Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Postwar Studebakers

18990929495120

Comments

  • bhill2bhill2 Posts: 1,270
    It is my memory that they were pretty reliable. However, they were often not well suited to the engines they were connected to, so the performance was greatly compromised relative to the stick shift model. I had a chance to directly evaluate this in one application. My father had a '68 Volvo 144 with the BW automatic and my sister had the same car with a stick. There was no comparison. My sister's car wasn't a rocket, but my father's car would have struggled to pull a champagne cork out the bottle. I actually bent the accelerator pedal on that car trying to make it get out of its own way.

    2009 BMW 335i, 2003 Corvette cnv, 2001 Jaguar XK cnv, 1985 MB 380SE (the best of the lot)

  • fintailfintail Posts: 32,892
    Was it kind of a universal model mated to many varied cars? Maybe suited better to higher torque/domestic style applications.
  • jljacjljac Posts: 649
    "I wonder if MB chose B-W for the automatic because of the Studebaker link? "

    My 1955 Commander has the Borg Warner/Studebaker transmission and I used to get it serviced at a shop that specialized in rebuilding old Jaguar transmissions. The last time I got a new torque converter the mechanic who rebuilt them for many years said that the transmission was also used in US postal vehicles and he got parts from that source. My car used the same torque converter but he had to change the ring gear.

    I like the transmission because it has 3 speeds and is easy to get it to start in first gear, although the early ones started in second gear unless you shifted to low. Since I only have 259 cu. inches, with 15 inch over size tires, I need the low gear to get the engine revs up before I get any power.

    It is easy to control the shifting points by letting up on the gas pedal briefly and there is a throttle control rod under the car that connects to the gas pedal I can adjust to choose what speeds I would like the shifts to take place. When others drive the car, they usually feather foot the gas pedal, and it shifts too early, because you have to tell it what to do and keep the pedal down until you want it to shift. If you know what you are doing it works very well. To quote an Englishman who wrote a review at the time, "If one drives like a clot, the transmission behaves like a double-clot."

    It has direct drive in third gear and gets very good gas mileage It is air cooled by fins on the torque converter, so overheating the engine does not affect the transmission.

    The one thing I do not like about it is that on steep hills with a speed limit of 40 mph or less, it shifts from second to third gear when I would like to hold it in second gear. Long uphill drives (like Whitney Portal Road in Long Pine, California) result in shifting back and forth between second and third gear although I would rather hold it in second gear. Then too, maybe I should not be driving a 50+year old car to the highest point in the continental United States.

    One of the biggest mistakes Studebaker made was not permitting Ford to also build it in 1950 when Ford asked to share it. It the Studebaker automatic became too expense to build for Studebaker alone, so they adopted the Ford transmission in 1957.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,334
    Thanks for posting. I've seen Malcolm Berry's white R2 Wagonaire several times over the years. He put whitewalls and the stock wheels and wheelcovers on for this article, apparently. The seats are reupholstered, and production of '66 Studebakers was nearly twice what the article mentioned, but still a great article for folks like me who appreciate the final Studebakers.
  • bhill2bhill2 Posts: 1,270
    Was it kind of a universal model mated to many varied cars? Maybe suited better to higher torque/domestic style applications.

    It was indeed a universal model (Type 35). I think the primary problem was that it was not adapted to engines that needed to rev to create torque. Most domestic engines produced significant torque at low revs. The big problem in my dad's car was that it took forever for the torque converter to transmit any to the gear set.

    2009 BMW 335i, 2003 Corvette cnv, 2001 Jaguar XK cnv, 1985 MB 380SE (the best of the lot)

  • fintailfintail Posts: 32,892
    That would explain it. Old I6 MBs have to be revved a bit to get going, too.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,334
    I'm home looking at the one pic I have of my dealer friend's Dad's old 180, and it is much-more trimmed than the black 180 you showed in the earlier posting. His car had two horizontal strips of chrome near the rocker panels, a strip running along the crease on the front fender and onto the door, and a strip that outlines (mostly) the bulge of the rear fender. It has two round spotllights low on the front and two bumper guards. It has the black hubcaps with tri-star emblem, and a trim ring. Either his was an upgraded model or he added those accessories himself.
  • fintailfintail Posts: 32,892
    Oh, that would be a 6 cylinder car, with all the chrome, probably a 220S or 220SE ponton. While they resemble the 4 cylinder cars, they are on different platforms, and are larger. While possible to add all the trim to a 4 cylinder car, I doubt it would have been done.

    Here's a lovely 220SE ponton sunroof model next to a nice sunroof fintail
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,334
    edited January 2013
    Except for no Skytop...er.., sunroof!...that pic looks exactly like Mr. Filer's car. For some reason I thought it was a 180 but I'm sure his son told me at some point it was a 220. Thanks for clarifying. As my daughter would say, sorry for being such a 'noob' about the cars! LOL
  • fintailfintail Posts: 32,892
    edited February 2013
    They look similar, pontons are easy to confuse. There was the smaller 4cyl car, the larger 6cyl car, and a weird mix car, the 219, which was a 6cyl nose and engine on a 4cyl body. Kind of like the 230 fintail, which had the base 6cyl engine in a 4cyl W110 body.
  • bhill2bhill2 Posts: 1,270
    I'll be darned. I always thought that the 219 was a decontented 220. You learn something new every day. You are a veritable fount of Mercedes information, Fin.

    2009 BMW 335i, 2003 Corvette cnv, 2001 Jaguar XK cnv, 1985 MB 380SE (the best of the lot)

  • fintailfintail Posts: 32,892
    I know a little, but don't consider myself a real expert :shades:

    It was an unloved model, too.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,334
    edited February 2013
    ...of my favorite Studebaker model of all (not necessarily this color, but equipment-wise, yes):

    http://www.autominded.net/brochure/studebaker/64%20Stude%2020.jpg

    There was one that looked, and was equipped, just like this at the Hershey show several years back, and his paperwork from the Studebaker National Museum showed it was built for the Auto Show circuit and was an early serial number. Beautiful supercharged, Powershift, disc brake example.

    The hood was tricky--inside release, pull it before lifting up, and the big chrome grille and surround was attached to the hood and went up with it, looking like Jerry Lewis in "The Nutty Professor" when open! ;)
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,334
    my favorite model year of all, for Studebaker, and the last built in the U.S.:

    http://www.autominded.net/brochure/studebaker/64%20Stude%2019.jpg
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,334
    http://www.autominded.net/brochure/studebaker/64%20Stude%2021.jpg

    The other pages are all mechanical drawings, not as dramatic as photos I think.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,334
    http://forum.studebakerdriversclub.com/showthread.php?68805-62-Lark-in-My-Three-- - Sons-Episode

    I don't like how the Lark owner seems like such a phony, but the car is interesting and I'm surprised with Pontiac sponsoring the show, a Lark is featured so prominently. Guess by '67 Studebaker couldn't complain much.

    The Lark must be a four-speed by the way the father reaches to the floor to shift.
  • jljacjljac Posts: 649
    I'm surprised with Pontiac sponsoring the show, a Lark is featured so prominently.

    I do not know who sponsored that show in 1967 because it had a run of more than ten years, but in the early years it was sponsored by Chevrolet. I remember that because at the end of the show the credits would run with different Chevrolets driving down the road as seen below.

    image
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Kent, OHPosts: 7,334
    I remember always seeing light blue metallic Pontiac Catalina Safari wagons from '65 through at least '68 as the Douglas' family car. In the early '70's, I seem to remember seeing Mercury wagons so the sponsorship must have changed. I'm thinking the show changed networks in the last couple years of programming (it went off the air in '72).
Sign In or Register to comment.