PDA

View Full Version : 62 and 63 sedans 2-door



hotrodstude
05-29-2009, 03:55 AM
ok i survived the 60's but i just notice something about 62 and 63 larks 2-door sedans the doors are different and the windshield is different. is this not so? am i having a flashback? how about the front fenders? will they inter change. the doors on the 62's look like the doors on the 59-61?

jimmijim8
05-29-2009, 07:57 AM
Fenders are interchangeable. The doors differ from 62-63 because of the different style windshields. jimmijim

41 Frank
05-29-2009, 08:03 AM
Up to and including 62 the Lark used a shortened version of the sedan body which had been around since the mid fifties.Starting with the 63's the wraparound windshield was done away with by redesigning the cowl area and the bulky B and C pillars were done away with also.

Warren Webb
05-29-2009, 08:15 AM
Front end sheet metal is all the same. Everything related to the "greenhouse" (roof area) is unique to the 63 only. 64's had a different windshield (except convertibles & wagons) with different roof stampings. Another question to "why did they do that when money for tooling was so scarce".

60 Lark convertible
61 Champ
62 Daytona convertible
63 G.T. R-2,4 speed
63 Avanti (2)
66 Daytona Sport Sedan

Dick Steinkamp
05-29-2009, 09:28 AM
quote:Originally posted by Warren Webb

Front end sheet metal is all the same. Everything related to the "greenhouse" (roof area) is unique to the 63 only. 64's had a different windshield (except convertibles & wagons) with different roof stampings. Another question to "why did they do that when money for tooling was so scarce".



The 64 (through 66) roof is lower than the 63. They probably should have "chopped the top" when they did the other changes to the 63.

I had one guy ask me if I raised the roof on my '63 [:0] :(

Dick Steinkamp
Bellingham, WA

http://i706.photobucket.com/albums/ww63/dstnkmp/pics075-1-1.jpg

63t-cab
05-29-2009, 07:57 PM
So Dick does that mean 64-66 door upper frames are not the same as 63s on sedans?

Joseph R. Zeiger

showbizkid
05-30-2009, 12:12 AM
That's right - way different contours.


[img=left]http://members.cox.net/clarknovak/lark.gif[/img=left]

Clark in San Diego
'63 F2/Lark Standard
http://studeblogger.blogspot.com
www.studebakersandiego.com

Bill Pressler
05-30-2009, 04:06 PM
I remember reading that it cost Studebaker less money to tool the '64 from the '63, than it did to tool the '63 from the '62. Although I like '63's and '64's both better than '62's, they sure got more 'bang for the buck' with the '64 facelift.

I have also heard folks say it's too bad they couldn't have moved the '64 styling up one year, and not have the '63 styling. I disagree with which year should have been done away with (!), but I understand what they mean.

Bill Pressler
Kent, OH
'63 Lark Daytona Skytop R1
'64 Daytona Hardtop

8E45E
05-30-2009, 08:22 PM
quote:Originally posted by Bill Pressler

I remember reading that it cost Studebaker less money to tool the '64 from the '63, than it did to tool the '63 from the '62.


One must keep in mind, a major portion of the 1963 styling budget was alloted to create the Wagonaire. The split two-piece tailgate had become rather clunky and old-hat by 1962, and a modern crank-down window-into-the-tailgate was sorely needed to keep the station wagon model up-to-date. Again, a case of Studebaker being forced to 'keep up' with the rest of the domestic automakers. It's hard to believe now, as most SUV's have a two piece tailgate, but it was really truly old-fashioned by 1963!

Craig