PDA

View Full Version : 1955 Studebaker Speedster II



EssexExport
11-16-2017, 10:10 AM
Not sure of the motor. Any ideas?

<font size="4">
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxrsz8CD7yc&amp;feature=em-subs_digest

PackardV8
11-16-2017, 10:47 AM
It was at South Bend this year; a modified Stude V8.

jack vines

DEEPNHOCK
11-16-2017, 11:33 AM
289 Stude V8 with a polished Smoljan 3 deuce intake with Rochester carbs on it.

StudeRich
11-16-2017, 12:55 PM
It looks about a 100% better than an Original Speedster, but I fear they may have kept the '55 Nose. :(

Jessie J.
11-16-2017, 01:23 PM
Without the '55 nose, it wouldn't BE a '55 Speedster. Just a shortened '53 or '54.
So it is, but that flaw is easy to fix. :)

Jessie J.
11-16-2017, 01:44 PM
More like a '54,'55,'56,'57 combination. Hood and grill from '54. Name from '55. Fin's from '56 GH. Dash from '57+ Hawk.
Assembled with anachronisms not authentic to the 1955 model year. Highly unlikely Studebaker Corp. would have ever produced this anachronistic hodge-podge.

PackardV8
11-16-2017, 02:07 PM
More like a '54,'55,'56,'57 combination. Hood and grill from '54. Name from '55. Fin's from '56 GH. Dash from '57+ Hawk.
Assembled with anachronisms not authentic to the 1955 model year. Highly unlikely Studebaker Corp. would have ever produced this anachronistic hodge-podge.

As always, your opinions may vary and we'll always defend your right to them. Customs can be very polarizing; some are always going to like it and some are going to hate it. I've examined this car up close; it's beautifully done and I'd be proud to own and drive it.

As to the anachronisms, "Inigo Montoya: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." The custom in question is certainly contemporary with what Studebaker could have and did build in the '55 - 58 era. Maybe a look at the '58 Packard Hawk?

jack vines

EssexExport
11-16-2017, 02:31 PM
​Great, figured some of you would know. Thanks to all.

Commander Eddie
11-16-2017, 03:07 PM
Just for the record, I like the '55 front end.

thunderations
11-16-2017, 03:22 PM
I agree. Iconic mid 50's massive chrome on the front and sides. What I didn't like was the model series after 55, but that's just my opinion and not a complaint or dig at anyone that likes the next series of Studebakers. I was just 8 years old and went to Playland Park in South Bend with my grandfather, a long time Studebaker employee, for the employee preview of the 56's and I asked him why they made the new Studebaker so ugly. Guess kids didn't have to be PC at that time and were allowed to have an opinion.

Just for the record, I like the '55 front end.

63t-cab
11-16-2017, 03:37 PM
Me too, it's about the best style and felt this way at age 13 :!:


Just for the record, I like the '55 front end.

TWChamp
11-16-2017, 03:45 PM
I like everything about the 55 Speedster, except the front end.
If they kept the 53 front, they would have had a perfect car.

rockne10
11-16-2017, 05:16 PM
The nose is '53. It's in the 2018 Madd Doodler calendar for April.

ddub
11-16-2017, 05:33 PM
I never liked the 55 front end, now I own one, go figure.

DougHolverson
11-16-2017, 06:59 PM
I like the '55 guppy grills. That big bulbous bulge in the hood not so much. It ruins the sleekness.

Jessie J.
11-16-2017, 10:50 PM
I actually like this " '55 Speedster ll". But do admit I'd admire this project even more, were it built as a "53", and lost those '56 fins and Hawk sourced parts.
OR was built as a "55" Speedster, with a model year proper '55 grill and no fins.
OR as a 1956 Golden Hawk Speedster, with a year appropriate '56 Hawk hood and grille.
But hey, that's just me, others are welcome to whatever configuration they prefer.

sals54
11-17-2017, 01:21 AM
I love it.
It has the best of all possible worlds.
Convertible
Roadster cockpit
56 Fins
53 Front End
Hawk dash (although the Speedster dash is the MOST beautiful of all the CK dashes)
Scallop Doors
Triple Carbs
Speedster Interior
How could anyone dislike any of that?????

Jessie J.
11-17-2017, 09:00 AM
I like all of the individual elements, just not all mashed together into one vehicle
The conglomeration of fins, scoops, swoops, fender vents, scallops, check marks, plus two-tone, and all liberally sprinkled with jewellery, is just way too overdone for my taste.
They managed to throw in just about everything except the iconic 'toilet seat'.
The beautiful flowing simplicity of the classic '53 shell gets lost under all that elaborate wedding cake foofaraw. But hey, that's just me, others are welcome to pile on as much unneeded confection and additional sprinkles as they like.

JRoberts
11-17-2017, 09:19 AM
I like it just as it is. Gorgeous in my opinion. Better in person

Jessie J.
11-17-2017, 10:06 AM
Been thinking about what other 'bling' could have been added, and the first thing that came to mind, it being a " '55 Speedster" are those popular bumper guard Speedster fog lights. Then add on a pair of the factory optional spotlights, a '56 hood scoop, or a '57 hood overlay. A set of Golden Hawk fender lamps, and a set of the fanciest Golden Hawk side mirrors, Hawk finned rocker panel moldings, curb feelers, stainless door edge protectors, door handle guards, Hawk twin rear antennas, a deck lid mounted center antenna (triple rear antennas + plus a pair of roll up antennas in the front fenders, ya gotta have 'balance' ya know) The deck lid fake spare tire toilet seat AND a Continental kit. Care to add on anything else? :D
Whoops! forgot the '55s big chrome bird hood ornament.

Jett289
11-17-2017, 11:03 AM
Aw Jessie you did forget maybe a visor across the top of the windshield.. hehe .. I can appreciate the hard work and the excellent workmanship that went into this car but when I first looked at it I thought the same way as Jessie .. It just has to much going on and messes up the clean lines . I like the 55 Speedsters the way they are..

studegary
11-17-2017, 07:07 PM
I like it just as it is. Gorgeous in my opinion. Better in person

I had just the opposite opinion. I liked it less when I saw it in person.

sals54
11-17-2017, 07:37 PM
But... it is a tribute car to some degree. I like the fact that he took the time to build it. It does nothing but bring attention to the brand. Nothing wrong with that, in my opinion.

StudeNewby
11-17-2017, 08:37 PM
I like all of the individual elements, just not all mashed together into one vehicle
The conglomeration of fins, scoops, swoops, fender vents, scallops, check marks, plus two-tone, and all liberally sprinkled with jewellery, is just way too overdone for my taste.
They managed to throw in just about everything except the iconic 'toilet seat'.
The beautiful flowing simplicity of the classic '53 shell gets lost under all that elaborate wedding cake foofaraw. But hey, that's just me, others are welcome to pile on as much unneeded confection and additional sprinkles as they like.
Couldn't agree more. But his money, his car.

Devan
11-19-2017, 06:40 PM
I think we are critiquing this car the wrong way, for the wrong reasons. Sals54 said it best. We're giving our opinion of what we would have done, what we would rather see or too many cliche Studebaker parts used. Well geeze, it's a Studebaker! Instead we should be admiring the workmanship that gives it such an authentic look. I give these guys a lot of credit and thanks.This car is every good and as beautiful as any GM or Chrysler '50's 2 seat show cars. I saw this car at the meet this year and was spellbound with the possibilities and what ifs.

tsenecal
11-19-2017, 06:58 PM
I agree with Devan. They didn't build the car to be factory correct. I think it was put together as a concept that could have been produced and sold in that era. The body work and upholstery are beautiful, and I think the mixture of parts from different years looks good together. I have a few ideas in mind for a major body modification on some four door Lark parts cars, when I get a little free time.