Announcement

Collapse

Get more Tips, Specs and Technical Data!

Did you know... this Forum is a service of the Studebaker Drivers Club? For more technical tips, specifications, history and tech data, visit the Tech Tips page at the SDC Homepage: www.studebakerdriversclub.com/tips.asp
See more
See less

GT Hawk problem areas

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

  • #16
    Right Jerry - the inside skin of the trunk lid is the same on the GTs as the earlier C-Ks, a cost-saving move I'm sure. Russ Farris

    1963 GT Hawk R-2 4-speed
    1964 Avanti R-1 Auto
    1963 GT Hawk R-2 4-speed
    1964 Avanti R-1 Auto

    Comment


    • #17
      I'm with PackardV8 in balancing this out with some positives. One of the major ones that I would add is the EXCELLENT handling and front-rear weight distribution. A GT Super Hawk with radius rods and rear stabilizer can take on anything of its era in the handling dept., and a lot of what has come after as well. And for driving in snow, the balanced weight distribution makes the GT more sure footed than any other rear wheel drive car I've ever driven.

      Gene Nagle
      1963 Hawk R1
      Gene Nagle
      1963 Hawk R1
      1985 Avanti

      Comment


      • #18
        I am not sure if this design was changed later on, but the hardtops(the versions with no B pillar), had something that resembled hog troughs underneath. They went from behind the lower rocker panel to the outside frame rail and looked like spot welded strips of sheet metal underneath. They are under the floor, kinda like a sub floor. These will rot through over the years, and unfortunately, they give strength to the body of the car since the pillar is not present in the hardtops, and keep the car and its body from flexing. You may go to look over a hardtop and perfect floors, but have these hog troughs rusted away.

        These are also available from our vendors(Classic Enterprise to name one).


        [IMG=left]http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t102/PlainBrownR2/55%20Studebaker%20Commander%20Streetrod%20Project/P1010531-1.jpg[/IMG=left]
        [IMG=left]http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t102/PlainBrownR2/55%20Studebaker%20Commander%20Streetrod%20Project/P1010550-1.jpg[/IMG=left]
        [IMG=right]http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t102/PlainBrownR2/Ex%20Studebaker%20Plant%20Locomotive/P1000578-1.jpg[/IMG=right]
        [IMG=right]http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t102/PlainBrownR2/My%201964%20Studebaker%20Commander%20R2/P1010168.jpg[/IMG=right]

        1964 Studebaker Commander R2 clone
        1963 Studebaker Daytona Hardtop with no engine or transmission
        1950 Studebaker 2R5 w/170 six cylinder and 3spd OD
        1955 Studebaker Commander Hardtop w/289 and 3spd OD and Megasquirt port fuel injection(among other things)

        Comment


        • #19
          yes, there's definitely POSITIVES to owning a Studebaker

          - parts availability (except for rust free front fenders)
          - vendor support
          - knowledgeable community
          - bulletproof mechanicals - despite the comments above about the front suspension bushings, the front suspension is pretty "fail safe," e.g. you can have bushings running metal to metal, sloppy, worn out kingpin bushings, and trunnions seized up and flopping around in ways the factory never intended and the car will still drive "OK." Not that I would recommend driving like that, but there is no common failure which will result in the front end of your car crashing into the pavement like there is with a ball joint front end.

          nate

          --
          55 Commander Starlight
          http://members.cox.net/njnagel
          --
          55 Commander Starlight
          http://members.cox.net/njnagel

          Comment

          Working...
          X