Super cool Stude Gasser (pity about the motor)

[allstudedude]

Someone may have posted this already....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VjvfMmpvfA&feature=share

[JRoberts]

The Nelsons have put together many very interesting cars over the years. They have raced with the East Coast Timing Association and the Grassroots Motorsports Magazine's $2000 competions. Not always in the same car, but low budget machines they have literally put togeher in their backyard. Andrew posts on this forum from time to time. The Nelsons do much of their automotive endeavors as a family. Good to see them in action with this really cool Lark, no matter what's under the hood.

[EssexExport]

C-o-o-l. This hobby has many aspects.

[Mike Van Veghten]

What's wrong with the "motor" ?
The engine seems fine to me...!

Mike

[rodnutrandy]

11;30 et , nothing wrong with motor . Yes , a Studebaker motor is a force to be reckoned with , but their car , their money .

[BobPalma]

'Agree with Joe Roberts' Post #2.

1959 and 1960 Lark 2-door "F" bodies are so plentiful that the "Pure Studebaker" hobby will never need or use all of them sitting around. The same is true of 1949-1953 R series trucks; 'more than enough for every iteration of the hobby.

The Nelson's car is just great. Carry on! BP

[Bordeaux Daytona]

Nice car!
This one's been on craigslist for a while. I wish they had a picture of the whole car.

http://chicago.craigslist.org/sox/cto/4702600885.html

[Jessie J.]

Like the stance, straight axle, and the patina. Radiused quarters and a built Stude V-8 ...a 409 or even a 348 would hold more appeal to me. But that is only personal preferences.
What they built certainly works, and its always good to see another Studebaker out blasting the quarter-mile.

[junior]

[BobPalma]

Easy, Junior; I don't see any post bad-mouthing them about having a non-Studebaker engine (or motor). Every post in this thread has an overall positive attitude toward their car.

True, there is a disparaging tone to the thread's title, but that's all. And there has been no piling on...to the contrary, actually, with Posts #2 - #8 all having positive comments. BP

[Pat Dilling]

I think we need more Studes running at Drag Week. That looks like a ton of fun. They have classes for every sort of car from mild to wild. I am anxiously waiting for the 2015 tracks and route to be announced.

[evilhawk]

I like the car. Yes it would be cooler with a Stude 289, but I think its cool the way it is. I would remove the "Id rather fix it than switch it" logo on the rear if the car were mine. I think that logo would be better used on pure stock studes that are still driving around today.

[warrlaw1]

My bumper sticker would read "If you don't like the way I'm driving, help me get these handcuffs off!"

[Lamar]

What's the problem, just a Mckinnion(sp)on steroids. LOL Lamar

[junior]

Easy, Junior; I don't see any post bad-mouthing them about having a non-Studebaker engine (or motor). Every post in this thread has an overall positive attitude toward their car.

True, there is a disparaging tone to the thread's title, but that's all. And there has been no piling on...to the contrary, actually, with Posts #2 - #8 all having positive comments. BP

Easy...that's the whole point...Andrew' s success was anything but easy. You are correct about the disparaging tone to the title. Simple fact is what Andrew Nelson has achieved is outstanding regardless of what powered the Lark, so why any comments about the engine? When I said I dare anyone with a Stude powered car that can run low 11's and survive HOT ROD Drag Week I meant it. Talk is cheap, but to run an old car in the low 11's, and run it down hundreds of miles on the highways, and then whip on it at 5 different drag strips in a week without a support vehicle is amazing to me. Now, if anyone is up for that challenge in a Stude-powered Studebaker then go for it, but I'm betting nobody out there is. Many times we discuss what can we do to bolster SDC membership and keep people on this forum. The exposure that Andrew has received in HOT ROD both in print and video only furthers the cause for Studebaker, but when folks see comments like 'pity about the motor' it only undermines the exposure that this forum and club needs. It just seems like it happens time and time again, and sooner or later some folks get tired of the narrow-minded attitude. I usually try to be positive on this forum, but to call this Stude out because of it's engine frustrates me to no end. Regards, Junior.