Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options

Postwar Studebakers

12425272930150

Comments

  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Member Posts: 16,860
    Also interesting that someone was using Chevies: a white 1964 and black 1964 shown in the pictures.

    Andy mentions in the article that "...the Impala was a rental car. It had a huge trunk with a huge decklid that we used as a picnic table".
    2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Member Posts: 16,860
    Also, Tex, I don't remember ever seeing a claim on a can of regular STP that it was good for 25K miles, like the product "STP Engine Treatment with (whatever the hell the additive was)" in Shifty's link. Just sayin'.
    2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
  • jljacjljac Member Posts: 649
    edited November 2011
    I have heard of folks who have retrofitted A/C to a supercharged car. My understanding through the years was always that it was a space issue under the hood, initially.

    Emphasis should be placed on the word "intitally," Putting air conditioning in a supercharged Avanti creates a number of problems in addition to the space limitations. The image below shows that the water coolant tank is where the air conditioning compressor might be located. However, that problem is easy to solve by moving the tank which is what many (most) cars do today, or eliminating it.

    image

    Most supercharged Avantis also had power steering because the supercharger added weight to the front end of already heavy V-8. Therefore, there were already belts for the alternator, water pump, power steering and supercharger without adding an air conditioning compressor to the mix.

    Once air conditioning is added, the condenser also restricts flow through the radiator. My friend who added air conditioning to his supercharged Avanti then needed a better radiator and fan.

    The supercharger then adds more heat by compressing the air and then putting more fuel and air into the engine than would be otherwise be possible. (Supercharged Avantis have a modified fuel pump to deliver more gasoline.) My friend then turned the intake manifold into an intercooler by
    running water through the bottom of the intake manifold where exhaust gasses heat up the manifold when the engine is cold. Therefore it performed a cooling function instead of a heating function, but it took longer to warm up the engine when it was cold because it was heated with water instead of being heated directly by exhaust gasses.

    When Studebaker sold the Avanti, it had to assume that some drivers would run the cars hard in hot weather with the air conditioning on. Therefore, adding an air conditioner created too many additional cooling problems to be worth the trouble.
  • texasestexases Member Posts: 11,107
    Thanks for the great picture and description. Looking at that 'blow through' supercharger with the housing around the carb, they had to have some gas boiling/vapor lock issues, didn't they?
  • jljacjljac Member Posts: 649
    Also, Tex, I don't remember ever seeing a claim on a can of regular STP that it was good for 25K miles, like the product "STP Engine Treatment with (whatever the hell the additive was)" in Shifty's link

    STP would not have made any claim that STP was good for 25K miles because they always recommended that you add the oil treatment when you changed your oil. In addition to impossibility of changing the oil without also removing STP, the STP makers wanted you to use more of the product than would be possible if you only changed the oil every 25K miles.

    I have a couple of cans on unopened STP that say product of the Studebaker Corporation. I might take some pictures of them soon if I have the time. No such 25K claim was made.

    Any car can be made to look bad by emphasizing its weak points and minimizing its strong points. That was taking place a lot here, which is why I opened this discussion topic.
  • texasestexases Member Posts: 11,107
    Well, now it's the FTC that's making things up, I guess.

    I imagine the 25k claim was made by STP for some short period, until they were forced to drop it. Do you have any other explanation?

    By the way, I like Studes and Avantis. The very first car memory I have is trying to start our '55 Studebaker (I must have been about 4), much to my dad's consternation!
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    edited November 2011
    He was lying, obviously, and the Feds caught him, too. The extreme nature of the fine rather suggests that they had a very good case.

    Having taken apart a lot of engines doped with STP, my personal advice is don't put it in your classic V8. Even if it didn't do any harm, it will make your mechanic hate you. I had to strip those blocks and dunk them to get rid of that stuff.

    However, on a positive note, I used to mix up a batch of warm STP and oil and lightly dip the rod and main bearings in it, so that the slimy mixture would stick to the bearing while I assembled the engine---it helped to prevent scratches to the bearing surface. But I never used very much of it---maybe a teaspoon or two.
  • texasestexases Member Posts: 11,107
    edited November 2011
    Correction, it was a '53 Starliner, looked just like this (except for the rust I remember bubbling through the paint in the usual locations, and the plain/normal hubcaps we had):
    image
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Member Posts: 16,860
    Beautiful car...the proportions were perfect.
    2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    edited November 2011
    I like the original hubcaps a lot better. Tiny wire wheels or wire hubcaps don't look right on an American car. Just pimpy IMO. Kinda spoils an otherwise lovely car.
  • jljacjljac Member Posts: 649
    edited November 2011
    Looking at that 'blow through' supercharger with the housing around the carb, they had to have some gas boiling/vapor lock issues, didn't they?

    I do not know of or recall any issues when the car was running. Problem was the engine would keep chugging (diesiling) (sic?) after the ignition was turned off. That was easy to stop by engaging the clutch on cars with manual transmissions, but cars with automatics would run quite awhile after the ignition was turned off in hot weather.

    I also had to use high octane gas (Sunoco 260 was my favorite). When I had my R-1 rebuilt, I used standard dish pistons instead of the flat top R-1 pistons and the diesling problem was solved BUT the car was not as fast as it once was. I could tell the difference.

    The engine pictured is not a factory installed R-3. . .is has an R-2 type air cleaner. The factory R-3s had a pipe that looked like a clothes dryer pipe that went into the engine compartment wall and then the air cleaner was down by the air scoop in front of the radiator. The factory R-3s had many additional features and parts including body shims so that it sat more level like the later Avanti IIs. When anyone says that Studebaker did not intend to sell R-3s to the public, all those additional parts and features say otherwise. The additional $1,000 cost was not only for the motor, pressure box and the 160 mph speedometer.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Member Posts: 16,860
    I agree about the wheelcovers. The '53 full wheel disks were beautiful in their simplicity, with the gold centers.
    2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
  • jljacjljac Member Posts: 649
    edited November 2011
    I like the original hubcaps a lot better

    We agree on that point. I think those are '55 Speedster hubcaps. The simplicity of the standard hubcaps are hard to beat. I had mine stolen twice, and I don't believe they were stolen by a fellow Studebaker owner.
    image
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Member Posts: 16,860
    I think Andy may have some issues about remembering things correctly in his late eighties, I don't know. He probably also had a big ego, not unlike that other guy who was with Packard and GM, DeLorean. DeLorean said everything at GM was great...until he got fired and wrote his book.
    2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
  • isellhondasisellhondas Member Posts: 20,342
    I once pulled the valve cover off a 235 Chevy truck that belonged to a gardener. This truck burned oil so every week, he would add a couple of quarts of oil along with a can of STP.

    I had to beat that valve cover off with a rubber mallet.

    You would not BELIEVE what a mess this made. The STP oozed all over the engine and the shop bay.

    Since the old hot tanks seem to be a thing of the past, I don't know how a shop cold clean up an STP'd engine.

    In the case of that truck, I put the VC cover back on and told the customer to take it to a shop that would rebuild it.
  • wevkwevk Member Posts: 179
    Consumer Reports once tested STP. As I recall, they said you could have the same effect by adding a quart of 50wt oil.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Member Posts: 16,860
    edited November 2011
    Well, now it's the FTC that's making things up, I guess.

    Nobody's saying that, but it looks pretty obvious to me that STP (First Brands Corp.) in the '70's through '90's was apparently making more than one product.
    2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
  • jljacjljac Member Posts: 649
    I think Andy may have some issues about remembering things correctly in his late eighties, I don't know.

    The things Andy said about using STP at the Bonneville speed runs he said first in this book which was first published in 1969. http://www.amazon.com/They-Call-Me-Mister-500/dp/0809296357 Of course, I have one of the earliest copies.

    It is fair to assume that Andy was not directly running the company in 1995 when the FTC had a problem with the advertising. STP was one of the first oil additives of many that followed. I believe that one of the ingredients used in STP is now used in Techron which Chevron is now advertising.

    I know that I was glad I was using STP regularly when I read that the Federal government took the ZDDP out of the oil long after it happened.
  • jljacjljac Member Posts: 649
    It is sometimes hard to remember things that all the things existed at a certain point in time long ago. It is easy to say that 1963 the Avanti should have had an oil cooler or an intercooler for the supercharger, or a certain type of oil, but those things may not have been available at the time. Ingredients that were in STP then may have been added to the oil or gasoline later.

    When Andy Granatelli wrote his book in 1968, he was not that far removed from the events of October 1963. If the oil was running too hot and the STP cooled it down, that would have been an important event witnessed by a number of pepple who were present and had reason to know about it.

    I am skeptical that STP ever claimed that its oil treatment would last 25K miles when they consistently wanted it added with every oil change. I am not certain what the reason was, but it should not have been that reason.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,675
    >one of the ingredients used in STP is now used in Techron which Chevron is now advertising

    But Techron is a gasoline additive and not an oil additive. STP at that time was strictly for oil, nichts wahr?

    IIRC, the main use for STP was to slow down oil burning in the engines of that day back in the 60s.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    edited November 2011
    I think the point some people here were making is that it is scientifically impossible to cool oil down 100 degrees with a can of additive, no matter what it was.

    I've been trying to research the history of the intercooler, and who used it first, but haven't come up with anything. I suspect it came from turbo diesel technology.

    Of course, back when the Avanti was alive, you could buy some really good high octane fuel, which helped to prevent destructive detonation caused by very high intake temperatures.
  • jljacjljac Member Posts: 649
    edited November 2011
    But Techron is a gasoline additive and not an oil additive. STP at that time was strictly for oil, nichts wahr?

    Nicht korrect. I realize that Techron is a gasoline additive, but that does not mean it cannot be an ingredient in an oil additive too . For example, fluoride is in toothpaste but it might be in the water too. http://www.skepdic.com/slick50.html

    The basic ingredient is the same in most of these additives: 50 weight engine oil with standard additives. The magic ingredient in Slick 50, Liquid Ring, Matrix, QM1 and T-Plus from K-Mart is Polytetrafluoroethylene. Don't try to pronounce it: call it PTFE. But don't call it Teflon, which is what it is, because that is a registered trademark. Dupont, who invented Teflon, claims that "Teflon is not useful as an ingredient in oil additives or oils used for internal combustion engines." But what do they know? They haven't seen the secret studies done by Petrolon (Slick 50).

    I believe that Techron is related to Teflon. Ich verstehe Deutsch auch, weil ich in Deutschland lebte fast drei Jahre. Happy Veteran's Day to me and Fritz der Schmitt!

    image
  • wevkwevk Member Posts: 179
    I believe STP (an oil thickener) would cause engines to run hotter, thinner oils produce less parasitic drag on the rotating components, so less energy (friction) is consumed in simply turning the engine. This produces less heat.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    Makes sense. A cold engine is harder to turn over than a warm one.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,675
    Techron is loosely described as polyether amines: light solvents.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • jljacjljac Member Posts: 649
    edited November 2011
    I dusted off my old copy of They Call Me Mr. 500, first edition. Page 212 says that the oil temperature gauge on one of the cars was above 180 degrees (normal operating temperature), but does not say how hot it got. It then reports that Andy called Ed Windfield who told him to put in some STP and the oil temperature then stabilized at 170 degrees after that.

    Page 213 reports and the V-8 convertible driven Vince had a transmission that kept popping out of gear. Andy determined that the synchro colars were expanding too much because of the heat and put in some STP in the transmission. That solved that problem.

    At page 218, a press release at the time is quoted as saying that a stock R-2 was officially timed by the USAC at 158.19 mph for the flying kilometer. I am not certain if the press release was in error by calling the car an R-2, but Andy says something similar about an R-2 in the Hemmings article. Maybe there was an R-2 there.

    Andy Granatelli’s story was consistent in both accounts, but he does not say how hot the oil got in the first account,. It does not seem that he was associated with STP when it got in trouble with the FTC in 1995. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STP_(motor_oil_company)

    As I understand it, when oil gets too hot and thin, it loses its viscosity wich results in metal to metal contact which then causes more friction, heat and seizure. When my own Stude Commander V-8 siezed up in the Mojave desert, it ran with very little power for a time before it quit running completely. I believe that was because of the heat and friction in the crankshaft bearings.

    My Dad had a Ford pickup truck in which he used non-detergent bulk oil because it was cheap. When I had to rod the motor out because oil was blowing out the cap, it had sludge in it that looked like STP, but I am certain that he never used STP because he would not even pay for good detergent oil. The story at the time was that detergent oils were bad because they made engines leak more oil.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Member Posts: 16,860
    Techron is loosely described as polyether amines: light solvents.

    A little off the original topic, but I had heard that Chevron Techron could keep deposits off of fuel gauge sensors and actually get them to work right again. Although this sounds like a "Marvel Mystery Oil" story, it did in fact make the gas gauge in my wife's old Chevy van spring back to life after one bottle!
    2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,675
    >Techron is loosely described as polyether amines: light solvents.

    The light solvents were the opposite of the teflon family of add ins which appeared to have polymerized or broken down to form the goop that was sometimes left behind.

    The Techron still indicates it can help the sulfur problem from the fuels that affects the gas gauge sender contacts by cleaning the AgS which I'm guessing is what forms (tarnish).
    Link to Techron

    To stay on topic, grin: this additive can be used in your Studebaker.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    His story still makes no sense. Oil operates by getting in between metal parts--the parts never touch--so as long as the oil doesn't break down, it doesn't much matter what's between the metal parts. When it *does* break down, catastrophe is fast and furious---there's no time to debate the issue.

    This anecdote sounds like a conclusion in search of facts...a more likely explanation is a fluky oil gauge or a change in atmospheric conditions.
  • jljacjljac Member Posts: 649
    I believe STP (an oil thickener) would cause engines to run hotter, thinner oils produce less parasitic drag on the rotating components, so less energy (friction) is consumed in simply turning the engine. This produces less heat.

    REPLY: Mobil 1 motor oil is based on the theory that thinner oil reduces friction and drag. It is extremely thin and has been around for many years. Why aren’t thinner motor oils like that more common?

    Makes sense. A cold engine is harder to turn over than a warm one.

    REPLY: A cold engine (near freezing) turns over more slowly because the battery loses power. As one who tried to get a Studebaker Lark VI to crank fast enough to start during Chicago winters, I found that keeping the battery warm was the most effective remedy. I tried a heated oil dipstick too, but that did not seem to make much difference. (Note: I am not blind to the weaknesses of Studebakers.)

    My 1955 Commander V-8 with a six volt electrical system cranks much more slowly when the motor is hot. Am I the only person in the world who had a car that was harder to start when the engine was hot?

    It seems that I should have titled this post FRiction and Fact about the Avanti
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    If your engine is hard to turn over when hot, that has nothing to do with lubricants...more like timing, carbonized cylinder head, or bad starter motor. A dragging starter can suck enormous AMPS out of your battery.
  • texasestexases Member Posts: 11,107
    "REPLY: Mobil 1 motor oil is based on the theory that thinner oil reduces friction and drag. It is extremely thin and has been around for many years. Why aren’t thinner motor oils like that more common?"

    Not correct. 5W-30 Mobil 1 meets the same viscosity specs as 5W-30 dino oil. Most new engines are specifying lower viscosity oils, and they can be dino or synthetic. Mobil 1 is no different.
  • jljacjljac Member Posts: 649
    edited November 2011
    If your engine is hard to turn over when hot, that has nothing to do with lubricants...more like timing, carbonized cylinder head, or bad starter motor.

    I have owned my Commander V-8 since 1979 and have been though many starter motors and batteries and a complete engine rebuild. It always cranks slowly when the motor is hot. . .i.e., after running more than 20 minutes. It cranks like a Douglas DC 3, but it always starts (except when the battery needs replacement) so I live with it.

    I do not blame lubricants for the drag. I believe that all those engine bearings in the crankshaft, camshaft and piston rods create more friction when they are hot and expand. That is the same reason transmissions heat up. I believe that you are put too much emphasis on the thickness of
    the lubricants.

    It is possible that in 1963 motor oil did not have the additives that they now have and that STP reduced the friction that made the oil too hot.

    Upon further reading of the Mr. 500 book, I find that the Ed Winfield that Andy Granatelli called to get the STP recommendation was the engineer who developed the NOVI race motors and Andy Granatelli speaks of him with the greatest reverence in his book and credits everything he knows about engines to him.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    edited November 2011
    The STP claim still makes no scientific sense, even if Einstein said it. It's just an anecdote of dubious credibility. As Smokey Yunick used to say about these additives---"what can be more slippery than oil?"

    Regarding hard hot-start------If your bearings were tight enough to bind an engine, they would score, since you'd have metal to metal contact. So the slow engine cranking isn't about lubricants.

    Now it IS possible, if an engine is flooded with fuel, or that spray-in starting fluid, that it could bind up, since oil is washed from the cylinder walls.
  • jljacjljac Member Posts: 649
    As Smokey Yunick used to say about these additives---"what can be more slippery than oil?"

    That may have been true when Smokey said it, but the many synthetic oils that have been developed since that time proved him wrong.

    Mobil 1 was the leader in producing low viscosity motor oils and still is today (Mobil 1 0W-40 and 5W-20) http://www.mobiloil.com/USA-English/MotorOil/Oils/Mobil_1_FAQs.aspx

    Use of STP during speed runs in 1963 was justified and thicker motor oils are better for older engines All quotes below from here http://www.aa1car.com/library/oil_viscosity.htm"

    Higher viscosity motor oils that are thicker and better suited for high temperature operation. These may be multi-grade oils or single weight oils such as SAE 30, 40 or 50.

    Most vehicle manufacturers today specify 5W-20 or 5W-30 for newer vehicles for year-round driving. Some European car makes also specify 0W-20, 0W-30, 0W-40 or 5W-40 for their vehicles. Always refer to the vehicle owners manual for specific oil viscosity recommendations, or markings on the oil filler cap or dipstick.

    As a rule, overhead cam (OHC) engines typically require thinner oils such as 5W-30 or 5W-20 to speed lubrication of the overhead cam(s) and valve-train when the engine is first started. Pushrod engines, by comparison, typically specify 5W-30, 10W-30 or 10W-40.

    As mileage adds up and internal engine wear increases bearing clearances, it may be wise to switch to a slightly higher viscosity rating to prolong engine life, reduce noise and oil consumption. For example, if an engine originally factory-filled with 5W-30 now has 90,000 miles on it, switching to a 10W-30 oil may provide better lubrication and protection. The thicker oil will maintain the strength of the oil film in the bearings better so the engine will have more oil pressure. This will also reduce engine noise and reduced bearing fatigue (which can lead to bearing failure in high mileage engines).
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    I'm not sure what any of this has to do with STP and its discredited claims however.

    Smokey Yunick would just tell you to use the proper weight oil.

    And it's still scientifically impossible for an additive to drop oil temperature 100 degrees.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    hard to say whether these cars are stock, but my guess is that the R3 lost because of the high rear end ratios that were geared more to top speed. Also higher displacement means more torque.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5U0iqIGLUA&feature=related
  • jljacjljac Member Posts: 649
    edited November 2011
    And it's still scientifically impossible for an additive to drop oil temperature 100 degrees

    You are dwelling on a minor detail here. When Andy Granatelli wrote his book in 1968, he did not say hot hot the oil got, but was concerned when it went over 180 degrees. After STP was added, it stabilized at 170 degrees. When he spoke about the same subject in 2009, he remembered a high temperature of 300 degrees and a low of 200 degrees, but the story was essentially the same except for the figures.

    We have a President who once said that there were 57 United States. That does not mean that there were 57 States or that he believed it, he just had a temporary lapse of memory. No need to make a big deal out of it.

    The bigger questions are if bearing friction does not generate much heat, why do transmissions get hot and is a hot motor harder to crank than a cold motor? If so, then why?

    The "discredited STP claims" concerned an advertisement that was published in 1995, more than 30 years after 1963. Andy Granatelli was not running the company then and they concerned a different product than STP oil treatment that existed in 1963.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Member Posts: 16,860
    edited November 2011
    I'm not familiar with that Avanti, but I'd say it's an R2 as the R3 wasn't available until the '64 model year and the PSMCD makes you document with factory paperwork what your car has under the hood. Check out the many videos of the '64 Lark R3, with aerodynamics of a brick and a driver in his seventies, in great performances at the PSMCD. That's the only R3 I've ever been aware of that has performed at that event, which is always documented in the Studebaker Drivers' Club monthly magazine, Turning Wheels.

    Also note the reference to "289", when the R3 was 304.5 inches displacement.

    I have seen a single white R2 '63 Avanti at that event over the years. I believe that's the car in the video.
    2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
  • bhill2bhill2 Member Posts: 2,596
    edited November 2011
    You are dwelling on a minor detail here.

    At this point I propose declaring STP a minor detail and concentrating on talking about Studebakers. Do I have a second?

    2009 BMW 335i, 2003 Corvette cnv. (RIP 2001 Jaguar XK8 cnv and 1985 MB 380SE [the best of the lot])

  • texasestexases Member Posts: 11,107
    Agreed, if we include STP and oils...
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    edited November 2011
    Could be, could be the wrong R designation. You never know how old cars have been messed with after so many years.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Member Posts: 16,860
    edited November 2011
    Here's a video of the last 2008 run of "The Plain Brown Wrapper", a plain-Jane '64 Lark Challenger two-door sedan with an R3 engine, versus a 455 Olds 4-4-2. The Lark did the quarter-mile in 13.13. The car is still owned by its original owner! The car was built with a 259 but the R3 was bought by the original owner via a Stude dealer's parts department in 1965. The Pure Stock Muscle Car Drags allows this if the brochures/documentation show the engine available in a certain model-year car, and the R3 (and R4) are shown in the '64 Lark brochure as options.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_aoyow4GjM
    2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Member Posts: 16,860
    Here, the '63 R2 Lark beats a '72 GTO. This Lark is affectionately called "The Stude Tomato":

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrcmjCjAjcU&NR=1
    2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Member Posts: 16,860
    edited November 2011
    I always liked the Champ series of trucks ('60-64). They were America's lowest-priced pickup, had the highest payload of any half-ton, first with a 5-speed trans and sliding rear window; didn't make you pay extra for a full-size rear window. I like the looks. In '60 they were only available with the old Stude double-walled bed, but with the push to be able to put a four by eight piece flat, later utilized the old Dodge bed with a new front panel and tailgate. It was too wide for the Stude cab but I think the styling of the bed (width excepted) was actually closer to the Stude cab than to the Dodge cab.

    http://www.fastlanecars.com/images/Cars/e40a9e80-4b22-447d-880f-a7e7128a3c17/100- - x1large.JPG
    2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Member Posts: 16,860
    Here's a Dodge pickup with the same bed:

    http://www.reelcars.net/images/1960/11.jpg
    2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Member Posts: 16,860
    In the early '60's Ford brought out a stylish pickup with unitized body/bed, but it soon became known that the body wasn't holding up. In '62 they brought back the bed they used from '57-60, which was the right width but had no styling continuity with the cab at all!

    http://www.ebaymotorsblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/1962-Ford-F-100.jpg
    2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Member Posts: 16,860
    Richard Poe's R1 Lark is labelled as an R2 in a loss to a 428 Mustang.

    Dot the 'i''s and cross the 't''s, folks!
    2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
  • jljacjljac Member Posts: 649
    I have been reviewing that video and the track announcer seems to say "R-2". Additionally, the track looks wet and the spectators seem to be wearing clothing for rain. Given that the Avanti has a very light rear end, a finger seems to be on the scale in favor of the Pontiac in this selected video clip.

    There is no reason to believe that the Avanti had a high gear ratio. The Avanti usuallly came with a 3.73 or 3:31 to 1 ratio, but better gears for drag racing were available with 4.09, 4.27 and 4.55 to 1. By comparison, the 170 m.p.h. Bonneville record R-3 car had a ratio of 2.87 to 1.

    Here are two trivia questions or riddles:

    First, why would Clorox bleach be used at a drag racing track?. (The answer has nothing to do with cleaning or the fact they bought STP)

    Second, if you could put one part on an R-2 Avanti to make it run like an R-3 Avanti, what part would you choose? (Note an R-3 engine is not a “part”).
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    Ah, don't make excuses. The Avanti got whipped, on this day and at that time. :P

    Bleach --actually they don't use bleach--it's called a bleach box but it's just patches of water. They used old bleach bottles to carry the water and dump it and so that's how that story got started. Bleach would screw up the track and probably the car's tires.

    I don't know the R3 answer :confuse:
Sign In or Register to comment.