I need some convincing.

Unknown

Here goes. I am doing up a 49 super six coupe. My original idea was to put a sbc in it and a 400 transmission with a ford 8"Granada rear end. BUT, I am really starting to appreciate the Hudson hornet engine. I also have a 54 hornet that is too far gone to restore. It does have a complete drive train with a twin h engine and a borg warner automatic transmission. My question is this...will the entire drive train from the hornet fit into the super six? And from a reliability stand point, will the 54 rear end be worth using? I realize I would have to switch the steering column and all but I was going to anyways as the hornet has a chrome column. Any how I want to use the car for local car shows and cruising and also to be able to drive on the hiways at regular speeds and get where I want to with a reasonable amount of reliability. I would appreciate your thoughts and input into this. I do think that the hornet engine would be more interesting at shows.

Unknown

On one hand, I understand someone wanting the conveniences of a modern drive train. But then again, anyone with a check book and some time can do that. Keeping cars original is more of a challenge, and it's one I personally like. As far as the engine transplant you suggest, there are others here who have more experience so I will defer to them.

nick s

with a little work. you need to swap crossmembers for the tranny and use the center floor as your 49 is not built for the larger tranny. the gearing of the rear end would be desirable, (see the rear end thread) not sure about the borg vs a hydramatic though i do know many have swapped a borg over to hydramatic. anyway with the car there it shouldn't be too bad. with the spicer you do get away from the tapered bore bearing so for service the spicer does have that advantage.

[Deleted User]

Jim, seems like you've got everything for the swap. Though I'm not much a fan of flatheads, if you want one, sounds like you've got a pretty good start. Others here know better than I, but it seems most of the stepdown stuff is pretty plug-n-play between the years, with few, if any, modifications needed.

I think go with whatever works for your taste and needs. But Dave, I think keeping a car original isn't difficult at all (except for the early stuff), just locating parts. And around the Club or this Forum, there's plenty of stuff floating around to pick up. Modifying, on the other hand, takes much more fabricating and design work. Running original on mine, I think, would save me probably at least a year in build time and a whole lotta cash. But then, I never do anything easy! lol

Let us know what you decide Jim. :-)

Jay

Unknown

Jay's right, you've got everything to do the transplant. I've done both and the Hudson drivetrain is reliable and does get away from the "cookie cutter" SBC combo. The '54 rear end is the Spice derivative and parts are pretty available so that's the way I would go.



Convert to 12 volt so you can put in the creature comforts for cruising, change the radiator to a heavy duty 4 core with a shroud and you should be happy with the change over.



Good luck and keep us posted!

Unknown

jsrail wrote:

But Dave, I think keeping a car original isn't difficult at all (except for the early stuff), just locating parts. And around the Club or this Forum, there's plenty of stuff floating around to pick up. Modifying, on the other hand, takes much more fabricating and design work. Running original on mine, I think, would save me probably at least a year in build time and a whole lotta cash. But then, I never do anything easy! lol



Let us know what you decide Jim. :-)



Jay

Jay, I'm glad that keeping a car original isn't difficult for you. But then again, it depends on your perception of original. I've spent years doing research and chasing after elusive NOS parts for some of my cars, not all of which are Hudsons or have the vast support they enjoy. No doubt that modifying a car is an involved process. I like my Hudson for what it is. If I want a car that will do 0 to 60 in 6 seconds or less, I'll hop in my FX45 and go for a drive.

[Deleted User]

Jim,

with that engine and tranny swap out the rear end as well it will get you a better ratio. The 54 has the Dana 44 in it so you can get lots of parts for that.

Unknown

jsrail wrote:

Jim, seems like you've got everything for the swap. Though I'm not much a fan of flatheads, if you want one, sounds like you've got a pretty good start. Others here know better than I, but it seems most of the stepdown stuff is pretty plug-n-play between the years, with few, if any, modifications needed.



I think go with whatever works for your taste and needs. But Dave, I think keeping a car original isn't difficult at all (except for the early stuff), just locating parts. And around the Club or this Forum, there's plenty of stuff floating around to pick up. Modifying, on the other hand, takes much more fabricating and design work. Running original on mine, I think, would save me probably at least a year in build time and a whole lotta cash. But then, I never do anything easy! lol



Let us know what you decide Jim. :-)



Jay

Jay,



I got to tell you from even my short experience, doing a hudson to original specs is way more difficult than doing a custom. FInding original parts is almost impossible for a lot of models. Look how much trouble people have just finding convertible parts, tapered rear bearings, or hornet coupe trim, or at one time, engine parts, good chrome, front end parts, the lower grille bars for a 50 super/commodore (i've been looking for 12+ years... for the one side) or a trunk handle for a 48-9 commodore, just to name a few items...



There are still the same rust issues to deal with either way, especially on a hudson, you got a lot of fabricating either way. I think subframing a car is more or less maintaining accurate measurements, and geometry. We're gonna find out on the 40 chevy, but I think saying one way is easier is an unfair assessment to make this statement.



A custom is as easy or as hard as you make it, plain and simple. No one tells the owner to section this, chop that, channel here.



I think the customizer has a better palate to work from, more choices, with colors, trim, interiors, drivelines, etc... which might make it appear more to task with all of the variables, but the restorer has to work towards a set example of what the finished product should be with little to no variation.

SuperDave

Hudson308 wrote:

Jim, I've got a '52 308 in a '49 Super Six sedan, and I'm personally much happier with the Hudson six than I would have been with the 400SBC sitting in the corner of my garage... and I've been a Chevy guy all my life!!! The Chevy would have been easier, cheaper, more powerful and probably more reliable to build, but I'm very happy with that big old six. We got 19MPG at 70-75 (with 4:11 gears!) driving down to Kearney last summer, listening to the big-pipe buzz the whole way. The best reason, however, will come every time you pop the hood at car shows. With a huge flatmotor and dual carbs, people will cross the street at the shows to see what you've got. They'll gawk and point and ask questions and reminisce. Here at the huge annual "Back to the Fifties" car show in St. Paul, people walk right by the endless engine bays stuffed with yet another bow-tie bent eight. The 308 stops 'em in their tracks.

Ditto... but dump the BW and find a good HydraMatic.

DaveW

hudsontech

Jimalberta wrote:

Here goes. I am doing up a 49 super six coupe. My original idea was to put a sbc in it and a 400 transmission with a ford 8"Granada rear end. BUT, I am really starting to appreciate the Hudson hornet engine. I also have a 54 hornet that is too far gone to restore. It does have a complete drive train with a twin h engine and a borg warner automatic transmission. My question is this...will the entire drive train from the hornet fit into the super six? And from a reliability stand point, will the 54 rear end be worth using? I realize I would have to switch the steering column and all but I was going to anyways as the hornet has a chrome column. Any how I want to use the car for local car shows and cruising and also to be able to drive on the hiways at regular speeds and get where I want to with a reasonable amount of reliability. I would appreciate your thoughts and input into this. I do think that the hornet engine would be more interesting at shows.

Years ago I had a '49 C6 coupe with a 1956 308 in it. That is quite common, I've come to beleive. Don't remember what the tranny was, seems to me I recall it was a standard. I know, I know - guy has a car and can't remember what the tranny was!!!!! I only drove it once - again, kids and bills got in the way of restoring it.



Hudsonly,

Alex B

[Deleted User]

I agree if you start out with a carcass of a car, you may have trouble finding parts, or buidling an Essex or some Terraplanes, but as far as a stepdown, seems like a lot of parts and cars (not missing everything) out there. If you have to have a nos part instead of a part bought off another member, that might be somewhat difficult, but thats like saying "I want all the original parts which were on this particular car." Of course thats difficult. But stepdown parts and decent cars seem to be readily available out there, so I see no difficulty there. If someone buys a rust bucket that needs a lot of work, thats their issue, and they have accepted the parts finding and welding tasks. But it doesn't make the overall job more difficult.

If you move past the chasing down of parts, where is the difficulty? Have the parts....bolt them on. I had a friend years ago who was restoring a '39 Caddy Limo. NO'd 001. Now there are almost no original engine parts for them. He had to have the pistons and rods made to rebuild the engine. Now, thats difficult! Now restoring a rare Hud, early Terraplane, or an Essex, that I can see as potentially a difficult restore because of some lack of parts and possible know-how on them. But other than that, I don't see it guys. Lack of parts is the only think that makes a restore difficult, there are no other design or fabrication issues (unless a part has to be handmade) related to a restore. Just bolt it together. Now, having said that, that Jet convertible prototype IS a difficult project since there are no others like it. But thats not what we are discussing here.

As far as modifying any Hud.....thats tougher, because there are few, if any, bolt-in aftermarket parts and things such as my rear suspension, which will have to be custom built or I'll have to customize an aftermarket piece to fit my application. Have you seen Barry's Coupe? They slapped an Impala dash in it! Now that had to be a difficult design and fabrication issue. My Coupe would have been cake in a restore! Even using a donor frame/shell, its just a matter of moving the parts from one car to another, pretty mindless there.

Sorry guys, can't agree on this one.

Jay

[Deleted User]

My Dads 49 ran a 308 for years before we made a race car out of it. I can remember when that was our only car and I'm only 35. Built right with a 12v electrical system, Electronic ignition, and the later model rearend this car can be a reliable cruiser and draw huge crowds at car shows. Seeing as how the car is not an "original" anyway I'd say run a GM alt and hydromatic, that way its cheap to buy and repair if you have to.

Unknown

jsrail wrote:

If you have to have a nos part instead of a part bought off another member, that might be somewhat difficult, but thats like saying "I want all the original parts which were on this particular car." Of course thats difficult. But stepdown parts and decent cars seem to be readily available out there, so I see no difficulty there.



If you move past the chasing down of parts, where is the difficulty? Have the parts....bolt them on. I had a friend years ago who was restoring a '39 Caddy Limo. NO'd 001. Now there are almost no original engine parts for them. He had to have the pistons and rods made to rebuild the engine. Now, thats difficult! Now restoring a rare Hud, early Terraplane, or an Essex, that I can see as potentially a difficult restore because of some lack of parts and possible know-how on them. But other than that, I don't see it guys. Lack of parts is the only think that makes a restore difficult, there are no other design or fabrication issues (unless a part has to be handmade) related to a restore. Just bolt it together. Now, having said that, that Jet convertible prototype IS a difficult project since there are no others like it. But thats not what we are discussing here.



As far as modifying any Hud.....thats tougher, because there are few, if any, bolt-in aftermarket parts and things such as my rear suspension, which will have to be custom built or I'll have to customize an aftermarket piece to fit my application. Have you seen Barry's Coupe? They slapped an Impala dash in it! Now that had to be a difficult design and fabrication issue. My Coupe would have been cake in a restore! Even using a donor frame/shell, its just a matter of moving the parts from one car to another, pretty mindless there.



Sorry guys, can't agree on this one.



Jay

See, I think that subframing and changing the driveline of a hudson seems more cake than hunting down the kingpins and upper inners, tie rods, etc... for a front end rebuild for a stepdown. They make ready to go stubs, fabricated for hudsons (fatman) who's making front end rebuild parts for a stepdown???



How about a 48-49 steering wheel? Don't see too many of those laying around, intact....



The guy that put the impala dash into his hudson, while a neat idea, that's the level of difficulty that he dedicated himself to, much like the person that takes a rusted hulk, and decided to weld on it for three years, or hunt all of the parts down.



Ask anyone that has a 52-54 hornet 2 door, and ask them who repros the side trim.... Ask them how hard it is to find those 4 specific pieces...



Ask someone that has a 52-53 hornet, ask them about parking light, taillight chrome, thank go someone has made a few....



In terms of fabricating, either way you slice it, if your perimeter is gone, your going to be making a lot of metal by hand and welding for some time. There are no frame patch panels out there...



The rods in that 39 caddy, unless they were missing, there were a few there to use for casting patterns. Ask anyone what they went thru in the late 80's or before to rebuild a hudson engine, with a needed bore... you went to Egge and had pistons made... at a cost...



And there's those hard to find taper bearings... makes sense to swap out that rear....



There's a lot more to it either way, that makes an effective argument for either side, but as I said it before, it all depends how hard you make it, in a restoration, or a custom...



you're not gonna make a lot of pals, saying that the efforts of a restore are nothing compared to a custom. each one has it's level of dedication.

Aaron D. IL

I find if everything is set up right you don't have a lot of problems with the old 6's and it's true you'll get a ton more attention with the 308 under the hood. Good gas economy for an old car and capable of cruising at 70 mph plus. I've had more trouble with Hudson's that sat for long periods of time but if you drive them fairly regularly you encounter that a lot less because these cars love the road. Main thing whether you choose a SBC or a 308 is that it's set up right just like the manuals tell you to or how could you expect reliability? You're not going into any uncharted territory with a 308 swap. There are 308's now in lots of Hudsons that never had them from the factory, many of which were also converted with 12V, a stereo, AC, and electornic ignition. Parts I don't think are a problem at all for step-downs, you just gotta talk to the right people. Many tuneup parts are still available at your local NAPA. Never had problems with the engine itself, it was always the things around it, like fuel pumps, carbs, dist. You know maint parts. 308 may need maintainance a little more frequently than the SBC but if you're willing to take care of it it shouldn't bother you. Your '54 engine was a more perfected engine than the earlier year 308's.

[Deleted User]

I would definately choose the 308 from the '54 to go into the car. I have a '49 with a 308 and can't see any of the rest of the shows/cruises I go to for people talking with me about the engine. They never hardly notice the car, they want to see that engine. And, hear it run!



They are immensely durable and reliable when in shape.



You have all the right pieces in the engine, rear end, but your transmission lacketh. I'd shy away from the Borg Warner.



If you really wanted to make the car reliable mechanicly and very user friendly, I'd investigate a K-Gap adapter for the 700r4 GM transmission. Wilcap.com also makes one. A good 700r4 would work like a charm with the Hydramatic 3.07 rear end from your '54.



I stuck with my old 3 on the tree, simply because I got addicted to shifting it. I'm too young to remember them being commonplace and its a treat for me to drive it, flippin' through the gears. There is nothing wrong with simply transplanting the engine right into your car. Swap flywheels, and everything else bolts right in trouble free. You'll have to drill out one hole in the bellhousing to get the Hornet sized bolt through and into the block, everything else is cake.



A Doug Wildrick clutch outfit, a Borg rebuild, or a good 700r4 - the cheapest option amongst these three is the Dr. Doug clutch. The most reliable also, with the 700r4 being second.



That's my spin, for what its worth.



Here's a link to my gallery with an album devoted to a '49 coupe with 308 transplant. I also have my standard transmission album there, which I hope to be adding to shortly.

http://www.classiccar.com/photopost/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/69

Mark

[Deleted User]

hudsonkid wrote:

you're not gonna make a lot of pals, saying that the efforts of a restore are nothing compared to a custom. each one has it's level of dedication.

hudsonkid, I'm not trying to be negative towards anyone, my point is that if you only have to hunt parts for a stepdown, thats seems pretty minor compared to what most modifiers do to their machines. Yes, they choose to do this, but we're only discussing the difficulty level here. I was not commenting on wether a restoration or restore was preferrable. Nor did I say one was better than the other, just more difficult to build a custom than a restoration (unless its the old/rare models). The more you intend to customize a car, the more difficult it gets. I think since he has all the pieces to swap, and likes the flathead idea, he should consider that swap. I guess eventually the 308 will become scarce and parts will become harder to find, but seems alot of them around for now. And the 308 is probably more common in Huds than a SBC. And there seem to be plenty of complete stepdowns for sale in the WTN, so hunting parts is not so hard to do.

Don't take offence anyone, 'cause none was intended.

Jay :-)

harry54

Hudsonator,

What Do You Suppose The Hp Rating Is On The Stroker ? I'll Bet That Beast Has Alot Of Get Up And Go....

hudsonguy

Jimalberta wrote:

Here goes. I am doing up a 49 super six coupe. My original idea was to put a sbc in it and a 400 transmission with a ford 8"Granada rear end. BUT, I am really starting to appreciate the Hudson hornet engine. Any how I want to use the car for local car shows and cruising and also to be able to drive on the hiways at regular speeds and get where I want to with a reasonable amount of reliability. I would appreciate your thoughts and input into this. I do think that the hornet engine would be more interesting at shows.

Jim,



With the Hornet engine installed in it your car will be more interesting everywhere it goes by a long shot. Nothing bores me faster than spotting a SBC under the hood of anything that didn't start out with it. Sure the SBC's have more bolt on equipment available, but all that tells people is you had extra money to spend! Keep your Hudson's 'soul' intact and power it with a Hudson engine.



As far as cruising long distances, etc. you can't find a better old car for this than a stepdown Hudson with a Hudson engine in it. It'll do anything a Brand X powertrain will do (I can hear 'em groaning now).....but it's true. You'll have ten times the fun and never regret it.



Of course, proper care, tuning, maintenance, etc. is more important than ever, but that's half the fun! Hell, I WANT to be able to adjust my valves!

[Deleted User]

if you run a sbc you will avoid the "why don't you put a small block chevy in your mercury?" guys that seem to lurk everywhere you go, i say confuse them even more with the 308 and you will have a few good stories for the "silly comments" thread.

Unknown

I currently have a small block Chrysler in my Hornet, but I have a flathead Ford V-8 I need something to put it in. Hmmmm, it is a flathead.... Jim, dare to be different!

Terry

[Deleted User]

harry54 wrote:

Hudsonator,

What Do You Suppose The Hp Rating Is On The Stroker ? I'll Bet That Beast Has Alot Of Get Up And Go....

I don't know for certain. When I bought the cam from Randy Maas, he ran off a dyno simulation for me from his computer. I believe, it was 304 hp at 4800 rpm with a peak torque of 425 ft/lb at 2800 rpm. I lost the printout, but the torque number is what made me tingle, not the hp. I wish I hadn't misplaced that - maybe Randy will post one up here.



The induction is the wildcard in the stroker build, I will say that. All I like being done with the engine is working out the porting/relieving/etc. I say that like it isn't much, but is probably the most important thing associated with a Hudson build. I know I'm being overly slow and cautious, but with the rarity of these blocks in good condition - I can't afford to mess it up. I'm using a cracked block to play around with, and hoping to cast a transparent resin copy of the combustion chamber by the end of the month.



The stroker, once completed will be dyno run and tested with some real numbers for my elevation.



First, I really want to put some of the '49's demons to rest. Namely the new transmission build and the rear end swap. My list of Hudson chores is getting smaller before the Stroker becomes numero Uno again.



Mark

Unknown

I'm getting a lot of good response here and Its greatly appreciated. It soulds like the 54 rear end is durable enough to stay with. If I found a hydromatic transmission I would have to get the shift indicator as well to mount on the steering column. The borg warner is a 3 speed or 2 speed and what is wrong with it or is it just that the hydromatic is so much better?

Unknown

Compared to previous years, the rear ends on the 53 and 54 were supposed to be improved/stronger and easier to service. The BW transmissions were supposed to be slugs. But then again, the Hydra-Matics aren't without their flaws too. For one thing, they tend to shift more quickly (and harshly) than some people like. IMHO, I'd say that G.M. had more R&D money to spend on trans developement than did BW.

nick s

easiest and cheapest definitely would be to use the borg set-up, to go hydramatic there may be some linkage issues to sort out (i know from experience the twin h linkage is different) as well as driveshaft length and right now you have all the parts to do the borg and can see them in place. so if you feel the borg is in good order it will be the quick and dirty solution. make the swap later if needbe.
the borg is a three speed though you don't get to explain that R is Park to observers. anyway I don't think I've not heard any real bad tales of it but it is not a common transmission in hudson circles, so perhaps talk to some studebaker guys for the lowdown. as they say talk to the man who owns one.

if it makes you feel better, i have a service manual for the borg and it doesn't look as though the dealer needed to use it.

[Deleted User]

I have both the BW trans ( in my coupe ) and the Dual range Hydro ( in my sedan ) Both seem to be good transmissions, and are well matched to the Hudson. From What I have gathered by talking to other Hudnuts is that the BW trans is fine in everyday driving, but if you are planning on racing or really putting a lot of pressure on the trans you probably need the hydro. Cruisin' or Bruisin' that's the difference.
Bob

Unknown

They are both long wheel base cars so I'm thinking that the entire drive train should bolt right in , from engine, tranny,driveshaft and complete rear end, springs and all.

Unknown

52 kahuna wrote:

I currently have a small block Chrysler in my Hornet, but I have a flathead Ford V-8 I need something to put it in. Hmmmm, it is a flathead.... Jim, dare to be different!

Terry

Im hoping to do a 308 in my just aquired 52 Wasp coupe but am curious about a small block Chry. if the 308 doesnt materialize . big question is the front supension and steering ?? if you wouldnt mind sharing

Unknown

stateline wrote:

Im hoping to do a 308 in my just aquired 52 Wasp coupe but am curious about a small block Chry. if the 308 doesnt materialize . big question is the front supension and steering ?? if you wouldnt mind sharing

Hudsondad's wasp has it's original 262 in it. I think it's a bit more around 270~ cubes, but I would say it runs every bit as good as a 308. The hydramatic behind it makes the fun factor even better. Of course, my next engine for my 50 will be a 308, but I got a 54 block ready to go, so my choices are a lot easier.

Unknown

stateline wrote:

Im hoping to do a 308 in my just aquired 52 Wasp coupe but am curious about a small block Chry. if the 308 doesnt materialize . big question is the front supension and steering ?? if you wouldnt mind sharing

I have the original suspension under mine. My uncle did the swap about 20 years ago, so I'm not positive, but it looks like the only modifications (other than mounts) were to the oil pan. I'll take some pictures for you.



Terry

[Deleted User]

52 kahuna wrote:

I have the original suspension under mine. My uncle did the swap about 20 years ago, so I'm not positive, but it looks like the only modifications (other than mounts) were to the oil pan. I'll take some pictures for you.



Terry

If you'll do a search for "Wes Kitchens V8 swap" some of the best sbc swap information you'll find will pop up. Wes has done a super nice job swapping an sbc into an original front clip and had pictures posted in his threads to back up the situation.



I'd make the Hudson engine my first choice, but I realize that isn't always gonna be the case.



Mark