Sat morning thoughts:-)

[Hawklover]

[sweetolbob]

Personally, I think that talking about the beauty and unexpected power of a 63 Avanti with an R3 would have a much more positive effect on the uninformed interested party than a droll discussion on what constitutes an exact one from a pretender.


Most folks at car shows don't care if an Avanti is a true Studebaker or, like mine, a pretender with a great looking SBC under hood. They care about where it was built, what is has for power and can they hear it and/or sit in it. All of which they can.


If I tried to explain why/how mine differs from an original, their eyes would glaze over and they'd slink away at the first chance. Most non-Stude car folks don't give a cr@p about the nuances of our marque or any other for that matter.

I believe in letting the style and other attributes sell the cars and fill in the rest after they are hooked.


In this era of 5-second attention spans, you'll lose most of them after that time. When's the last time any of us really set still while a Corvette owner ran on about the nuances of double hump heads and the exact date of the last solid axle car.


Just my opinion but I'll continue to put Studebaker on the write up on my 83 Avanti windshield and I'll bet I get a lot moire interest in Studebaker than the guy next to me with the 63 Avanti that continues to tell the Vox Populi that mine has no business being called a Studebaker and drones on about the reasons.

Bob

[52-fan]

I have lots of things that either amuse or irritate me about how people treat and/or represent their cars, but I know none of it is really important. I try not to let my attitude drive anyone away. They may change over time.

[SN-60]

Personally, I think that talking about the beauty and unexpected power of a 63 Avanti with an R3 would have a much more positive effect on the uninformed interested party than a droll discussion on what constitutes an exact one from a pretender.


Most folks at car shows don't care if an Avanti is a true Studebaker or, like mine, a pretender with a great looking SBC under hood. They care about where it was built, what is has for power and can they hear it and/or sit in it. All of which they can.


If I tried to explain why/how mine differs from an original, their eyes would glaze over and they'd slink away at the first chance. Most non-Stude car folks don't give a cr@p about the nuances of our marque or any other for that matter.

I believe in letting the style and other attributes sell the cars and fill in the rest after they are hooked.


In this era of 5-second attention spans, you'll lose most of them after that time. When's the last time any of us really set still while a Corvette owner ran on about the nuances of double hump heads and the exact date of the last solid axle car.


Just my opinion but I'll continue to put Studebaker on the write up on my 83 Avanti windshield and I'll bet I get a lot moire interest in Studebaker than the guy next to me with the 63 Avanti that continues to tell the Vox Populi that mine has no business being called a Studebaker and drones on about the reasons.

Bob

Oh Oh....Careful Bob,...There are three people on this forum that are adamantly AGAINST connecting the name Studebaker with an '83 Avanti! (Don't ask Me how I know this)

[sweetolbob]

Oh Oh....Careful Bob,...There are three people on this forum that are adamantly AGAINST connecting the name Studebaker with an '83 Avanti! (Don't ask Me how I know this)

I sense you are correct Ed but the display that goes on my windshield says, in essence.

Avanti - Originally designed and manufactured by Studebaker until 1964, from 1966 on built by Newman and Altman with SBC drive trains. It then goes on to talk about the car itself. Because that takes 5 seconds to read there is no mention of Blake, Kelly or any other part of the Avanti family. The readers don't need to be confused.

Irrespective of opinions, The name Studebaker on the sheet brings back a lot of memories of some of the folks about relatives cars or starts a discussion about where they were manufactured possibly Canada even. I believe that display has started more Studebaker discussion in this part of Michigan than any other thing I can think of.

In any case, It reads the way I want it to read and that ain't changin'.

Bob

[SN-60]

I sense you are correct Ed but the display that goes on my windshield says, in essence.

Avanti - Originally designed and manufactured by Studebaker until 1964, from 1966 on built by Newman and Altman with SBC drive trains. It then goes on to talk about the car itself. Because that takes 5 seconds to read there is no mention of Blake, Kelly or any other part of the Avanti family. The readers don't need to be confused.

Irrespective of opinions, The name Studebaker on the sheet brings back a lot of memories of some of the folks about relatives cars or starts a discussion about where they were manufactured possibly Canada even. I believe that display has started more Studebaker discussion in this part of Michigan than any other thing I can think of.

In any case, It reads the way I want it to read and that ain't changin'.

Bob

Yes, Stick to Your guns Bob....because You are RIGHT!

[Gunslinger]

An Avanti is an Avanti...regardless of the parent corporation. I will admit that the later cars and the 2001-2007 cars can be described somewhat as factory assembled kit cars since they're based upon donor platforms, but what the heck...if Studebaker had succeeded and flourished does anyone think they wouldn't have ultimately designed new platforms and engines for their entire line, not just Avantis?

Full disclosure...I own a 2002 "kit car" as some have said. It's an outstanding vehicle and is a credit to the Avanti brand.

[Pat Dilling]

Personally I am fine with clone cars as long as they are represented as such. In the case of R3 Avanti's or R3 anything for that matter, I think it is great that people create clones or tribute cars that they are willing to drive and take out to share with the public. In most cases the true original cars are so precious because they are so rare that the owners guard them closely and do not want to drive them for fear of damage or loss of value due to mileage or wear. I personally would rather own a clone so I could drive it and enjoy it for something besides a "museum piece." I am reminded of a fellow I met last summer who has a numbers matching LS6 454/450 hp 1970 SS Chevelle. I asked him if he ever took it to the drag strip and he said "No, I don't want to take a chance on blowing up the numbers matching motor." So, he has one of the most significant high performance Chevrolets of all time and he is afraid to drive it like was intended. On the other hand if someone built a clone car, it certainly would not be worth as much, but the owner could take it out and enjoy the performance available.

[SN-60]

Personally I am fine with clone cars as long as they are represented as such. In the case of R3 Avanti's or R3 anything for that matter, I think it is great that people create clones or tribute cars that they are willing to drive and take out to share with the public. In most cases the true original cars are so precious because they are so rare that the owners guard them closely and do not want to drive them for fear of damage or loss of value due to mileage or wear. I personally would rather own a clone so I could drive it and enjoy it for something besides a "museum piece." I am reminded of a fellow I met last summer who has a numbers matching LS6 454/450 hp 1970 SS Chevelle. I asked him if he ever took it to the drag strip and he said "No, I don't want to take a chance on blowing up the numbers matching motor." So, he has one of the most significant high performance Chevrolets of all time and he is afraid to drive it like was intended. On the other hand if someone built a clone car, it certainly would not be worth as much, but the owner could take it out and enjoy the performance available.

I completely agree with You Pat

[53k]

The man who bought my crate R-3 to install in a '63 spent a BUNCH of bucks to do the car as a Paxton/Granatelli retrofit (which was not uncommon). My reaction to his plan- Why not? Sounds good to me.

[swvalcon]

Paul I agree with you 100%. If you've got the money and thats what you want to do by all means go for it. I look at it as the run is in driving the cars and enjoying them. If you want to just look at it have somebody paint a picture of your favorite car on your garage wall and just sit and look at it and drink a beer in your easy chair.

[Bob Andrews]

Bob- you are spot on. I invited a local guy with a Stude to look in on the forum. He logged in to look and saw a long thread arguing about minutiae. Then he saw a couple of our sad little trolls (they know who they are) making their childish cheap shots. He never joined the forum, or the SDC. This is a successful younger guy who is an accomplished restorer. Said he's having too much fun in life to get involved with a bunch of old crabs and nitpickers.

He asked me why I would be involved here, since I too enjoy life. I told him the small people and their comments mean nothing to me; I come because most of the people here are good folks, and I have made some good friends. But as a newbie, he wasn't interested in trying. Instead he just chooses to enjoy his Stude and his life, and his other cars, instead of coming here to get a wet blanket thrown on him.

Every so often somebody gets on a kick for making an environment welcoming to newbies, 'We invented cool', stuff like that. But the reality is, there will always be crabs and old grouches and nitpickers looking to start arguments to medicate their unhappiness- more so than many places.

Like it or not, that's our rep. It's hard enough loving unpopular cars and trying to introduce them to others without a few putting a bad face on the Club via the 'net. I just accept it as part of the deal.

Newbies? Not so much.

[Flashback]

It's not just Studebakers. I have been a member of numerous clubs over the past 53 years (since I was 16). Model A, Ear
ly Ford, Mustang, Corvette and 5-6-7 Chevy, as well as street rod clubs. You have the same types in all of them. People that can't take the nit pickers and grouches, ain't hard core car people. JMHO

[bezhawk]

I have heard the same thing over and over and over about the forum. It is a bad representation of the true spirit of the club.

[SN-60]

Bob- you are spot on. I invited a local guy with a Stude to look in on the forum. He logged in to look and saw a long thread arguing about minutiae. Then he saw a couple of our sad little trolls (they know who they are) making their childish cheap shots. He never joined the forum, or the SDC. This is a successful younger guy who is an accomplished restorer. Said he's having too much fun in life to get involved with a bunch of old crabs and nitpickers.

He asked me why I would be involved here, since I too enjoy life. I told him the small people and their comments mean nothing to me; I come because most of the people here are good folks, and I have made some good friends. But as a newbie, he wasn't interested in trying. Instead he just chooses to enjoy his Stude and his life, and his other cars, instead of coming here to get a wet blanket thrown on him.

Every so often somebody gets on a kick for making an environment welcoming to newbies, 'We invented cool', stuff like that. But the reality is, there will always be crabs and old grouches and nitpickers looking to start arguments to medicate their unhappiness- more so than many places.

Like it or not, that's our rep. It's hard enough loving unpopular cars and trying to introduce them to others without a few putting a bad face on the Club via the 'net. I just accept it as part of the deal.

Newbies? Not so much.

Hey Bob, maybe You should think on this quote...."A critic is a man created to praise greater men than himself, but he is never able to find them" (Le Gallienne)..Does this shoe fit Mr. Andrews?