Are resto-mods for you?
I am seriously considering it for my '54 Super Wasp Hollywood Hudson; purchased a rare 1992 GMC Sonoma GT engine in Mesa, AZ, with "HO (195 hp)", V6, 4.3L (262 cu in), and mated to a 700-R4 tranny. Currently my car has a 308 non-original 54 eng; running. I have recently retrieved the original, numbers-matching, "308" engine and it is currently being rebuilt; once it cools down some. The original engine will be re-mated to the original tranny (DG-200), covered and saved to go with the car when it is sold, before or after I die, whichever comes first. The current, recently-rebuilt 54 engine (in it for the last 47 years) will be disassembled to fix the heavy leaks from both ends, dynamically-balanced and rebuilt as a TRUE "7-X", and sold on ebay to the highest bidder.
check out link below for other "resto-mods" in the world
http://biz.yahoo.com/weekend/retromod_1.html
check out link below for other "resto-mods" in the world
http://biz.yahoo.com/weekend/retromod_1.html
0
Comments
-
54 HSWH]I am seriously considering it for my '54 Super Wasp Hollywood Hudson wrote:
Your car...goes without saying and I probably would not change anyone's mind on the issue. But I would not restro-mod on a rare '54 Super Wasp Hollywood. Do whatcha want though, this post IS NOT an attack on you 54-HSWH... what I take issue with is the article.
Interesting article though!
It states: "There's something people often forget about those great cars Detroit put out during the 1950s and 1960s.
They were mostly horrible to drive. "
NOT TRUE for Hudsons they're a lot of fun to drive....and it also depends on HOW you drive...there's a lotta bad drivers out there that would never leave themselves enough of a space cushion to operate a classic car safely. True they do not stop on a dime or corner like a motor cycle, but they weren't meant to and they were designed for 2 lane highways.
"For those spoiled by modern cars with features like steering wheels that steer, brakes that stop in less than "eventually" and engines that don't require repair and adjustment before each start, actually living with a "classic" car can be a bit of a bummer. They're great to look at and to be seen in, but they're often less fun to drive than you might remember. "
That paragraph is an exageration, they do stop if you're enough of a mechanic to set up your brakes properly. Nor do the engines require adjustment before each start, if you can deal with simple mechnical devices you can set up your engine right the first time and not have to do a lot to it. Living with a classic is not a bummer they're awsome to drive...it's the closest you can come to a time machine...to experience driving differently, to use your couch-potato muscles a little! LOL
"These are problems that can be fixed with a little modern technology, though. "
The answer to the problems of technology is always MORE technology.... Yes improvements have been made but more crap on your car = more to go wrong...it's not that you would have LESS problems, you'd simply have a different set of problems. Classics are not hard to repair if you can handle simple mechanical devices and have the right tools.
""I want it to drive like the Lexus I drive every day," said Mike Staveski of Time Machines, describing a typical customer's desires.
Customers typically pay between $150,000 and $250,000 for the restoration and upgrades, he said. "
You want to drive a Lexus, go drive a Lexus, don't expect a machine that's several decades old to drive like a lexus!. I don't think that argument holds water....I have never seen a classic restro-mod that someone has used as a daily driver anymore than a stock classic. $150-250 K!!!!! I could buy a resotred step-down for every day of the week or just one exceptionally nice one for that kind of money and drive it just as often.
"Craig Jackson, president of the Arizona-based collector car auction company Barrett-Jackson brought his own 1969 Camaro to Unique Performance, a Texas company, to have it made into a more livable daily driver.
"After scaring myself a few times by not handling through the corners I decided to resto-mod the car," he said. "
B-J....the perennial expert on the car hobby (see other threads on this forum).....probably scared himself cause he drives like an idiot.
We live in a fast-paced disposable society that doesn't care about the past or our heritage and doesn't value anything about an old car except its' looks and we want to put disposable engines in our cars and swallow our fast food while watching DVD's and listening to CD's, while on our cell phones doing 120 mph and doing everything but simply driving and being awake enough to enjoy the journey. Didn't anyone catch that moral in the story in the movie CARS ?????0 -
54 HSWH]I am seriously considering it for my '54 Super Wasp Hollywood Hudson wrote:
That would be a good dependable power-train. I bet if you took the time you could get that sized motor/trans package installed so that it could be reverted back to the original if someone was so inclined to do.
Is yours running and driveable now?0 -
It sounds like you've had a really bad experience with the rebuild of your motor, and I couldn't blame you for wanting to put a modern powerplant in your Wasp so that you can actually enjoy it, instead of waiting for work to be done to it.
Many in the Hudson world love Hudsons for their styling and uniqueness while others love Hudsons because of their superior engineering to most everything else that was being produced at the time. If the thought of having a 52 year old engine, that performs about as well as new engines do, under the hood of your Wasp doesn't thrill you, then the GMC V6 is for you.
Hudson owners have been putting Gm powerplants in Hudsons for over 50 years, there's nothing out of the ordinary in putting that V-6 in there.
I do think it's cool that your V6 is a 262, the same cubes that Wasps came with.0 -
Aaron,
I saw on the forum menu page that it's your birthday. Happy Birthday!
BTW, I agree with your review of the above mentioned article. That moron Jackson probably has zero driving skills. And if my Hudson drove like my Audi or my Cadillac I wouldn't be as interested in driving it.
Matt0 -
hi everyone, i have been contemplating putting a v-6 carburated w/auto o.d. and ford 9 inch into my coupe. i have research this and after much debate and some heated discussions i am still up in the air. i have an old time hot rodder near me, he was born in toronto the same year as my coupe 1937. he has done conversion like this for years. the v-6 sits in with out cutting my front motor mount plates and moving centre cross member back for auto trans. the orig rad needs to be mod. for lower hose install. 12 volt natch, and the 9 inch will accept my hudson stock rims w/orig axle up front, new king pins and shocks ect... coker w/w/walls all around. this guy still drives a 32 pontiac sedan he built in 1971. big block, small block and now a v-6. for 6 thousand my coupe will be done ready to roll, i want the outside orig. and interior same w/ clutch pedal intact and a gennie shifter to keep that look orig. just a new drive train where if need be i can go back, no slice and dice of frame or firewall/body. i know some people will hate this, but i do not intend to chop this car up. i would rather stay slow and old than be a butcher.i hope every one understands but, it is my car. hey stop throwing things at me ouch ! lol. i could build a hot rod , love t-buckets, but i know i would want to drive the terraplane more. i love the look, the dash, the car in whole. this is my keeper for retirement in 10 years, had offers and will keep saying no sale, really i love this 37 t-plane that much. if it goes ahead it will be this winter, i want to go to detroit for 2009, any dates yet for this 100 years of hudson ?? well thats my thougts on resto-rods. thanks, dermot.0
-
I don't think you would need a Ford rear with a carburated V-6. It's not going to give you that much more power than what the original rear was designed for.
Just my opinion...0 -
i just like to say it is a 9 inch ford diff... lol, it is sort of like saying it,s a 427 side oiler. a rock crusher trans, or, it has a quick change rear end. lol sounds cool, traditional. purple shaft cam shaft, detroit locker. lol. sorry, i will stop, not, lol. dermot hhhhhhhhhhha hhhhaaaa !!0
-
54 HSWH]I am seriously considering it for my '54 Super Wasp Hollywood Hudson wrote:
Sounds like a good idea to me! I like the body styles of old, but the convenience and reliability of modern drivetrains. There will always be "restorers or purists" so there are original cars being saved by that group. But there are plenty of cars around for hot rodding in my opinion. And since you aren't cutting any of the frame or body, it should make some folks even happier. I think you should do alright with that set-up. Those retro-mod cars are a bit pricey for me, but hey, if someone is doling out the cash, let them have them. I want a car I can drive anywhere, everyday of the week, and afford the gas it burns!
I'm back from vacation now......didn't you guys miss me? lol !!!!!!!!
Jay0 -
royer wrote:It sounds like you've had a really bad experience with the rebuild of your motor, and I couldn't blame you for wanting to put a modern powerplant in your Wasp so that you can actually enjoy it, instead of waiting for work to be done to it.
Many in the Hudson world love Hudsons for their styling and uniqueness while others love Hudsons because of their superior engineering to most everything else that was being produced at the time. If the thought of having a 52 year old engine, that performs about as well as new engines do, under the hood of your Wasp doesn't thrill you, then the GMC V6 is for you.
Hudson owners have been putting Gm powerplants in Hudsons for over 50 years, there's nothing out of the ordinary in putting that V-6 in there.
I do think it's cool that your V6 is a 262, the same cubes that Wasps came with.
Royer/Matt, you are thinking what I always thought too (all 54 Wasps came w/262 originally). HOWEVER, you may have missed it above in the original post of this thread. This Wasp has a numbers-matching three-oh-eight (308); it sat on the 2nd owner's garage floor in CA from 1959 til 2006). Thats whom I recently purchased it from. Whether this numbers-matching engine was installed at the factory or at the dealer this Wasp, apparently, was ordered with a 308 (even more rare). It has been balanced, bored .040"-over and needs paint and reassembly-too hot at the present time.0 -
54 HSWH wrote:Royer/Matt, you are thinking what I always thought too (262 originally). HOWEVER, you may have missed it above in the original post. This Wasp has a numbers-matching three-oh-eight (308); it sat on the garage floor in CA (from 1959 til 2006) of the 2nd owner whom I recently purchased it from. Whether this numbers-matching engine was installed at the factory or at the dealer this Wasp, apparently, was ordered with a 308. It has been balanced, bored .040"-over and needs paint and reassembly-too hot at the present time.
Contrary to what anyone can say, you are smart finding and keeping an original and matching number engine for the car, especially since it is a rare 308 Super Wasp Hollywood. You will always be able to sell this car to any group of enthusiasts since it is not hacked up and butchered.0 -
nhp1127 wrote:Contrary to what anyone can say, you are smart finding and keeping an original and matching number engine for the car, especially since it is a rare 308 Super Wasp Hollywood. You will always be able to sell this car to any group of enthusiasts since it is not hacked up and butchered.
I also agree with the above statement, as far as what sounds to be a pretty rare Hudson.
I also wanted to say that I have absolutely nothing against putting a Brand X transplant engine in a Hudson (even though I'd probably never do it). Just make sure you put a power plant with a proven track record into it. I'm sure I'm comparing apples to oranges here, but please humor me on this one...:-)
The first time I tried to drive to California (about 2100 miles from here) I made it as far as Elko, Nevada before the No. 6 rod bearing in my '95 4.3L V-6 with 110,000 miles on it decided it had had enough. After several so-called 'GoodWrench' installed engines later, and talking with numerous owners of similar vehicles, I found out that these are notorious for the No. 6 rod bearing going out right around 110,000 miles... like clockwork. Of course the first replacement engine did the same thing at 3,000 miles, but that's another story. I've had the displeasure of maintaining this engine/vehicle for about 5 years now, (too much money in it to sell it now!@#) and in my humble opinion, it's not that good of a design, if you ask me. I've had much better luck with Ford 3.0 V-6's, for instance. Strong, quick, a heck of a lot easier to work on, and I put over 280,000 miles on an 1987 Taurus with this engine.
Anyway, I finally did make it to California last year. In my 56 year old Hudson with the original 262. It felt pretty good to drive through Elko this time! In fact, I'm driving it back out there this year again. The car has a role to play in a family wedding in the Santa Cruz mountains on the 18th.
So I've personally learned (and proven:) that you need a Hudson-powered Hudson to do some serious travelling these days!
Hudsonly,
Doug0 -
royer wrote:Aaron,
I saw on the forum menu page that it's your birthday. Happy Birthday!
BTW, I agree with your review of the above mentioned article. That moron Jackson probably has zero driving skills. And if my Hudson drove like my Audi or my Cadillac I wouldn't be as interested in driving it.
Matt
Royer thanks very much for the birthday wishes. I'm now 28 n kickin arse.
Nothing made before or after drives like a step-down Hudson.
Hope all is well with you too buddy.
p.s.
Barrett-Jackson is to the car hobby what Starbucks is to the rainforest.0 -
If you are going this route I would suggest using a Buick GN or T-type Regal setup. From your avitar it looks like you already know about these. Save the GMC for someone that will pay $$ for it down the road. Of course I would like to use the 308 behind a modern 2004R or 700R4 or like tranny. Hey why not turbo charge the 308!0
-
50C8DAN wrote:If you are going this route I would suggest using a Buick GN or T-type Regal setup. From your avitar it looks like you already know about these. Save the GMC for someone that will pay $$ for it down the road. Of course I would like to use the 308 behind a modern 2004R or 700R4 or like tranny. Hey why not turbo charge the 308!
The Grand National is too long, plus it generates a lot of heat; it won't be a race car.
The 262 (V6/700-R4) is going in there this Fall; hate to tear it back apart, but......... it will be neatly done so that it can easily converted back some day by the next owner, perhaps. I'm looking for reliability and great gas mileage - should get over 30 mpg @ 70 mph, w/AC.0 -
54 HSWH wrote:Royer/Matt, you are thinking what I always thought too (all 54 Wasps came w/262 originally). HOWEVER, you may have missed it above in the original post of this thread. This Wasp has a numbers-matching three-oh-eight (308); it sat on the 2nd owner's garage floor in CA from 1959 til 2006). Thats whom I recently purchased it from. Whether this numbers-matching engine was installed at the factory or at the dealer this Wasp, apparently, was ordered with a 308 (even more rare). It has been balanced, bored .040"-over and needs paint and reassembly-too hot at the present time.
You could get a Holden motor. They have a 308 that bolts to a 700R4! Shipping might be a tad bit high though! :-)
Jay0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- 37K All Categories
- 106 Hudson 1916 - 1929
- 19 Upcoming Events
- 91 Essex Super 6
- 28.6K HUDSON
- 559 "How To" - Skills, mechanical and other wise
- 993 Street Rods
- 150 American Motors
- 173 The Flathead Forum
- 49 Manuals, etc,.
- 78 Hudson 8
- 44 FORUM - Instructions and Tips on using the forum
- 2.8K CLASSIFIEDS
- 599 Vehicles
- 2.1K Parts & Pieces
- 77 Literature & Memorabilia
- Hudson 1916 - 1929 Yahoo Groups Archived Photos