Avanti II (65-69) question + some pics of my 55 Prez... (lengthy...)

I added a few videoclips of the 55 Prez that my son took with a plain Samsung digital camera ( not with a camcorder) .... will make a bit nicer once i get the supercharger in place. But I thought that you would like to analyze how the Stude engine sounds when it is brought this far from its home ...

has been many years, but had a '67 (bought used from Nate Altman/Avanti)....and several newer models. recollections:

build quality was superb, especially body fit & finish, panel fit, etc.

performance was tops: 300 hp 327, powershift with 3.54 axle, no emisions, converter, etc. but now (if its original) where do you get gas for the high compression (extra expense of additives) .....where do you get powershift fixed.

had desirable early features: dovetail door locks, quick steering box, neat original Avanti steering wheel, no bumper guards

didn't have a lot of the luxury/safety features we take for granted now.....sound system, marker lights, highback seats, wire type rear defog, side marker lights, real wood dash trim, etc.

could go on and on, but in short would say that the early II's are extremely desirable.....if you can find an original one or one that has been thoughfully updated. but a lot were butchered over the years not to mention the usual hog trough/undercarriage issues. and of course, if you could find one with a 4 speed that would be extra fine. don't have my reference material handy, but production was very low in those years......60-90 a year or so.

Jim only the '57 Clipper left - will it ever be done?

"PekkaP" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@localhost.talkaboutautos.com...

The first Avanti II I owned was a '66. I considered it to be the best of the bunch that I have owned ('66, '72, '76, '83) though the '83 was awfully nice. The '66s were the most like Studebaker Avantis appearance wise. They still had the "pirate buckles" and all the Studebaker emblems less the "S". Even the steering wheel was a '64 Avanti with woodgrain over the part of the horn button that said "Studebaker Corporation". The seats were like '64, but more comfortable. They came with the Corvette 327 cid 300 hp engine and they were VERY strong. Altmans apparently would install other Corvette engines if requested as the '66 I had was running a 327 350hp. All '66s had either the Powershift automatic (still with second gear start) or a T-10 four-speed. Everything was standard on the '66s (tilt wheel, AM-FM, TT, etc.). It seemed like most '66s were still painted Studebaker Avanti colors though supposedly the buyer could have any color. Mine was Avanti White with fawn dash and vinyl (heavier, better quality than Studebaker) with Avocado cloth seat and door panel inserts. The only weak points I remember were the job of filling the front wheel openings was poor (could see the outline) and the Corvette engine would thrown fan belts if you wound it up to tightly. Mine also had a Holley carburetor which was much more troublesome than the AFBs. It was a very well-balanced car weight-wise. It had excellent traction even in snow. However, it would burn rubber even in the second gear start. One time when I was out in the American Mid-west I demonstrated it to some of my family (three in the car in addition to me) by running up to 100 mph (160kph) then stomping on it. It would press people into the seats at that speed. I never tried top end (didn't have enough nerve). By '67 they had made some things optional, so they may not have as much equipment at the '66s. However, otherwise they were identical.. Good luck in finding one. Paul Johnson

Thanks Paul, Thanks Jim. I have seen just few early 1970's models here. Not very exiciting --- thus to me 1966 / 67 seems like a pretty desirable. The gas issue is not that big -- sure it costs a lot but over here the octane level is not an issue and sure with some lead substitutes added things work out OK over here.

But again -- thanks for a helpful description. I was a bit concerned on how the build and finish quality was. Not anymore.

Pekka

As the years have passed, I cannot understand what the fascination with Chevy engines is.

An acquaintance bought a '65 Cruiser and it has been a total PIA to work on with the latest task being a change of distributor. Three pages of instructions on how to "clock" it properly and the oil pump slot lineup is a major hassle. The high rise exhaust manifold make changing plugs a major project and don't even think about replacing freeze plugs.

The Stude engine is bullet proof, relatively easy to work on and has far superior engineering as to the ease of service.

IMNSHO, Studebaker would have been better served if they switched to Ford engines rather than GM.

Just my 2¢ worth,

JT

PekkaP wrote:

That's about right.... Two cents....maybe just one cent... They (Chevrolet/GM) have built that engine for 50 years and Stude did their V8 engine for what...12? This is an ages old argument that constantly has to be brought up by people that just don't get it, and never will. JT, if you can't understand a small block Chevy, then you SHOULD stick to Stude engines. This subject rates right up there with politics' and gas pump prices.... Sheesh Jeff (Get out of bed on the other side...) Rice

"Grumpy AuC> As the years have passed, I cannot understand what the fascination with

yup.... if the 260s/289s had been picked for Canadian sedans it would have been quite a package. Avanti IIs started in late 65/66.....were

351s around yet? Have often thought the HiPo 351s would be nice in Avanti......100 less pounds than Chebie and more space around them. Probably easier in the tranny dept to, rather than adapting BW to the Chebie. (course, I had a '67 Checker with a 327 and Cruise-O-Matic, so maybe the bits were already available).

But the availability of Chebie parts & ez service undoubtedly helped a lot of Studie/Avanti/Excalibre owners thru the years.

JC

I have no specific fascination for the chevy engines... I just asked as there may be a specific Avanti II for sale and it is kind of interesting peace of Studebaker history. All my Studes have Stude-engines... ( Ihave owned maybe 10 and only one was fitted with Chevy-engine -- and I am toying with the idea of putting a Stude- engine and T10 ( which I have as extra) into a Brand X car from 1964.... But coming from the Arctic Circle next to the Russian border one just can't cherry pick among tens or hundreds of potential candidate -Avantis or Studebakers ...it is just a handful that ended up to this part of the world... sure I have bought two from US as well.

And sure if there would be a nice 63-64 Avanti for a good price and untouched original over here I would prefer that for Avanti II.

Pekka

Where do you get a hundred pound difference and a smaller package on a 351W (compared to a SBC)???? I have both (all three if you count the three Stude engines) in my shop right now and the 351W is the same size and close to the same weight (full up) as the SBC.. Not slammin' or supporting anything... Just an firsthand observation... Jeff

"Itsfrom Click" wrote...

Chevy engines had a zillion varients

Some people just never see the light even when it bangs 'em (er, skins their knuckles) et al.

Gladly. I learn from the suffering of others...

JT

This has been done here though not very often.

That would be my advice... Hold out for the real thing where the engine, chassis and body were engineered to go together. The Avanti II was a patchwork, (the same individual I referred to in my first post has one of them too and has been groaning ever since threatening to put a Stude 259 in it), that has poor documentation and got worse as time marched on.

And, Avanti II chrome was perhaps the worst ever produced...

JT

(Who once bought a Avanti II center bumper which was rusting three weeks later..)

in re: Ford vs Chebie weights. SOMEwhere in my files (piles) I have engine weght info.....but I am just relying on failing memory. Can remember the Motor Trend or Car Life articles on the 220/260 Fairlane V8 when it was new........450 pounds ready to run.....I'm no expert, but pretty sure that beats the contemporary Chebie. Also remember them going nuts that it was only 21 inches across. Maybe it gained size and weight as it grew to 289, 351, erc. Maybe the Chebie lost weight thru the years, but seems to me I've seen 550 to 585 sited most often.

Again, I know little about Chebies. Can remember when I got my first Chebie powered Avanti and my mechanic wasn't pleased: said it was shoe-horned in there....at a greater angle (front to back) than as installed in Chebies which he claimed would lead to u-joint & pinion woes, as well as top-end draining problems "those damn Chevies are always fowling #8 as it is because of the poor drainage). well, he didn't know anything - he was just right (!) wish I had listened to him and dumped the quadrijets, too!!!!!

JC

again, my expertise is limited to applying wax.....but:

if they had used Ford small blocks, at least there would have been more clearance between the engine and center steering bits (unless that grinding noise was an early "engine mount sag sensor:).

continuing our rants on how inaccurate Hemmings Classic Cars is: how about the cover story on the '58 Ford convert and the helpful information on the "332 Y block". I don't know much, but I know better than that.

back to weights & Studes......every Golden Hawk article in the last

20 years talks about how front-heavy the '56 was since the Packard engine weighed "at least 100 pounds more than the Stude:,,,,,,,,yet everything I have sez the Packard weighed about 750 INCLUDING accessories & radiator. so what did a 289 weigh with a supercharger bolted to it? Enough of a difference to make a substantial improvement in handling? hmmm. One thing I'll grant you.....the Packard engine was BIG (think it had at least 5" bore centers compared to Studes, what, 4.5"? If nothing else, the mass of the Packard engine must have resulted in it sitting higher in the frame which couldn't have helped the center of gravity.

I'm done now - take your best shots!

JC

Grumpster.....

so why would Avanti II chrome be any worse than Stude Avanti......it was the same stock.

Pouring thru all the literature at the time, those statemens by Nate that they were dedicated to the "timless beauty" of the Avanti and wouldn't be changing anything for change's sake, were very inspiring.

Then visiting the factory and cilmbing thru floors of leftover bumpers, stacks of wheelcovers, barrells of pirate buckles, piles of tail lights, etc., etc. .....I could see why he was in no hurry to change anythingm - at least until the stock was used up.

BTW......one thing I always did on every Stude/Avanti......took off the bumpers and coated the underside with epoxy, urethane or whatever the latest impermiable coating I could find. never had any bumpers rust or pit.

JC

Jeff - I think what was meant was that a great many folks these days don't even think about what motor to use. They just assume everyone will use a small block bowtie motor - thus the derogatory "belly button motor" term was born. There are more choices than just a Chevy, and since the whole point (for me, anyway) in buying Studebakers was to get away from the Chevy thing. All my rodding and racing friends don't even consider something other than an sbc, and in this day and age - choice it what it's all about. Smooth your hackles - it is we who get it.

I once owned a 66 and the build quality was fine. My recollection is that it used the same automatic transmission that the Stude Avanti used, I believe a Borg Warner design that Ford also used on their sedans in the early 60's timeframe.

I have a 67, it is very reliable, it can sit for months and when I get in her she fires right up. I have found no real flaws in the construction, workmanship appears real good.

They only made 60 something of these that year.

Current 91 or better octane should be fine, it was not that high a compression engine. Any tranny shop that has worked on a lot of Ford-O-Matics should have no problem. AMC also used that tranny. Need an old tranny guy by the name of Crusty..................

Wood trim was available by '69, not sure they were even using the original style steering wheels by then.

but a lot were butchered over the years not

Very, very few 4-speeds were built, they are pretty rare. It was a 'Chevy pattern' T-10.

-- wf.