Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
Cruiser sedan (from the Lark line):
http://www.carhobby.com/64sPCc.JPG
Gran Turismo Hawk:
http://www.carhobby.com/64sPCh.JPG
Avanti:
http://www.remarkablecars.com/main/studebaker/1964-studebaker-avanti-1.jpg
Champ pickup (photo of '63; indistinguisable from '64):
http://www.automotivehistoryonline.com/1963%20Studebaker%20Champ.jpg
Diesel truck:
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4088/5073207627_5691b51acf_b.jpg
One-ton truck:
http://www.studebakerracing.com/truck632L.jpg
According to Wikipedia, the 240 actually came out as a truck engine in 1963, but then was used in full-sized cars from 1965-70. It was used in fleet cars through 1973 or 1974, and persisted in trucks through 1977. The 300 version came out in '65 as a truck engine, and lasted through 1996!
Tthe "Cruiser" is the Stude I see driving around locally now and then
My Auto Encyclopedia (Consumer Guide, so take it with a grain of salt) lists the 240 as being standard on the big Fords through 1972, when it had 103 hp. But, as Wikipedia said, it may have persisted another year or two as fleet-only. For 1973, my book shows a 351 with 158 hp being standard.
Chevy put the 250 in their big cars up through 1973, with 100 hp, although by then it was limited to the Bel Air. Base V-8 was a 145 hp 350, and it stayed at 145 for '74.
Plymouth, at least, wised up and made the 318 standard in the big Fury starting in 1972. It had 150 hp. Had the 225 slant six been used, it would've had 110 hp (probably 100 in CA). I guess the 225 might have carried on in some fleet-only models, though?
And then it started up again in 1976, when Buick started putting 231's in the mastodon, pre-downsized LeSabre. That must have been faster than the speed of moss. :sick:
Y'know, there's something to be said for cars like Studebaker, Packard, Nash, Hudson, DeSoto, etc failing when they did. At least they all got out before they got TOO horrible. Well, okay, there was the '56-57 Hudson, '58 Packard, and '61 DeSoto, which were all pretty ugly, but not necessarily horrible cars. But, just imagine the humiliation they would have had to endure had they soldiered on into the 70's and 80s!
There was a girl I liked when I was about 19 years old and she had a Ford Falcon. I tried to get into her good graces by changing her brakes. I knew how to do that because I already had a brake drum puller for my Lark, but I did not need to use it on her Falcon. The drum came off nice and easy.
The last Studebakers (1964) did not need brake drum pullers either.
Rambler gave up on the small Nash Rambler in 1955. But they realized they made a mistake and brought it back for 1958. Studebaker was thinking of bringing back the small Champion in 1958, but they shortened the existing sedans instead. That actually worked out pretty well because they kept
the V-8 option.
The Studebaker Champion L-head six came out in 1939 and was designed to power the small Champion car. Unfortunately, in 1951, Studebaker was able to shorten the Commander because the new V-8 was shorter than the old Commander 6-cylinder motor. As a result they decided to make the
Champion and the Commander body the same size and the Champion ended up powering a heavier car than intended.
There is an argument to be made that the Champion was the first compact car, but I don't want to make that argument because the 1950 Nash Rambler stole the show. . . especially the Superman TV show. The Nash/Rambler aka Rambler American saved American Motors and made George Romney a wise and rich man. (I am not so sure about his son.)
A "1974 Packard" probably would have a spring-loaded cormorant hood ornament with a stand-up grille with a thick chrome"yoke" grille cap and hexagon emblazoned wire wheel covers. I almost see it as a cross between a 1974 Imperial and a 1977 Lincoln Continental with all the period '70s styling cliches like an opera window.
Then of course there was the Crosley, but that's really sub-compact.
Yeah, I kinda imagined it as a Firesweep being the same thing as a Diplomat/LeBaron, an Adventurer being a clone of a Magnum/Cordoba, and the Firedome/Fireflite being slightly cheapened Newport/New Yorkers.
As for Packard, there were a few revival attempts in the 1970's, none of them pretty. They mainly look like '79 vintage Rivieras that have been poorly butchered, and I've seen one revival that looks like they used a Caddy Brougham as the basis.
And then there's this...
I don't know what it's based on, but it makes me think of a 6000 SUX!
^ ex-'63 Lark owner
I always imagined it would have been very hard to sell Canadian Studebakers in South Bend, although they still had two dealerships in town and one in nearby Mishawaka, after the shutdown. The Corporate offices and Parts Distribution were still in South Bend though.
I always heard there was a large inventory of unsold new cars in South Bend after the shutdown was announced. How I wish I could go back with today's money and bring home with me, now, an R3 Avanti, a Daytona convertible, a Gran Turismo Hawk, and a half-ton Champ pickup.
I have some images of the Mishiwaka. Stude dealer from about 5 years ago but cannot post images directly here. It can be easily identified as a Studebaker dealer because of the Studebaker wheel in the front facade. The factory Studebaker dealer of Freedman-Spicer became a Chrysler dealer after 1966 and then the Studebaker National Museum. Below:
My Dad bought a Plymouth with a Slant 6 from F & S around 1968 and liked it. The Slant 6 was also used as an industrial engine for Hobart welders used at construction sites.
Studebaker had a large inventory of 1963 model cars in South Bend when they closed. I wish they had skipped the 1963 model year because they had many mechanical improvements but looked much like the 1962 models.
Studebaker sometimes used short people in advertisements to make the cars look bigger. They were weclome on the production lines too for getting into cramped spaces (trunks).
Notice how in this video clip with Tom Bosley that says how BIG, NEW and WIDE the 1956 cars were, although they could not possibly have been wider than the 1955s. That said, they did appear to be a lot different than the 1953-1955 sedans. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVdKKne8_hk
http://www.autolandautos.com/view_car.php?vehicle_id=59
I saw that oil cap and it triggered a faint memory of Studebaker's reccomendation of adding STP at every oil change.
What a horrible thing to do!
Did Studebaker have some sort of a connection with STP? Something in my memory banks is thinking there was something.
Yes, a lot of the photos are really duplicates. I love the car though. Wish I knew what it sold for.
One of the best tools in that bunch was a special carb adjusting tool fron Kent-Moore I believe that was used specifically to adjust the triple carbs on the Oldsmobile J-2 engines. That could work on ANYTHING!
What you don't want is to run too lean, because then you run too hot, and with a supercharger, that can be deadly to an engine, as the SC generates enough heat of its own. The result is pre-ignition, or detonation, and that's an engine-killer.
I'd imagine that colder spark plugs would help a Supercharged Studie run a lot better.
In re the question about STP, the image of the Novi Indy car I posted earlier shows the Studebaker-STP connection. I have a few unopended STP cans with the Studebaker name on the side.
I use STP regularly and am glad I did because modern motor oils do not have zinc phosphorus (ZDDP) in them but the STP does, so I might have avoided camshaft problems. This should be added to engines with flat tappet camshafts, which includes the Studebaker V-8s. I now add a little oil additive to be certain that I have enough.
They wouldn't have been any wider on the inside, without some major redesigning, but it's possible that the sheetmetal was altered just enough that the car was made larger at its widest point, enough that they could proclaim "wider".
FWIW, I think it was the 1960 Ford that actually came in at something like 80.5 or 81.5" wide, which meant that technically it had to be titled as a truck in some states! For '61-64, they were able to trim down below that 80" threshold.
Even today, I think if a truck is wider than 80", it gets classified as a medium-duty truck, and I'm sure there's some kind of rule for cars as well.
I've seen the results of STP'd up engines and I wouldn't put it in my lawnmower.
Many Studebaker ads seem to make the cars look longer, but here is one that makes the Golden Hawk look shorter.
Compare to this:
STP still makes a number of automotive products. I see them in the auto supply stores regularly. http://www.stp.com/products/
I use the Lead Substitute in the gray bottle, although it is not shown here. Maybe it was discontinued.
Kinda like the Andy Griffith show where Barny bought a used car with sawdust in the tranny...
It totally silenced a howling differential on a buddy's Ford Woody and it was a month before the howling came back. By that time, he had the money to throw in a used one.
I think it's a lot like homeopathic medicine---it may not work but it's usually harmless and it's like throwing your car a doggie treat.
I'm sure I do similar things without thinking about it.
I never used STP in cold climates because it is too thick, but it does keep the oil pressure better when the motor is very hot. My Commander does not like slow freeway traffic on a hot day and that is why I use it.
I am surprised nobody discussed zinc phosphate (ZDDP) being taken out of the motor oils over the past few years. That was a repeated topic of discission in the Studebaker Driver's Club magazine Turning Wheels. I thought that would get some comments here. It sounds like the older engines need it.
Sometimes, I put a little auto transmission fluid in the gasoline if I don't have lead substutute to protect the valves. An old mechanic said that was a good idea. I don't know if that it true or not, but it does not seem to cause any harm, so why not?
For the most part the ZDDP in Rotella is gone in numbers needed for older engines. Pay attention to the API ratings. CJ-4 rated oil supercedes the CI-4, CI-4 was the last one to have enough ZDDP in it. It has been discussed that 1200 ppm is where we need to be. The CJ-4 rated oil is supposed to have "NO MORE" than 1000 ppm.
Simply adding 50 weight modern engine oil would not do that.
I can't imagine while they would be deemed so fragile as to expire on modern engine oils. I could see where those people running race engines with big camshafts and stronger springs might worry about cam wear, but even then, if your cam and springs are radical, ZDDP isn't going to save them from excessive wear.
Last of all, I see that there are plenty of oils on the shelf that offer ZDDP. There seems to be no reason whatsoever to use an additive.
Also the stuff I see advertised is more like $9 a bottle and they tell you to use it every oil change.
It seems to me that if most of the motor oils included this additive ZDDP for more than 50 years, there must have been some reason for doing that and I suspect that reducing the amount might have adverse consequences too just as taking the lead out of gasoline did.
I found this web site for Classic Car Motor oil, and the middle of the page has some of the discussion from the Studebaker Drivers Club Turning Wheels magazine article (with images of camshaft damage) that caught my attention. http://www.classiccarmotoroil.com/articles.html The evidence may be anecdotal , but there seems to be a lot of it going around and that applies to the statements about STP clogging up engines too.
As far as STP goes I don't think that the "gumming up" statement is anecdotal, because if you, or anyone, opens up an engine that's been doped with a lot of it, you will readily see that it gums everything up. Put in a lot---gums up/ don't put it any, no gumming. But sure, in the amounts you use it, I doubt it clogs anything up at all, and the statement is not fair in your case.
As for the Studebaker Club, it sounds like soft camshaft mass hysteria to me. The tip-off IMO is a statement they make that actually gives a *better* reason for the camshaft wear than lack of ZDDP. It says:
" The majority of these (engines) has been or will be rebuilt with ground camshafts or new after-market parts of widely varying metal quality."
AHA! There's your culprit, I bet. Nothing "anecdotal" about a wiped out camshaft if they have photos, but what's anecdotal is speculation as to the reason.
Unless someone runs a side by side lab test with two OEM camshafts using different oils, and does it numerous times, then really, nobody can say they "know".
If the problem really is poor metallurgy or re-grinding, then I would think synthetic oil and/or a Rotella would certainly help reduce the wear. Of course, if the aftermarket camshaft is really junk, then what can you do?