Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why we restore Studebakers....

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

  • Why we restore Studebakers....

    If a picture is worth 1,000 words, here's 4,000 of them.

    As offered for the money shown at a large, multi-make car show on Fathers' Day 2016:







    Anyone care to hazard a guess as to the Nova's structural integrity, given their flimsy unibody design to begin with...with the rust shown?

    No matter, you'll have plenty of time to think about it while replenishing your savings:




    Now, 'spare me the lecture of how much a top-flight 1963 Nova SS Six convertible (because a V8 wasn't available in 1963) is "worth" when done, versus the "worth" of a 400-point 1963 Lark Daytona V8 convertible.

    I can't imagine it costing much more to restore the Lark if it was as rough as this Nova...heck, maybe even less. And when both cars were done, I'd bet they'd sell within $1,000 of each other. Heck, the Lark might even sell for more, since it could be a V8. 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.

  • #2
    Just a couple of evenings ago, I thought about the son of the lady where I lived in 1961-1962. He came out of the service then and purchased a new Nova convertible. We had a lot of fun in it. Girls seemed to be attracted to it.

    Back to the subject car. To me, it doesn't look too bad. I didn't check, but there are probably a lot of NORS panels avilable for this car or you could use a donor two door sedan or hardtop.

    For an "OBO" asking price, I do not think that it is out of line if this is what you are looking for (not me). I think that you better recheck your restored value for this car versus a Studebaker.
    Gary L.
    Wappinger, NY

    SDC member since 1968
    Studebaker enthusiast much longer

    Comment


    • #3
      I have owned each nova convertible a 1962 and the 1963 SS plus many other 1st Gen. Nova's I finally threw in the towel they are really just a cheap throw away car. Lark's are 10 times the car without even getting into the $$$ aspect of either. I do still like the Nova's styling however and the Hardtops are really sharp!!! but still truly just a cheaply built car. Knowing what I know now? I Lust for a JTS Lark.
      "Fords are cars Studebakers are Automobiles" -Jerry Washburn

      Comment


      • #4
        I recall seeing a fair amount of those around at one time, including a family who lived two blocks to the east of us who owned one.

        They were certainly never 'rare' like a Daytona convertible of the same year would be. What does your book tell us for production numbers?

        Craig

        Comment


        • #5
          Bob -

          Interesting that a well designed, "non-framed" car is as strong if not more so that many "framed" cars that have less designed bodies..!
          Many of the American cars fit that bill, Chevy II's, Nova's, Mustangs, Darts, etc. Even the lowly Vega (body wise !) was done fairly well.
          Fact not hearsay, look it up.

          I, as well as many other east coasters have seen the damage corrosion does to...framed cars, as well as non-framed cars..! But yes, in this case, a non-framed car may not last as long as a framed car on the east coast with the salt both on the road and in the air for those living near the ocean.

          Mike

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by 8E45E View Post
            They were certainly never 'rare' like a Daytona convertible of the same year would be. What does your book tell us for production numbers? Craig
            There is no breakout for SS versus "regular" 1963 Nova convertibles, Craig.

            The numbers are:

            24,823 1963 Chevy Nova convertibles

            1,015 1963 Studebaker Lark convertibles

            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


            • #7
              Bob Hagerty old car guide shows the 63 Lark Daytona convert with v8 worth $23,600 and a nova 400 convert with a 6 as $16,300. not quite the same car but close. I would think about the same cost to restore maybe a little higher on the lark as chev mechanical parts should be less as most fit all Chevy's. and should be a large supply of body parts as most body style novas parts interchange.

              Comment


              • #8
                they are really just a cheap throw away car.


                I thought the same thing when i was into 64-67 Mustangs.
                101st Airborne Div. 326 Engineers Ft Campbell Ky.

                Comment


                • #9
                  My answer to your original question is on my cap...

                  John Clary
                  Greer, SC

                  SDC member since 1975

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Mind you, it's still sitting there for that asking price.... It did not actually SELL for that number.

                    I saw many similar on the Power Tour. Many want them because it is so easy to drop in a crate Chevy engine with minimal modifications, a 700R4 (or better) and a heavier rear axle from a different Nova and you've got a real power house. It's not my cup of meat, but I like Different By Design!
                    Dis-Use on a Car is Worse Than Mis-Use...
                    1959 Studebaker Lark VIII 2DHTP

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Speaking personally only, I always liked the '65 by far the best of that first Chevy II styling, and there were potent V8's available from the factory by that time.

                      Being into Studes for a long time now, I'm always surprised at how goofy the competition looks today...I'm talking early '60's compacts. Like this Chevy II, most have a lot of fussy trim down the side, and most have small rear wheel openings, which to me date the styling. This Chevy II has small front wheel openings too IMHO.

                      And a '63 Lark instrument panel is much nicer-looking. Of course I realize that is a subjective opinion.
                      Bill Pressler
                      Kent, OH
                      (formerly Greenville, PA)
                      Currently owned: 1966 Cruiser, Timberline Turquoise, 26K miles
                      Formerly owned: 1963 Lark Daytona Skytop R1, Ermine White
                      1964 Daytona Hardtop, Strato Blue
                      1966 Daytona Sports Sedan, Niagara Blue Mist
                      All are in Australia now

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        But...But...But... The latest craze in turning big profits in the resto mod world is to transplant a potent LS power plant into a car like this Nova and do the rest of the car as essentially stock. I would bet that an LS powered Nova Convertible would sell for far more than any 400 point Daytona Lark Convertible. It may not be fair, but thats the world we live in.
                        sals54

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          All the old cars where throw away cars. They wanted them to rust out and wear out about every 5-7 years so you had to buy a new car. That's how all manufactures intended to stay in business.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by sals54 View Post
                            But...But...But... The latest craze in turning big profits in the resto mod world is to transplant a potent LS power plant into a car like this Nova and do the rest of the car as essentially stock. I would bet that an LS powered Nova Convertible would sell for far more than any 400 point Daytona Lark Convertible. It may not be fair, but thats the world we live in.
                            How about apples to apples: drop a LS into the Lark. How would they compare now?

                            (Personally I would rather have a stock Lark, and I did, but I'm just wondering.)
                            Mike Davis
                            Regional Manager, North Carolina
                            1964 Champ 8E7-122 "Stuey"

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by sals54 View Post
                              But...But...But... The latest craze in turning big profits in the resto mod world is to transplant a potent LS power plant into a car like this Nova and do the rest of the car as essentially stock. I would bet that an LS powered Nova Convertible would sell for far more than any 400 point Daytona Lark Convertible. It may not be fair, but that's the world we live in.
                              Agreed, Sal. But how's about we drop a genuine R3 in the 400-point Lark and see what that combination would bring? <GGG> 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

                              Working...
                              X