The Lamberti papers #16

[Jim B PEI]

I would say, in 1963, no way! Until the glow-plug was introduced, and turbocharging was more mainstream in a Diesel, they were impractical in Canada. First, they had to be plugged in if it was below only 32 deg. F, and a 0-60 time of >20 seconds sealed their fate here; not to mention, the 15-25% greater cost over its gasoline counterpart. Sure there were always Diesel Mercedes Benzes and the odd Peugeot Diesel, but they were few and far between.

Craig

I remember a return trip one midwinter day from near Ottawa to east end of Toronto with a 'gearhead and rallyer' friend of my dad's, using more backroads than main highways. He was driving his rallye car, a M-B 190D (diesel) and I do remember just how nimble it was, and how much it impressed me with its suspension. That 190D had a glow plug, and was a 1959 I believe. The car was a few years old, and I was about 8 or 9 at the time, so 1961 or 1962? I do remember that it started easy on a very cold day after about a 30 second delay for the glow plug--First start early that morning, and also from the Toronto end as it had cooled off to dead cold after a car parts shopping spree spree and then a long lunch and chat. I think that from 58 onwards that they had glowplugs. Like all non turbo diesels, it was deadly slow from a standing start, but it did just fine on the highway--it could accelerate and pass respectably once it was moving, like the early VW Rabbit diesels. It had a top speed of about 75 miles per hour, and was quite happy at 65 and 70, although he mostly drove it that day 50-60 mph. He had a special extra speedo/odometer/other gauges arrangement for his winter rallye time trials, which were extremely accurate, so what was displaysed was the real speed. I was really amazed that he was using a large, low power (48 hp?) 4 door sedan as a rallye car, but I was incredibly impressed how it scrambled up and down very steep and rutted snow and ice covered gravel lanes in the middle of nowhere. Since that day I was a diesel convert, and 'got' the idea. In our tiny town, there were about 5 diesel cars, all M-B. I don't think the Peugeots came with glowplugs until sometime in the late 60s?early 70s? I never saw a diesel in a 403 or 404 in Canada, and saw nary a diesel Peugeot until the 504 came along.

I do think diesel would have been a natural for Studebaker with the M-B tie-in. Odd that they never tried to source diesels from M-B, but likely Perkins was way cheaper as in "trying to get a foothold". The Checkers installed Perkins, didn't they? Same model engine as Studebaker?

[8E45E]

Good points, Craig. They sure would have needed even more than 50,000 of the base Studebaker script at that rate. BP

Well, according to what I read, there were 4238 Zip Vans made, and maybe add 500 Y3's, that's over 10% of them!

Craig

[BobPalma]

Y3's (x3), and Zip Vans (x1) also used them. Add them to the count. Craig

Good points, Craig. They sure would have needed even more than 50,000 of the base Studebaker script at that rate. BP

[8E45E]

Now, I don't know what to make of the 50,000 count for the basic Studebaker script, however. That was used on all Commanders and Challengers plus the Hawk! So I'm not sure how they figured they needed to project script for 45,000 Commanders and Challengers (minus service stock) but only 50,000 of the Studebaker script that would have been needed for all the "Larks" plus the Hawks.
More mysteries, or they sure didn't plan on selling many Hawks. BP

Y3's (x3), and Zip Vans (x1) also used them. Add them to the count.

Craig

[BobPalma]

Some years ago, I bought a folder full of drawings at a swap meet. They apparently came from a company that made the chrome script for Studebaker. Based on a request from the Brooks Stevens organization, the company was quoting on the nameplates for the 1964 cars. There are pencilled notes for the quantities expected - wildly optimistic at the time. Note that the drawing date is April 1963, about the time of the board meeting. Here is the drawing with the notes:

Actually, Gary; it's not as optimistic as we might think. The total for the four model scripts is 130,000. Since there are two scripts per car, that's "only" 65,000 cars...actually less than 65,000, because some of the script would be service stock for collision repair and such. ('Not sure on that percentage, of course.)

Now, I don't know what to make of the 50,000 count for the basic Studebaker script, however. That was used on all Commanders and Challengers plus the Hawk! So I'm not sure how they figured they needed to project script for 45,000 Commanders and Challengers (minus service stock) but only 50,000 of the Studebaker script that would have been needed for all the "Larks" plus the Hawks.

More mysteries, or they sure didn't plan on selling many Hawks. BP

[garyash]

Some years ago, I bought a folder full of drawings at a swap meet. They apparently came from a company that made the chrome script for Studebaker. Based on a request from the Brooks Stevens organization, the company was quoting on the nameplates for the 1964 cars. There are pencilled notes for the quantities expected - wildly optimistic at the time. Note that the drawing date is April 1963, about the time of the board meeting. Here is the drawing with the notes:

[COMMANDERPINK1]

Thanks for looking it up, Peter.

Commander Pink Tom: Now you have a choice if you want to read that road test.

You can find either a June 1963 Car Life or a September 1988 Turning Wheels. BP

THANKS BOB
Tom

[avantilover]

There are 2 copies of the Car Life magazine on eBay 1 for $7.99 the other $12. I just purchased the 3rd one.

[8E45E]

They could have sold those Diesels in Canada, with our perennially higher fuel prices. 50% better mileage would have just gotten the Canadian driver back to an equal footing with their US counterpart.

I would say, in 1963, no way! Until the glow-plug was introduced, and turbocharging was more mainstream in a Diesel, they were impractical in Canada. First, they had to be plugged in if it was below only 32 deg. F, and a 0-60 time of >20 seconds sealed their fate here; not to mention, the 15-25% greater cost over its gasoline counterpart. Sure there were always Diesel Mercedes Benzes and the odd Peugeot Diesel, but they were few and far between.

Craig

[monomaniac]

Was that executive dining room more like a restaurant OR more like a staff cafeteria?
I recall working at Swifts many, many years ago. We had a "restaurant" in the plant/office.
But it was not like a restaurant in that you had menu choices. Everyday the chef would post that day's offerings
and if you didn't like it, there was always your bag (U.S. equivalent = sack) lunch. The food was very good BUT there was no choice.
I sort of side with the chef on this one.

[Corvanti]

no chicken for you!!!

[BobPalma]

Bob...Right on as usual. Issue deals with 63 GT Hawks.

Thanks for looking it up, Peter.

Commander Pink Tom: Now you have a choice if you want to read that road test.

You can find either a June 1963 Car Life or a September 1988 Turning Wheels. BP

[PeterHawk]

Tom: The subject Daytona Wagonaire was Serial Number 63V18524. See its Build Order and more information about it on Page 8 of the July 2009 Turning Wheels. It's included in my interview of David Blackmer, who shepherded the car around Los Angeles automotive press people and such.

The Road Test appeared in the June 1963 Car Life. 'Not sure where you'd find a copy, but I would think an on-line search of literature vendors would scare one up in short order.

Edit: I seem to remember our reproducing that Car Life Road Test in Turning Wheels; possibly the September 1988 edition. For the life of me, I can't find that copy in my collection this morning; 'must have pulled it out for something else and mislaid it.

Anyway, if someone has a September 1988 Turning Wheels handy, would you please check to see if thatCar Life Road Test appears as a reprint? Thanks. BP

Bob...Right on as usual. Issue deals with 63 GT Hawks.

[FlatheadGeo]

You have got to be kidding me:

"3. Executive Dining Room

Mr. Soelch told of an incident that occurred when he took the division purchasing directors to the executive dining room for lunch. No special menu had been requested, but the waitress began serving each of them chicken. Four men in the group, including Mr. Soelch, don’t care for chicken and asked to be served something else from the menu in the dining room. (There were three main-course choices.) When the girl went into the kitchen to get their orders, a man came out (presumably the manager) and told them they couldn’t have any substitutions, and that they had to eat what was served them and nothing else. Mr. Soelch said the entire group of 11 men was embarrassed and added that he will not take a group to the executive dining room again. Dr. Lamberti asked Mr. Soelch to send him a memo on this with a copy to Mr. Cox."

[Jim B PEI]

I betcha the Canadian operation could have made money selling all those 6 cylinder Daytonas with A/C, automatic, and power steering, as a special Polar Bear edition. Make that a 'sleeping' Polar Bear. <ggg>

I think the "Executive Dining Room" episode would have likely tipped a vote or two into shutting down vehicle operations all by itself. ie, there is just no use talking to these people about serious stuff when there is this sort of nonsense about little things going on.

They could have sold those Diesels in Canada, with our perennially higher fuel prices. 50% better mileage would have just gotten the Canadian driver back to an equal footing with their US counterpart. Studebaker was smart enough to let Hamilton do its own thing and make money at it. Compared to the non-stop disasterous decisions which were taken when Renault took over AMC (ie, putting a Frenchman direct from France and located in the US, instead of say, a francophone Quebecer with Canadian ties to the Brampton operation--after all, the Canadian operation of AMC was much more vibrant, modern and successful, and Renault sold 60% of its product in Canada, and half of THAT in Quebec) and current idiocies from especially VW and above all Ford--again both US based and totally US focused, and completely misreading the Canadian market, I think Studebaker did good.

A company that DOES get it right and makes a lot of money doing it is Toyota. They sold a hatchback Eco here and it became their best seller, and didn't even both trying to sell it in the US. Americans 'don't like diesels' and 'don't like wagons or hatchbacks' and that seems to drive all the decisions taken. (for the life of me, I cannot figure out why anyone would ever buy a 4 door sedan with a teeny trunk opening when they could get a 4 door wagon or 4 door hatchback with rear window wipers folding rear seats and the possibility of carrying something too large for or too awkward to load in a sedan, once or twice a year--but then again I'm a Canadian so there. BTDT, with two bargains being returned to the store cause I couldn't get them home in a sedan. Never again will a sedan other than a Studebaker sully my driveway)