PDA

View Full Version : Studebaker undercoat



swvalcon
10-04-2017, 11:05 AM
Did the factory do the undercoat or was it done at the dealer? I have a rear fender on a hawk that I'am about to work on and where it was undercoated it was easy to install and I'am sure easy to see but did very little to prevent rust. Looks like more of a sale pitch item than to actually prevent rust. Where the real rust would start had no undercoat. The rear fenders and inner fenders should have been undercoated before the fender was installed. I'am sure if they had taken the time to ask a bodyman at the time he would have told them( No undercoat over here and over here.)

Mike Sal
10-04-2017, 12:14 PM
Undercoating was actually more for sound proofing rather than rust prevention....although it was certainly marketed for rust by dealers and local garages as a way to make extra money.
Mike Sal

StudeRich
10-04-2017, 06:39 PM
Up until 1954, Most of the Factory Undercoated Cars if not all, were covered on Top and bottom of the floors, Firewall to Rear of Trunk.

Some of the Non-factory undercoated Cars would have been done at Dealers.
And THEN, there is the possibility that your Fender or other Part was a wreck replacement hurriedly done by a Body Shop. :(

swvalcon
10-04-2017, 07:16 PM
Stude Rich I have three sets of rear fenders for the 62-64 Hawks and this is the way all are done. Just undercoated in the wheel area on both inner and outer fenders. There is a baffle at the front and rear of the opening and that is where the undercoat stops. I'am sure the undercoat was done after the car was totally assembled.

55s
10-04-2017, 10:13 PM
The build order for the Packard Hawk I just had painted had factory undercoating. It has less than 60K miles, I believe it is original, and it seems to be all over the bottom and inside the fenders. The good news is that there was virtually no rust.

Pckstude
10-06-2017, 12:12 AM
I recently received a copy of the build sheet for my 1965 Wagon. It indicates undercoating from the factory.

kmul221
10-06-2017, 02:22 AM
In my Packard-Hawk it was on the factory build sheet,put on after it was fully assembled.lt was every where but in the places where but the places where it would have done the most good.

DEEPNHOCK
10-06-2017, 06:30 AM
My '61 Hawk had the factory tar put on in stone impact areas, but it was not considered 'undercoating'.
My Dad had the dealer do the 5 year guarantee undercoating before he picked it up at Pabich Motors in Roselle, IL.
That undercoating was super accurate, too.
5 year guarantee.
5 years and 5 minutes later the whole car was pretty much rusted through....:rolleyes:

Bordeaux Daytona
10-06-2017, 08:37 AM
I recently received a copy of the build sheet for my 1965 Wagon. It indicates undercoating from the factory.

Yep. Here's a copy of the window sticker of our '65. It says no charge. Sorry it's so large, it's from another post.
The frame rotted out towards the leaf springs. I have a '64 fixed roof that wasn't undercoated and the frame is a lot nicer so it's going to be used on the '65 with the X member swap.

http://forum.studebakerdriversclub.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=4732&d=1288316252

swvalcon
10-06-2017, 11:20 AM
Bordeaux. I see your car was shipped to Mn. and in Minneapolis at that. There is the reason for the rust. Back when I first started to do bodywork in the early 70's most cars here in Mn would start to show rust in just under 5 years maybe 6-7 if one of the better undercoats was applied when new.

studegary
10-06-2017, 07:31 PM
Yep. Here's a copy of the window sticker of our '65. It says no charge. Sorry it's so large, it's from another post.
The frame rotted out towards the leaf springs. I have a '64 fixed roof that wasn't undercoated and the frame is a lot nicer so it's going to be used on the '65 with the X member swap.



It states "no charge" for the "aluminized rust proofing". It includes "070 undercoating" for what looks like an additional $23.50. It is the undercoating that led to more rust problems, such as on your frame. The undercoating got hard and separated from the metal leaving pockets to trap dirt and moisture, resulting in accelerated rust.

Chris_Dresbach
10-06-2017, 11:30 PM
While leading tours through the plants, I had a former Studebaker employee who told me about the undercoating line. Somewhere near the end of the line in final assembly in both the truck plant and car plant there was a pit the cars would come over similar to old garage service pits. Down in the pit there was a guy with a spray gun applying the undercoating. That guy was always high due to poor ventilation in the days before OSHA.

Warren Webb
10-07-2017, 03:11 AM
I have a 60 Lark 4 door that is now a parts car. I cut out the floor to use on the 59 wagon. When I removed the undercoating it revealed clean metal as if it was made yesterday. No doubt it was from the factory.

pinehurstbob
10-07-2017, 08:20 AM
My 60 convertible was factory undercoated according to the build sheet. Its a South Bend build and it certainly preserved a lot of the body since the car was in Maryland from new till I bought it and restored it 11 years ago. The worst rot was in the torque boxes, where it appeared to have rusted from the inside out. Firewall was like new when rust proofing removed.
Bob

JoeHall
10-07-2017, 10:57 AM
I recall reading in TW, undercoating was standard procedure in all 64 and later Studes. No longer an option that cost extra.

jts359
10-07-2017, 12:08 PM
Not to get off the subject , But the quote on post 11 is the problem I see with powder coating , A little scratch and moisture gets underneath and rust starts , Ed

studegary
10-07-2017, 07:32 PM
I recall reading in TW, undercoating was standard procedure in all 64 and later Studes. No longer an option that cost extra.

It was standard, but it could be deleted.

jclary
10-07-2017, 07:47 PM
Not to get off the subject , But the quote on post 11 is the problem I see with powder coating , A little scratch and moisture gets underneath and rust starts , Ed

That's true with any coating...whether electroplated galvanize, chrome, paint, or powder.

Bordeaux Daytona
10-07-2017, 07:51 PM
It states "no charge" for the "aluminized rust proofing". It includes "070 undercoating" for what looks like an additional $23.50. It is the undercoating that led to more rust problems, such as on your frame. The undercoating got hard and separated from the metal leaving pockets to trap dirt and moisture, resulting in accelerated rust.

I'm surprised I didn't notice that. My 64 Daytona hardtop looks like it was undercoated too. The frame is also very rusty. I was thinking the undercoating made it worse too.

Bordeaux Daytona
10-07-2017, 07:55 PM
Bordeaux. I see your car was shipped to Mn. and in Minneapolis at that. There is the reason for the rust. Back when I first started to do bodywork in the early 70's most cars here in Mn would start to show rust in just under 5 years maybe 6-7 if one of the better undercoats was applied when new.

I heard it was bad there and they use a lot of salt here too. Getting pulled out of work duty in the late 70s saved its life.

Flashback
10-07-2017, 08:16 PM
My 53 was factory undercoated, inside, in trunk, and underside. It might have been for sound, but it sure did preserve it, with no rust.

Jeffry Cassel
10-08-2017, 08:43 AM
Undercoating certainly did nothing to prevent rust as the most rust prone areas were usually devoid of any protection.

RadioRoy
10-08-2017, 11:03 AM
Yep. Here's a copy of the window sticker of our '65. It says no charge. Sorry it's so large, it's from another post.
The frame rotted out towards the leaf springs. I have a '64 fixed roof that wasn't undercoated and the frame is a lot nicer so it's going to be used on the '65 with the X member swap.

http://forum.studebakerdriversclub.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=4732&d=1288316252

My brother worked at Steenerson Studebaker in the very early 60's. That's probably where he got his love for the marque.

SScopelli
10-10-2017, 03:19 PM
I believe more Studebaker floors have rusted from top down, and not from underneath.
And more than likely the factory undercoating trapped water where it should have been left to drain and cause more rust than prevented it.

BobPalma
10-10-2017, 03:42 PM
http://forum.studebakerdriversclub.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=4732&d=1288316252

:o Anyone else notice that the Hamilton window stickers, at least this one, do not specify the car's color or interior trim / color? Interesting. :cool: BP

StudeRich
10-10-2017, 04:28 PM
Several differences from the South Bend ones are present and ODD in addition to no Paint or Interior Colors.

There is also no mention of the Engine other than the VP8 and the C5XXXXX Serial Number, they did not call out the Optional V8 283 Engine, either way it would be included in the Base Price $2,890.00.

No mention of Bench Seat, Split Bench, Split Bench Reclining, or Bucket Seats either.

More importantly there is no Date and NO YEAR Model anywhere to determine what Year model it is, again other than the Serial number, looking only at that Sticker, it could be a Second Series Canadian '64! :ohmy:

No mention of a Sliding Roof, so if it is a '65, that verifies that there were no '65 Fixed Roofs.
From the Light Blue Seat Belts we can ascertain that it had a Blue Interior.

I think it is interesting that the Franklin Refrigeration Div. of Studebaker Corp. bought or ordered it. Of course they ordered it fully loaded. ;)

Of course the Production Order would have it ALL, just Detail info not needed to SELL the Car is not shown.

Bordeaux Daytona
10-10-2017, 06:44 PM
Here's another Franklin Division Studebaker, found the sticker on eBay. One invoice number different. I wonder how many cars they got. They're probably in the archives.


http://forum.studebakerdriversclub.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=4733&d=1288316331

studegary
10-10-2017, 09:25 PM
[QUOTE=StudeRich;1077411


No mention of a Sliding Roof, so if it is a '65, that verifies that there were no '65 Fixed Roofs.


[/QUOTE]

I believe that it only verifies that the sliding roof was standard. The fixed roof could have been a delete option for credit.

Hallabutt
10-11-2017, 03:40 PM
I don't know if anybody mentioned it, but the car was undercoated not the parts prior to assembly. That means that voids like the fender area aft of the door never got any undercoating. We look at this stuff sixty or more years later and it's all dried out and peeling, but for the first few years it probably did a pretty good job improving the cars life, by a couple of years. Ever notice that the tops of the wheel well openings don't seem to rust like some of the cars that weren't undercoated. Today the stuff is a PITA, to a restorer that has to remove it.

swvalcon
10-11-2017, 07:13 PM
I've found its not that bad to get off if you use a small torch and a sharp putty knife. Just heat a small area and scrap as you go. I've gotten pretty good at it.

Bill Pressler
10-12-2017, 03:20 PM
RE.: Window stickers--I always chuckle that on late South Bend cars, the serial no. was handwritten on the window sticker.

swvalcon
10-16-2017, 07:22 PM
Had time over the weekend to slap a patch over the rust hole and seam seal the back side . Just need to pick up some bed liner and got the first coat of mud on the front side.