Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Eye Candy for 2/11/12: 64 Daytona convertible

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • BobPalma
    replied
    Originally posted by Stu Chapman View Post
    Wow...I can't believe our car developed so much in-depth comments! Stu Chapman
    'Never can tell what's gonna happen here, Stu! <GGG> Bob

    Leave a comment:


  • R3 challenger
    replied
    Originally posted by Chris_Dresbach View Post
    Good points Bob. Lets say though that with all of the racing parts removed (and stock parts added), the Ford would basically become a stock 1964 Ford Fairlane with a 427. If the stock 1964 Fiarlane with a 427 went up against a 1964 Daytona with an R3 (Or a Challenger, Commander, etc.) it would still be a close race.
    Good points, all. But actually, Chris, something similar to what you suggest has already happened: Several years ago, cousin Stan Palma brought his 1967 (?) 427 Fairlane (set up to Pure Stock specs) to the Pure Stock drags. On one of the final Friday time-trial runs, Stan's 427/automatic Fairlane came up against Ted Harbit in the R2-powered Stude Tomato. The Tomato won.

    Granted, that was early in the development of Stan's 427, and it did run faster in subsequent years, but then, so did the Tomato. And we're talking actual racing, not bench racing.

    George

    Leave a comment:


  • Stu Chapman
    replied
    Wow...I can't believe our car developed so much in-depth comments!
    Stu Chapman

    Leave a comment:


  • Chris_Dresbach
    replied
    Good points Bob. Lets say though that with all of the racing parts removed (and stock parts added), the Ford would basically become a stock 1964 Ford Fairlane with a 427. If the stock 1964 Fiarlane with a 427 went up against a 1964 Daytona with an R3 (Or a Challenger, Commander, etc.) it would still be a close race.

    Leave a comment:


  • BobPalma
    replied
    Originally posted by Chris_Dresbach View Post
    I agree, I've always really liked that body style for '64. I've always wanted to see a hard top '64 Daytona, but with a completely stock "racing package" like that of the Plain Brown Wrapper go up against a '64 Ford Thunderbolt... I bet it would be a close race.
    Chris: Don't let them beat you up on your Thunderbolt remark. On the surface, it looks like you're whipped with The Plain Brown Wrapper having turned a best-ever 12.664 against the two cited Thunderbolt figures of 11.61 and 11.76.

    I don't doubt the Thunderbolt figures. They were bully-fast, purpose-built drag race cars, fun to watch "in the day." I know. Not only did I watch them first hand, but when Studebaker was out of the picture, I was a "Ford man" against those evil Chevys that had driven Studebaker out of business (as perceived at age 17), so I enjoyed the Thunderbolts whuppin' on the 409 and experimental 427 Chevys.

    However, Chris, let's configure a T-bolt as was The PBW when the 'Wrapper turned it's 12.664; you know, so we can instruct your PBW detractors to compare apples with apples.

    First, let's put a full, production interior in the T-bolt, adding the appropriate weight and comfort required of The PBW. Put all the correct seam sealers and modest undercoat on it as well. Get it porked up a little so it's a functional street car, as is The PBR. Install a wiper motor and wiper assemblies that work as advertised. Put heavier, what-would-now-be DOT-spec glass all the way around, and install window regulators so all four side windows can be positioned up or down at will, as are The PBW's.

    Ford didn't sell production 1964 Fairlanes with the battery in the trunk for good weight transfer, nor was that permitted of The PBW when it posted a 12.664 ET at The Pure Stock Muscle Car Drag Race. So, put the T-bolt's battery back up front where it belongs in the production-line battery tray....with the correct battery hold-down, of course! (Heavens yes, don't forget that!)

    Next, yank off the T-bolt's open exhaust and headers and choke down that 427 with full, street-legal exhaust all the way to the rear bumper, including street-legal mufflers. Oh, and while we're at the bumpers, pull off the Thunderbolt's lightweight, heavy-gauge aluminum-foil bumpers and put heavy, "real steel" production-line bumpers on it, as has The PBW.

    Now we'll replace the T-bolt's pretty, lightweight bubble hood and open air intakes with a good, sturdy, heavy, production-line 1964 Fairlane steel hood and hinges. Fix it up to breathe through a production-line air filter cartridge and air intake assembly, as does The PBW. And while we're addressing fuel and air delivery, lose the T-bolt's cool can that delivers iced gasoline to the engine rather than the bone-stock fuel pump, lines, and standard fuel filter in The PBW.

    Set up the T-bolt's suspension to be reasonably streetable, with production-line specifications all the way around, as has The PBW.

    Finally, and this is the biggee, pull off the T-bolt's drag-strip issue racing slicks on the rear wheels and put stock-width rear wheels on it (same as the fronts) and a set of DOT-spec G70X15 tires on those rear wheels...and mount the same size shoes on the front, instead of the little skinnys that weigh less and offer lower rolling resistance than the front tires required to be on The PBW.

    Now that the two cars are reasonably equal as to street legality, wish Ford luck finding anyone who can drive as well as does Ted Harbit. Then we'll go drag racing.

    (And if anyone doesn't want the Thunderbolt emasculated as described above, then allow The Plain Brown Wrapper to benefit from all the weight-reduction and race preparation afforded The Thunderbolt.)

    Personally, I think both cars are pretty neat in their own right.

    But one is a street-legal car Ted Harbit can hop in and go get a gallon of milk to lubricate his Wheaties (that would be Breakfast of Champions) the next morning. (It can even be raining when he leaves and the ambient temperature can be 35 degrees. He'll be able to see through the defrosted and heated windsheild as the wipers clear the raindrops.)

    The other car's driver, if he tried to use the car as configured for those 11.70-second-odd quarter-mile runs, would be lucky to get to the grocery store, much less home, with his ear drums intact and driving record unsullied by the local constabulary due to the resultant noise. And that assumes the car didn't overheat on the way there, or fail to restart after a ten-minute hot soak while he accumulated his moo juice and a pocket-size dispenser of Preparation-H to soothe his posterior after the round trip. BP

    Leave a comment:


  • raprice
    replied
    I agree with everyone's assessment of the styling. I'm always amazed at how Studebaker was able to make significant styling changes with very little money------and, of course, Brooks Stevens.
    Rog

    Leave a comment:


  • 50starlite
    replied
    The 1964 Ford Thunderbolt

    Specifications
    Wheelbase, inches: 115.5
    Weight, lbs: 3225
    Number built: 100
    Base price: $3,780

    Standard Engine
    Type: ohv V-8
    Displacement, cid: 427
    Fuel system: 2 x 4bbl.
    Compression ratio: 12.7:1
    Horsepower @ rpm: 425 @ 6000
    Torque @ rpm: 480 @ 3700

    Representative Performance
    0-60 mph, sec: NA
    1/4 mile, sec. @ mph: 11.76 @ 122.7

    Only 103 built
    WOW!!!!!

    Leave a comment:


  • bezhawk
    replied
    64 convertibles are really pretty. Any 64 lark is prettier without it's top. 63 roof line is much sleeker, and less Rambler like (IMHO).

    Leave a comment:


  • 31Streetrod
    replied
    A newly introduced 1964 Ford Thunderbolt turned 11.61 @ 124.8 mph at Lions Dragstrip, Cal. in November, 1963.

    Leave a comment:


  • studegary
    replied
    Originally posted by Chris_Dresbach View Post
    I agree, I've always really liked that body style for '64. I've always wanted to see a hard top '64 Daytona, but with a completely stock "racing package" like that of the Plain Brown Wrapper go up against a '64 Ford Thunderbolt... I bet it would be a close race.
    Are you kidding?

    Leave a comment:


  • studegary
    replied
    Originally posted by Warren Webb View Post
    The finest example of the evolution of the "Lark" body! Every time I see a 64, especially a convertible, I cant believe they didnt sell as well as they looked. Brooks did a terrific job on that one both in & out.

    (all opinions expressed herein are only mine, but if you want to join me............smile!)
    I think that one of the sales problems was that the 1964 models looked too much like the rest of the industry to the average buyer. They lost their unique style factor. The other problem was pricing. In 1964, my father and I each purchased new Furys. Equipped in a comparable manor, the Furys were less expensive. My hipo 383 would have been like buying an expensive R3.

    Leave a comment:


  • Chris_Dresbach
    replied
    I agree, I've always really liked that body style for '64. I've always wanted to see a hard top '64 Daytona, but with a completely stock "racing package" like that of the Plain Brown Wrapper go up against a '64 Ford Thunderbolt... I bet it would be a close race.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bullet
    replied
    I agree! :-)

    Leave a comment:


  • BobGlasscock
    replied
    The one 'Studebaker regret' that I have is that I couldn't save my family's 64 Daytona. It was the most beautiful car I've ever seen. I have learned 40 years later that an SDC club member bought it from my brother and parted it out. So parts of it, anyway, survives in other cars.

    Man, it was beautiful.

    Leave a comment:


  • Lou Van Anne
    replied
    Well said! I must agree.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X