 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Antique and Collectibles / Studebaker / September 2005propane/autogas conversions
I've been trying to figure out how this whole propane conversion things works, with an eye to maybe finding room for a propane tank in my '57 provincial project, and maybe in my '71 GMC as well. As you may know already, I am a rank amateur when it comes to automotive stuff, but I am intent on learning. The studebaker tie-in, apart from my project, is that I have ready that the 289 and it's bretheren were designed in hopes that higher octange fuels would come along. Well, I've also read tonight that propane is equivalent to 105 octane gasoline. Is the 289 therefore an ideal motor to pump propane through? Maybe you can set me straight on this: A propane system requires a mixer (same as a carb?), vaporizer, and a cutoff switch (which they seem to like to call a vaccum switch I think) for safety. But why do some systems call for simple, ring shaped mixers, while many people are selling 'propane carbs' on ebay? But can you run one of these systems off, say, a 60 pound removable tank, like the ones you use on a propane grill? How far would you get on a tank this size? I imagine you could hook up a series of these tanks for more range. I know this is not the reccomended method, but I have my reasons for wanting to do it this way :) .. would it work? I guess, bottom line, could something like this 'quadrajet' system be made to work on my 289 (once I unfreeze it that is.. it's soaking right now :) )? http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1,1&item=7996563856& sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT Thanks in advance! patrick please forgive the 1 am spelling errors :) There is a place in Michigan called Nolfs that has propane parts cheeper than I have seen them on e-bay or localy. I became a certified propane installer at IPCO back in the 80's, then propane was 55 cents a gallon and regular fuel was $1.25. The dual fuel that Paul is talking about uses a Ipco 350 mixer. If your Stude gets 20 MPG on gas it will get 16-18 on propane. The course I took was 2 weeks in class and 1 week hands on, the one thing most stressed wsa safety, propane is 40+ degrees below O when liquid, also at 350lbs. pressure if it squirts out at refilling and a few drops of liquid get on your skin it is instant water blisters and when they dry they are ugly and painfull. SAFETY,SAFETY. It is not for any one who is clumsy or is unwilling to put money into Stainless high pressure hoses and 1/2" SS tube. please forgive the 1 am spelling errors :) please forgive the 1 am spelling errors :) If you guys are interested, I came across an extremely lucid and practical write-up on LPG conversion: http://wps.com/LPG/ So, this answers most of my dumb questions above. I'm still curious as to how LPG might do in Studebaker motors specifically, and if anyone has tried this. Maybe there are a few electrified Larks out there as well? -patrick I'm not sure why google groups posts my messages more than once.. * shrug * Patrick, Propane conversions used to be real popular here in Alberta. Back in the '80s, darn near every taxicab in Calgary ran on the stuff. Scarcely anyone is doing the conversion now, although if you have an existing propane vehicle, you can readily get propane,a nd it is a BIT cheaper. What has changed? Several factors at play, IMHO. First, when propane conversion first began to catch on, there was a glut of it in the marketplace as it was an under-utilized byproduct of natural gas and/or oil production. Also, there were tax incentives to make the conversion, based on the idea that propane-fueled engines were lower emitters. So it made economic sense for many high-mileage users to do the switch. And cars back then ran carburetors, and were handicapped by some of the poorly-designed emission controls of the era, so they got pretty poor mileage on gasoline anyway. Now, the price of propane has risen a lot closer to that of gasoline, and gasoline-burning cars are nearly all running EFI, which has much better driveability and mileage than their carbureted predecessors. Given that propane engines never get as many miles per gallon as do gasoline engines (lower energy density of the fuel itself), there simply isn't much of a margin anymore to encourage people to make the switch to propane. Personally, I think propane might be a real good choice for an R-series engine, with high compression or a blower. They would be able to take advantage of the high octane rating of propane better than a regular 289. Around here used propane conversions are not hard to find; many '70 and '80s cars so equipped are going to the scrapyard these days, being either miled out or rusted out. But unless you plan to drive the car a lot, I doubt you'd earn back the cost of doing the conversion, unless you did all the work yourself, and had gotten the parts cheap to begin with. Gord Richmond > I've been trying to figure out how this whole propane conversion things > works, with an eye to maybe finding room for a propane tank in my '57 [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > tanks for more range. I know this is not the reccomended method, but I > have my reasons for wanting to do it this way :) .. would it work? In '86 I brought a '64 GT back to the US from the UK (along with a bunch of other stuff). The car had been rigged to run on either propane or gasoline. My memory is a bit fuzzy, it was fairly simple. The propane line ran from the trunk (more on that later) to a mixer near the Stromberg WW two-barrel carburetor (NOT a special propane carb). I think the gaseous propane was introduced into the air cleaner (which was not a stock air cleaner), but I don't remember how it was kept from coming out of the air cleaner. To switch between the two involved flipping a switch on the dash (which I'm thinking activated a solenoid valve to turn on (or off) the propane and pulling a knob which I think cut off the gasoline. I had two 55-liter tanks very firmly mounted horizontally in the trunk. The fillers were outside in the right rear wheel opening. They did have fittings that were the same as those used to fill small (20 and 30 pound) bottles, but I had trouble finding propane suppliers that were willing to fill the tanks. I never measured the mileage on propane, but any change in driving characteristics from switching between the two was invisible (couldn't tell any difference in acceleration or highway running). The Hawk was a standard 289 with LOW compression heads (build sheet showed it ordered with 7.5:1 compression). Propane was great for starting. There was a technique for giving the carb a rich charge of propane (but I don't remember exactly how). Starting was then instantaneous when you turned the key. When I picked up the car at the port it hadn't been run for more than a month. I followed the seller's instructions for starting on propane and it was idling smoothly with two turns of the starter. The car had been emptied of gasoline for shipping so I drove some distance on propane only before buying gas and switching to it. I sold the car in '90 or '91 and drove it to Detroit (from the Washington, DC area) to the buyer. Somewhere in Ohio a chunk of tread peeled off the old bias ply tire on the right rear. It wrecked the fillers immediately behind the wheel and I lost the propane. I don't know whether the buyer ever tried to fix them or not. Regarding using bottles like you use for grilles, I don't think they would work. Maybe a RV-type horizontal tank would work. I think the propane has to be in liquid form at the mixer (but I'm not sure about that). Any form of tank would have to be WELL secured. You are driving with powerful bombs when you are carrying propane tanks. I may have some pix and some other info, but it will take some digging. BTW, the Hawk was a right-hand-drive export model. Paul Johnson Pat,unless you can obtain the propane in some peculular manner,I doubt if you'd ever drive far enough to save the money spent on conversion.Also like Paul says,driving around with a bomb in the trunk is not a happy thought either. Your oil would never need changing though,just top it up once in awhile. I worked for the milatary as a civilian Power engineer for a short time back in the 80's and all their half tons were propane powered. I had to pass a test on the proper fueling technich and have a license to do it,as I spent most of my time driving from base to base checking on their heating systems. The Dodge trucks worked every bit as good on propane as regular gasoline models. >> I've been trying to figure out how this whole propane conversion things >> works, with an eye to maybe finding room for a propane tank in my '57 [quoted text clipped - 55 lines] > BTW, the Hawk was a right-hand-drive export model. > Paul Johnson Thanks for all the replies so far. I wonder how it would work to operate the plain tanks upside down in a steel box in my truck bed, betweeen and above the frame. A nice homemade steel box might make the tanks a little safer, and my understanding is that in vertical tanks the gas boils off the top, as you inferred. There was a pickup on ebay running on propane that sold a few weeks ago for just a few hundred dollars.. I'd like to convert my 1971 GMC 292 6 cylinder motor first, and if that worked out, bring online the Studebaker in the same manner. Thanks for the stories everyone. Paul, it does seem like the british are more into this what with their longtime high fuel prices and all I suppose. For the sake of anyone searching for information, the British call propane/LPG in cars 'autogas'. I've noticed that their gear seems to use a simple ring shaped mixer the inject the fuel. For some reason the north american setups tend towards using a propane-only carb. The primary US manufacturer seems to be Imco, so that seems to be an important keyword to use on ebay. The author of the story I linked previously mentioned that their patents had run out, so their might be some clones around too. I figured out I've been paying about $2 per gallon for propane.. I suppose you guys are right, the difference might be minimal all-in-all, even doing it myself and scrounging the components. Still, it would have a certain neat-factor. :) I guess we'll all see how it goes with what is shaping up to be the Second Oil Shock maybe.. :( -patrick "djvirto" <djvirto@gmail.com> wrote in news:1125589940.229283.235420 @g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com: > Thanks for all the replies so far. I wonder how it would work to > operate the plain tanks upside down in a steel box in my truck bed, [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > -patrick Upside down? the 80% valve will not work. What are you doing?Trying to kill yourself? Go buy the book Propane Fuel Conversions by Jay Storer it is a SA designs book ISBN 0-931472-12-1 read it a couple of times then ask some questions. Paul, The carb must be configured to keep the fuel bowl from emptying or something rigged to keep the float from bouncing around if the bowl empties. Other than that, you're spot on. Karl |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.