Postwar Studebakers

berri

Studepackard had the Catfish

Was that one supercharged?

Mr_Shiftright

I've researched this in the contemporary magazines of the day, and most people were just as horrified then as I am now. But what you say is true---1958 was not the best year for good looks.

As for your examples of ugly the Hudson and Edsel are good competitors, and also the object of ridicule at the time, as was the Packardbaker.

Probably the worst part of the car is that it bears the Packard name, which only adds to the travesty of it. Think of a '58 Edsel with the words Lincoln Continental on it.

jljac

Should any person feel burdened by the ownership of a 1958 Studepackard, I would happily take that trouble off their hands.



Note how the rear window was similar to the Avanti that appeared five years later.

Mr_Shiftright

Believe me, if I inherit one, I will give it to you for free. :P

fintail

For the class of 58 domestics, I'll take a Caddy (the 4 light look was decent on those, and they had nice fins) or a mid range Mopar.

I also wouldn't kick a senior Edsel out of my garage, for some reason.

berri

The Class of 58 I'd go midrange with a DeSoto (no wrecked tail lights like on the Chrysler). Plymouth was alright, but I preferred the 57 and Imperial still looked good. Over at GM I'd go Pontiac since I'm really not a fan of the Olds, Buick or Caddy that year (thought they looked better in 57 but still kind of frumpy - if I had to take one of those I'd go over the top chrome and take the Buick). Impala was also nice and the Corvette was a nice looker too. I agree that the Edsel looked better in the senior longer wheelbase models. Over at Ford I guess I'd default to the Squarebird (like GM, I think Ford stepped backwards stylewise). The independents were really kind of going out of the picture by then except for the Rambler.

Mr_Shiftright

Yep, I'd feel fine being seen in a '58 Cadillac (better than a '59!) or Mopar. I'd rather not have a '58 Corvette because it got junked up with phony louvers and quad headlights and bits of chrome here and there. I'd rather have the cleaner '62 model, with the new 327 V-8. My favorite "Bakers" would be the GT, or maybe a cute 1st generation Lark V-8 convertible.

berri

That 62 Corvette was a very clean looker but you don't hear much about them. I suppose that's because of the 63 Stingray. The 58's were a bit bit overdone, but I always thought they kind of moved Corvette ahead from the previous models in attracting attention and popularity.

fintail

Oh yeah, squarebird, I don't really mind those either.

But if I was going to pick any 1958 model sold in the US, I'd take a MB 300SL roadster.

berri

Those were kind of neat and I know you're an MB man. I think I'd more likely go with some Italian design back then like a Ferrari. They put out some nice bodywork for the 50's. I also kind of liked the looks of that period Citroen DS although I know that one is definitely a take it or leave it for most people.

fintail

The period Ferraris are beautiful and the DS is very cool, but I bet the MB would be easiest to live with out of the three. Fairly modern to drive, fuel injected, and although all three dealer networks barely existed, MB probably had better access to service and parts than the others.

berri

I don't doubt that. I'm not mechanically inclined enough for any of them, so I default to styling. Getting back to Studebaker, I think by 58 they had their deal with MB in place, so your pick is more appropriate for the topic!

fintail

Yep, I like how I can bring up MB in this thread and not be too bad :shades:

To be fair, Stude deserves credit for their venture with the Germans - it was the initial foothold. And if GM did anything bad to Stude, maybe it can be seen as revenge, as MB has IMO done the most damage to Caddy (along with Caddy itself, of course)

jljac

Many Packard fans are upset with the last 1958 cars with the Packard name on them, but the full size 1958 Packard looks much better than the same model of Studebaker AND the Packard had the supercharged 289 motor in it.



I admit that the Nash-Hudson image I posted earlier was actually a 1957 Hash, but I did that to show that Nash treated the Hudson much worse than Studebaker treated the Packard because the Studepackard was the top of the line and had the Packard instrument panel and tail lights. I wish they both could have survived.

lemko

That 1958 Studebaker wouldn't look so bad if they were able to integrate the quad headlights into the fenders rather than having those awkward tacked-on pods.

berri

This one's going to be a hard sell. Not only the quad headlight pods, but also the way the rear fins look. I think I'll go with Uplander's 64 instead if I'm picking a late model Studebaker sedan. My fav's of that era would be a Hawk GT or a gold colored Avanti. Mid fiftes, a conestaga station wagon.

jljac

That 1958 Studebaker wouldn't look so bad if they were able to integrate the quad headlights into the fenders rather than having those awkward tacked-on pods.

I was just making the point that Studebaker did as well as they could with the Packard line given the limited money they had and that I believe that the Packard was the better of the two. I would love to own that black Studepackard I posted, but the 1958 Studebaker line does not interest me at all (except for the Golden Hawk, which was also supercharged that year).

Production of both models was so low in 1958 that they had a lot of time to put them together right, so the quality was good too.

Mr_Shiftright

It's not a Packard. It's a Studebaker. There's not a Packard nut or bolt on it.

jljac

It's not a Packard. It's a Studebaker. There's not a Packard nut or bolt on it.

I am certain that Uplander guy can confirm that the Packard instrument panel was modified for use in the 1957-58s and the tail lights were also used. They have the model dashboard at SASCO and they still have many tail lights in stock.

There was a story in Turning Wheels earlier this year about all the Packard tail lights they sent to South Bend after the Packard factory was closed. Compare the image below to the 1958 Studepackard I posted earlier. They are the same.

Mr_Shiftright

Okay, it's a Studebaker with Packard tail lights then. But please, for the sake of history, let's not call them Packards. This demeans not only Packard, but Studebaker as well, to pretend. It's like saying "I'm not good enough on my own, so please call me something else".

It's a Studebaker. That's just the truth and what's wrong with that?

uplanderguy

The taillights are indeed '56 Clipper, and the instruments are from '56 Packards as well. They were registered as a separate make for 1957 and 1958. Everyone knows they're really Studebakers. Ironically, I've pretty regularly seen on eBay that condition-for-condition, bodystyle-for-bodystyle, the '57 and '58 will often bring more than a '55 or '56.

jljac

Here is a partial photo of the 1958 instrument panel, the best I can do on short notice.



The rest of the article is of a very nice 1958 Packard Station Wagon I would be proud to to own.
http://stationwagonforums.com/forums/gallery/showimage.php?i=3410&c=17

Here is the 1956 Packard instrument panel.



Studebaker shortened the width and put it in the 1957-58 Studebaker Packards. 1958 was the last year of the full-size Studebakers and the best of the last had the name Packard on them.

uplanderguy

Ironically, I've pretty regularly seen on eBay that condition-for-condition, bodystyle-for-bodystyle, the '57 and '58 will often bring more than a '55 or '56.

I'd exclude the Four-Hundred and Caribbean from that statement, though.

uplanderguy

Speaking only personally, I could enjoy a supercharged '57 Packard wagon. I like the trim size and low beltline. It'd have to have a roof rack and be pained white over lilac. Still, as a function of my age probably as much as anything (53), I like the Studebaker line of '63 and '64 the best although I now own a '66.

uplanderguy

Actually, Merc and Dodge had tacked-on quad headlights...I think Merc chromed their 'extensions'.

fintail

The MB units weren't tacked on extensions made to update an old design on the cheap - they were how the company adapted to DOT regs. The rest of the world W111 fintails had large composite lights, probably the first large scale production car (1959) to wear these. These were a no-go from our federal overlords for eons, so a quad light replacement was made. This is one of the few cases where IMO the US-spec lights look nice.

As it was designed:



As it was adapted for US regs:

uplanderguy

I meant "Mercury", not "Mercedes". Generational thing I guess!

My hometown Stude-Packard-MB dealer to this day says "MER-si-deez".

Mr_Shiftright

He could be accidentally correct. Maybe that's how they used to pronounce the young girl's name in the early 1900s. I think she was Swiss.

Yeah, the Mercedes/Studebaker cooperation was probably a good thing for Mercedes, as it did give them a foothold in America. And it wasn't long after Studebaker's collapse that Mercedes really started to take off in sales, with their new line of more modern looking cars for 1968 (sorry, fintail, no offense).

I can't say whether there was mutual benefit for Studebaker. I suppose the appearance of the Mercedes cars in the showroom might have given the Studebaker buyers some confidence that they weren't going to buy a soon-to-be orphan car. But in the late 50s, there wasn't the sense of doom in the air that one found for Studebaker later on in the 1960s, when everyone knew the company was dying.

uplanderguy

...a Sunbeam Tiger pulling a supercharged Avanti! 41-sec video here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z99ouA0B65Y

I love the Avanti in black, but at $35.50 extra when new, they didn't build many.

Ironically, my small-hometown Stude-MB dealer (not a suburb; borough population in 1960, 8,800) took on Simca and Sunbeam in the mid'60's.

Mr_Shiftright

Very dangerous thing to do. The Sunbeam is way past its limits in chassis and braking. Good way to wreck two very nice cars.

uplanderguy

"Somebody who knows somebody who knows..." the owner says it's a Ford 260 and way-overbuilt for strength, but it looks scary to me, for sure.

texases

Somebody should tell the owner it doesn't matter what engine it has, the chassis isn't set up to tow anything that size.

fintail

Ah that makes more sense. And yeah, a 58 Mercury was a pretty shameless tack-on too.

The girl behind "Mercedes" was Austrian.

jljac

Actually, Merc and Dodge had tacked-on quad headlights...I think Merc chromed their 'extensions'.

It is my recollection that Chrysler-Dodge-Plymouth started the horizontal quad headlight craze in 1957 and that the other automakers followed the style in 1958. Studebaker had a harder time adopting to the new style.

I said horizontal headlights because a few other models may have had vertical quad headlights before that (Rambler), but Plymouth was a huge sales success in 1957 because of the quad headlight look and you could see the Dodges on Highway Patrol with Broderick Crawford every week .

Mr_Shiftright

I would describe the driver otherwise, but I want to be polite.

berri

The auto industry was pushing the change to quad headlights in the mid fifties. Chrysler bet it would happen for 57, but some states hadn't approved them yet. Virgil Exner's designs pretty much accommodated either quads or combined headlight parking light to look like them for the new 57's. The exception was Imperial and personally I thought the single light version looked a bit dorky and overly ornate. Some high line 57 Mopars had quad headlights and those that didn't still looked kind of like it making them instantly seem very modern compared to the competition. GM was doing a big facelift for 58, so their 57's didn't need to accommodate them. I suspect GM didn't think they'd be approved by all states in 57. I don't know about Ford. Obviously the 58 Lincoln's were a new design with canted quads. The 57 Ford and Merc styles didn't readily accommodate them. The 58 Ford got a new T-bird like look grill that did alright with quads, but Merc seemed to just be a bit of a hack job. In retrospect it may seem kind of silly that quad headlights were such a big deal back then, but then square headlights came on in the 70's and today its all sorts of different lenses instead. So I think headlight design can affect design popularity in vehicles.

Mr_Shiftright

i think stacking the quads is always a mistake, but if you have a car with horizontal quads and a low, long grill, this could work nicely.

bhill2

i think stacking the quads is always a mistake, but if you have a car with horizontal quads and a low, long grill, this could work nicely.

PLEASE, Shifty. Don't tell me that you think the '65-'67 GTO was ugly! I spent those years of my youth with my tongue hanging out.

fintail

The stacked lights on 65-67 Fords weren't bad either, and the middle-upper MB of the period weren't exactly eyesores too. Diagonal stacked lights (58-60 Lincoln) were the messy ones.

uplanderguy

How 'bout '63-67 full-size Pontiacs? Beautiful cars IMO. Blows out of the water, my general avoidance of enormous cars. The vertical lights look great on them I think.

berri

I agree that Pontiac probably wore stacked headlights the best. Mid 60's Ford and Plymouth not as much. Then there are the monstrosity examples like the 57 Hash and the 58-60 Lincoln set ups.

Mr_Shiftright

I didn't say cars with stacked lights were "ugly"--and I have to admit the long low grill on the GTO certainly de-emphasize the "stack".

lemko

Quad "tack-on" Mercury



Two headlamp Mercury

lemko

The 1965-68 Cadillacs also look great with the stacked quads. Here's a 1967 model:



My 2007 Cadillac DTS has sort of a stacked headlamp look that is reminiscent of the 1965-68 Cadillacs.

berri

Dang - that Merc's got bling!

uplanderguy

One thing I always liked about Fleetwoods back then was the lack of a side molding right smack down the middle (although someone put one on that '67), and the individual "FLEETWOOD" letters at the bottoms of the front fenders (missing from the car in the photo). I disliked when in '74 Caddy started using a script "Fleetwood" nameplate, like the deVilles, and in '76 disliked it even more when they did a 'mock' individual-lettered Fleetwood nameplate, on a body-colored background so it was a one-piece nameplate that went on the car.

The only real negative to a Fleetwood back then in my mind, was that they reminded me of 'funeral automobiles', unlike lesser Cads.

bhill2

Dang - that Merc's got bling!

Ah yes, the classic Mercury Turnpike Cruiser. It showed all of the tasteful restraint of the '58 Buick. Power everything; I think the ashtray smoked your cigarette for you.

uplanderguy

If anyone doubts how much $$ value is added to Lark pricing with the supercharged engine, here's a cute little example:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1963-Studebaker-Lark-R2-Supercharged-Muscle-Car-/- - 200664855574?pt=US_Cars_Trucks&hash=item2eb88eb416

I'm doubting a low-line two-door sedan like that would bring $10 or 10.5K without that engine. (Don't get me wrong; I like '63 Larks!)

It was built before the complete "Super" package was available, but I'd have to put the front fender "Avanti Supercharged" badges on this car. They were sent out to dealers and dealers could contact existing owners and have them put on their (earlier) cars. I have two photos of my '63 R1 Lark Daytona from Sept. '64 and the "Avanti Powered" badges are on the car, and it was built in Sept. '62.

fintail

Visited the little MB museum at the factory in Alabama today, saw this little pic in a history display, thought some here might like it

uplanderguy

Thanks for posting. The Studes in the photo are '62 models.

Can anybody read the wording between "Lark" and "Hawk" on the windows, above "Mercedes Benz Sales"? I can't.