77 Camaro sub frame on a 1948 Hudson?

I have a 48 Hudson coupe that I'm considering front clip swap. I know that stock these front ends were pretty good, but I'm leaning towards disc brakes and some later model geometry/engineering.

I don't know if the 77 Camoro clip is too wide for the Hudson or should I be looking at GM G bodies from 78 - 87 (monte carlo, regal etc).

Lastly, the 77 clip is being considered since its completely rebuilt including the steering box and I'm getting for a song.

Look forward to any comments on this proposed swap.

 

I used a rear steer nova clip in my 47 plymouth if you use a front steer clip the steering box winds up in the radiator area

 

I guess you have plenty room up front for the steering box.I have found the 77 camaro fT end with 5" wheel from 52 chevy fit the best 205/75/15 tires.
Measure your wheel base, mine was tight on 52 chevy car.Great clip.
Rear steering may work better.

 

I used a rear steer nova clip in my 47 plymouth if you use a front steer clip the steering box winds up in the radiator area

 

Narrow the sub frame,its not that hard.A lot of cars that are sub framed look stupid becaues the front is to wide.Rear steer is usually the best for a sub frame application.

 

when you're done send me the 'left overs'

 

May not be pertinent to the question but someone gave me a '77 Camaro once and I used the subframe for my '38 Ford Coupe and it gave the car a nice stance and it handled great.

As others have said if you don't have a lot of room up front the rear-steer versions are preferable but this one was free so I made it work.

 

77 Camaro is now 36 years old. From a design standpoint nearly 50 years old. If you do this swap in 10 years you will be trying to buy parts for a 46 year old front end.

Suggest you use something newer and better, like a Ford Crown Vic with better brakes, better geometry, better ride and rack and pinion steering.

The Ford Crown Vic has the added advantage of having the same wheel bolt pattern as the Hudson, if that matters to you.

Believe it or not, the Hudson was the best handling, best road holding car of its time. The Camaro would offer very little improvement over a stock Hudson, rebuilt, with disc brakes and gas shocks.

 

C/Vics are to wide for our hudsons,

Hudson's track width are some where around 58 & C/vics are 62? I have info some where.

 

I had a 40 Hudson Super 6 years ago. I used a kit that retained the original suspension but new caliper mounts, Camaro discs calipers, & bearings. The steering set up is funky on those cars but it drove fine at highway speeds. I used a 10 bolt rear end from a Camaro and an in the floor GM style power boosted master cylinder.

 

Standard track width for many years was 4'8" or 56". Hudsons were a little wider at the front than at the back.

Can the CV be narrowed or some newer front end used? I have nothing against Camaro front ends but there has been some progress in car designs since the seventies.

 

Please don't do this off a tread width measurement! You need to know what your hub to hub is at ride height, then measure you potential cadidiates the same way. "Tread width" is misleading in that it never takes into account things like wheel back space. My gut feeling would be that the Camaro is going to be too wide for what you want to do, and even though narrowing a clip isn't that hard, it negatively effects the car's roll center. If this project was in my hands I would be measuring a AorG body G.M. as you stated (58 1/2" or so) or a Jag XJ6 ('bout the same). See how either of those stacks up to the hub to hub of the Hudson.

 

I narrowed mine 2 inches that I put under a 50 chevy truck.

 

What kit was that?

 

Isn't the Hudson a unibody?

 

Yes.

 

40-47 were body on frame, 48 above were unibody

 

There's a new disk brake kit being offered by a Hudson fellow. Complete bolt on, common GM rotors and calipers, new master cylinder. Can get the custom parts and a parts list, or the whole she-bang.

Rack-and-pinion is a good update the the stock Hudson front, but I've had mine rolling down the highway at 80 straight as an arrow and hangs good in through the turns.

 

Listen to Rusty.

 

I dont think you'll be happy with the camaro, theyre to wide, and dont give much of a suspension upgrade

 

The Labud's & Pridemore (Both are no longer being made!)
PARTS LIST::::::::::

HUDSON DISC BRAKE CONVERSION
PARTS LIST AND INFORMATION SHEET


ROTORS:
RAYBESTOS Right #6045 Left #6047
NAPA Right #85802 Left #85803
These rotors are found on 1975-1979 Ford Granada/ Mercury Monarch

CALIPERS:
RAYBESTOS Right #RC4043 Left #RC4044
NAPA Right #242-2015 Left #242-2014
These calipers were originally used on 1969-1974 Nova and 1969 Camaro

BRAKE PADS:
RAYBESTOS D-52 ORGANIC OR MD-52 SEMI-METALLIC
WAGNER 728A (same as D52)
The RAYBESTOS calipers above come loaded with MD-52 pads.
Organic pads have been used, and seemed to work well on the HUDSONs.
Uses WAGNER Pad clips # F73102-5

BRAKE HOSES:
WAGNER or PRONTO #F80027 (Best choice)
RAYBESTOS #BH38160 (Will work but have to be modified to fit the frame bracket)
Use Lawson Hose retention clips for frame bracket.

BANJO BOLTS:
RAYBESTOS # H 5373 7/16 X 20 X 1.346
NAPA #82701

WHEEL STUDS:
NAPA #641-1578 10ea. Pressed into hub
WAGNER #8D61269
Use NAPA #641-2026 Lug Nuts

BEARING RACES:
BCA #09195 (Pressed into rotor hub)
BEARING RACES continued,
BCA #15245 (Pressed into rotor hub)

WHEEL SEALS:
NATIONAL #482253

CALIPER BOLT:
WAGNER # F76075-S

Or read more here:::
http://www.classiccar.com/forum/discussion/comment/154239#Comment_154239

 

If you don,t like the clip then go with Fatman Stub Frame they list one for Hudson 1940-1954