57 Commander in garage for 38 years

[studegary]

It's really too bad that Studebaker (and all other car makers of the era) did such a non-existant job of rustproofing the backsides of the sheet metal. Twenty bucks worth of zinc chromate primer on the backsides, and cars like this would be rust free. And if they'd spent another twenty bucks per car on exterior acrylic enamel (which was available at the time), cars stored like this would still have pristine bodywork.

Not a knock against Studebaker. All car mfrs at the time thought saving $40 per car was well worth it.

Sit in on a 1950s Ford, GM, Chrysler, SP cost analysis. "$40 per car? Are you nucking futts? Sell the damned things. Three years for now, sell them another one."

Reminds me of Bob Bourke telling me that the mechanism for the rear quarter windows in K bodies was cost reduced by 50 cents each. The company did not want to spend $1 per car for a better mechanism.
It isn't that people did not know how to make better cars. As you said, they were built for three years use by the original owner. As it was, Studebaker's build cost was much higher than it was for the big 3.

[8E45E]

Didn't we just recently see some nickel & dime cost-cutting with GM over a bunch of ignition switches??

Craig

[Stude Shoo-wop!]

Nice one! Always refreshing to see the less popular Studebakers such as your 57 Commander receive their just due. I may get myself a sedan soon as well!

[t walgamuth]

Congratulations on your find!