If only Studebaker built it's own P2 box.

[63t-cab]

Would it have been narrow enough to match cab width?or wider to match the current size of other makes?surely I can picture the typical Studebaker style,like a nice clean smooth fender flair around the wheel opening to match the front fender.and it would be centered over the rear wheel instead of how they are now.the rear taillight with the ribbed line curving around it looks like something Studebaker would have done,even though it's what Dodge did.wonder if there are any sketches of what might have been?

[Milaca]

Had they designed their own fleetside box, I'm sure it would have been better built than the wimpy Dodge box. The old Stude box had double wall construction whereas the Dodge box is single wall and flimsy. The design of the 1963 to 1966 Ford pickup box looks about right to me but it too may be slightly over width. Studebaker should have at least offered vertical chrome exhaust stacks to hide the Dodge box being over width & mismatched to the cab. All the money they spent on far-fetched prototypes would have more than covered the design & tooling for a proper box. Let's take a DeLorean back in time to the Stude headquarters and do some protesting!

[Bill Pressler]

Had they designed their own fleetside box, I'm sure it would have been better built than the wimpy Dodge box. The old Stude box had double wall construction whereas the Dodge box is single wall and flimsy. The design of the 1963 to 1966 Ford pickup box looks about right to me but it too may be slightly over width. Studebaker should have at least offered vertical chrome exhaust stacks to hide the Dodge box being over width & mismatched to the cab. All the money they spent on far-fetched prototypes would have more than covered the design & tooling for a proper box. Let's take a DeLorean back in time to the Stude headquarters and do some protesting!

I've always thought that except for width, the wide box matched the styling of the Champ cab better than it matched the styling of the Dodge cab it originated with--the shape and flare of the wheel opening, and the horizontal feature line. I still prefer the P2 bed to the old '49-style bed against the Champ cab.

[jclary]

Well...as acustomed as us Studebaker folks are to cutting and patching ... how 'bout one of you guys undertake to cutting a couple of inches out of one of those beds and narrowing it up a bit.

You could get what we've discusd and the rest of us will brag on you and pat you on the back!

Hey! .... be sure to post lots of pictures.

[Chris Pile]

It's been done and it looks good.

[Warren Webb]

If the bed had matched the cab it may have been better looking but it wouldn't have held a 4' wide piece of plywood. Would have sold about as well as a diaper franchise at "leasure world". There was an article years ago in Turning Wheels that had pictures of the various pickup boxes from other manufacturers on a Champ, comparing the appearance & use. The Dodge box won. My Champ was one of the first ones made with the P2 box. Anyone know the vin of the first one??

[StudeRich]

Wide Box, YES!

I think we (Forum members) are about 55% against the wide box and 45% for it!

I still can't understand why that is, because to me a Pickup is used to haul and more-so the long bed 1/2 Ton and even more-so the 3/4 ton. nobody in the day ever noticed it or mentioned that it did not fit because that is what Trucks do is have larger beds than cabs, every 1 ton and larger flatbed, box van, stakebed etc. has a wider bed than cab, so it was expected on a REAL Truck, but not so much on an El Camino useless type Pickup used for transportation only.

The Champ always LOOKED like a real he-man Truckers type tough Truck, even though the Cab was a poor installation, it can be corrected with added cab mounts and reinforced floor.

[woodysrods]

If you want anything to look exactly like you think it should have been.....Then customize it or build it yourself!
I did!
Built the box for my M series with over 400 fabricated pieces and some unique special features.
Good Roads
Brian

[Sdude]

Has anyone widened the Champ cab to match the bed? I bet that would look cool...

[woodysrods]

Now you are talking!
Brian

[Welcome]

Had they designed their own fleetside box, I'm sure it would have been better built than the wimpy Dodge box.<<<

Apparently Studebaker WAS working on "stylizing" the box.

Yesterday at the SB Meet a vendor had a stack of various Studebaker Engineering Dept. photos he was selling. One I recall was a "re-stylization" of the taillight area. There may have been other truck box photos, but didn't have a chance to look through the entire stack.

[Milaca]

I think we (Forum members) are about 55% against the wide box and 45% for it!

I still can't understand why that is, because to me a Pickup is used to haul and more-so the long bed 1/2 Ton and even more-so the 3/4 ton. nobody in the day ever noticed it or mentioned that it did not fit because that is what Trucks do is have larger beds than cabs, every 1 ton and larger flatbed, box van, stakebed etc. has a wider bed than cab, so it was expected on a REAL Truck, but not so much on an El Camino useless type Pickup used for transportation only.

The Champ always LOOKED like a real he-man Truckers type tough Truck, even though the Cab was a poor installation, it can be corrected with added cab mounts and reinforced floor.

I believe the entire point of the other manufacturers (Ford, GMC/Chevy, Dodge, International Harvester and eventually Jeep) for designing & manufacturing a wide bed was to make it match the lines of the cab. Simply for style. I accept what Studebaker did with the Champ but know they could have done much better and had they done so, they probably would have sold many more Champs.

[63t-cab]

Rich,I'm not sure why you say that about pickups.it's not normal to have a wider bed than the cab,the Champ cab just happens to be more narrow than the then standard size bed.as for the 1tons and bigger,ya that's a different ball game all together.look at the big 3 pickups of the day,they are matched up.guess they were'nt on a budget like Studebaker.

I think we (Forum members) are about 55% against the wide box and 45% for it!

I still can't understand why that is, because to me a Pickup is used to haul and more-so the long bed 1/2 Ton and even more-so the 3/4 ton. nobody in the day ever noticed it or mentioned that it did not fit because that is what Trucks do is have larger beds than cabs, every 1 ton and larger flatbed, box van, stakebed etc. has a wider bed than cab, so it was expected on a REAL Truck, but not so much on an El Camino useless type Pickup used for transportation only.

The Champ always LOOKED like a real he-man Truckers type tough Truck, even though the Cab was a poor installation, it can be corrected with added cab mounts and reinforced floor.

[Mark57]

P2 Beds

I will comment on this from a different perspective. I, like many others always preferred the look of the P1 bed with both the C-Cab and the T-Cab trucks. However, the stock P2 bed has grown on me over the years - while it does look a bit odd when you first see one, the reality is that this is how Studebaker chose to produce a fleetside bed pickup. Would anyone with some $$$'s in the budget build a similar style pickup today (or even in the 60's)? Very likely the answer is "No".


So, having a stock one with its quirky look is simply driving a piece of history - with an interesting story behind it. After all, isn't being different one of the reasons we drive Studebakers??

[8E45E]

One reason the box had to remain that width regardless of the cab width would be the aftermarket industry. I could NOT imagine the aftermarket companies that manufactured toppers, liners, step bumpers, etc., tooling up for a 'Studebaker-only' line as the sales wouldn't have been there to justify it. It would have made only one more reason for buyers not to have looked at a P2 Champ.

Keep in mind, International went the other way with a pick-up box on the CXT~a way narrower box on a much wider cab!!

Craig