I spotted an (insert obscure car name here) classic car today! (Archived)

roadburner

Here's the only picture I found:

I'd hope the crappy side molding is self-adhesive...

Also going across the block are: "Triumph motors & transmissions - carburetors, manifolds, seats, wheel covers, bumpers, rear end, door panels, etc. - engine stand - jack stands - tools & tool boxes"
Yep, better steer clear...

stickguy

Heck no. Just buy it all as a package, load it in a trailer, and bring it home. Nyou want all those extras.

Mr_Shiftright

It's a car you'd want to drive first.

xwesx

roadburner said:

Here's the only picture I found:

I'd hope the crappy side molding is self-adhesive...

Also going across the block are: "Triumph motors & transmissions - carburetors, manifolds, seats, wheel covers, bumpers, rear end, door panels, etc. - engine stand - jack stands - tools & tool boxes"
Yep, better steer clear...

Yeah, especially if they are all going as a single lot.

explorerx4

In the parking lot at work today. Definitely not stock.

ab348

This 1955 Studebaker President for sale in Texas strikes me as very handsome. I have seen the really gaudy-looking ones in green and yellow, pink and charcoal, etc., and those really don't appeal to me that much, but I find myself admiring this:

1955 Studebaker President

The price seems rather reasonable all things considered, if it as nice as it seems.

uplanderguy

That's a President, and the gaudy ones you mention are the President "Speedster". The only thing I really like about the Speedsters are the leather seats and the Speedster-only instrument panel, totally different than all the other Studes although with no glovebox!

I'm glad this red '55 doesn't have the foglights, which clutter the looks I think. In fact, I'd rather it didn't have the back-up lights, but it does!

I really don't know a whole lot about those cars and what they've brought in hardtop guise, but I can tell the seats and door panels of this one have been reupholstered with non-authentic material, as I'm sure you've probably surmised.

From the underside pic, it was apparently blue at some point.

I'll be curious to see if this car sells. It is a pretty car.

Michaell

explorerx4 said:

In the parking lot at work today. Definitely not stock.

That's sharp!

ab348

uplanderguy said:

I really don't know a whole lot about those cars and what they've brought in hardtop guise, but I can tell the seats and door panels of this one have been reupholstered with non-authentic material, as I'm sure you've probably surmised.

From the underside pic, it was apparently blue at some point.

I'll be curious to see if this car sells. It is a pretty car.

I figured it probably was reupholstered, based on the texture of the material, although this seemed tasteful enough. I have no idea what it should have for upholstery. The blue underbody made me assume it was that shade originally. The red looks better to me. These must be pretty rare cars.

explorerx4

@Michaell,
The car has a nice stance, rear slightly higher than the front.
Nice chrome, GT fog lights, polished(?) front anti sway bar, long tube headers, disks all the way around, large dual exhaust pipes.
Red interior has aftermarket gauges in stock bezels and a 4 speed with a cue ball shift knob.
Just some quick observations.

iluvmysephia1

That is a righteous looking red Moo-stang fastback.

uplanderguy

Re.: the TR-7--I always thought that Chevy cribbed the rear-end styling of the first Cavaliers from the TR-7. I haven't looked online, but I remember the taillights and surround being almost identical. I remember driving around the Lordstown plant with a friend of mine on a Sunday, trying to sneak a peak of the new J-cars before they were out. Security actually stopped us, but let us go after we told them our goofy 20-something goal. I did see two parked along the building, fenced-in, and right away, I thought "TR-7" when I saw the rear end/taillights.

Mr_Shiftright

uplanderguy said:

That's a President, and the gaudy ones you mention are the President "Speedster". The only thing I really like about the Speedsters are the leather seats and the Speedster-only instrument panel, totally different than all the other Studes although with no glovebox!

I'm glad this red '55 doesn't have the foglights, which clutter the looks I think. In fact, I'd rather it didn't have the back-up lights, but it does!

I really don't know a whole lot about those cars and what they've brought in hardtop guise, but I can tell the seats and door panels of this one have been reupholstered with non-authentic material, as I'm sure you've probably surmised.

From the underside pic, it was apparently blue at some point.

I'll be curious to see if this car sells. It is a pretty car.

There's a lot I don't like about this car, once I looked over the photos closely. It's strikes me as a budget restoration, at best. Note the overspray, the old and tired chassis and suspension, wrong upholstery, rattle-can engine bay, color change, filthy underneath.

Chrome looks look though, and there doesn't appear to be rust.

I'd say $10K overpriced.

uplanderguy

With production orders (build sheets) so prevalent in the Studebaker hobby, people (not all, of course) do tend to want the car to be a reasonable facsimile of how it was originally built.

Mr_Shiftright

Studebaker buyers are generally known to be sober buyers so I can't imagine any knowledgeable Baker-head paying that much for this car.

imidazol97

Mr_Shiftright said:

knowledgeable Baker-head

LOL

Mr_Shiftright

A term of endearment I assure you.

uplanderguy

I find the first thing people surmise about owning a Studebaker is that parts are non-existent. I wanted a Stude when I first bought one in '88 because I remembered them and they were different, but I quickly became very pleased with the parts situation. Lots of NOS exists, particularly for '60's Studes, and there is a ton of repro trim available. For my '63, I could count on one hand the number of chrome or exterior trim pieces that I couldn't find for the car, either NOS or repro...and reasonably priced. I even bought NOS soft interior pieces at South Bend, although those are now owned by a separate vendor away from South Bend.

fintail

Spotted a small bumper BMW 2002 today.

texases

Saw an MGA driving (slowly) on the way home.  Nice looking. 

uplanderguy

This is the Riv my friend just bought. He's supposed to receive it via truck this weekend.

I'm excited for him, and it is a sharp car.

http://www.diversionmotors.com/1361_63_Riviera.html

Mr_Shiftright

One of my favorite cars. This one looks pretty good, older cosmetic resto looks like, with some age to the chassis underneath (but clean). I'd grade it high #2, low 2. Nice "driver".

stickguy

Certainly has style. What did that sell for?

uplanderguy

Well, I don't know exactly what it went for, but I believe it was around twenty.

uplanderguy

The red-on-red is unusual IMHO. He wasn't really locked into a color combo, and neither am I when I've bought an old car. In fact, in old cars I often joke that sometimes I'm color-blind. I'll see an old car and tell somebody I saw it, and remember the year and make and body style and not remember the color!

The car is authentic-looking (all nameplates, emblems, correct wheelcovers, correct interior seat trim and door panels, etc.) which is a very big thing to me, personally.

Mr_Shiftright

Price sounds about right.

imidazol97

That's a great Riviera. The interior red is a true red like a lipstick red. IIRCC that was a popular color for interiors at that time.

uplanderguy

He is tickled to get it. It'll be his first old car. He's a retired guy and has the time to enjoy it.

stickguy

20 grand sounds quite reasonable to me if nice.

Mr_Shiftright

It's about market correct for the condition of a "clean driver". It would take a lot to make it a show car, so that's the difference. A fair price for both parties IMO.

texases

While I know the wire wheel hubcaps were factory, I'd rather have plain ones, I guess there were no other options in '63.

Mr_Shiftright

There were two options listed --the aforementioned spinners for an additional (gasp!) $75 and something called "Super Deluxe Wheel Covers" in cast aluminum for $65. You could also buy the optional "litter basket" for $2.50!

uplanderguy

For all the positive press those cars have received for decades, I think they're pretty affordable compared to some other stuff. He chose one over four-speed '63 and '64 Impala SS's he had looked at for price, and then realized that he really liked the Rivs.

Mr_Shiftright

Riv is a much nicer car. You don't want to be rowing around a gearshift on a huge car like a '64 Impala.

uplanderguy

The brochure shows that the heater/defroster on the Riv could be "deleted for reduced cost", LOL!

The car has the optional Custom interior, which would've been leather seating with the woodgrained door panels. The back seat looks like leather to me, but of course I can't tell for sure and typically leather doesn't hold up very well over the years.

sda

Two lonely finds today, on the same property. I would have looked at them closer, but there were

warning signs all over the place and it was creepy. 67 Buick (Wildcat?) and pre 73 Triumph Stag.

texases

Just waitin' for the owner to start that restoration project he's been planning...

sda

uplanderguy said:

The brochure shows that the heater/defroster on the Riv could be "deleted for reduced cost", LOL!

The car has the optional Custom interior, which would've been leather seating with the woodgrained door panels. The back seat looks like leather to me, but of course I can't tell for sure and typically leather doesn't hold up very well over the years.

The brochure shows that the heater/defroster on the Riv could be "deleted for reduced cost", LOL!


That reminds me of the 63 Olds Dynamic 88 my parents bought in 65. We were in St Petersburg, FL and the original owner had special ordered the car with factory a/c and heater/defroster delete. He was an elderly gentleman and has doctor ordered him not to drive any more. I think the car had 2000 miles on it when my parents bought it. We like to froze when we moved to New Orleans and the car didn't have a heater.

andre1969

That Riv is a sweet looking car. Normally, I'm not too crazy about red on bigger and more luxurious cars (I think more of a burgundy/metallic suits them better), but that Riv is still sporty enough to pull it off. Plus, it's a nice, deep red, and not that tomato/rental car red that seems more common these days.

Looks like it's in great shape, too!

ab348

texases said:

Just waitin' for the owner to start that restoration project he's been planning...

"Nah, they aren't for sale! I'm gonna fix them up someday..."

I think I may have mentioned an acquaintance locally has actually restored a Stag. Why, nobody is sure. He is on his second engine rebuild as the first one didn't work right. The bills must be just enormous.

stickguy

a Stags is an odd thing to see in the woods someplace in S. Carolina!

I always liked those, but have never driven one. Or even sat in one! And no real desire to own one.

ab348

That Riv is very nice. For years they were undervalued in the collector car market for some reason. They were a very high quality car for the era.

Re the wheel covers: I had the optional spinner wheel covers on my '64 Skylark. The center was a diecast piece that was then plated and ornamented. The things weighed a ton and with age the wheel covers liked to fly off the wheels on turns because they didn't have anything other than the usual fiction fit springy tabs on the inside to hold them in place. They really needed something like what the wire wheel cover cars had with a special adapter that held them on. .

stever

sda said:

Two lonely finds today, on the same property. I would have looked at them closer, but there were warning signs all over the place and it was creepy. 67 Buick (Wildcat?) and pre 73 Triumph Stag.

Spotted this in a sheep pasture today.


Also passed a Prowler.

fintail

Today spotted a 67 Cougar and a W201 190D.

ab348

Fascinating history here of a link between Studebaker and Datsun that almost happened. This was all news to me.

http://datsunforum.com/1571-2/

Mr_Shiftright

Triumph had full corporate access to the Buick V-8 but for some inexplicable reason chose that abomination of a V-8 instead. We British car fans are all still wondering about that.

hpmctorque

The Buick V6 of that era wasn't very good either, although I wouldn't go so far as to call it an abomination.

Mr_Shiftright

The Buick V-8 was okay, though. It got improved over time by the Brits. The Stag V-8 was awful.

uplanderguy

Fascinating history here of a link between Studebaker and Datsun that almost happened. This was all news to me.

Thanks for posting. Stu Chapman, who ran Advertising at Studebaker in Hamilton, Ontario, those last couple years has written about this before too. I am amazed that I could not find a single basic error of fact in the Hagerty article--hats off to them. Too often, IMHO, journeyman "auto writers" (and I even use the term "journeyman" loosely) write stuff where in the first four paragraphs I can find, three, four, five errors of the most basic fact and then, of course, since it's in print, it gets repeated as fact. Ugh.

uplanderguy

One other thing re.: the Nissan-Studebaker deal that was 'almost'--I bought a file of correspondence a few years back, between a Kent State professor and Studebaker--he was a vocal supporter those last few years and was a letter-writer. I'm looking at an original letter from R. H. Guthrie of Mudge, Stern, Baldwin, & Todd, 20 Broad Street, New York 5, NY, in response to a letter the prof apparently wrote them. It reads:

December 4, 1963

Dear Mr. McCormick,

I want you to know that it is a pleasure to receive a letter such as yours in relation to the Studebaker Company (sic). You can be sure that we are doing our best with the Company. If we receive sufficient support such as you demonstrate you can be certain we will solve all our problems.

With kindest personal regards, I remain
Yours sincerely,
R.H. Guthrie

At the upper-right of the letterhead, it reads: 'Richard M. Nixon, Counsel (Member of California Bar Only)'