For those who want to replace a Hudson Power Plant

50C8DAN50C8DAN Posts: 2,159Senior Contributor
edited April 19 in HUDSON
We all see a Hudson I6 being replaced by many other engine options, mostly SBC or in some cases the LS series of GM V8s.  However, If you want to follow the beat to a different drummer and stay in the I6 design here is an option.  

https://www.topspeed.com/cars/car-news/the-forgotten-inline-engine-gm-s-42-liter-atlas-i-6-ar174949.html

https://engineswapdepot.com/?p=67404


You would probably need to find a 2WD version as opposed to the probably more common 4WD version.  I am still driving our 2006 Buick Rainier with a GM4200 with close to 210,000 miles and never had any engine issues!  Would be a much more unique swap than what we typically see.  For me, I will just stick with a H I6 or I8.

Comments

  • superwaspsuperwasp Posts: 173Member
    I looked into this for a stovebolt I was working on. I kept the stovebolt in the end, but gave this very serious consideration. There's a guy (lime-swap) who reworks the PCMs and makes simplified harnesses to take the pain out of running one in a classic.
    This was a cool build that shows how unique it is. https://www.hemmings.com/stories/article/1950-chevrolet-fleetline-de-luxe
    Waaay more unique than a belly button 350 and makes decent power. 
  • 50C8DAN50C8DAN Posts: 2,159Senior Contributor
    edited April 19
    Thanks Superwasp, I was not aware of all the work being done on the Atlas series engines.  Even the 5 cylinder, which would be a good fit for early rods is in the mix!  I can see the possibility of Hudson building such engines if they had made it into the 21st century.   Interesting how an engine that has not been built in over 11 years is still popular with the rodders.  Kind of like Hudsons!

    http://www.lime-swap.com/home


  • superwaspsuperwasp Posts: 173Member
    Yes, the Atlas 5 is pretty ubiquitous as well and can often be found in the manual trans variant. You're right, it would make a fantastic engine for a small hotrod. Small, lightweight, and plenty of power out of the box for an old T bucket or similar.
  • 50C8DAN50C8DAN Posts: 2,159Senior Contributor
    I thought I would post this interesting video.  These guys used a '62 Stude Lark with a turbo on a 4.2L I6.  If this can fit in a Lark it would have no problem fitting in a SWB Hudson.  The 5 cylinder 3.5L would fit easily in almost any of the prewar Hudsons.  

    This is pretty impressive from a home-built I6.  

    https://grassrootsmotorsports.com/forum/build-projects-and-project-cars/1963-studebaker-lark/55516/page18/
  • BigSkyBigSky Posts: 827Senior Contributor
    That is some impressive power numbers they are making. Thanks for sharing.
  • 50C8DAN50C8DAN Posts: 2,159Senior Contributor
    GM could have also made an I8 with this generation of engines and with the formula of .7L/cylinder it would have been a 5.6L but of course pretty long!  But I bet they could have produced well over 600hp.  A new I8, go figure. 

    Here is the I6 in a '69 Firebird that had an original Sprint OHC 6.  
    https://www.hotrod.com/articles/ccrp...ec-inline-six/

    Sharp looking install.
  • cheyenne7271cheyenne7271 Posts: 257Member
    The 2wd and 4wd engines will be the same it’s the transmission that will be different in the tail shaft. The Atlas I6 oil pan has a hole cast through it to accept 4wd front diff. I bought a new Trailblazer 2wd back in 2005 that was like that. Great engine and plenty of power, fuel economy to me really wasn’t impressive. I had a V8 Chevy truck that was a tad better on the highway for mileage. 
  • superwaspsuperwasp Posts: 173Member
    The Atlas I6 oil pan has a hole cast through it to accept 4wd front diff.
    The original pan also has the sump at the front making it hard to fit older applications, but a couple people are making new ones to move the sump location to the rear.

  • terraplane8terraplane8 Posts: 554Senior Contributor
    One issue is it isn't pretty to look at! It looks like an industrial powerplant rather than an engine.
  • 50C8DAN50C8DAN Posts: 2,159Senior Contributor
    This is what happens when designs are made with CAD and elemental analysis, pure function.  Also, most folks really don't care what it looks like, just that it goes.  Beauty and style is a human quality, machines not so much.
  • cheyenne7271cheyenne7271 Posts: 257Member
    It’s the same thing with an LS, Coyote from Ford or a modern HEMI, they aren’t cool or attractive looking engines without a lot of work. No offense to the gentleman that had the bright green car with the bright green LS. It takes a lot to make these engines look right in something old. Just sayin. 
  • BigSkyBigSky Posts: 827Senior Contributor
    I second that I Terraplane8, that 6 far to ugly.  Then again why not have a V8 where one isn’t always trying to overcome the handicapped design!  While I like my 6 cylinder’s, I really love my V8’s!
  • 50C8DAN50C8DAN Posts: 2,159Senior Contributor
    The nice thing about inlines is you have a ton of space to use for turbos, etc. that are not available with V engine layouts.  It is also interesting that the Atlas engines get a darn good bang for the buck on power and torque.  I still want to do a turbo setup someday and this engine would be easier to do than a V8.  I have toyed with twin-turbo V8 layouts and it is just too tight in many places  The option is that a system that will help you layout putting the turbos at the end of the exhaust pipes away from the engine compartment (http://www.superchevy.com/how-to/148-0502-rear-mounted-turbo).
  • superwaspsuperwasp Posts: 173Member
    Yeah, I agree. It's not nearly as cool looking as our Hudson blocks. There are some people doing creative decorating of modern engines to make them less fugly. Seems like the LS guys keep dressing their engines up like 283s and nailheads. I suppose you could do something similar with the Atlas.
Sign In or Register to comment.