PDA

View Full Version : March Hemmings Classic Cars



doug
01-20-2012, 02:29 PM
There is a 4 page spread on the 1931 President Roadster, a column about new car sales with nice words for Studebaker, mention of the current Museum display and comment about '54 Starliner.

Bill Pressler
01-20-2012, 02:46 PM
There is a 4 page spread on the 1931 President Roadster, a column about new car sales with nice words for Studebaker, mention of the current Museum display and comment about '54 Starliner.

I got mine today...you're leaving out an interesting column by Bob Palma on the 'watering down' of performance nameplates over the years, and also an "I Was There" column on inspecting '57 and '58 Chevys in a plant by SDC'er Buzz Beckman, father of the SNM's Andy Beckman!

fpstude
01-20-2012, 03:02 PM
I got my issue a couple days ago. There is a lot to look forward to in this issue. I always enjoy the "I was there" feature. This month it is about an inspector job in Janesville, Wisconsin. A few months ago it was about an employee at the Studebaker plant. Of course the Bob Palma article every three months or so makes the subscription worthwhile.

BobPalma
01-20-2012, 03:40 PM
Thanks, guys. Yes, it is every third month.

AFAIK, that March article you're reading is the first time the 1957 Golden Hawk 400 has been introduced to the general populace. <GGG>

'Next column will be in June. It's already done. There is an appropriate Studebaker mention in it, too, although not to the extent of the Golden Hawk 400 material because the topic isn't Studebaker per se. BP

Chris Pile
01-20-2012, 04:32 PM
I'll be checking it out.

BobPalma
01-26-2012, 02:06 PM
Seriously, you folks who don't subscribe to Hemmings Classic Car will undoubtedly want to buy a newsstand copy of this March 2012 issue. It's probably hitting the newsstands about now.

It's loaded with Studebaker material:

Page 2: Little teaser photo of the '31 President

Page 8: Nice mention of "Untouched Studebakers" at The Studebaker National Museum

Page 10: Two photos and discussion of late SDCer David Neitzel's 1922 Studebaker Children's Hearse

Page 29: Patrick Foster's column includes mention of 1954 Studebakers

Page 33: My column introduces the 1957 Golden Hawk 400, with photo

Pages 34-37: Gorgeous write-up with many color photos of 1931 President Eight Roadster "Speedway"

Page 66: Nice photo and mention of 1954 Commander Starliner introduction

Pages 76-77: Nice report from SDCer Buzz Beckman about working at Chevrolet Janesville WI Assembly in 1957 / 1958

Enjoy. BP

BRUCESTUDE
01-26-2012, 10:23 PM
Yes, it's nice to see so much Studebaker information in print, especially in a mainstream publication! Of course if Bob Palma mentions "Studebaker" in every column he writes, it may be like a subliminal message to all those brand X'ers, who will eventually think Studebakers are cool!

BobPalma
01-27-2012, 06:55 AM
Yes, it's nice to see so much Studebaker information in print, especially in a mainstream publication! Of course if Bob Palma mentions "Studebaker" in every column he writes, it may be like a subliminal message to all those brand X'ers, who will eventually think Studebakers are cool!

Thanks, Bruce. If it is appropriate, I'll include Studebaker models. (Not to the point of looking for an excuse, of course...which wouldn't be appreciated, I'm sure.)

My June 2012 Hemmings Classic Car column is done and while the topic is of a general nature, there is a legitimate place where a given Studebaker model would/should be included among a list of specific cars.

So I included Studebaker's offering in addition to the "normal" Chevrolet, Ford, and Plymouth models. Normally, of course, the Studebaker model would be omitted even though it is valid and warranted within the "topic de jour." (Ironically, while there is an appropriate Studebaker for June's list, there is no corresponding American Motors model; the list just includes model examples from Chevrolet, Ford, Plymouth, and Studebaker!)

That's really the difference, just making sure Studebaker is given credit where due, but not overly so. That way, non-Studebaker folks can't cry "favoritism," and those of us in Studebaker-land can't grumble about a given Studebaker not being included when it should have been. BP