1962 Rambler Classic vs. 1962 Studebaker Lark Y body

[Jessie J.]

Its a much different world now than the one that I grew up in. My grandchildren do know what a Studebaker is, 'cause their grandpa has a half a dozen of them, but have no idea of any 'Rambler'? or 'Hudson'?
They will never even think to ask me that old question; 'Is that some kind of Rambler?'

Which has never really bothered me much at all anyway, because in the past I have owned and loved a Rambler, and a Hudson, have driven a 'DeSoto' and a 'Plymouth', and used to play my afternoons away in a 'Kaiser', and a 'bathtub Nash'.
My 'dream car' as a teen ager was a 'Hupmobile Skylark'
These are all about as foreign to them as some unknown Chinese make is to me.

Already they get a bit of a glazed and perplexed look in their eye when I tell them that I worked for 'Fisher Body' and built 'Oldsmobiles'. Yes, there are a few still around, but their presence and once proud reputation simply does not register to these children of a new age, any more than Jack Benny's infamous 'Maxwell'.

[EssexExport]

It certainly can be hilarious when the non-informed expound their automotive knowledge.

[Jessie J.]

I can tell you back in the early 70's when I was a kid working in the wrecking yards we always had Ramblers but few Studebaker's .

Two things I remember about the ramblers were the shift linkage went to h*ll on the columns a lot and the rear ends had the shocks almost hold the rear end on they had coil springs in the back instead of leaf like Studebaker's and if a shock broke and you raised the car up to load on a wrecker the coil springs could fall right out then they were a bitch to load.

I actually had them rip right out from under the car and start coming apart while loading them, they have inclosed drive shafts and if the puny bolts that held them on the transmission broke the rear ends would fall right out from under the car.
If a shock broke and the coil fell out of place at speed over a rough road the car could go out of control .

Give me a Studebaker any day , there had to be a reason there were more Ramblers in the wrecking yards then Studebaker's.
About the only thing we ever sold out off the Ramblers were the radiators, then they would just sit there and rot.

Know what your talking about. I had to install leaf springs in my '62 Classic to keep the rear axle from falling out.
Got some hilarious stories on my 'learning curve' with that one.

[Mikado282]

If things had gone as had been originally planned Studebaker and AMC(Rambler) would of merged sometime in the late 50's. The Studebaker-Packard and Hudson-Nash mergers was just the first round. After a couple of years of digesting their merger partners then Studebaker and AMC were supposed to merge, but the guy who originally planned and orchestrated died of a sudden heart attack and the second part of the planned merger was never completed which left both companies doomed to fail eventually. Both companies made comebacks during the 58-64 time frame but neither one had the financial resources to sustain it. Would have been interesting to see if the combination would have worked.

Rambler to me means pre 1967 AMC's

A couple of observations: the Rambler and Studebaker V8's look so very much alike externally, I have to wonder if they might have had common ancestor. No other car manufacturers V8 engines look so much alike in the 50-60's. The reason I was always given for their being no aftermarket speed equipment for the the Rambler V8 that it would be useless to try to get more horsepower because of it's siamesed center exhaust port, yet Studebaker V8's do very well with theirs. Is their something else in the equation other than factory support? They both used the same basic BW automatic(Ford also used it too). Rambler had the best version IMO that it could be started in both first and second gear fully automatic. Why did not Studebaker use this version? Maybe it was a cost decision? Although I can't imigine it being that much more. One of earlier posters mentioned the parts situation, there are many Rambler's over the years that were unable to be repaired or restored because their are no parts available at any cost. Try to find a trunion for one. Studebaker owners have it good in comparison

[Corvanti]

wasn't the merge proposed by George Mason around 1954?

also, if Chrysler wouldn't have destroyed AMC parts (as stated above) when they acquired AMC - mainly for Jeep - many more NOS parts would be available. did Chrysler also destroy old AMC Jeep parts?

just asking....

[1962larksedan]

If things had gone as had been originally planned Studebaker and AMC(Rambler) would of merged sometime in the late 50's. The Studebaker-Packard and Hudson-Nash mergers was just the first round. After a couple of years of digesting their merger partners then Studebaker and AMC were supposed to merge, but the guy who originally planned and orchestrated died of a sudden heart attack and the second part of the planned merger was never completed which left both companies doomed to fail eventually. Both companies made comebacks during the 58-64 time frame but neither one had the financial resources to sustain it. Would have been interesting to see if the combination would have worked.

Rambler to me means pre 1967 AMC's

A couple of observations: the Rambler and Studebaker V8's look so very much alike externally, I have to wonder if they might have had common ancestor. No other car manufacturers V8 engines look so much alike in the 50-60's. The reason I was always given for their being no aftermarket speed equipment for the the Rambler V8 that it would be useless to try to get more horsepower because of it's siamesed center exhaust port, yet Studebaker V8's do very well with theirs. Is their something else in the equation other than factory support? They both used the same basic BW automatic(Ford also used it too). Rambler had the best version IMO that it could be started in both first and second gear fully automatic. Why did not Studebaker use this version? Maybe it was a cost decision? Although I can't imigine it being that much more. One of earlier posters mentioned the parts situation, there are many Rambler's over the years that were unable to be repaired or restored because their are no parts available at any cost. Try to find a trunion for one. Studebaker owners have it good in comparison

Rambler specific stuff isn't that hard to find; that coming from someone who had a 1967 American SW (me).

Siamese center exhaust ports: Pontiac V8's had those as well and God knows how much speed equipment was built for GTO's let alone Firebirds, etc.

[qsanford]

I think if the four companies had merged at the same time, it might have worked. The new American Motors would have had a full line of commercial vehicles and a genuine Luxury brand to complement their strong economy and mid range automobile lineup. If only...

[WinM1895]

If things had gone as had been originally planned Studebaker and AMC(Rambler) would of merged sometime in the late 50's.

There was never any plan for Studebaker...alone...to merge with anyone. George Mason, president of Nash-Kelvinator had proposed during WWII that the independents (excepting Willys) merge, but no one was interested because they knew there would be a sellers market as soon as the war ended.

But by mid-year 1953, the handwriting was on the wall, due to 'The Deuce's' (Henry Ford II) price war with Chevrolet and the cuts in defense contracts, the independents (excepting Kaiser-Willys) knew they had to merge to survive. The plan was that Nash-Kelvinator would acquire Hudson (which was in dire straits financially) forming AMC and Packard would purchase Studebaker (who by the end of the 1953 model run was also in dire financial straits) in a stock swap...then fold S-P into AMC.

AMC formed January 1954, but when Mason died suddenly of a heart attack, his successor George Romney, wanted nothing to do with S-P, which was left to 'go it alone.'

The Studebaker V8 was almost a direct copy of the 331 cid Cadillac OHV V8 introduced in 1949. The AMC V8 was originally developed by Kaiser-Frazer who couldn't afford to build it. At some point (I don't recall the particulars) AMC acquired the plans. The Packard V8 introduced in 1955 was similar to both the Cadillac & Studebaker V8's.

Read all about Packard's purchase of Studebaker: "The Fall of the Packard Motor Car Company" by James A. Ward - Stanford University Press 1995.

[1962larksedan]

One thing I've also noticed along with other posters here is the survival rate of Studebakers seems to be much higher than comparable vintage Ramblers.............