Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

1964 Daytona Convertible Registry

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

  • Hi Bill I believe your survival number may be on the low side as I know of 6 in N.J. alone and that's in the rust belt , Thanks Ed

    Comment


    • Bill: RE: Post #104.

      Not shooting the messenger, here, but the messenger's analysis is far too general and does not take into account important extenuating circumstances. The general observation about predicted survival rates based on raw percentages simply cannot be applied to specialty vehicles.

      For example, Chevrolet built 283,125 1957 210 4-door sedans, their most popular model that year. They also built 3,467 1956 Corvettes. Would we expect the survival rate (percentage) of each to be similar? Of course not, since 210s were so disposable and any 1956 Corvette, no matter how rough, will be saved and restored by someone, some time.

      Last year of production specialty cars may be assumed to have an even higher save rate because they were recognized as such almost immediately.

      Take 1957 Thunderbirds, for example. By early 1959, it was pretty obvious from the success of the 4-passenger 1958 Thunderbird, even in a recession year in which most cars took a sales hit, that there would likely never be another 2-passenger Thunderbird, at least in the foreseeable future. (The ill-begotten 2001 Thunderbird notwithstanding; few people can see 40 years ahead and besides, its sales proved it was not a good retro car anyway.)

      Hence, 1957 (and, to a lesser extent, 1955 and 1956) Thunderbirds were set aside more readily than other 1957 Fords, as would have been, say, retractable-top Skyliners. 1957 Custom 300 Fordors, though? Not so much, and more subject to the ordinary attrition rate advanced in the Naul citation.

      Enter 1964 Daytona convertibles and 1964 Gran Turismo Hawks. Less than a year after either/both were introduced, much less after production ceased, it was obvious there would never be any more of those cars, period. Hence, "Studebaker people," and even the hobby as a whole, would tend to save them more than other Studebakers of the era. We would expect them to have a far higher, far higher, survival rate than comparable cars of the era.

      One possible way to prove this, which I am not going to undertake, would be to make a careful count of 1963 Daytona convertibles among the cars owned by SCDCers in the most recent SDC Roster, versus the number of 1964 Convertibles. I wouldn't be surprised to see at least as many (or even more) 1964 convertibles accounted for as are 1963s, even though they made more 1963s (1,015) than 1964s (702).

      Also, while convertibles are more fragile, they tended to be better cared for than lesser models, regardless of make. They cost more to buy and were more highly-regarded than lesser-model counterparts. Another good example are 1956 Packard Carriage convertibles. There's a model on which there was pretty much a 100% lock would never be built again, and an unusually-high percentage of them are accounted for today, including the last one ever manufactured.

      Another excellent example are 1954 Hudson convertibles. Aagin, it was obvious to Hudson enthusiasts that there would be no more convertibles after the last step-down 1954 convertible was built in Detroit before that plant closed.

      I just returned from the 2014 Hudson-Essex-Terraplane Club's National Meet in French Lick IN and was amazed at the number of 1954 convertibles present. I didn't count them, but there seemed to be more of them than any more-plentifully-produced earlier year, and they were all nicely restored or pleasant survivors. Nobody knows how many step-down Hudson convertibles were manufactured in each model year from 1948 through 1954, so exact percentages cannot be computed even if you knew an exact number of survivors. (To clarify, however: The HET Club does know how many were built in the portion of 1954 model year production that occurred after January 1, 1954, when the new American Motors Corporation began keeping records that have survived.)

      Statistics are fun, but specific numbers cannot be applied to specialty cars regardless of manufacturer, especially last-year-of production specialty body styles. BP
      Last edited by BobPalma; 07-26-2014, 06:34 AM. Reason: spelling
      We've got to quit saying, "How stupid can you be?" Too many people are taking it as a challenge.

      Ayn Rand:
      "You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality."

      G. K. Chesterton: This triangle of truisms, of father, mother, and child, cannot be destroyed; it can only destroy those civilizations which disregard it.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by BobPalma View Post
        Bill: RE: Post #104.

        Not shooting the messenger, here, but the messenger's analysis is far too general and does not take into account important extenuating circumstances. The general observation about predicted survival rates based on raw percentages simply cannot be applied to specialty vehicles.

        For example, Chevrolet built 283,125 1957 210 4-door sedans, their most popular model that year. They also built 3,467 1956 Corvettes. Would we expect the survival rate (percentage) of each to be similar? Of course not, since 210s were so disposable and any 1956 Corvette, no matter how rough, will be saved and restored by someone, some time.

        Last year of production specialty cars may be assumed to have an even higher save rate because they were recognized as such almost immediately.

        Take 1957 Thunderbirds, for example. By early 1959, it was pretty obvious from the success of the 4-passenger 1958 Thunderbird, even in a recession year in which most cars took a sales hit, that there would likely never be another 2-passenger Thunderbird, at least in the foreseeable future. (The ill-begotten 2001 Thunderbird notwithstanding; few people can see 40 years ahead and besides, its sales proved it was not a good retro car anyway.)

        Hence, 1957 (and, to a lesser extent, 1955 and 1956) Thunderbirds were set aside more readily than other 1957 Fords, as would have been, say, retractable-top Skyliners. 1957 Custom 300 Fordors, though? Not so much, and more subject to the ordinary attrition rate advanced in the Naul citation.

        Enter 1964 Daytona convertibles and 1964 Gran Turismo Hawks. Less than a year after either/both were introduced, much less after production ceased, it was obvious there would never be any more of those cars, period. Hence, "Studebaker people," and even the hobby as a whole, would tend to save them more than other Studebakers of the era. We would expect them to have a far higher, far higher, survival rate than comparable cars of the era.

        One possible way to prove this, which I am not going to undertake, would be to make a careful count of 1963 Daytona convertibles among the cars owned by SCDCers in the most recent SDC Roster, versus the number of 1964 Convertibles. I wouldn't be surprised to see at least as many (or even more) 1964 convertibles accounted for as are 1963s, even though they made more 1963s (1,015) than 1964s (702).

        Also, while convertibles are more fragile, they tended to be better cared for than lesser models, regardless of make. They cost more to buy and were more highly-regarded than lesser-model counterparts. Another good example are 1956 Packard Caribbean convertibles. There's a model on which there was pretty much a 100% lock would never be built again, and an unusually-high percentage of them are accounted for today, including the last one ever manufactured.

        Another excellent example are 1954 Hudson convertibles. Aagin, it was obvious to Hudson enthusiasts that there would be no more convertibles after the last step-down 1954 convertible was built in Detroit before that plant closed.

        I just returned from the 2014 Hudson-Essex-Terraplane Club's national Meet in French Lick IN and was amazed at the number of 1954 convertibles present. I didn't count them, but there seemed to be more of them than any more-plentifully-produced earlier year, and they were all nicely restored or pleasant survivors. Nobody knows how many step-down Hudson convertibles were manufactured in each model year from 1948 through 1954, so exact percentages cannot be computed even if you knew an exact number of survivors. (To clarify, however: The HET Club does know how many were built in the portion of 1954 model year production that occurred after January 1, 1954, when the new American Motors Corporation began keeping records that have survived.)

        Statistics are fun, but specific numbers cannot be applied to specialty cars, regardless of manufacturer, especially last-year-of production specialty body styles. BP
        I bet NOT EVEN ONE of those 14,000 over-hyped 1976 Cadillac Eldorado convertibles ever got scrapped!!

        Craig

        Comment


        • Originally posted by BobPalma View Post
          No mention of Canada, though, Craig, although it is obvious the car was destined for Special Things. BP
          Bob, there are three 1964 convertibles I can think of right now that have a degree of provenance, be it used for "special things" or have a notable owner. These include the 'Mademoiselle' show car, the 'Miss Canada' tour car, and the one owned by Granatelli. As stated, Dave owns the Granatelli car, and the Mademoiselle car was shown in Turning Wheels a few years ago. And I believe I have seen a black & white photo of the Mademoiselle car in a magazine (Track & Traffic perhaps ?) of it at the Toronto Auto Show so it did make the show car circuit to Canada. So far, the Hamilton-built 'Miss Canada' car appears to be unaccounted for at present.

          Craig

          Comment


          • Originally posted by 8E45E View Post
            I bet NOT EVEN ONE of those 14,000 over-hyped 1976 Cadillac Eldorado convertibles ever got scrapped! Craig
            You got that right, Craig; the best example of all.

            Thanks for the reminder. BP
            We've got to quit saying, "How stupid can you be?" Too many people are taking it as a challenge.

            Ayn Rand:
            "You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality."

            G. K. Chesterton: This triangle of truisms, of father, mother, and child, cannot be destroyed; it can only destroy those civilizations which disregard it.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by 8E45E View Post
              Bob, there are three 1964 convertibles I can think of right now that have a degree of provenance, be it used for "special things" or have a notable owner. These include the 'Mademoiselle' show car, the 'Miss Canada' tour car, and the one owned by Granatelli. As stated, Dave owns the Granatelli car, and the Mademoiselle car was shown in Turning Wheels a few years ago. And I believe I have seen a black & white photo of the Mademoiselle car in a magazine (Track & Traffic perhaps ?) of it at the Toronto Auto Show so it did make the show car circuit to Canada. So far, the Hamilton-built 'Miss Canada' car appears to be unaccounted for at present.

              Craig

              I have to say that I've found this string fascinating. When I read post #104, I said to myself "that makes sense." Then when I read post #107 I said "that makes sense too." Aside from mine, I've only laid eyes on two others; a Strato Blue one at a car show in Londonderry, NH in 2012 (the one that inspired me to start looking for one in the first place), and a Bordeaux Red one at a car show at the Endicott Estate in Boston last year. As I recall, that one was badged as an "R" Daytona that really wasn't an R car. But I thought when I joined the SDC, the application asked what Studebakers I owned. If it did, then wouldn't the SDC already have at least something of a database of 64 convertibles to start with? From there, the only question would be the number that are owned by folks that are not members of SDC.


              Lastly, while I appreciate the comments Bob made about certain cars having high survival rates due to the fact that people "knew" at the time that they were likely to be collectible later (ex '57 T-Birds), was the case with 64 Studebaker convertibles really comparable? That said, based on the fact that 20 or so have already been accounted for fairly easily (no offense Stu), the 35-40 number still seems a bit low. But the 100-125 seems high. As with many things, the answer is probably somewhere in the middle.


              Here's one last idea....lets post images we find on the web of 64 Daytona convertibles to see if we can establish ownership for them. That might turn up some that belong to non-SDC members. For example this one.....

              http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...s_'10).jpg
              Last edited by David Daoust; 07-26-2014, 06:51 AM. Reason: typo
              David Daoust
              Stratham, NH
              '64 Daytona convertible

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Stu Chapman View Post
                Thank you Brian. Your build date is October 16th 1963.

                Stu Chapman
                That answers my longstanding question of whether or not Studebaker built any cars on my Birthday! I knew that the plant was taking production breaks during that time and I wasn't sure the lines were running that day. Awesome!

                Comment


                • RE POST #104

                  Bill, as of this morning we have 22 cars registered and I haven't even begun contacting all SDC members who show 64 ownership in their membership records. I think you may be pleasantly surprised. Keep watching.

                  Stu Chapman

                  Comment


                  • I did take exception to the author's contention that convertibles tended to deteriorate faster then non convertibles. Thinking instead that they would have some proprietary use which would tend to coddle them. Then I began to wonder how the second, third, etc. owners would have valued any orphan car in the ultra competitive 1960's when people couldn't give their Larks away. To put it frankly there was little secondary market for a Lark in the late 60's and early 70's and with Lady Bird Johnson's "Highway Beautification Act" and the demise of the urban wrecking yard it put a lot of pressure on the Studebaker collector. How much could we save when the even Studebaker owners viewed them as disposable transportation. Frankly our focus was the C/K cars and not the Lark.

                    Stu I hope that you are right and the 64 convert. will reach the hoped for numbers. We already know that they have survived much better then the other Lark type cars, just how much better Is yet to be determined.-Bill

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Hallabutt View Post
                      I did take exception to the author's contention that convertibles tended to deteriorate faster then non convertibles. Thinking instead that they would have some proprietary use which would tend to coddle them. Then I began to wonder how the second, third, etc. owners would have valued any orphan car in the ultra competitive 1960's when people couldn't give their Larks away. To put it frankly there was little secondary market for a Lark in the late 60's and early 70's and with Lady Bird Johnson's "Highway Beautification Act" and the demise of the urban wrecking yard it put a lot of pressure on the Studebaker collector. How much could we save when the even Studebaker owners viewed them as disposable transportation. Frankly our focus was the C/K cars and not the Lark.

                      Stu I hope that you are right and the 64 convert. will reach the hoped for numbers. We already know that they have survived much better then the other Lark type cars, just how much better Is yet to be determined.-Bill
                      Have just emailed 47 members who show 64 converts on their membership renewal info. There are many more without email addresses to whom I will have to write.

                      Stu Chapman

                      Comment


                      • I knew Mr. Olsen at the time that he wrote that book. I did not consider him to be even close to being an expert on that subject, or many others that he wrote about. Many automotive writers over the years were better writers than they were historians.
                        Gary L.
                        Wappinger, NY

                        SDC member since 1968
                        Studebaker enthusiast much longer

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by jts359 View Post
                          Hi Bill I believe your survival number may be on the low side as I know of 6 in N.J. alone and that's in the rust belt , Thanks Ed
                          Can you contact those 6 and get them aboard?

                          Stu Chapman

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Stu Chapman View Post
                            RE POST #104

                            Bill, as of this morning we have 22 cars registered and I haven't even begun contacting all SDC members who show 64 ownership in their membership records. I think you may be pleasantly surprised. Keep watching.

                            Stu Chapman
                            We're now up to 27 cars registered plus information on 4 more that were scrapped. Keep the information coming!

                            Stu Chapman

                            Comment


                            • 64 Clone Superlark convertible

                              Here is my contribution to this list: 64V6711, body no. 193, production date 9/18/63, Bordeaux Red, Black interior, engine PJ317, Flight O Matic, PS, PDB, 4 BBL Carb, white sidewalls, Climatizer, undercoating, rear Bump, Belts, radio push, Front Bump, Wheel Disc..... Restored to R1, powershift, AC, bucket seats, 160 speedometer, redline tach, a super lark clone.

                              I also have C504944 the last convertible built. Bordeaux Red, Red buckets, 259, flight-o-matic, a pretty basic car. Rough condition needing complete restoration.
                              I obtained it from John Kimbrough (Starlite) in trade.

                              Joe Harris
                              Goldsby, OK
                              Attached Files

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by harlowman View Post
                                Here is my contribution to this list: 64V6711, body no. 193, production date 9/18/63, Bordeaux Red, Black interior, engine PJ317, Flight O Matic, PS, PDB, 4 BBL Carb, white sidewalls, Climatizer, undercoating, rear Bump, Belts, radio push, Front Bump, Wheel Disc..... Restored to R1, powershift, AC, bucket seats, 160 speedometer, redline tach, a super lark clone.

                                I also have C504944 the last convertible built. Bordeaux Red, Red buckets, 259, flight-o-matic, a pretty basic car. Rough condition needing complete restoration.
                                I obtained it from John Kimbrough (Starlite) in trade.

                                Joe Harris
                                Goldsby, OK
                                Thank you Joe. Cars recorded.

                                Stu Chapman

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X