Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ever want a GT Hawk C Body Coupe?

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

  • klifton1
    replied
    Maybe the seller didn't build the car. That could be where the discrepancys come in. It looks to be a nice driver.
    Klif

    Leave a comment:


  • 41 Frank
    replied
    Looks to me like it still has the "power brake" pedal setup, although there does not appear to be a hydrovac any longer. There is a difference in the power versus non power brake pedal pivot mounting point and the pedal itself.

    Originally posted by Warren Webb View Post
    Nice looking car using all Studebaker components but if I was interested in buying it I would question why the brake pedal is so low in relation to the clutch pedal.

    Leave a comment:


  • JEWELL
    replied
    Well, this is one way to deal with rust, just remove old parts and bolt on whatever fits.

    Leave a comment:


  • 63 R2 Hawk
    replied
    On ebay a month ago.....
    http://forum.studebakerdriversclub.c...r-sale-on-ebay

    Leave a comment:


  • Warren Webb
    replied
    Nice looking car using all Studebaker components but if I was interested in buying it I would question why the brake pedal is so low in relation to the clutch pedal.

    Leave a comment:


  • Flashback
    replied
    I like the "improvements", all except the front sheet metal, front bumper, doors, rear bumper and dash.

    Leave a comment:


  • Milaca
    replied
    Johnny Cash worked for Studebaker? Does it have a Cadillac engine in it?

    Leave a comment:


  • PackardV8
    replied
    Very nice car, all around, but as previously mentioned, it's been through eBay already and been thoroughly discussed here. Most of the previous comment has been favorable. I'd drive it and enjoy it.
    jack vines

    Leave a comment:


  • 52hawk
    replied
    I never read the ad copy the other times it's been on ebay. "no cutting or welding" but it says the doors are GT Hawk. Not-they're 57 or later c-body.[Just nit pickin']. Nice car,maybe,but really just a 53 with some mis-matched parts.

    Leave a comment:


  • Corvanti
    replied
    you are correct, Mr. C !

    i recall seeing the ad several times in the past few months. in the last ad it did not meet its reserve at $8,800 earlier this month.

    i kinda like it, but wouldn't do a "one piece at a time" vehicle quite the same.

    i know nothing about her or the owner's skills. perhaps some of the central and western NC members can shed more light...

    Leave a comment:


  • Andy R.
    replied
    "I got one piece at a time, and it didn't cost me a dime..."

    Leave a comment:


  • jclary
    replied
    I don't think this is the car's first "go-round" on eBay or as a discussion on this forum. Also, I think this car has survived in this region for quite some time and keeps reappearing. I don't know what shape it is in mechanically, but in pictures...it is eye pleasing.

    Leave a comment:


  • spokejr
    replied
    Rich,

    That is a really sharp car, I especially like the 4 on the floor.

    When I first saw it listed, I noticed then (and he still claims it now), that the doors are off a `63 Hawk. I wonder if the skins are off a `63 because the `63 had a frameless window, not the full frame his has. If he really wanted to re-create Bob Bourke's original scheme, he would have needed to go with reshaping the entire door.

    If I recall correctly from an interview with Mr. Bourke, the idea was for an even longer door that would have its window reach all the way back to occupy the space that the rear wing window occupies. The bottom of the door would have ended where does now, but instead of rising straight up would have angled back to align with the back line of the wing window Engineering and Accounting squashed it due to cost of reinforcing the structure and hinges for the long door, also ingress and egress if the car is too close to another in a parking lot.

    Cheers,

    Ken

    Leave a comment:


  • rockne10
    replied
    I miss the sculpt on the doors. I would also question use of the '53 tail light lenses. '54 and later offer more safety. All in all, I would be real inclined to park it in my garage.

    Leave a comment:


  • StudeRich
    replied
    Originally posted by 63t-cab View Post
    I remember seeing one done kinda like this one some years ago (a black one) but really has nothing in common with a GT,except a couple front end peices.
    True, but that '63 Grille, '59 Fenders, Doors, Hood and Side Grilles, Dash; and '62 GT Power Train give it a definate "Hawk Look" at least from the front which is the main place you look to ID a Car.

    But you are right, a '53 is a '53 is a '53, especially unless it has a '62 frame.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X