PDA

View Full Version : Studebaker story in today's Toronto Star



Stu Chapman
01-05-2013, 07:28 PM
For those of you in southern Ontario who have access to the Toronto Star newspaper, in today's Wheels section is a half page article which I'm sure you will enjoy. It's on page W8. You can also access the story on the web at www.wheels.ca. In the box "Learn more" type in "Studebaker" and you will find the article. While there are a few inaccuracies, this article will certainly generate much interest about Studebaker.

Stu Chapman

avantilover
01-05-2013, 07:52 PM
Lovely piece Stu, gee if only Studebaker hadn't purchased Packard we may have had funds for better cars LOL.

Stu Chapman
01-05-2013, 07:56 PM
Lovely piece Stu, gee if only Studebaker hadn't purchased Packard we may have had funds for better cars LOL.

Actually John, Packard purchased Studebaker.
Stu

BobPalma
01-05-2013, 07:56 PM
Interesting, Stu; thanks for the link. Too bad they didn't ask you to edit it; it's clearly implied that 1960-1964 Studebaker convertibles were not assembled in Hamilton :woot: and, of course, their entire reference to the Packard merger is exactly backwards from what actually happened!

Nonetheless, worth a read. :) BP

avantilover
01-05-2013, 08:20 PM
Actually John, Packard purchased Studebaker.
Stu

Thanks Stu, I knew that and was being a little Sarcastic which is hard to do in print.

2R5
01-05-2013, 08:22 PM
Thanks for posting Stu.

2moredoors
01-05-2013, 08:43 PM
Thanks Stu. Good read even though they did mix up the Packard deal.

Stu Chapman
01-05-2013, 09:59 PM
Interesting, Stu; thanks for the link. Too bad they didn't ask you to edit it; it's clearly implied that 1960-1964 Studebaker convertibles were not assembled in Hamilton :woot: and, of course, their entire reference to the Packard merger is exactly backwards from what actually happened!

Nonetheless, worth a read. :) BP

As I noted, there were inaccuracies but I didn't feel it necessary to point these out to our members who will obviously pick them up. Frankly, I don't remember the 1979 interview from which I was quoted, but then that was 34 years ago. It's great that major media still recognizes us.
Stu Chapman

BobPalma
01-06-2013, 05:38 AM
As I noted, there were inaccuracies but I didn't feel it necessary to point these out to our members who will obviously pick them up. Frankly, I don't remember the 1979 interview from which I was quoted, but then that was 34 years ago. It's great that major media still recognizes us.
Stu Chapman

Stu: Did Hamilton assemble "Lark" convertibles all five of the later years? (1960-1961-1962-1963-1964) :cool: BP

Stu Chapman
01-06-2013, 03:03 PM
Stu: Did Hamilton assemble "Lark" convertibles all five of the later years? (1960-1961-1962-1963-1964) :cool: BP


Is this a trick question Bob? I joined the company in 63 and we were building Daytona convertibles in 63 and 64. I believe we built Lark convertibles in 60, 61 and 62.
Stu Chapman

Stu Chapman
01-07-2013, 08:57 AM
Stu: Did Hamilton assemble "Lark" convertibles all five of the later years? (1960-1961-1962-1963-1964) :cool: BP


I decided to go back and do a thorough comparison with the web-based story and the actual version that was published in the Toronto Star and realized that, in the editing process, certain material was removed. While the erroneous reference to convertibles not being built in Hamilton was still there, they had in fact removed the reference to Packard buying Studebaker. The published story still incorrectly refers to the last car being a "Lark" Cruiser. However the general public would likely never know the exact details so we should be happy we're still receiving this amount of publicity.
Stu Chapman

BobPalma
01-07-2013, 09:00 AM
Is this a trick question Bob? I joined the company in 63 and we were building Daytona convertibles in 63 and 64. I believe we built Lark convertibles in 60, 61 and 62.
Stu Chapman

No, Stu; not a trick; an honest question. I know you weren't there earlier, but thought you'd know if they had built convertibles there all five of those model years. (I would think so, but didn't know for sure and was just curious.) :D BP