Restoration (refurbishment) almost complete?

[jnfweber]

After several years, the [refurbishment] of my President Classic is (almost) complete. Last touch was addition of (non-stock) trunk liner panels from Loga Enterprises. I say "refurbishment" instead of "restoration" since restoration means "restore to original condition, which would mean sanding down to bare metal, "frame off" restoration, including "rotisserie" restoration of frame and drive line, painting (not "powder coating" or pre-painting with POR 15), which would be better than original condition. I will no longer have this car "judged" as a "picky" chief judge would detract from trunk liner, not original paint color or theme, while "passing" on their own cars to achieve 400 point condition. Deduct for amber front turn signals, and other "safety improvements" such as welded exhaust system, even with original clamps, and for that matter, stainless steel exhaust system. At least my car was undercoated at the factory (the frame was not undercoated). I still am on our chapter judging team, although I am a bit more tolerant of original glass, chrome, rubber, etc. After all, the name is still Studebaker Drivers Club. (I still need to get a 24 battery frame, although the bolts and wing nuts are original.
Question: Was a trunk liner a factory option for 1957 President Classic or 1958 Packard Starliner? Photo of latter also attached. The second to last photo is my trunk as it usually appears. <g>

[studegary]

Nice car! I am jealous. My first Studebaker was a 1957 President Classic that had been used for one year prior to my purchase. I also owned a 1958 Packard Hardtop for nine years.

The Packard Hardtop came with a fiber trunk floor covering. No options, like on the interior of these Hardtops (cloth/vinyl or all vinyl).

The President Classic also came with a fiber floor covering.

I do not see any indication of optional trunk interior trim (except for a trunk light) for either model.

[63t-cab]

Really nice President Jack, the all Black "even Tires" looks quite luxurious to Me for plushly motoring down the Road

[jnfweber]

Thanks for the information, Gary. There were remnants of cardboard trunk and rear seat backs in the car, plus a cardboard wheel disk which would have no way been used on a Studebaker, considering the spare tire was held in place by the jack base with a 6 inch bolt and wing nut. I recall some car I had in the past, maybe a 56 Pontiac Catalina that may have had a cardboard (tan, with pattern) to cover the open space on the rear of the spare tire wheel. Then, there were two versions of the 58 Studebaker hard top, one a Commander level and one a President level. There was no 58 President Classic and I doubt if there was a shorter-bodied 58 President sedan, which would have looked even more odd with the big fins and tail light. (and grafted-on dual headlight pods.) They should have left the single headlamps on each side and the 58 models would have looked decent. I have wondered if anyone has ever substituted a 57 front clip on a 58 Studebaker, or a 64-66 sedan front clip on a Champ truck.

Jack

[studegary]

Thanks for the information, Gary. There were remnants of cardboard trunk and rear seat backs in the car, plus a cardboard wheel disk which would have no way been used on a Studebaker, considering the spare tire was held in place by the jack base with a 6 inch bolt and wing nut. I recall some car I had in the past, maybe a 56 Pontiac Catalina that may have had a cardboard (tan, with pattern) to cover the open space on the rear of the spare tire wheel. Then, there were two versions of the 58 Studebaker hard top, one a Commander level and one a President level. There was no 58 President Classic and I doubt if there was a shorter-bodied 58 President sedan, which would have looked even more odd with the big fins and tail light. (and grafted-on dual headlight pods.) They should have left the single headlamps on each side and the 58 models would have looked decent. I have wondered if anyone has ever substituted a 57 front clip on a 58 Studebaker, or a 64-66 sedan front clip on a Champ truck.

Jack

A 1958 President sedan is a Y body (long version) and is a President Classic in all but name. The shorter President Regal (Vice President) is the model that was not continued from 1957 to 1958. I have owned both 1957 President sedans, Regal and Classic. There is quite a difference in them, especially in driving them.

I didn't mean to imply that there was no other trim pieces in those trunks, just that there were no options available.

I have seen earlier, like 1956, noses put on 1958 models. Putting a '64-'66 nose on a Champ would be much more difficult because of the cowl shape change in 1961 (Champ uses 1960 style).

Perhaps you were not buying cars in 1957 when there was a big push for dual headlights ("to be modern").

[63t-cab]

Jack, back in 1977 My Father bought out a Stude Dealer Parts stash. in one of the Buildings was a Champ Truck,with a 66 Lark type nose. I did not check it out up real close,so can't say what was/or was not done to the Hood/Cowl area. but from a general look,the only thing that was not quite right was that the front Fenders were/are to short top to bottom at the Door edge.

Thanks for the information, Gary. There were remnants of cardboard trunk and rear seat backs in the car, plus a cardboard wheel disk which would have no way been used on a Studebaker, considering the spare tire was held in place by the jack base with a 6 inch bolt and wing nut. I recall some car I had in the past, maybe a 56 Pontiac Catalina that may have had a cardboard (tan, with pattern) to cover the open space on the rear of the spare tire wheel. Then, there were two versions of the 58 Studebaker hard top, one a Commander level and one a President level. There was no 58 President Classic and I doubt if there was a shorter-bodied 58 President sedan, which would have looked even more odd with the big fins and tail light. (and grafted-on dual headlight pods.) They should have left the single headlamps on each side and the 58 models would have looked decent. I have wondered if anyone has ever substituted a 57 front clip on a 58 Studebaker, or a 64-66 sedan front clip on a Champ truck.

Jack

[56GH]

Of all the six Studebakers I've ever owned, I always had a special affinity for my Azure and Wedgewood blue '57 President Classic! We owned it from 1993 to 1997 when I sold it to buy a '56 GH. I sometimes wonder where it is now!

I'm glad you've got such a beauty! Mine had factory A/C and HD shocks and springs. The trunk liner material was missing when we bought the car but it could have been the Mattex material that has been discussed on the Forum before. Good luck with your terrific highway cruiser!

[truckguy]

Your car looks fantastic!

[jnfweber]

A 1958 President sedan is a Y body (long version) and is a President Classic in all but name. The shorter President Regal (Vice President) is the model that was not continued from 1957 to 1958. I have owned both 1957 President sedans, Regal and Classic. There is quite a difference in them, especially in driving them.

I didn't mean to imply that there was no other trim pieces in those trunks, just that there were no options available.

I have seen earlier, like 1956, noses put on 1958 models. Putting a '64-'66 nose on a Champ would be much more difficult because of the cowl shape change in 1961 (Champ uses 1960 style).

Perhaps you were not buying cars in 1957 when there was a big push for dual headlights ("to be modern").

I'd like to know what you think is the difference in driving a 57 H-W and a 57 H-Y sedan. Which do you think rides better, and which handles better? For reference, the Y bodies were on the Land Cruiser Sedans, the 54 model called State Sedan, and 55 called President State Sedan. Oh, and I've never heard the W body President called "Vice".

http://classiccardatabase.com/postwar-models/Studebaker.php

I never liked dual headlamps, started on the 1957 Nash, the same folks that destroyed the Hudson Hornet, although the Hudsons 56-57 looked much better than the Nashes. And as far as worst looking, the 1958 Fords and Studebakers took the prize!

[studegary]

I'd like to know what you think is the difference in driving a 57 H-W and a 57 H-Y sedan. Which do you think rides better, and which handles better? For reference, the Y bodies were on the Land Cruiser Sedans, the 54 model called State Sedan, and 55 called President State Sedan. Oh, and I've never heard the W body President called "Vice".

http://classiccardatabase.com/postwar-models/Studebaker.php

I never liked dual headlamps, started on the 1957 Nash, the same folks that destroyed the Hudson Hornet, although the Hudsons 56-57 looked much better than the Nashes. And as far as worst looking, the 1958 Fords and Studebakers took the prize!

Having owned and driven both of mine ('57 Classic and '57 Regal) for many miles, and also driven others, I always found the long wheelbase models to be more comfortable, better riding and better handling. Besides the length difference, there is a difference in "balance" of the car. Of course, these are my observations.

I personally think that a 1958 Edsel's headlight treatment is much worse than a 1958 Ford. My FiL purchased a new 1958 Ford Country Sedan package in black and white. In 1963, I bought it from him to use as a second car. I thought that it looked okay for the time, but it was mechanically a terrible car. In about 1965, I traded it in on a 1961 Lark VIII Regal sedan that was a great car.

[StudeRich]

This Chart is very complete as to the Model listings but full of Errors!

http://classiccardatabase.com/postwa...Studebaker.php

I see it "SAYS" the '57 President Classic Y Body has a 116 inch W/B and the same 210 HP that the W & F Body Presidents have, NOT! It says they all have the Engine Number at the Rear of the Block and a Dual downdraft Carter Carb!


I have never or seldom seen Year Ending Serial Number listings before, I don't believe Studebaker ever listed them, I wonder where they got those and if they are correct?

NOPE, you're both wrong, the Worst looking '58 is clearly the '58 Buick with the Olds very Close behind!

[Studeous]

Wow! You’ve done a fantastic job. That black Machine is quite stunning

[jnfweber]

Your President was a nice one. I had considered those colors for mine. Did the air-conditioning still work?

[jnfweber]

This Chart is very complete as to the Model listings but full of Errors!

http://classiccardatabase.com/postwa...Studebaker.php

I see it "SAYS" the '57 President Classic Y Body has a 116 inch W/B and the same 210 HP that the W & F Body Presidents have, NOT! It says they all have the Engine Number at the Rear of the Block and a Dual downdraft Carter Carb!


I have never or seldom seen Year Ending Serial Number listings before, I don't believe Studebaker ever listed them, I wonder where they got those and if they are correct?

NOPE, you're both wrong, the Worst looking '58 is clearly the '58 Buick with the Olds very Close behind!

In my opinion, the 59 Olds is the "wurst' of the models from the GM sausage factory in those days, and the 59 Pontiac did the best job with dual headlights, followed by the 58 Chevy, then the Buick, 59 Cadillac and 59 Olds, from best to worst. 58 Ford, somewhat worse than the '59 model, but still, our beloved Studebaker is still "worst of the worst', with the obviously "add-on" headlight pods, and the 4 door wagon, OMG the way the fins extended beyond the rear window and gate, almost screams for a rear package platform to complete the abortion, or a "continental kit", which would have made rear entry nearly impossible. Even the 58 Packard looked better, except the wagon. It is about time for someone to put a 57 front clip on the 57 Packard Starliner to make a fairly nice-looking custom.