Is it possible? Most such things are possible. Will it turn out the way you want? You need to think about what do you want to do with the truck when it is finished before you can address that question. I'm betting front track width will be too wide for a lowered truck without either body or suspension modifications. Without knowing what kind of bed you intend its difficult to comment on the rear.
the body always seem to set too high on the frame, friend tried a 1500 under his andswaped back to a stock frame with a camaro stub and rearend. sets low and body fit great. of course it should it's basicly the stock frame.[the camaro sub fits right in side the stud frame] it did on his anyway. unless you want that look or for a hauler but check the wheel base first i thought it was the same but not pos. the first thing to go is your memory,i think!
s-10 frame pulls the wheels inside of the body too much to look right, in my opinion. i am planning to put mine on a 82 c-10 frame, it is the closest track width i could find.
I love Studebaker trucks. I have built two so far. Why not clip it? Every Studebaker truck I have seen with a newer frame grafted under it Looks like shit! When I find one for sale were someone has started this I walk away from the abortion .
Yes i have 22 tapes measure but i didnt received my truck yet so i dont have the spec of the studebacker but i have the 1984 chevy 3500 frame in the garage
I don't my truck has had a frame swap in the past, done poorly, with leaf springs welded directly to the frame. i can only speculate what it would have been, as mine is currently way too narrow. if you find any specs on it, please let me know
I assume from the picture that you intend to use this truck as a car hauler. The one pictured isn't real tall as trucks go, but neither does it appear to be lowered, at least not much. I still think you need to look at how the wheels will fit in the front wheel wells. That will mean some measuring and comparing and thinking carefully how high to mount the cab on the frame to keep wheels inside the wheel wells while also covered and maximize your ability to turn because something that long is hard to park.
Looks like you won't have the only one on a full size dually chassis. Found this one in a Google image search. If you have the big truck fenders, track width should be about right.
wow that look god the chevy box have the same width as studebaker that is a option that i might look at
Wow. Except for the color I like that one. The bed isn't quite right, but it fits that truck better than the bed's on 60's Studebaker's fit 60's Studes.
I'm amazed the basic side contour of the Chevy box is that close to the shape of the Stude cab. Except for that reveal in the side it looks like it belongs there. And you can make those beds fit an 87-back frame, there's one local here that's like an '85 with an '89 or so bed on it. But you have to cut up the tailgate and weld in the part of the Stude gate so it says Studebaker across the back. I know a guy not too terrible far from you with a couple more Stude trucks that vintage, PM me if you end up needing a parts truck.
Kinda funny Im planning on upgradeing my dovetail 69 International 1300 with a 94 Ford superduty chassie . Something about four wheel disc brakes and 4spd with od. Is your 3500 a pickup? Youneed at least a 160 wheelbase for a dovetail body. And you cant put much on a 3500 after you put a heavy body on a truck like that either. Im not a Stude expert still a cool ride though, Maybe fit some 1-2tonfront fenders(if yours is a half ton), so the 16s will fit. The measurement roughly from left to right front hubs on both the 69 and 94 were 76" wide. Hope this helps. Good luck! Have fun.
If I'm reading that right, it says front tread width is 60-1/2", the rear's about the same. I can tell you that I had my '46 Stude on a '69 F350 dually chassis, & with the 1-1/2 ton fenders on it the front tires were just about right. I'd post a pic, but Photobuckets having a fit at the moment. I believe the 2R series are a touch wider than the M series were.
ok so is it a direct bolt on if i use the 1951 R16 front fenders only on my 1951 R5 truck ? the R5 front tread is 60 13/16 and the R16A is 63 1/2
I can't say for certain on the R series, but on the M series the fenders are a direct swap. Here's a pic of my M on the F350 chassis.
ok thanks for the info but i just notice that on the orange truck it does look to have the R16A front fenders ? i will try to find out what is the exact frame on that truck its maybe original ? because the tread on a GM 73-87 is 65.8
wow i just find some info on that truck it a original 1 1/2 ton and the bed is narow 12 inch so this truck doesnt have a newer frame
The Jalopy Journal
