Woulda, coulda, shoulda? Maybe Studebak should have kept the '1963' body style till the end instead?

[1962larksedan]

After reading the 'Hemmings' thread here about that 1963 Regal in Ohio and after finding that 1963 Cruiser in the Phx area for Brian who lost his first one to a crash; I suspect Studebaker may have been better off continuing the '1963' body through the end instead of spending the $$ to develop the 1964-66 style----------especially in light of the Wagonaire keeping said styling aft of the front clip.

Any thoughts?

[2R5]

Personally I think the '64 style is one of the best looking Studebakers ever made , especially the HTs

[SN-60]

Personally I think the '64 style is one of the best looking Studebakers ever made , especially the HTs

Agreed!...The 'stubby' look disappeared on the '64's.

[warrlaw1]

Just read the Classic Car convertible feature and the 64 Daytona had it's own little feature. They did well in 64 with the little $ they had to work with.

[Bill Pressler]

In a two-door or wagon, I like the '64's better. In a four-door, I like the '63 better. I also LOVE the '63 Cruiser's broadcloth interior trim--it's Cadillac-level! In '64 you could still get broadcloth, but the seat design was the same as the regular Cruiser (not a bad thing, but not like the '63 broadcloth).

I've owned '63 and '64 Daytona Hardtops, and a '66 Daytona Sports Sedan. I love the '64's styling, but the '63 hardtops have their charms too.

[1962larksedan]

In a two-door or wagon, I like the '64's better. In a four-door, I like the '63 better. I also LOVE the '63 Cruiser's broadcloth interior trim--it's Cadillac-level! In '64 you could still get broadcloth, but the seat design was the same as the regular Cruiser (not a bad thing, but not like the '63 broadcloth).

I've owned '63 and '64 Daytona Hardtops, and a '66 Daytona Sports Sedan. I love the '64's styling, but the '63 hardtops have their charms too.

I have to agree there.

[Bill Pressler]

I've read that Studebaker spent more money to make a '63 from a '62, than a '64 from a '63. They definitely got more 'bang for the buck' with the '64, in terms of it looking different from the previous year's model.

[2R2]

I've read that Studebaker spent more money to make a '63 from a '62, than a '64 from a '63. They definitely got more 'bang for the buck' with the '64, in terms of it looking different from the previous year's model.

Yes Bill, I agree. The changes from '62 to '63 were pretty significant. Larks got a new cowl with a non wrap-around windsheild, the elimination of the exposed "B" piller on four doors, new dash design, two piece sedan doors (bolted on uppers) and of course an all new wagon.and so on. The trouble is that they LOOKED like the '62s. The '64s were reallly changed a lot less, but looked different, with their new front clip.
I think Stude got a lot of "look" for the '64 dollar, and the '64s are nice looking cars. I think the '63s are more "unique" looking, compared to the '64s, as the newer ones are crisper, more GMish. The '63s still look like a Lark, and tend to stand out a little more.

Just my two cents, of course!

[1962larksedan]

Yes Bill, I agree. The changes from '62 to '63 were pretty significant. Larks got a new cowl with a non wrap-around windsheild, the elimination of the exposed "B" piller on four doors, new dash design, two piece sedan doors (bolted on uppers) and of course an all new wagon.and so on. The trouble is that they LOOKED like the '62s. The '64s were reallly changed a lot less, but looked different, with their new front clip.
I think Stude got a lot of "look" for the '64 dollar, and the '64s are nice looking cars. I think the '63s are more "unique" looking, compared to the '64s, as the newer ones are crisper, more GMish. The '63s still look like a Lark, and tend to stand out a little more.

Just my two cents, of course!

What I bolded I agree with 100%. The 1963 model also says 'Lark' to me whereas the 1964-66 models have a more generic early 1960's Ford/GM look to them..........which is no bad thing either.

[8E45E]

In a two-door or wagon, I like the '64's better. In a four-door, I like the '63 better.

They could have reintroduced the W-body with the 108" wheelbase and that '63 front clip, and made a very economy car out of it which would have taken it back the original roots of the Lark in 1959. And at the same time, going with the 1964 redesign emphasis which was on length, and in keeping with what the rest of the compacts were doing.

Craig

[BobPalma]

If they had kept the 1963 body through the end, "the end" would have been sooner! BP

[EssexExport]

Evolution, no?

[rodnutrandy]

I like the 64 2 door hard top ,think they may have goofed when they went to sedans in 65,66. The 59 thru 63 are also nice ,but I prefer the 2 dr. hardtop their also. I think the 53 year was one of the better looking Studebakers.

[Corley]

For my money, they should have just re-introduced the '53 C/Ks, with the R-1, R-2, and R-3 engines. Best ever look for Studebakers. But really, I'm not opinionated, now am I?

[Corvanti]

For my money, they should have just re-introduced the '53 C/Ks, with the R-1, R-2, and R-3 engines. Best ever look for Studebakers. But really, I'm not opinionated, now am I?

...with a mini bullet nose to replace the "upside down" Mercedes star on the early 53's.