have had to completely remove emissions systems because the parts to fix it were NLA.  In addition (and probably most importantly), the EPA allows the states to exempt vehicles with historic/antique license plates from emissions inspection.  So if you have historic tags, you can pretty much modify your car any way you want.

Skip

Did you mean 1972 and 1973 for EGR?

[Skip Lackie]

1 hour ago, A0136 said:

Skip

Did you mean 1972 and 1973 for EGR?

No, but what I should have said was the PCV (not EGR) started in 1962/63.  I dunno what I was thinking (another old age brain fart).  Thanks for correcting me.  I will edit my earlier post.

[mfg]

I doubt if there’s enough ‘60’s, ‘70’s, ‘80’s, or even ‘90’s cars being driven regularly enough to even be concerned about the emissions they produce…. Also,…..collector vehicles are generally kept in very good states of tune which helps some.