PDA

View Full Version : Might be a little bargain: '65 Cruiser on Ontario Kijiji for $3,000



drpreposterous
03-06-2014, 05:25 PM
Don't know how clean it really is, ya gotta wonder if it's been exposed to salty winters...
Be nice little round-towner, though. BTW, $3K Canadian is $2,724 in Yankee bucks.

http://ontario.kijiji.ca/c-cars-vehicles-classic-cars-1965-studebaker-cruiser-W0QQAdIdZ566882316


http://thumbnails110.********.com/31252/9b536b312511823.jpg (http://www.********.com/image/9b536b312511823) http://thumbnails112.********.com/31252/10b9f4312511827.jpg (http://www.********.com/image/10b9f4312511827) http://thumbnails112.********.com/31252/edf947312511829.jpg (http://www.********.com/image/edf947312511829)

Jessie J.
03-06-2014, 05:43 PM
Could never understand why Studebaker would offer their top of the line model in '64-'66 with an anemic base 6 and three on the tree. It sure as hell didn't help boost any public perception that the Cruiser was the best that Studebaker offered. Little wonder they went under.
A former '65 Cruiser 8 owner.

Steve T
03-06-2014, 05:57 PM
Three of us from the Hamilton Chapter checked this Cruiser out last year. It is drivable (one of us trundled round the block in it with the current owner riding shotgun)...but both the engine and the brakes need work. Still, I could see someone from Western NY making out OK with it given the current exchange rate, if that buyer could do the work himself/herself...

S.

Stu Chapman
03-06-2014, 07:45 PM
Could never understand why Studebaker would offer their top of the line model in '64-'66 with an anemic base 6 and three on the tree. It sure as hell didn't help boost any public perception that the Cruiser was the best that Studebaker offered. Little wonder they went under.
A former '65 Cruiser 8 owner.

In fairness this decision had absolutely nothing to do with our closing. If you've got a few days there's much to read about the true story, including facts in my book.

The reason we decided to offer a minimally equipped Cruiser was to attract buyers who we're looking for our prestige car but didn't have the necessary $$$. Remember Mustang then? Ford offered a GT model with all the bells but you could get a base model for a lot less and you'd still turn heads.

Stu Chapman

1962larksedan
03-06-2014, 09:52 PM
In fairness this decision had absolutely nothing to do with our closing. If you've got a few days there's much to read about the true story, including facts in my book.

The reason we decided to offer a minimally equipped Cruiser was to attract buyers who we're looking for our prestige car but didn't have the necessary $$$. Remember Mustang then? Ford offered a GT model with all the bells but you could get a base model for a lot less and you'd still turn heads.

Stu Chapman

In all fairness the 1965-66 Mustang GT had a 289-4V engine as standard. No Six was even offered in that model.

StudeRich
03-06-2014, 10:19 PM
A "Base Model" is a base model, not a GT.
Of course you could buy a Mustang with a 6, even in the U.S.A.

I remember looking at them when they came out at Parnelli Jones Ford in Torrance, CA and noticed that as Stu says, you could choose how nice or how Fast you wanted.
The Chrome on the Studebaker design 1/4 Panel body crease, the rocker Panel Moulding, the Trans. and Engine; 6, 260, 289 and Hi Performance 289, everything was available, FOR A PRICE!

Stu Chapman
03-07-2014, 10:05 AM
In all fairness the 1965-66 Mustang GT had a 289-4V engine as standard. No Six was even offered in that model.

Agreed. My comparis9n was only intended to demonstrate why we did what we did. By the way the reason we went back to single headlights in 1966 was because Mustang had them and we figured it worked for them so why not us.

Stu Chapman

Mark57
03-07-2014, 01:03 PM
By the way the reason we went back to single headlights in 1966 was because Mustang had them and we figured it worked for them so why not us.

Stu Chapman

Thanks Stu! That's an interesting factoid that I had not previously heard about. I do like the look of the '66 front end - especially the Commander/Wagonaire style (guess that's why I bought one;)) and it has the 230 six as well (another reason I bought it). FWIW I fully support being able to buy an upscale model with a smaller displacement engine - in fact the newer iron in my fleet is from manufacturers that offered such products. I have reached a point where fuel economy and luxury are the more important factors in buying a vehicle. :)

Jessie J.
03-07-2014, 08:35 PM
It was my distinct pleasure to have accompanied my father to our local Studebaker showroom and assist in the choice of our new 1966 Studebaker.
We agreed the Commander was the most appealing to both of us. He was the one who would be making the payments so it had to be a 4 door, I got to pick the color (Richelieu Blue) and dad, for the first time in years, decided to go sporty with a manual 3 speed with o/d.
We both proud as peacocks got a lot of fun and grins out of our new 'hot rod Chevybaker'
Dad had bought a new Studebaker every two years for most of his adult life like 20+ consecutive. He was extremely disappointed by Studebaker's shutdown (as was I) both of us would have continued on as loyal Studebaker customers indefinitely. Dad never owned another car that he was as satisfied with.
And I don't think I have either. When I was driving my '69 Camaro SS 396, what I really wanted was a mint '64 Daytona, when I had my '71 Road Runner, what I really wanted was a mint '64 Daytona, and on through a life-time of some very desirable models.
Have owned around a dozen Studebakers over the decades, and I presently own three '64 Daytona's ...but sadly they are anything but 'mint'.
But I'll never forget what it was like driving them when new. Nothing since has ever suited me as perfectly.

StudeRich
03-08-2014, 12:23 AM
Great story Jessie, very similar to mine when Dad bought his New late '64 Daytona Hardtop with 259 and Automatic.
It was a Canadian built of course, Astra White with Red all Vinyl Individual reclining seats. We picked it up Dec. 24, 1964 kinda a Christmas present.

Was your Dad's commander Overdrive a 194 or 230 6 Cyl. or 283 V8?

Jessie J.
03-11-2014, 08:02 AM
Thunderbolt 283. Our trade in was dad's Bordeaux Red '64 Commander 259 auto (my most favorite out of all dad's Studes that I can remember)

cruiser
03-11-2014, 08:47 AM
Wish I was around in 1964/5/6 to buy a new Studebaker . Some of my favourite cars .

Unfortunately in that time span I had enough money to buy maybe the underdash Kleenex

dispenser and a refill ! Would have bought a '64 Daytona 289 R1 Hardtop powershift auto.

By 1966 , dragged kicking and screaming away from the Mustang lot , ( 2 year turnaround)

I would have got a '66 Daytona Sport Sedan ( 2 door ) with Vinyl Roof , 283 auto . Never

thought much about what I would buy in 1968 , probably an AMC Javelin 343 auto Coupe .

CRUISER

Jessie J.
03-11-2014, 05:36 PM
Funny you should mention it. I had a '68 AMX 343 4 speed. Ran like stink. Short wheelbase and torque steer fun up the wazoo.
Quality was in the pits though. Glued in place door glass had a habit of falling out daily. Traded it off on 'The Great Pumpkin' a '70 Cougar Eliminator 428 with 4 gear, Drag Pac & 4.30 axle. Used it for my daily driver. Hey gas was still cheap in those days.

WinM1895
03-11-2014, 06:30 PM
A "Base Model" is a base model, not a GT. Of course you could buy a Mustang with a 6, even in the U.S.A.

I remember looking at them when they came out at Vel's Ford in Torrance, CA.
1965 Mustang assembled before 8/23/1964: 170 & 200 I-6's, 260 2V, 289 2V, 289 4V, 289 4V HiPo.

From 8/23/1964, the 170 I-6 & 260 were cancelled.

There are two different 289's. Assembled before 8/23/1964 have a 5 bolt bell housing pattern. From 8/23/1964, have a 6 bolt bell housing pattern.

The timing cover and waterpump are also different before/from 8/23/1964.

Parnelli Jones was Vel Miletich's "silent partner" back then. I once rode in a car Jones was driving, it was pedal to the metal and to hell with the traffic!