Studebaker Factory Tire Sign

[StudeMichael]

I think this is a repop since the seller mentions it is resin:

http://tinyurl.com/7k65q8

1957 Packard Clipper
1957 President Broadmoor
1963 Daytona Convertible
1963 R2 Daytona
1963 R2 GT Hawk
1963 R1 Wagonaire
1963 R4 Avanti
1964 Champ
1966 Cruiser

[showbizkid]

Even so - where ya gonna find another?


[img=left]http://members.cox.net/clarknovak/lark.gif[/img=left]

Clark in San Diego
'63 F2/Lark Standard

http://studeblogger.blogspot.com

https://www.studebakersandiego.com

[barnlark]

That was recently discussed the last time it came up for sale. I couldn't find it in a search, though. There are plenty of the reproductions still out there, but the originals are pretty rare and brittle. Big difference in the weight, as I recall and the molds for making them are gone. The Museum sold them, too.

Edit: Found it. Good info..

http://forum.studebakerdriversclub.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=22182&SearchTerms=concrete,wheel,sign

[2R5]

Any original I've seen the bottom is all uneven because they were just broke off the top of the posts.

[IMG]Home of the Fried Green Tomato
"IF YOU WANT THE SMILES YOU NEED TO DO THE MILES "

1960 Champ
1964 Daytona HT

[Green 53]

I'm sure it is a repop. I have one. Carroll Studebaker had a few made quite a number of years ago. I think the mold was broken later. The originals were on the fence posts at the proving grounds. A few have survived but were pretty weathered and would show on the bottom where they were broken of the posts.
Denny L

[BubbaBear]

It doesn't look like a repo or an original. But if I had to guess I would say someone ruined a repo with a real bad paint job. It was my thread referenced above. A friend of mine owns one and I took the photos. The one here does not look like either. It is entirely too white, is blotchy and is missing a blue outline. Also in the last photo on the Ebay site there is a very noticeable mold mark around the center.

I'm posting them side by side for comparison.

Here's the one on Ebay now.

Here is lstude's reproduction:

And here is the original that belongs to my friend:

[barnlark]

That price is getting serious. This seller has multiples of these in resin based and concrete versions. eBay made it so that sellers can't change the description once bids have been posted, apparently. I don't think he went into this knowing they weren't the real thing.

[barnlark]

Price at $760...now with an added description disclaimer at the bottom. If I may ask, what did the reproductions cost when they were available?

[Retired]

It's been awhile but, I believe I paid $25.00 for a Carroll Studebaker reproduction.

Richard

[BubbaBear]

This one looks painted. And badly. Is it a Carol Studebaker reproduction that has a bad paint job or another copy that no one knew about. I don't think it is an original.

http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m307/BubbaBear_2006/StudeOct15001-1.jpg

[barnlark]

Do you mean an "original" reproduction? Certainly not the real concrete version at that weight. The problem is it was initially described as from the factory (Proving Ground wall) and the price went up from there. To me it's another buyer beware situation. It's not the real thing, either way. Then again, it's eBay, someone will probably say both seller and winner will be happy.
50% of that transaction will.

[BubbaBear]

I'm positive it's not a proving grounds original. It may be a Carrol Studebaker reproduction someone ruined with paint but I wonder if it is yet another copy or poor amateur reproduction. I really wish some good quality reproductions would be made.