Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

64 Wagon

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 64 Wagon

    I don't care for the wheels,but sure looks like a nice Wagonaire
    http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...tem=4554641175

  • #2
    I agree. I'm not sure WHAT somebody was thinking when they chose those rims. They are definitely not that car. It does look like a nice ride though.

    Comment


    • #3
      Those wheels belong on a tuner car.

      ________________________
      Mark Anderson
      http://home.alltel.net/anderm
      1965 Studebaker Cruiser

      Comment


      • #4
        there was a '53 or '54 Starlight at SB with those rims, I thought they actually looked pretty good on that car. I think those are supposed to be lightweight rims for drag racing. As for the Starlight, I am guessing it was Chevy powered from the exhaust note but never got to see under the hood. It was very nicely done with some subtle custom graphics and a Hawk dash with a bead blasted aluminum face. I really liked the overall look of that car.

        nate

        --
        55 Commander Starlight
        62 Daytona hardtop
        http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel
        --
        55 Commander Starlight
        http://members.cox.net/njnagel

        Comment


        • #5
          Nice looking wagon. Looks like one I have. Except the paint is better... and the upholstry... probably the engine...
          Nice thing about those wheels is that NOS wheels and hubcaps are readily avialable.

          Lotsa Larks!
          Studeclunker
          A.K.A: out2lunch
          Home of the famous Mr. Ed!
          K.I.S.S. Keep It Simple Studebaker!
          Ron Smith
          Where the heck is Fawn Lodge, CA?

          Comment


          • #6
            Don't get me wrong, I like wheels as much as the next guy, but I think they should be "period correct".

            If you're gonna go that route[]

            ________________________
            Mark Anderson
            http://home.alltel.net/anderm
            1965 Studebaker Cruiser

            Comment


            • #7
              I would agree. A nice set of Cragar S/S or American Torque Thrusts would look better .

              ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Tom - Sterling Heights, MI

              Ancient Chinese Proverb: "Injection is nice, but I'd rather be blown!"

              1964 Studebaker Daytona - Laguna Blue, Original 4-Spd. Car, Power Steering, Disc Brakes, Bucket Seats, Tinted Glass, Climatizer Ventilation System, AM Radio (136,989 Miles)
              Tom - Bradenton, FL

              1964 Studebaker Daytona - 289 4V, 4-Speed (Cost To Date: $2514.10)
              1964 Studebaker Commander - 170 1V, 3-Speed w/OD

              Comment


              • #8
                My wife's 64 Wagonaire cost a lot more but isn't as nice. I'm thinking of pulling the 259 V8, 3-speed & rear to install something like a stock 5.4 Lightning or FI 502 Chevy that will allow her power steering (will likely have to put a Mustang II front end on it), brakes, & either an automatic or 5-sp. Probably go with a 9" Ford rear to hold the power & torque. Might be easier to just pop the body on a late model Ford or S-10 Frame. Ever hear of anyone doing that?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Oh God, here we go....[V]

                  ________________________
                  Mark Anderson
                  http://home.alltel.net/anderm
                  1965 Studebaker Cruiser

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    In the immortal words of Uncle Fred: "Hey...do your own thing, it's your car "

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      quote:Originally posted by Thecarphotoguy1

                      My wife's 64 Wagonaire cost a lot more but isn't as nice. I'm thinking of pulling the 259 V8, 3-speed & rear to install something like a stock 5.4 Lightning or FI 502 Chevy that will allow her power steering (will likely have to put a Mustang II front end on it), brakes, & either an automatic or 5-sp. Probably go with a 9" Ford rear to hold the power & torque. Might be easier to just pop the body on a late model Ford or S-10 Frame. Ever hear of anyone doing that?
                      [B)]

                      Dave's Place
                      Studebaker Emporium
                      www.davesplaceinc.com
                      sigpic
                      Dave Lester

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Now, explain the old bait & switch to me one more time.....................


                        quote:Originally posted by Thecarphotoguy1

                        My wife's 64 Wagonaire cost a lot more but isn't as nice. I'm thinking of pulling the 259 V8, 3-speed & rear to install something like a stock 5.4 Lightning or FI 502 Chevy that will allow her power steering (will likely have to put a Mustang II front end on it), brakes, & either an automatic or 5-sp. Probably go with a 9" Ford rear to hold the power & torque. Might be easier to just pop the body on a late model Ford or S-10 Frame. Ever hear of anyone doing that?
                        Sam Roberts

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Actually,this is probably the guy with the 57 Silver Hawk on e-bay,just trying to get back at us for making fun of his Hawk!

                          not golden hawk,not silver hawk,just hawk.
                          Oglesby,Il.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            quote:Originally posted by Thecarphotoguy1

                            My wife's 64 Wagonaire cost a lot more but isn't as nice. I'm thinking of pulling the 259 V8, 3-speed & rear to install something like a stock 5.4 Lightning or FI 502 Chevy that will allow her power steering (will likely have to put a Mustang II front end on it), brakes, & either an automatic or 5-sp. Probably go with a 9" Ford rear to hold the power & torque. Might be easier to just pop the body on a late model Ford or S-10 Frame. Ever hear of anyone doing that?
                            All I will say about this is that neither of these engines will fit. My Ford Ranger has a larger engine compartment than your '64 and these engines wouldn't fit my truck either. There was a reason Studebaker went with SB Chevys. If you must use a Ford, measure out a 302 or 351W (and even then 351W are taller and may not clear the hood). TCI (Total Cost Involved)can set you up with a prefab suspension kit based off Mustang II. I'd stay with the Stud frame.

                            And no BSing. I'm sure your wife wasn't pounding on the table for a 9" rear and 500 HP...

                            ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            Tom - Sterling Heights, MI

                            Ancient Chinese Proverb: "Injection is nice, but I'd rather be blown!"

                            1964 Studebaker Daytona - Laguna Blue, Original 4-Spd. Car, Power Steering, Disc Brakes, Bucket Seats, Tinted Glass, Climatizer Ventilation System, AM Radio (136,989 Miles)
                            Tom - Bradenton, FL

                            1964 Studebaker Daytona - 289 4V, 4-Speed (Cost To Date: $2514.10)
                            1964 Studebaker Commander - 170 1V, 3-Speed w/OD

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X