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
An advertisement from Studebaker is worth 1000 words.
It doesn't really look like a wedge car though, does it? C'mon, Studebaker, look at your own car for gawd's sake!
I don't think of "wedge" as a compliment in the context of car styling.
I always think of a wedge car as:
And what a pile of crap it was...when I was a little kid I thought these were pretty hot though.
On a different subject, I always thought the first Cavalier's taillights were a total rip-off of the TR-7's taillights. I remember when a friend and I drove around the Lordstown plant and saw a few pre-production Cavaliers sitting out. I couldn't believe the similarity.
It is not easy to see the color of the wheels when the full wheel covers are on.
I see the Avanti's tail lights, back up light on the trunk, coke bottle shape and air scoop under the bumper on the second series Cavalier. Show me a car before 1963 that had those features.
Seems like the coke-bottle shape found imitators but the shovel-nose didn't get many copiers.
Shovel nose...only other that comes to mind is a 70s Vauxhall Chevette.
The front of that Toyota does not look anything like the Avanti and I never heard the term "shovel nose" used, although I did hear of such terms as "aerodynamic wedge design." The Avanti had no grille, no chrome and the air intake under the bumper. Even GM discovered how to make the front end of its cars look like the Avanti. . .about 30 years later.
">
I don't know about "aerodynamic" which is more of a marketing term, but the Avanit's coefficient of drag wasn't bad at all for the day...around .33 I think.
You can't really tell CD by the shape at all. It could have good "aero" looks and a terrible coefficient of drag.
The only car I see known by name as a "shovel nose" is the 1932 Packard.
http://www.cars-on-line.com/47212.html
Again, this is NOT a technical styling term like "Kamm-back" where everyone agrees on what it is; basically, all that "shovel-nose" means is a backward tilt of the nose of the car, that's all.
Amazingly to me, I have repeatedly seen where, condition-for-condition, a Packard Hawk will bring higher money than a Golden Hawk. Guess it's a combo of the low production (588) and the Packard name.
'59 would end up being Studebaker's best-ever profit year...with all hints of any Packard name on a product, gone (although the company was called "Studebaker-Packard" until early 1962).
(GOOGLE "Ugliest American Cars")
There are plenty of freak cars worth money, so on that level, yeah, okay the 58 Hawk works for shock value. But running a freak show would get very old very fast for me, personally, as an owner. I mean, how many times can you stand to have your car pointed at with snickering? It can't be *that* much fun.
it wouldn't have taken very much to make the '58 "Pakcard" Hawk decent-looking.
Look how nicely the Studebaker GT Hawk turned out--would it have been so hard to do that in 1958 for this car? I don't think so.
Here's a pretty even-handed review of the car:
http://www.autos.ca/classic-cars/motoring-memories-1958-packard-hawk
The 58 Packard Hawk does have one distinction though--Hemmings Motor News says it was "the fastest Packard ever built".
The front end is not that much different than the 1955 models which were chromed there. The outside arm rests may seem silly, but if you drive a "C" or "K" body Studebaker with the big steering wheel, it is most comfortable with your left arm out the window and the padding there is actually a nice feature.
I much-prefer the Studebaker Hawk's front end, though.
Grandpa used to park his gray 1952 Champion on the wide side walk under the railroad bridge in the morning because he was there early. The photo was of the Packard Hawk was taken where there appears to be a train and there were railroad tracks there at the time.
I like the image below because it shows the difference between the 1952 and 1953 and 1963 models by the same building. The owner of the 1953 bought it new and still owns it. He was President of the Driver's Club around 1970 and has initials KH. I wish I had a better camera then
http://studetrucks.tripod.com/plant03.htm
My Grandfather was foreman of 4th floor of building 48. I think they had a cafeteria up there, but they did not serve beer, so many workers went to local beaneries for lunch.
(Pleease don't censor me Mr. Shiftright!!!!!!)
Neat photos...thanks for providing.
The yellow Lark is mine, then a white GT Hawk and then the gold Packard Hawk from the earlier image. My father said that he got his 1959 Lark from a garage door at the north side of the building (48 A) without going through the Friedman-Spicer dealership. There was supposed to be
a “doll-up line” on that first floor. If you could look right, you would see the administration building.
I wish that I could post my gif image of the final assembly buildings (Nos 82 and 83) being demolished, but I cannot so you can see it at the bottom of the page here. http://stude.net/rollingalong.html
I do not want to sell the ash tray from Deka’s Lark Bar, but I will keep you in mind if I do. here is some information about Jimmy Deka of the Lark Bar.
http://articles.southbendtribune.com/2009-01-19/news/26726624_1_polka-music-sons- -senior-moments. Jimmy Deka was a pierogi eating, polka playing man of some fame in the South Bend area.
http://significantcars.com/cars/1964studebaker/
A '64 GT Hawk is my very favorite Studebaker. The 'roots' of the '53 are evident, yet I like it much better than a '53. I would love their dark green or Bordeaux Red better than this color, and I wish it had the front-half-only vinyl top, but otherwise I'd love this car. The jury's out on the Halibrand wheels, which were a Studebaker accessory in '63 and '64, but any guesses as to what the dealer is asking? I'll post when I get a reply from them.
My guess is $45K.
The 1953's look nice, but many improvements were made in 1955 including more power, more options, better quality (including electrical wiring ), tighter bodies, better bumpers and the best tail lights ever (simple functional elegance).
Many complain about the chrome front end of the 1955s, but I think they would have looked worse than the Packard Hawk if the front was painted instead of chrome and sales did improve over 1954. Granted, the 1953-54s have the pure lines with very little chrome, and look better when they are perfectly clean, but they don't look so good in the winter with salt and grime on them.
I was a little kid when the 1953-1955s were new and could not distinguish between model years, so I thought the 1955s were more expensive cars because the earlier ones were too plain. I ended up with my 1955 because my friend who owned it died in a motorcycle crash, but I liked it so much that I kept it and sold my Avanti. I call this image "Fun Rides."
I agree with what you say about the Larks too. My father had an early 1959 Lark 2 door wagon, and it had a broken A-frame above the front coil spring and broken spot welds in the body. That never should have happened.
There is a movie, Men of Honor, starring Robert DeNiro and Cuba Gooding Jr. where there is a crazy old officer in a tower who talks to himself. When Cuba Gooding arrives on the base and sees this officer, the explanation given is, "The old man has more screws loose than a Studebaker."
Unfortunately, in times when production was at his highest, quality was at its lowest. But imagine what would have happened if GM planned to sell 20% Camaros and ended up selling 80% of total sales instead. That is similar to what happened in 1953 when coupes and hardtops outsold sedans. The production that year was hectic considering that production for the 1953 model year did not begin until January 1953.
The 1953 production convinced Studebaker to build the conveyer across Sample Street to get the bodies to the final assembly buildings. After that, they could build them fast enough, but could not sell them fast enough. That is why I put the factory far down the list of problems that Studebaker had, but quality did suffer during times of high production.
A four-door Cruiser worth more than a 2-door hardtop Daytona? Not on your life. Not ever. Not now.
A fixed-roof Wagonaire bringing a 10% premium over a 'slider'? Absolutely comical. The first thing the numerous folks on the S.D.C. forum ask when a Wagonaire is up for sale, "Is it a slider?".
Where does OCPG get this stuff? Makes me think the whole mag would be good bird-cage liner.
From what I know, convertible>2 door HT>2 door post>wagon>4 door HT>4 door post - with wagons now being cool and rare they have worked their way up.
Farcical.
I tend to believe that Brooks Stevens must have been greatly involved in both designs because they are so similar (especially the roof and glass) and arrived at the same time. Someone would have been complaining if their design had been copied. I noticed that the steering column and PNDLR shift selector seems common to both vehicles. Jeep is celebrating its 70th birthday.
Those Wagoneers are a really timeless design.
It's like what happened to woodies, which are now at the TOP of the price ranges---even above convertibles.
Of course, we shouldn't jump to too many conclusions about value based on the occasional sale of exceptionally nice, or original cars.
Just because Barrett Jackson sells an outstanding car X for $100K, that doesn't mean everyone else's tired, banged up rust bucket of the same type is worth $10 more than yesterday.
Woodies have always been in their own world, IMO. Kind of a mythical romantic status because of their looks, heavy maintenance requirements make survival rates low, and speculators like them.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=300580228269