Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ramblers vs. Studebakers

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

  • #16
    My parents owned a 1960 Rambler wagon thatI remember well.As Studeclunker said,with the little six,it was so under-powered that it was hard to take off without stalling it.If it had a V-8 it might have been a real nice car,but because of its engine(wasn't AMC still using a flathead six in 60?),I hated it.
    Then Dad started buying Mopars,and thats all we had for years,many Valiants,a 63 Plymouth Belvedere etc,and all were good cars.I used to think thier push-button trannys were really cool.(still do,Id love to have a late 50's Desoto or a big Imp from the same era)

    Comment


    • #17
      Does anyone know about the Dodge 330? My first foray into the classic car genre was one of these beautys. She had the indestructable 225 slant six under the hood and "Piano Finger" pushbutton A/T. Kevin

      1963 Champ

      Comment


      • #18
        quote:Originally posted by KevinSheen

        Does anyone know about the Dodge 330? My first foray into the classic car genre was one of these beautys. She had the indestructable 225 slant six under the hood and "Piano Finger" pushbutton A/T. Kevin

        1963 Champ
        Yes, to your question, and I owned the other end of the line, a 1963 Dodge Custom 880. Many people are not familiar with that model.

        Gary L.
        1954 Commander Starliner (restomod)
        1959 DeLuxe pickup (restomod)
        Gary L.
        Wappinger, NY

        SDC member since 1968
        Studebaker enthusiast much longer

        Comment


        • #19
          I have a pretty direct comparison of Rambler to Studebaker. I have
          a '63 Lark Daytona convertible and a '65 Rambler American convertible.
          Both are 6-cylinder with three speed manual. The biggest difference is the ride quality. The Stude with body-on-frame construction feels
          like a larger car (it's not) and it's quieter and gives a more substantial feeling. But the Rambler feels sportier and lighter on its feet and the doors still close perfectly too, at 112,000 miles. Can't say the same for the Stude, even though it has far fewer miles.
          Neither car is any barn-burner, of course, but that's not why we bought them. They're both fun little cars. I'd have to say the Rambler
          gets more attention, but that's probably because more people who see it "used to have one".

          Mikey in San Diego

          Comment


          • #20
            In 1970 I traded my '62 Hawk with a tired motor for a '65 Rambler Marlin in white with red and a Twin Stick, 287? and bucket seats. The first thing I noticed was that the Rambler didn't handle worth crap and even though the Stude 289 was tired and had a Flighto it would have run circles around the Rambler. Also there was a lot more plastic in the Marlin than the Stude, both had comfortable seats. But, that rear suspension with the torque tube, that was a dumb idea from the beginning if ever there was one. Then there was the trunk lid that was just big enough to fit the tire through, what were they thinking? Oh, one more thing, even though the car had Budd disc brakes, they were horrible. Maybe there was something wrong with them, but if you stood on them hard in a panic stop the pedal would very slowly sink to the floor. The Rambler was quieter, in some ways roomier and didn't leak nearly as much, but it wasn't long and I wanted my Stude back. Funny, I've never missed the Marlin.

            Tim K.
            '64 R2 GT Hawk
            Tim K.
            \'64 R2 GT Hawk

            Comment


            • #21
              In 60 Rambler had an aluminum blocked OHV 6

              Norm
              58 Transtar 1 ton dually PU
              58 2 door wagon
              Davenport, Fl
              Norm
              58 Transtar 1 ton dually PU
              58 2 door wagon
              Davenport, Fl

              Comment


              • #22
                Well I think that I have a rather unique comparison between a 68 Impalla and my 65 Commander. It happened 14 year ago. I was driving home to Puyallup from work in Enumclaw and I got to the point where Highway 410 intersects with Highway 16 ? North and the Cross over to get to South Hill in Puyallup. At that time the off ramp from 16 Southbound dumped right on to 410 Westbound and immediately there was the onramp to get to the cut off for South Hill and it was one lane only.

                Here I was in 70 MPH traffic with the lanes converging and I had to get to the South Hill Cut off ramp. Cars diving in and out... I make it into the off ramp lane and OOOOOOHHHHHH SH$% ahead of me is some idiot backing down the onramp and I am doing 70 MPH. I dynamited the brakes and hoped for the best.....

                I wound with my 65 off to the shoulder and the blasted horn wing shoved up my nasal cavity. Holding my face I slowly crawled out of my Commander to see how bad it was......The hood was bent up and the left fender smashed and of course the radiator was smashed. I learned later that the fron crossmember was torn completely loose. I walked over to the Impala and the rear end of the car was folded up and the gas tank had been pushed through the back seat. Good thing that she was driving alone because no one in the back seat would have survived.

                Two weeks later I picked up a used fender and hood and drove my Commander to the body shop three miles away. $600 dollars worth of frame streightening and welding later I drove it the thee miles home.

                It drives just a good as it ever did. Th eonly way you can tell it was in such a horrific crash is if you look at the front bumper brackets. The body shop got one side of the frame a bit higher when they streaghtened it out so the brackets are just a bit off.

                I sure an glad I was driving a Studebaker that day.

                If you car is ugly then it better be fast.....

                65 2dr sedan
                64 2dr sedan (Pinkie)
                61 V8 Tcab
                61 Tcab 20R powered
                54 Champion Wagon
                If you car is ugly then it better be fast.....

                65 2dr sedan
                64 2dr sedan (Pinkie)
                61 V8 Tcab
                63 Tcab 20R powered
                55 Commander Wagon
                54 Champion Wagon
                46 Gibson Model A
                50 JD MC
                45 Agricat
                67 Triumph T100
                66 Bultaco Matadore

                Comment


                • #23
                  I own a 1963 Rambler Classic 770 4 door sedan. It has the 195.6 Aluminum Cast Engine. (Before we deep cleaned it we thought it was cast iron and now it shines like the inside of a new Coke can). It has 69,000 original miles and is an unrestored "survivor" that I drive every now and then. My Dad has a 1952 Champion Regal 2 Door Hardtop, a 1963 Avanti, a 1963 Gran Turismo Hawk, and a 1964 Cruiser 4 door. All are near and dear to my heart. We drove his massive Ford truck up to northeast Indiana last summer to purchase the Gran Turismo. We noticed the 64 Cruiser hiding in the rear of the gentleman's garage. After the deal was struck on the 63 GT Hawk, Dad asked the man about the 4 door Cruiser with the 259 V-8. "You don't want that one, we haven't even had it started in over 2 years!" Dad shot some ether into it and she started right up. Dad made the man an offer and my Mom drove the big Red Ford, Dad in the Hawk, and I drove the Cruiser 250 miles home. I'll never forget it. Meanwhile I drive the Rambler around town and dream of Future Studebakers.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    The little '64 AMC Typhoon I sold for my buddy Scott did quite well...

                    http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...RK%3AMESO%3AIT

                    Probably sold for not much less than what a '64 Daytona 2 door hardtop with similar equipment would have sold for.

                    Maybe these old Rammers' are gaining in popularity also.



                    Dick Steinkamp
                    Bellingham, WA

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      I don't think it hurt that this was a limited edition model too.[:I] Add to that that so many of these went to the crusher - maybe moreso than Studes did since Studes were sorta recognized as nostalgia pieces (talkin' postwar Studes here) before the likes of this Typhoon did. After all, AMC was still around in some fashion, thru 1987. They got a late start at being "collectible" for most folks. (I guess I was an exception to that rule as I got caught up in the early AMC nostalgia movement early on. I remember the look on car guy's faces as I talked with gusto about how cool my 66 Classic was in my eyes. Circa 1977)
                      Another factor hampering the advancement of Rammers is the parts situation. Chrysler - in their whiz-dumb, smashed all the remaining Rambler parts when they took over[V] Damned few vendors have stepped up to repop parts as is the case with Studebakers.

                      I kinda watch Rammers on ebay. If you're looking for a 50s or 60s Rammer (or even a clean 70s car), there's some real deals by Studebaker standards![]

                      Miscreant at large.

                      1957 Transtar 1/2ton
                      1960 Larkvertible V8
                      1958 Provincial wagon
                      1953 Commander coupe
                      1957 President 2-dr
                      1955 President State
                      1951 Champion Biz cpe
                      1963 Daytona project FS
                      No deceptive flags to prove I'm patriotic - no biblical BS to impress - just ME and Studebakers - as it should be.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X