224V8 Studebaker's "OUTLIER"

[Skip Lackie]

I believe it was in Turning Wheels that I read Studebaker bought the design of the 224 from Cadillac whilst they were finishing out the design process for a Studebaker OHV V8 (the 259). Hence, this design doesn't seem to fit your definition, as the motor was produced by Studebaker, though a Cadillac design. Then again, I'm really not a gear-head and these things really aren't very clear to me. The thing I don't understand is why Studebaker discontinued the 245. It was a good motor and people like my Father loved it. The old man never really trusted a V8. Although he sure seemed to love the speed of one...

IMHO, the 245 was obsolescent, if not totally obsolete, by 1951 when the 232 V8 came out. Its design dated to the early 30s, and by the early 1950s, flatheads were passe in everything except lawnmowers. Studebaker continued to offer it in trucks, where relatively high torque at low RPMs was still valued for things like delivery trucks. Chrysler did the same thing with its (more modern) flathead 6 until 1954. The real question should be why the company didn't immediately offer the V8 in its trucks as soon as that engine became available, instead of waiting until 1954/55. More than half of the Stude trucks sold in 1955 (the first year the V8 was available in all truck lines) were equipped with V8s, which tells us how badly the company was misjudging the truck market. The Commander 6 was dropped from the lineup for 1956, but was made available again in February 1956 in response to those few customers wanting a low-revving lugger. It continued to sell in small numbers until 1960. I have a 245 in my 3R6 pickup and love it, but its limitations are all too obvious.

[Scott]

IMHO, the 245 was obsolescent, if not totally obsolete, by 1951 when the 232 V8 came out. Its design dated to the early 30s, and by the early 1950s, flatheads were passe in everything except lawnmowers. Studebaker continued to offer it in trucks, where relatively high torque at low RPMs was still valued for things like delivery trucks. Chrysler did the same thing with its (more modern) flathead 6 until 1954. The real question should be why the company didn't immediately offer the V8 in its trucks as soon as that engine became available, instead of waiting until 1954/55. More than half of the Stude trucks sold in 1955 (the first year the V8 was available in all truck lines) were equipped with V8s, which tells us how badly the company was misjudging the truck market. The Commander 6 was dropped from the lineup for 1956, but was made available again in February 1956 in response to those few customers wanting a low-revving lugger. It continued to sell in small numbers until 1960. I have a 245 in my 3R6 pickup and love it, but its limitations are all too obvious.

My guess is that Studebaker didn't want to introduce the V8 earlier either for cost reasons (price point) or because farmers who often bought the trucks were already very famliar with the 245 and how to fix or troubleshoot it. There might also have been the factor of parts-on-hand in local rural areas to make repairs. On top of that Studebaker might have assumed - probably correctly - that farmers were a conservative bunch who were interested in new technology, but liked to stick with the tried-and-true. Remember, Studebaker was making horse drawn wagons until 1920!

[Skip Lackie]

My guess is that Studebaker didn't want to introduce the V8 earlier either for cost reasons (price point) or because farmers who often bought the trucks were already very famliar with the 245 and how to fix or troubleshoot it. There might also have been the factor of parts-on-hand in local rural areas to make repairs. On top of that Studebaker might have assumed - probably correctly - that farmers were a conservative bunch who were interested in new technology, but liked to stick with the tried-and-true. Remember, Studebaker was making horse drawn wagons until 1920!

Good point on the price point -- I really don't know enough about Studebaker's 1950s price/competitive position in the truck market. However, I would respond to your other points as follows.
1, Stude dealers were already stocking V8 parts to repair and service the 1951 and later Commander cars.
2. They weren't selling many cars after 1952, so they had plenty of foundry capacity to make more V8 engines.
3. The company was already building V8-powered, RHD model 2R28 trucks for the Indian Army -- so they had already done ALL the engineering necessary to install the V8 engine in their line of trucks.

Bottom line: adding V8-powered trucks to their model lineup would have broadened their market base, even if: (a) the 245 engine also remained available, (2) conservative farmers didn't buy any of them, and (3) they only sold a few hundred V8 trucks. Their market share dropped by more than 50% between 1952 and 1954 -- that should have been enough of a scare for them to try ANYTHING to sell more trucks.

[SN-60]

The 320 CI Packard V8 is an obvious choice......All that meat and no potatoes!!

[Scott]

Good point on the price point -- I really don't know enough about Studebaker's 1950s price/competitive position in the truck market. However, I would respond to your other points as follows.
1, Stude dealers were already stocking V8 parts to repair and service the 1951 and later Commander cars.
2. They weren't selling many cars after 1952, so they had plenty of foundry capacity to make more V8 engines.
3. The company was already building V8-powered, RHD model 2R28 trucks for the Indian Army -- so they had already done ALL the engineering necessary to install the V8 engine in their line of trucks.

Bottom line: adding V8-powered trucks to their model lineup would have broadened their market base, even if: (a) the 245 engine also remained available, (2) conservative farmers didn't buy any of them, and (3) they only sold a few hundred V8 trucks. Their market share dropped by more than 50% between 1952 and 1954 -- that should have been enough of a scare for them to try ANYTHING to sell more trucks.

Well, there's always bad management to consider.