Every so often, a "stat" jumps out...

[BobPalma]

Every so often, a statistic jumps out at you that reminds you of just what Studebaker was up against in terms of sales and market penetration.

So it was as I considered the comprehensive 1958 General Motors article in the October Collectible Automobile.

To wit: Studebaker built and sold only 44,759 cars in the dismal 1958 model year, all models.

Things weren't much better over at GM as regards total production when compared to the previous year...but, still, Chevrolet Division of General Motors built and sold 55,989 Chevrolet Impala Convertibles in 1958.

Think of it: Chevrolet built 25% more Impala convertibles in 1958 than all the 1958 Studebaker models combined! YIPES! BP

[Son O Lark]

It would be interesting to see which has survived in greater numbers, 1958 Studebakers or 1958 Chevrolet Impala Convertibles!

[BobPalma]

It would be interesting to see which has survived in greater numbers, 1958 Studebakers or 1958 Chevrolet Impala Convertibles!

I'd bet you could account for a higher percentage of the Impala convertibles, Barry. So much of Studebaker's 1958 production were disposable Scotsmans "rode hard and put up wet," and were thrown away. BP

[warrlaw1]

58 Chevies had as severe or worse rust out problems than Studes, up here in snow country. Very few survived more than a few years. 58 was also a recession year in Canada, so all car purchases were down.

[JEWELL]

How many 58 Packards were built? I assume fewer than the Studebakers.

Mark

[BobPalma]

How many 58 Packards were built? I assume fewer than the Studebakers. Mark

2,034 (total) Packard sedans, hadtops, and wagons, plus 588 Packard Hawks, Mark. BP

[JEWELL]

2,034 (total) Packard sedans, hadtops, and wagons, plus 588 Packard Hawks, Mark. BP

Wow, As I stated on our forum before, 1964 is my favorite year model for all cars built in the US and second is the 1958 car models. Now I know why I see so few 1958's. Must have been a really bad year for the industry.

[scott.rodgers]

Wow, As I stated on our forum before, 1964 is my favorite year model for all cars built in the US and second is the 1958 car models. Now I know why I see so few 1958's. Must have been a really bad year for the industry.

1958 was a really bad year for the industry as a whole - the country was in a pretty nasty recession. If I remember correctly, only Rambler had a sales increase that year. This lead directly to the success of the Lark in '59 - the right car at the right time. Like with the Champion before it, Studebaker really got the timing right for the Lark.

[BobPalma]

1958 was a really bad year for the industry as a whole - the country was in a pretty nasty recession. If I remember correctly, only Rambler had a sales increase that year. This lead directly to the success of the Lark in '59 - the right car at the right time. Like with the Champion before it, Studebaker really got the timing right for the Lark.

That's correct, Scott, as for whole companies.

Some individual models posted sales gains. I believe the largest gain was by the Ford Thunderbird, which is understandable since they broadened the market for it with a 4-place car! BP

[warrlaw1]

In 58 there was a recession, but I was 5 years old and making money! The gas pipeline was going right through the neighbourhood and I had a lemonade stand After they shut down for the day I found all the wire they used for the blasting caps and traded that for good stuff, too. Dad's '50 Champion starlite coupe was the neatest car in the neighbourhood and our dog had puppies. What more could you ask for?

[8E45E]

[/B][/I][/COLOR]To wit: Studebaker built and sold only 44,759 cars in the dismal 1958 model year, all models.

And to think Ford had the nerve to call the Edsel a 'sales flop'!! More Edsels were also sold than Studebakers that year as well.

Craig