When was 289 V8 first available in the Lark???

[avantilover]

Recently, I replied to new member Michelle stating that the 289 engine was available in 1960, Studerich sent a PM suggesting it wasn't until 1962.

I have information from my club member's data book that a 289 was optional in 1960 with engine numbers commencing (US) P70501 and (CAN) PC2201.

Was this correct? I'm sure that Rich knows his stuff and I can advise Daryl to correct his data if necessary.
It's probable that Daryl typed out this data for the Hawk then added it to the Lark pages in error.

Thoughs/comments

[8E45E]

It was an option for Fleet use on 1960 Larks (i.e. Marshals), and then made available to 'anyone' starting in 1961.

Craig

[Skip Lackie]

Let me try to give a qualified answer. Others who know more about the subject can correct me. I used service letters, parts books, and anything else I could find to prepare the V8 serial number list:

http://www.studebakerdriversclub.com/V8EngineID.asp

I could find no record whatsoever that 289s were installed in any 1959 Stude passenger car, nor in any 1960 car model except Hawks. There ARE plenty of records that indicate 289s were installed in 1961 Cruisers and police Marshals. That said, rumors persist that a few 289s were installed in 59 and 60 Larks by special order, though no proof has been provided to my knowledge. Stude had a reputation for being willing to make special exceptions to the catalog to make a sale, so it may very well have happened in a few instances. After all, they were still building 289s for 1959 and 60 trucks.

[8E45E]

I could no find no record whatsoever that 289s were installed in any 1959 Stude passenger car, nor in any 1960 car model except Hawks.

Here's a '60 that had a factory installed 289. http://forum.studebakerdriversclub.c...556-New-Member

Craig

[BobPalma]

Yep; if you look at Option #90 in Post #17 to the thread Craig linked, the issue of any 1960 Larks being built with a 289 is decided once and for all. BP

[Skip Lackie]

My analysis was based exclusively on what info was available in factory literature, most of which, of course was printed very early in the model year. That material did include the 289 in police cars, and by extension, fleet sales. It would be interesting to know if/when the factory decided to actually list the 289 as a formally available option on non-fleet/police cars. Listing it as option 90 with other stuff implies it was a special order, and not in the catalog.

[BobPalma]

My analysis was based exclusively on what info was available in factory literature, most of which, of course was printed very early in the model year. That material did include the 289 in police cars, and by extension, fleet sales. It would be interesting to know if/when the factory decided to actually list the 289 as a formally available option on non-fleet/police cars. Listing it as option 90 with other stuff implies it was a special order, and not in the catalog.

True, Skip: If you remember, "Skinny's" car, the one referenced in Craig's post, was indeed a police car. It was one of several ordered by the Milwaukee PD, IIRC; not a retail sale to Joe Customer.

Cousin George Krem was following this situatiion closely in 1960 when his father ordered their new power kit 1960 Lark DeLuxe V8 2-door mid-year. At the time (which is to say in early spring 1960), I remember George and his father later lamenting the fact that Dad had not waited a month or two before ordering his new '60, because the 289 had become a police option in the interim.

They were sure they could have "got 'er done" and ordered a 289 had it been available on the day he ordered his new '60, despite Larry the Cable Guy having yet to be born...but, alas, it had not been, to the best of their knowledge. BP

[Skinnys Garage]

As Skip indicates, my '60 Marshal brochure (printed in '59) doesn't show the 289 as an option. I'm not sure when or if it was an "official" option, but the 56 289 powered Marshals for Milwaukee were ordered in March of '60. This information along with many other interesting facts about the cars are found in the special deviation permit #4664 listed on the production order.

I'll try to get the 7 page special deviation papers scanned and posted to my '60 Marshal update thread.

http://forum.studebakerdriversclub.com/showthread.php?22720-60-Marshal-Updates

[52-fan]

Recently, I replied to new member Michelle stating that the 289 engine was available in 1960, Studerich sent a PM suggesting it wasn't until 1962.
Thoughs/comments

I imagine that Studerich was refering to the full flow 289 becoming available in 1962.

[mookandairin]

All these Larks,is mine a regal Lark? or just a Lark? 1960 2 dr hp?

[StudeRich]

Well I think that we all know that what Skip says is true, as a GENERAL rule for 99.9% of privately ordered and owned Larks as advertised, the 289 was not available in the U.S. until 1962 except as an option, ordered in ONLY '61 Cruisers, or Standard in '60 V-8 Hawks and '61-'64 Hawks. End of story.

Hawks were also not available with a 289 in 1959, but strangely they were Standard in all 1959 (Scotsman and deleted) Studebaker "C" Cab V-8 Trucks.

Available to special people and for special purposes, as extra specially ordered, of course as always, "Studebaker aimed to please"!

[StudeRich]

All these Larks,is mine a regal Lark? or just a Lark? 1960 2 dr hp?

Hardtops and Convertibles were not available as "Deluxes", only as Regals. The only exception was in 1962 when you could get a "Regal" with a bench seat and no Daytona rear quarter trim, OR a "Daytona" with the trim, simulated Walnut, Cruiser Dash and Bucket seats with Console.

Excepting Sherwood Egbert of course, who could have whatever he wanted!

OPPS, I found this post where you show pics of your car: http://forum.studebakerdriversclub.c...gress&p=573829
So based on it being a 2 door SEDAN, not a Hardtop, you do not have a Regal, it's a Deluxe.

The Lark type 2 Dr. Sedans were not built in luxury type models except in '63 and '65-'66.
I think Studebaker found that most of the lowest priced 2 Door Sedan Cars were used as "Business Coupes" in Company Fleets and for mundane uses not requiring fancy stuff like padded dashes, carpet, nice upholstery and stainless or chrome trim.

[Skip Lackie]

Three more or less unrelated thoughts
1. I'll have to add the fact that the 289 became available in Marshals late in the 60 model year to the engine table.
2. I've always found it truly weird that the year (1959) that the 289 wasn't available in any Stude car was the same (and only) year that the 289 was the standard engine in all Stude trucks (as Rich notes).
3. Studebaker spelled it both marshall and marshal at different times.

Truly a strange company.

[2R2]

Regarding the '59 trucks - the 289 was the only V8 available on the Deluxe models; the 259 was available on the Scottsman trucks. Of course, Scottsmans were also available with the 170 and 245 sixes.

[StudeRich]

/Cut/2. I've always found it truly weird that the year (1959) that the 289 wasn't available in any Stude car was the same (and only) year that the 289 was the standard engine in all Stude trucks (as Rich notes).
3. Studebaker spelled it both marshall and marshal at different times.
Truly a strange company.

I don't think of it quite that way. To me, I think there had to be some reason for most all of what they did, were they all the BEST decisions? History would prove, not always!

In this case a reason could be ASSUMED, that maybe the goal in '59 was to keep the 289 in Production, so it could easily be used later on, and in "special" cars like we found, such as Fleets, Taxis, Fire/Ambulance, Police and special orders.