I had forgotten how people tailgate each other at 75 MPH and I can't believe I used to be one of those people!
The only day I enjoy driving now is Sunday, especially in the morning. That is when I usually take the Commander out for a run. I drive the Chevy at 80 m.p.h. but I am just moving with the flow of traffic at that speed.
In a strange way, the 55 m.p.h. speed limit was fun because most people were driving 65 or 70 m.p.h. so I could put on a little burst of speed to show them how fast my old car could get to 80 m.p.h. Now that everyone is already going 80 m.p.h or more (while talking on the cell phone) I just stay in the slow lane and let them go by. I will still be driving my Commander when most of those cars are gone too.
So given two equal Studebakers priced at $18,000, would you really choose the 6 over the 8 cylinder to save $700 a year (if that much, if you drive 12 months a year)?
I doubt it, given that you'd easily spend $700 for some improvement to that very same car without blinking.
Funny you should mention the $700 figure, because that is exactly what I paid for the Commander in 1979. I do drive the car all year because I live in the Los Angeles area. I don't drive it when it rains.
It is not just the gas expense, but everything that goes with the V-8 and all the options. Over the past ten years, I had to replace/rebuild the hydrovac power brake unit twice, the automatic transmission once, and the power steering pump once. The power windows are slow on a six-volt system, so I have to keep those cleaned and oiled or they won't work properly. Changing the plugs on the driver's side of the car takes a lot of time because the battery and power steering hoses are in the way.
I spent most of my time and money fixing things that are not even on that 1952 Champion plus that Champion keeps a lot cooler in hot weather and the motor is very quiet because there is no overhead valve noise.
Therefore, if that same car was available either as a Champion with the overdrive transmission or as a V-8 Commander with the automatic, it would be a close question for me given that I live in the City and have to stop and go on most trips.
Good points but you have to admit, those old flathead 6 Stude engines were pretty weak affairs. You'd have to be very patient to drive one of those on modern roads. At least with the Studebaker Eights you have a fighting chance, and you can enjoy all the accessories that a V-8 can propel on its drive belts.
I like the power and sound of a Studebaker V-8, but my girlfriend often reminds me that I should not be driving a 55+ year old car more than 70+ miles per hour. I admit she has a point and have been slowing down lately. It is amazing that the car does so well on modern highways. The first Model T did not even exist 50 years before the Commander was built.
The engine-building side of the business started at an equally unintentional pace. After a friend asked him to rebuild a flathead six, he took on a couple more rebuilds, then eventually decided to advertise that service as well. Bill said he now builds about six engines a year, one at a time, and despite the wide range of engine rebuild options he gives his customers, he generally builds his engines for both power and reliability. "These things are like a tractor engine," he said. "If they're in good shape, you can't hurt them."
Each engine he builds completely to the customer's tastes, from 90hp stone stockers up to outrageous (for a Studebaker flathead six) 140hp naturally aspirated, non-stroked, multi-carbureted fire-breathers. Prices range from $2,800 for a basic rebuild to as much as $4,300 for the heavy hitters ====================================================
My first car was a 1960 Lark 6 with an automatic trans and I later owned an Army surplus Lark with a three-speed with overdrive that I bought for $300 in 1980. That was the best $300 I ever spent and the transmission made a big difference in the performance. I did not have any major maintenance or repairs during the ten years I owned and drove it, then the reverse gear below on the transmission and it went to the junk year under its own power. I swear, I would rather have a Studebaker 6 in my Chevy instead of the Quad 4 that had a major breakdown at 30,000 miles and had to be replaced before 50,000 miles.
My old Lark ended up here and was still there when I stopped by about 5 years ago. http://www.pvilleparts.com/ It claims to be the hubcap capital of the world.
I think I will send them an E-mail and find out if the Lark still exists. All the Studebakers were parked by the family house and it was still complete except for the rear brake drums. They had a 1957 Packard station wagon in restorable condition last time I was there too.
I'm from L.A. too from San Pedro where the climate never changes.
Thher used to be a guy everyone called Flathead Temple who specialized in flathead Ford V-8's but if he decided he liked you he would take on a flathead Studebaker six. He used to tell us kids that the Studebaker V-8's were junk compared to the flathead sixes.
He lived in Lomita and worked out of a shop in his backyard. You couldnt' rush him and he was a real Prima Donna but his work was cheap and pure perfection.
He used to tell us kids that the Studebaker V-8's were junk compared to the flathead sixes.
It is definitely a minority opinion that the Stude Sixes were better than the V-8s. Bill Cathcart seems to be the only guy into rebuilding the sixes on a regular basis, but there are numerous Stude mechanics who like the V-8s and they stay together even when you supercharge them and triple the original horsepower. They were designed for compression ratios of greater than 12 to 1, which is one of the reasons why they are heavier than later V-8s.
I came to the defense of the six-cylinder motor because it makes sense in that nice 1952 Champion hardtop shown earlier. That is such a nice looking but economical car to own and operate. A car that is getting near 60 years old should not be exceeding the speed limit (in every State except Texas) in any event.
The main difference between the Citroen styling and the Studebaker seems to be in the glass area. The Stude does not have the curved glass and the passenger compartment is wider. I read somewhere that the front windshield created high speed drag on the Stude, but the design it is still much more efficient than the first Ford Mustang. Studebaker wanted to put a curved glass windshields on the coupes and hardtops, but (fortunately) they did not have the money to do that. The sedans and wagons did get curved glass winshields in 1955.
Well cars like the Citroen and Studebaker "look" aerodynamic but they really weren't particularly any better than a Chevy Astro Van. But "for their day", they at least were trying to express aerodynamics. The Citroen was considerably better than the Stude though, but the Stude was as good as say a modern Subaru Forester or Ford Escape.
*genuinely* aerodynamic cars would probably have shapes we wouldn't like.
>*genuinely* aerodynamic cars would probably have shapes we wouldn't like.
I agree with that statement. The AMC Pacer has a drag coefficient of 0.32. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile_drag_coefficient The 1953 Studebaker is better than the Ford Mustang and Dodge Viper. Too bad they do not list many older cars.
Studebaker thought America wanted economical and fuel efficient cars in the 1950s, but they were wrong. Gas was too cheap to bother with that. Even Nash Rambler gave up on their economy Rambler/American in 1956 and 1957 until they decided to try it again during the recession of 1958. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rambler_American That is an amazing story.
Wasn't that the car I found for sale in L.A.? I thought it was a good buy when I posted it last month.
Market price is probably around $7500 to $8000.
Cool car! Personally I would resto-rod it but very tastefully. I wouldn't change the exterior except for radials and I'd try to use the column shifter for the automatic gearshift. Not much engine room in there, so I dunno....maybe a V-6 with a blower?
I love '62 and later Studes, and this is a pretty one, but I am stunned at the bidding on this car. Some non-authentic (though not major) items on this car are the hood ornament, black painted wheels instead of off-white, and the chromed taillight housings (reserved for '64 model Hawks only). It's a two-barrel and has the dash without the tach (ick). Column-shift automatic. If this car sells for even the price it's at now, I think it could be a record for a non-Avanti-powered Gran Turismo Hawk...particularly with column-shift.
That's about market retail for a high #3/2- car with a good, known history. Why are you shocked? They often bring more than Avantis anyway. Nothing unusual in the bidding that I can see.
My buddy sold a '64 (which is usually the most-sought-after GT by Stude fans) that was extremely solid, probably not as 'sharp' as this car but very similarly equipped and even in the same colors, as this for $11K last year and I thought he did well compared to others I've seen on eBay.
GT's have done better than Avantis for a while. Avantis were high for a Stude for a long time but never went through the roof. Conversely, Hawks increased quite a lot, and even Lark hardtops and convertibles, in nice shape, have gone up quite a bit over the years. R2 Larks are in a class by themselves, and even low-level two-door sedans bring big bucks.
There were just under 16,000 GT Hawks built in the three model years (the '64 model year ending in Dec. '63), but it seems they have a high survival rate.
I recently sold my '64 Daytona Hardtop which is a 'twenty footer' to a Stude buff from Australia. I have the cash but we've yet to firm up a pick up date. It has floor rust which wasn't disclosed by the seller to me. The car was sold new by my small hometown dealer and I remember it as the original owner had it til 1990, but it's simply more project than I can deal with now.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Well, eBay doesn't always reflect the actual market. The "market" that is analyzed by appraisers takes information from a lot of different databases.
The $23K bid on the Hawk is pretty much what you'd expect for a nice car, at least based on photos.
As we all know, sometimes an eBay bidder is disappointed enough in the "camera tricks" that he takes on a lawsuit. It won't be the first time.
I'm sometimes asked to view a car that's shown on eBay and report back to the buyer before he bids, and occasionally I am shocked at the misrepresentation. So I'm not surprised that what seems like a "generous bid" is, in fact, not indicative of the market, but rather indicative of people's naivety or treachery.
Also it's hard to compare old used cars one to another. They are all different, so one can't be too "loose" in descriptions. If Car A has nice paint, and car B has shabby paint, then they aren't "close"---they are at least $5000 apart right there. And if you add a shabby THIS and a shabby THAT, then the car A could be worth double the car B.
Aside from what you noticed, I saw dirty carpets, some sloppy aftermarket trunk mats, and what looked like a rattle-can re=spray of the radiator shroud.
So I'm not so sure the new owner is going to be so happy with this car.
Without the actual car is front of us, it's hard to know which one of us is right. It *seems* from the description that they paid $5000 too much for the car.
I can honestly say that I've never seen a non-R-powered GT Hawk sell for that kind of money, and I look on eBay very frequently. I've got to believe more old cars are sold on eBay than in places like brick-and-mortar stores, but may be eclipsed by private sales through newspaper ads, magazine ads, or between friends. Not sure how many of those latter three types of sales have prices which are fed into the value guides out there.
But with 65 bids, in a still-shaky economy, this is yet another recent example that folks are indeed interested in a sharp Studebaker that is advertised attractively.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I think the seller just got lucky and found a couple of bidders that got carried away.
It's a matter of timing. Had that car been advertised at a different time and not spotted my these agressive bidders, the results could have been much different.
All the price guides suggest $20K is not out of line, so there is gleaned data to support that price at least.
But once again, a few sales don't make a "market". The buyer pool for Studebakers is quite small, so this depresses the value versus say an equivalent GM car. When you have limited supply AND limited demand, then rarity doesn't boost value.
Would a '63 Riviera or Grand Prix bring this kind of money, condition-for-condition? I haven't seen it for Rivs, and I don't look for GP's although I love the '65 model.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
A '63 Riv should bring about 25% more than a GT Hawk but a '63 GP would be worth 20% less than a GT Hawk, unless the Pontiac GP was a 421 --in that case it would be worth 10% more than a GT Hawk.
Of course, this presumes all of them are very very nice cars.
I think he was saying that a $30k '63 Riv is going to be a very nice show car like the past auction results here: 2009 Gooding and 2010 BJ. Between the two I find myself liking the blue car better. Normally that's not going to be my first pick.
Years ago my wife and I were shopping for a Honda and she picked out a Fiji Blue Pearl Civic for a test drive. I was dreading the cute jokes and nicknames this car would inspire..."I'm taking 'Pearl' for an oil change" or "Are you Hungary? I'll Fiji blue pearl!" I remember doggedly searching for something wrong with that car and settled on a loose-fitting interior door handle. Next!
A time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing.
Really, I understand why you might think that. But given cars of equal quality, nice '63 Rivs should routinely outsell nice GT Hawks.
The problem might be that we see a *lot* of Riviera beaters for sale because they made so very many more Rivs than GT Hawks (easily 10 to 12 times as many).
So the beaters tend to drag down the averages. Also a lot of Rivs get modified into low riders, customs, etc. whereas you rarely see that happening to GT Hawks.
But all things being equal, in the broad market of appeal, a Riviera done up really nicely is a more popular package in the overall marketplace.
I've owned two '65 Rivieras and I remain a huge fan although a 64-65 would be a lot more desirable to me than a '63. I wouldn't turn down a nice '63 but they still used the Dynaflow and they had troublesome A/C rotary controls that are hard to fix. The'64's all had the 425 Cubicv Inch 340 H.P. engines. Funny, in 1965, they went back to the 401 - 325 H.P. engines.
I keep looking for a nice one but every one that pops up on Ebay has either been ratty or modified. There was a stripper '63 awhile back that didn't have A/C or power anything that wasn't standard. I don't know if it met reserve.
Where I live, I often see a decent red '63 and an eye popping near perfect green '65 Gran Sport!
The Rivs are formidable competitors for Studebaker GT Hawks, T-Birds and other upscale 4-seater coupes. The interiors are beautiful, just about everyone likes the styling, and they have plenty of power. They are ferocious gas hogs though, and probably don't handle as well as a GT Hawk--but probably nothing is worse for handling than a period T-Bird, which would be my least favorite of the 3 cars I'm mentioning.
I had to edit my last post. I meant to say that I find the 64-65 Rivs to be more desirable than the 63's.
Funny you wouild talk aout gas mileage because "ferocious" is an understatement! If I jumped on the gas in my '65, I could watch the gas guage drop. Of course, it would lay rubber for a half block if I was so inclined. They also needed the highest octane I could find!
I had to chuckle when you mentioned the handling of those T-Birds. They would plow through corners while eating tires and front end parts.
They didn't get disc brakes until 1965 and they would go through linings and drums liek there was no tomorrow. The Rivs used huge aluminum front drums that were so much better.
It's well equipped as Riviera should be but Mickey Mouse has paid it a visit too. The half vinyl top is incorrect and tacky and whoever drilled the hood to install hood pins of all things is nuts!
The '65 is my favorite Riviera also. I've heard the clamshell headlight covers could be bad news, but styling wise, IMO, it's so cleaned up, with the fake rear quarter louvers removed, the inboard headlights removed, and the taillights moved into the bumper.
Several years back I saw a dark green '65 Riv GS at Carlisle. I liked it a lot. I get sick of white, black, and bright red on everything. I think color plays into values on old cars, and I wouldn't mind saving a few bucks on a color that doesn't knock everybody else out, if the car is super-straight. In later Studebakers, where I tend to know more of the details, I can't stand it when an otherwise really nice car has (to me) glaring authenticity issues, even minor ones, like that $25K GT had.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Oh yeah, the clamshell headlights were troublesome and a [non-permissible content removed] to fix.
I heard that the Buick mechanics just hated them. The slightest bump to the front bumper would cause them to quit working. They used a complex, primitive system along with some micro switches.
This is why you'll often see a 65 Ric with the headlights permanently opened. On one of my 65's they worked and on the other they didn't and I never bothered to find out why.
The 64's had pods next to the headlights that glowed softly when the headlights were turned on. A nice look!
I'm not an authority on Rivs, but it looks pretty darn authentic to me. I'm not sure about the wheels/wheel covers, and the ad says it's got a '64 engine, but I'm not seeing anything chromed that shouldn't be, etc., like on that GT.
Nice car.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I am surprised at the sales price of that Hawk, but I think they are generally undervalued. They have a nice classic look, with reasonable power and are a nice size. When I first started driving my Commander hardtop, I noticed that people paid more attention to it than when I drove the Avanti.
There is an expensive restaurant with valet parking in Marina Del Rey, CA. They only have 4 spaces by the entrance, all other cars park in back. It is so funny to see them park my Commander up front with the most expensive cars while Porsche's and Mercedes end up getting parked in back. The valets doing the parking think the Commander is rare and expensive. You get a lot of fun for the dollar driving a Studebaker.
That is a very nice Riv. I'm not crazy about silver, but the GS package and '65 styling are tops IMO. I don't think we can compare a '65 anything to a '63 anything when comparing prices though...a '65 Hawk was never built, after all. That said, it's a stunning car and I will be interested in what the '65 brings.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I don't think that little crimes of authenticity have any effect on the value of many "classic" cars---there are only a few makes of car where the buyers are insanely fussy, and neither Buicks nor Studies have to worry about this.
I always have to laugh when I hear people arguing about the correctness of the bolt heads on a Model A Ford. Henry Ford himself didn't much care what bolts he used---whatever was on the shelf was good enough. And really, on a car that is mass-produced in rapid industrial style, little problems of authenticity are, IMO meaningless quibbles, especially when they are easily correctible. You can grind and strip off chrome and paint it, you can fetch the right hubcaps if you so wish, and you can unbolt the fender skirts and continental kit and sell them.
What I'm saying is that I certainly wouldn't reject a nice car at a fair price if there are some wrong pieces on it. In fact, I'd probably keep them on there just to annoy the people who spend their whole day prowling the car shows in order to point out what's wrong with other people's cars. I love to say "oh, I know, and I don't care". :P
One thing, authenticity-wise, that drives me nuts, even about a contemporary car, is when somebody takes the time to do a great, original-looking paint job, then doesn't bother to put nameplates and emblems in the right place when done. Not a day goes by when I don't see this on the road. Isn't the idea of good bodywork that you can't tell it was done? On Studebakers (and believe me, there is 400-point judging done at Studebaker Drivers' Club international meets, and I've heard it's tougher than what a Stude would get judged at Hershey), it kills me to see an emblem six inches off in the wrong place. And I see that kind of stuff often too.
It doesn't take a genius to figure this out.
When I had repair work done on my '08 Cobalt at six weeks old, I rejected it at pickup time because the little square "GM" emblem on the front fender was too high. There is no way anybody even bothered to measure where the one on the other side is. LAZY!
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I don't mind the small details that may not be "correct" on an old car but it does bother me when someone touts their old car as being "totally original" when it has the wrong engine or an interior that is totally out of place. This happens a lot with Ebay cars I've noticed.
Years ago, I had a "restored" 1965 Mustang Convertable that was a beautiful car. It had 1966 wheels on it instead of the right ones and people just couldn't wait to point that out to me as if I didn't already know.
I saw something like that just today - a 2006 model E-class parked at a gas station. The model designation read "350E" - however, the number hasn't been placed before the letter on MB model designations since 1993. What were they thinking?
You know, on mass produced cars built for the common man, these judging contests strike me as rather pretentious. American cars of the 50s--80s were pretty much slammed together---I think the factory was far more indifferent as to fit and finish than modern day restorers are. These judges are pretending there was a world that in fact never existed. So their "authenticity" is not authentic either.
"Authenticity" doesn't mean fit and finish. It means colors as offered, nameplates where they're supposed to be, interiors as offered, wheel covers as offered. Personally, I don't care all that much about stuff like hose clamps and T-3 headlights, but I don't want to see stuff 100 feet away that I can tell is non-authentic. This is all easy stuff to document with sales literature. I like authentic cars best of all, but I wouldn't turn down an otherwise nice car for stuff that could be easily converted back to at least 'authentic'...at least the really visible stuff.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Comments
I had forgotten how people tailgate each other at 75 MPH and I can't believe I used to be one of those people!
The only day I enjoy driving now is Sunday, especially in the morning. That is when I usually take the Commander out for a run. I drive the Chevy at 80 m.p.h. but I am just moving with the flow of traffic at that speed.
In a strange way, the 55 m.p.h. speed limit was fun because most people were driving 65 or 70 m.p.h. so I could put on a little burst of speed to show them how fast my old car could get to 80 m.p.h. Now that everyone is already going 80 m.p.h or more (while talking on the cell phone) I just stay in the slow lane and let them go by. I will still be driving my Commander when most of those cars are gone too.
I doubt it, given that you'd easily spend $700 for some improvement to that very same car without blinking.
Funny you should mention the $700 figure, because that is exactly what I paid for the Commander in 1979. I do drive the car all year because I live in the Los Angeles area. I don't drive it when it rains.
It is not just the gas expense, but everything that goes with the V-8 and all the options. Over the past ten years, I had to replace/rebuild the hydrovac power brake unit twice, the automatic transmission once, and the power steering pump once. The power windows are slow on a six-volt system, so I have to keep those cleaned and oiled or they won't work properly. Changing the plugs on the driver's side of the car takes a lot of time because the battery and power steering hoses are in the way.
I spent most of my time and money fixing things that are not even on that 1952 Champion plus that Champion keeps a lot cooler in hot weather and the motor is very quiet because there is no overhead valve noise.
Therefore, if that same car was available either as a Champion with the overdrive transmission or as a V-8 Commander with the automatic, it would be a close question for me given that I live in the City and have to stop and go on most trips.
Here is an interesting article about a guy who rebuilds Studebaker flathead sixes.
http://www.hemmings.com/hcc/stories/2005/01/01/hmn_feature24.html. Part of the article says this.
The engine-building side of the business started at an equally unintentional pace. After a friend asked him to rebuild a flathead six, he took on a couple more rebuilds, then eventually decided to advertise that service as well. Bill said he now builds about six engines a year, one at a time, and despite the wide range of engine rebuild options he gives his customers, he generally builds his engines for both power and reliability. "These things are like a tractor engine," he said. "If they're in good shape, you can't hurt them."
Each engine he builds completely to the customer's tastes, from 90hp stone stockers up to outrageous (for a Studebaker flathead six) 140hp naturally aspirated, non-stroked, multi-carbureted fire-breathers. Prices range from $2,800 for a basic rebuild to as much as $4,300 for the heavy hitters
====================================================
My first car was a 1960 Lark 6 with an automatic trans and I later owned an Army surplus Lark with a three-speed with overdrive that I bought for $300 in 1980. That was the best $300 I ever spent and the transmission made a big difference in the performance. I did not have any major maintenance or repairs during the ten years I owned and drove it, then the reverse gear below on the transmission and it went to the junk year under its own power. I swear, I would rather have a Studebaker 6 in my Chevy instead of the Quad 4 that had a major breakdown at 30,000 miles and had to be replaced before 50,000 miles.
My old Lark ended up here and was still there when I stopped by about 5 years ago. http://www.pvilleparts.com/ It claims to be the hubcap capital of the world.
I think I will send them an E-mail and find out if the Lark still exists. All the Studebakers were parked by the family house and it was still complete except for the rear brake drums. They had a 1957 Packard station wagon in restorable condition last time I was there too.
Thher used to be a guy everyone called Flathead Temple who specialized in flathead Ford V-8's but if he decided he liked you he would take on a flathead Studebaker six. He used to tell us kids that the Studebaker V-8's were junk compared to the flathead sixes.
He lived in Lomita and worked out of a shop in his backyard. You couldnt' rush him and he was a real Prima Donna but his work was cheap and pure perfection.
It is definitely a minority opinion that the Stude Sixes were better than the V-8s. Bill Cathcart seems to be the only guy into rebuilding the sixes on a regular basis, but there are numerous Stude mechanics who like the V-8s and they stay together even when you supercharge them and triple the original horsepower. They were designed for compression ratios of greater than 12 to 1, which is one of the reasons why they are heavier than later V-8s.
I came to the defense of the six-cylinder motor because it makes sense in that nice 1952 Champion hardtop shown earlier. That is such a nice looking but economical car to own and operate. A car that is getting near 60 years old should not be exceeding the speed limit (in every State except Texas) in any event.
I might have posted this before, but both the 1953 Studebaker and the 1955 Citroen DS are shown as early examples of aerodynamic cars. http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2010/02/a-brief-illustrated-history-of-automoti- ve-aerodynamics-part-2/ In 1955 the Citroen only had 75 horsepower while the Studebaker Champion 6 was up to 102 hp. in 1955 and you could get a Stude V-8 with 185 hp.
The main difference between the Citroen styling and the Studebaker seems to be in the glass area. The Stude does not have the curved glass and the passenger compartment is wider. I read somewhere that the front windshield created high speed drag on the Stude, but the design it is still much more efficient than the first Ford Mustang. Studebaker wanted to put a curved glass windshields on the coupes and hardtops, but (fortunately) they did not have the money to do that. The sedans and wagons did get curved glass winshields in 1955.
*genuinely* aerodynamic cars would probably have shapes we wouldn't like.
I agree with that statement. The AMC Pacer has a drag coefficient of 0.32. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile_drag_coefficient The 1953 Studebaker is better than the Ford Mustang and Dodge Viper. Too bad they do not list many older cars.
Studebaker thought America wanted economical and fuel efficient cars in the 1950s, but they were wrong. Gas was too cheap to bother with that. Even Nash Rambler gave up on their economy Rambler/American in 1956 and 1957 until they decided to try it again during the recession of 1958.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rambler_American That is an amazing story.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1947-STUDEBAKER-CHAMPION-BUSINESS-COUPE-/26077295- 4445?pt=US_Cars_Trucks&hash=item3cb747814d
Market price is probably around $7500 to $8000.
Cool car! Personally I would resto-rod it but very tastefully. I wouldn't change the exterior except for radials and I'd try to use the column shifter for the automatic gearshift. Not much engine room in there, so I dunno....maybe a V-6 with a blower?
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1963-Studebaker-GT-Hawk-Rare-Black-and-Red-Very-N- - ice-/110679574940?pt=US_Cars_Trucks&hash=item19c504499c
GT's have done better than Avantis for a while. Avantis were high for a Stude for a long time but never went through the roof. Conversely, Hawks increased quite a lot, and even Lark hardtops and convertibles, in nice shape, have gone up quite a bit over the years. R2 Larks are in a class by themselves, and even low-level two-door sedans bring big bucks.
There were just under 16,000 GT Hawks built in the three model years (the '64 model year ending in Dec. '63), but it seems they have a high survival rate.
I recently sold my '64 Daytona Hardtop which is a 'twenty footer' to a Stude buff from Australia. I have the cash but we've yet to firm up a pick up date. It has floor rust which wasn't disclosed by the seller to me. The car was sold new by my small hometown dealer and I remember it as the original owner had it til 1990, but it's simply more project than I can deal with now.
The $23K bid on the Hawk is pretty much what you'd expect for a nice car, at least based on photos.
As we all know, sometimes an eBay bidder is disappointed enough in the "camera tricks" that he takes on a lawsuit. It won't be the first time.
I'm sometimes asked to view a car that's shown on eBay and report back to the buyer before he bids, and occasionally I am shocked at the misrepresentation. So I'm not surprised that what seems like a "generous bid" is, in fact, not indicative of the market, but rather indicative of people's naivety or treachery.
Also it's hard to compare old used cars one to another. They are all different, so one can't be too "loose" in descriptions. If Car A has nice paint, and car B has shabby paint, then they aren't "close"---they are at least $5000 apart right there. And if you add a shabby THIS and a shabby THAT, then the car A could be worth double the car B.
Aside from what you noticed, I saw dirty carpets, some sloppy aftermarket trunk mats, and what looked like a rattle-can re=spray of the radiator shroud.
So I'm not so sure the new owner is going to be so happy with this car.
I would have guessed half that amount but what do I know?
This is the BEST thing that can happen for a seller and this may be the case here. Egos take over and reason go's out the window!
But with 65 bids, in a still-shaky economy, this is yet another recent example that folks are indeed interested in a sharp Studebaker that is advertised attractively.
It's a matter of timing. Had that car been advertised at a different time and not spotted my these agressive bidders, the results could have been much different.
Like I said, the seller got lucky!
True, but only 3 were in it after $7,800, and 2 were in it from $20,000 on up.
But once again, a few sales don't make a "market". The buyer pool for Studebakers is quite small, so this depresses the value versus say an equivalent GM car. When you have limited supply AND limited demand, then rarity doesn't boost value.
Of course, this presumes all of them are very very nice cars.
Years ago my wife and I were shopping for a Honda and she picked out a Fiji Blue Pearl Civic for a test drive. I was dreading the cute jokes and nicknames this car would inspire..."I'm taking 'Pearl' for an oil change" or "Are you Hungary? I'll Fiji blue pearl!" I remember doggedly searching for something wrong with that car and settled on a loose-fitting interior door handle. Next!
Really, I understand why you might think that. But given cars of equal quality, nice '63 Rivs should routinely outsell nice GT Hawks.
The problem might be that we see a *lot* of Riviera beaters for sale because they made so very many more Rivs than GT Hawks (easily 10 to 12 times as many).
So the beaters tend to drag down the averages. Also a lot of Rivs get modified into low riders, customs, etc. whereas you rarely see that happening to GT Hawks.
But all things being equal, in the broad market of appeal, a Riviera done up really nicely is a more popular package in the overall marketplace.
I keep looking for a nice one but every one that pops up on Ebay has either been ratty or modified. There was a stripper '63 awhile back that didn't have A/C or power anything that wasn't standard. I don't know if it met reserve.
Where I live, I often see a decent red '63 and an eye popping near perfect green '65 Gran Sport!
Guess I'll keep looking.
Funny you wouild talk aout gas mileage because "ferocious" is an understatement! If I jumped on the gas in my '65, I could watch the gas guage drop. Of course, it would lay rubber for a half block if I was so inclined. They also needed the highest octane I could find!
I had to chuckle when you mentioned the handling of those T-Birds. They would plow through corners while eating tires and front end parts.
They didn't get disc brakes until 1965 and they would go through linings and drums liek there was no tomorrow. The Rivs used huge aluminum front drums that were so much better.
Here's one...
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Buick-Riviera-_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQ_trkparmsZalgoQ3- - dLVIQ26ituQ3dUCIQ26otnQ3d5Q26poQ3dLVIQ26psQ3d63Q26clkidQ3d8985187478773157081QQ_- - trksidZp5197Q2em7QQitemZ220779128442
It's well equipped as Riviera should be but Mickey Mouse has paid it a visit too. The half vinyl top is incorrect and tacky and whoever drilled the hood to install hood pins of all things is nuts!
Still, probably one of the nicest ones I've seen.
Several years back I saw a dark green '65 Riv GS at Carlisle. I liked it a lot. I get sick of white, black, and bright red on everything. I think color plays into values on old cars, and I wouldn't mind saving a few bucks on a color that doesn't knock everybody else out, if the car is super-straight. In later Studebakers, where I tend to know more of the details, I can't stand it when an otherwise really nice car has (to me) glaring authenticity issues, even minor ones, like that $25K GT had.
I heard that the Buick mechanics just hated them. The slightest bump to the front bumper would cause them to quit working. They used a complex, primitive system along with some micro switches.
This is why you'll often see a 65 Ric with the headlights permanently opened. On one of my 65's they worked and on the other they didn't and I never bothered to find out why.
The 64's had pods next to the headlights that glowed softly when the headlights were turned on. A nice look!
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Buick-Riviera-1963-BUICK-RIVIERA-_W0QQcmdZViewIte- mQQhashZitem3cb7a3b003QQitemZ260778995715QQptZUSQ5fCarsQ5fTrucks
I'm not an authority on Rivs, but it looks pretty darn authentic to me. I'm not sure about the wheels/wheel covers, and the ad says it's got a '64 engine, but I'm not seeing anything chromed that shouldn't be, etc., like on that GT.
Nice car.
Wrong color paint, wheel covers were an option for sure.
No air conditioning as a car like that should have.
Somehow I think the seats out of a '65 got in that car. Again, not 100% sure.
There is an expensive restaurant with valet parking in Marina Del Rey, CA. They only have 4 spaces by the entrance, all other cars park in back. It is so funny to see them park my Commander up front with the most expensive cars while Porsche's and Mercedes end up getting parked in back. The valets doing the parking think the Commander is rare and expensive. You get a lot of fun for the dollar driving a Studebaker.
It's a Gran Sport that has taken off!
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1965-Buick-Riviera-GRAN-SPORT-ORIGINAL-CONDITION-- /170635186154?pt=US_Cars_Trucks&hash=item27baa64fea
I always have to laugh when I hear people arguing about the correctness of the bolt heads on a Model A Ford. Henry Ford himself didn't much care what bolts he used---whatever was on the shelf was good enough. And really, on a car that is mass-produced in rapid industrial style, little problems of authenticity are, IMO meaningless quibbles, especially when they are easily correctible. You can grind and strip off chrome and paint it, you can fetch the right hubcaps if you so wish, and you can unbolt the fender skirts and continental kit and sell them.
What I'm saying is that I certainly wouldn't reject a nice car at a fair price if there are some wrong pieces on it. In fact, I'd probably keep them on there just to annoy the people who spend their whole day prowling the car shows in order to point out what's wrong with other people's cars. I love to say "oh, I know, and I don't care". :P
It doesn't take a genius to figure this out.
When I had repair work done on my '08 Cobalt at six weeks old, I rejected it at pickup time because the little square "GM" emblem on the front fender was too high. There is no way anybody even bothered to measure where the one on the other side is. LAZY!
It'll be interesting to see where it ends up for sure!
Years ago, I had a "restored" 1965 Mustang Convertable that was a beautiful car. It had 1966 wheels on it instead of the right ones and people just couldn't wait to point that out to me as if I didn't already know.
My response was usually the same as yours.
The two bidders that are going at it both have ZERO bid history. Not good.
The others have dropped out.