Tim Finn posted a couple of shots of a Studebaker Avanti at a car show. And in this case, it’s got a supercharged R3 engine under its fiberglass hood. A supercharged R3 engine?
Here’s the engine, which I assumed initially was the not-uncommon R2, which added a Paxton supercharger to the four-barrel 289 for some 285-290 hp.But then I took a closer look at that carb enclosure:
It says “R3” on it. But then that’s clearly a removable plate, and the odds of this being a genuine original R3 are very low. The R3 had a specially bored-out block with 304.5 cubic inches, and some 335 hp. But supposedly, only nine were ever sold. And how many are out there now?
According to The Avanti.com there was -one- gray R3 Avanti, so it’s plausible that this car might be one of the original nine. Do we have any interior shots? That car had an automatic transmission.
https://www.theavanti.com/r3.html
Those were the only shots I took of the car. I’m pleased to see it might be rare, I simply thought it was a very nice Avanti. You never know what you will see at a Cars & Coffee.
I stumbled across this site while searching for R3 info. This is my car shown at the World of Speed Cars and Coffee in Wilsonville Or. It is an R3 clone (I call it and R2.5). It has been bored to 304, has the R3 cam and other mods such as electronic ignition and disk brake upgrade. It is a rare car with the BW T-10 four speed. Very nice car with good performance.
Tim: BTW- If you have been to C&C you may have seen my Lola T-70 MKIIIb replica. I used to be a docent at WoS but the museum closed last March.
I see references to S3 in the title and first paragraph when it should be R3. Perhaps typo?
By the way, what’s that clear glass bottle filled with yellow fluid, resembling the original Listerine?
That bottle would have been for re-filling the windshield washer. I remember those in GM cars of that era, in that same triangular glass bottle held in with the metal clips.
Thanks! I always assumed that windscreen washer fluid is always blue.
This one is a bit of a mystery. It has round headlights while most R4s were 1964 models that probably had the square lights (though there may have been exceptions.)
That gray color is really, really rare. I found an article (https://www.oldcarsweekly.com/car-of-the-week/car-of-the-week-1963-studebaker-avanti-r2) about one owner who claims that the Avanti Gray paint replaced black for a couple of months due to black’s ability to highlight flawed fiberglass work. He estimates that there were very few built, and I know that I have never seen one myself.
I think I may have found this particular car when it was for sale. The link is below, and indicates that it was an R2 that has received some R3 upgrades. Serial number R4190 is not on the registries and the 2013 article does not ID the serial number of that car, so it is impossible to say if they are one in the same. I’ll bet there are not 5 Avantis in that color today so who knows.
https://www.specialtysales.com/vehicles/1963-avanti-studebaker-r-2-11327
More info – The Avanti Gray was added as a standard color in November of 1962. On orders after February 1 of 1963 black was only available as an extra cost option due to the need for additional work necessary to get a decent finish.
I have not yet seen anything indicating how many gray cars were built.
So it’s a modified car, rather than one of the original 9 ? Exquisite example, but are Avantis meant to have California rake ?
“but are Avantis meant to have California rake ?”
The Studebakers did, and it was a look that was not uniformly admired at the time. The Avanti II got rid of the rake, partly because of a need to raise the front of the body just a touch in order to clear the Chevrolet V8 that became the new powerplant. Personally, I prefer the stance of the earlier cars.
In about 1972 I owned an R2. I loved the “rake” and even put larger tires on the back. It was a BorgWarner auto and would burn rubber through 1st, 2nd and chirp 3rd even with the big rear tires. Don’t know what the rear end ratio was. Back then I was a young stupid. One morning 3:AM on the new I-5 between Long Beach and San Diego I took it up to 155… Then went peddle to the mettle. It still pushed my head back. I backed off.
This is probably a real R3 based on the VIN. Hope someone loves and preserves it.
Steve, your claim of going 155 and then accelerating hard “pushed my head back” is of course utterly absurd. Especially in an R2, which had 280/290 hp. If you’d had Andy Granatelli’s Bonneville car, with an experimental 500 hp twin-supercharged engine, I’d more likely believe you.
The R2 Avanti (you didn’t say whether your car was an Avanti or Lark) was tested by numerous magazines, and its top speed was right at 120 mph. The Lark would have been slower due to its worse aerodynamics.
Hmmm… I have a bunch of pictures I have been sitting on since the holidays of an R2 someone traded in. I need to post them to the Cohort. Always liked the Avanti. There’s excellent footage of one running the track in a Bud Lindemann test, although it was a later Corvette powered example.
Holy moly! Finally an Avanti! Being a rabid Studephile, I always thought this design looked as though it was sculpted out of a block of pure irrational exuberance synthesized from the very hopes and dreams of everyone who kept South Bend close to their hearts. Best of luck to the owners and may he serve as a beacon of truth for the uninitiated.
As a boy I always thought the Avanti was the grown-up version of Saab Sonett.
(Pretty much like Porsche 928 was the senior of Porsche 924).
So the ugly duckling grew into a swan !
Studebaker put such cool interiors in these…toggle switches, integral rollbar, full gauge package. A neighbor had one when I was a kid in the 80s (may still own it), maroon, black vinyl seats, 4 speed manual but skipped 3rd gear because the synchros were bad. Never drove it, but rode in it several times.
This must have been quite a shock when stodgy old Studebaker brought out something like this. Probably not a good use of scarce development funds but cool nonetheless.
I agree. The interior is fabulous. Unfortunately for Studebaker, the 63 Corvette took media and consumer attention away from the Avanti. In many way, the Avanti was a great alternative for people who wanted a Vette, but needed an occasional rear seat.
Don’t forget the red dash lighting! Looked way cool at night.
Red lighting! I had one one in 1970 and forgot that. Probably because the Navy (which I was in) used red lighting everywhere. Kept the night vision better! Amazing that an on the ropes Co. would try that in a car.
How were those old Stude 289s? I’ve heard they were stout, but heavy and relatively low-tech compared to the big 3 small blocks, but I’d like to hear from someone who had one or worked on one
The Stude V8 was early in the first wave of postwar V8 design. They were designed to handle extremely high compression (for super high octane gasolines that never came). They were loaded with forgings, had more bearing surface than the original Hemi (that was 100 cubic inches bigger), and used solid lifters and timing gears instead of a chain. They stood up to forced induction extremely well.
They were very heavy for their small displacement (actually they were heavy for almost any displacement). I have never owned one but hang out around some Stude forums. Nobody there bitches about the V8s.
Once Andy G got to work on them in the early 60s, they were impressive performers too. As I recall the R1 289 (naturally aspirated) had roughly the output of a 4 bbl Chevy 327 (around 240 bhp). That they held up to the stresses applied in the R series program including the experimental twin supercharged 500 bhp R5 tells us all we need to know.
As I recall the R1 289 (naturally aspirated) had roughly the output of a 4 bbl Chevy 327 (around 240 bhp).
Not to get all Chevy chauvinistic on you, but a better comparison would be with the Chevy 283, which in comparable high output versions made either 245 (single carb) or 270 hp (dual quads). Up to 315 with FI.
The 327 made anywhere from 250 hp (very mild tune, hydraulic camshaft) to 365 hp (solid lifters).
I give the Studebaker credit for being a tough beast, but good breathing wasn’t one of its qualities. That’s why it took a supercharger to make as much power (280 hp R2) as a naturally aspirated 283 Chevy was making back in 1957.
Ok, if we want to do apples to apples, look at the 57 Chevy 283 with the Power Pak that was rated at 220 bhp while the Stude 289 4 bbl of that year was rated at 225. While those factory ratings must be taken with a grain of salt, I don’t think the gulf between the engines when comparably set up was as wide as is commonly believed. What the Chevy had going for it was undeniable advantages in weight, cost and (especially) large production numbers.
What Duntov was doing to the Chevy 283 in the late 50s Granatelli was doing to the Stude 289 a few years later. The R4 (1 built) was a naturally aspirated 304 with dual 4 bbls good for about 300 bhp (right about the Chevy’s dual quad 283 output). My only point is that the Studebaker was a good performer that was in or very near the ballpark of the Chevy, and was mainly hampered by its weight problem and its scarcity.
What Duntov was doing to the Chevy 283 in the late 50s Granatelli was doing to the Stude 289 a few years later.
No way. The Chevy engines were mass-production items that were perfectly tractable in normal traffic, etc. The R3 and R4 were strictly hand assembled, blueprinted, with specially sourced parts, special cast headers, unique specially built heads, very aggressive cams, etc.. How many R3s were built? 9? R4s? 1? These were essentially racing engines, pure and simple.
You’d have to compare them to some of the exotic racing engine version Chevy built in very limited numbers.
The simple reality is that Chevy heads breathed much better. Which explains, along with its light weight, why it was so popular for racing. Breathing is everything.
I put the Studebaker’s heads in the same category as the Ford Y block: a relatively poorly breathing head design that could only compete with the Chevy (in genuine street tune) by using a supercharger to overcome its inherent limitations.
As to the ’57 289, we’d have to compare cam grinds and other details, because the 220hp 283 was in very mild tune. It was just a regular 283 with a four barrel. it was not a “Power Pak” engine. Power Pak denotes using the Duntov cam Those were only the 270hp carb engines (and the 283hp FI engine).
Here’s the details on the R3:
R3 Option: Special production order from Paxton Products Division of Studebaker.
(Granatelli brothers). The original engine was 299.5 CI, the production unit was
304.5 CID. Blocks were hand selected to assure straight cores for the overbore.
9.5-1 compression, Dual belt driven Paxton supercharger (8 in.
crank pulley (optional), 4 in. blower pulley), special cam ( 2 available- 276 or 288
degree), heads, dual point/mechanical advance distributer, forged (Forged-True) pistons,
cast exhaust headers on larger port heads, non-sealed AFB carb in a large cast
pressure box.
Granatelli R3 Engine numbers started with “B” . Estimated 335HP, but could be “tweaked”.
It is reported that Andy Granatelli would not allow an R3 out of the shop unless it hit 411 HP.
This car also had solid upper inner suspension bushings for tighter handling. Only 9 R3 cars
were sold as production orders, however there are cars in which these engines were
installed afterwards by owners, etc. There was an interesting option offered with
these, called a Carb-u-meter, which was installed in the dash console. This included a
vacuum guage and 2 carburator adjustment screws to fine tune the engine while driving. Any
R3 engine shipped to South Bend for installation in a production car would have the number pad
stamped with “R3SH followed by a production # (ie. R3SH5)
And the sole R1:
R4 Option: 304.5 CID, dual 4 barrel AFB carbs, 12.0-1 compression,
Forged-True pistons Non-supercharged, R3 cam selection. dual point, mechanical advance
distributor. Only 1 production engine installed and it was in a 64 Daytona ( See Nelson
Bove’s R3 on this site).
The Chevys had a 10.5:1 compression ratio, compared to the 12:1 on the R4. Good luck running that on common street gas back then.
The ultimate comparison would be with the Chevy 302 Z-28 engine, which was really just a 365hp 327 with less stroke. it was rated at a very low 290hp, but its performance and dyno testing confirms that it really made 375-380 hp. Which suggests very strongly that the 327s were also underrated, to not compete with the big block engines.
Thanks for this. I never heard of the R5 program. But I tore apart my R2 engine and it was completely balanced. Crank had weights, Cam was ground, and cylinders had little holes to make them all run at higher RPM. I never bored mine, but it looked like a really solid engine when you took it apart.
“Holes in the cylinder”???? “Cam was ground”???
The R2 was just a standard production 289 with the Paxton supercharger. No modifications to the internal parts.
In 1971 I took the heads off of one that had not been cared for and overheated. 1963 Avanti. In the process of course I saw the cam and crank. Both were full of balance holes. I went to the manual and the pistons were also balanced. I was dumb founded. I then knew why it would accelerate from 155mph. Put in a blower and balance the engine & you get a car!
There are said to be only ten Studes that were factory-equipped with the R3 – the aforementioned nine Avantis, and one Lark post coupe whose buyer was clearly in early on the muscle-car ethos, putting the most powerful engine into the cheapest, probably lightest car possible (and it’s still alive: http://www.hemmings.com/magazine/mus/2004/08/South-Bend-Stealth—1964-Studebaker-Super-Lark-R3/1280872.html). What floors me is that the R3 was also optional on the (gorgeous) GT Hawk during this period, yet not a single one was built. Which means the R3 Hawk (0 built) eclipses the R3 Lark (1 built) as the rarest muscle car ever.
There were, from what I understand, several more R3 engines built that didn’t initially have a car to be put in – most (all?) after South Bend was closed. This accounts for some of the R3 Studes currently on the streets. Factory R3 cars had numerous modifications though (as noted in the Hemmings article), and the high price of the R3 option (twice that of a supercharged 289 R2 upgrade) and inavailability with air conditioning undoubtedly put a damper on R3 sales.
IS THAT A CAST IRON INTAKE ? THEN NOT A R-3