Buffalowed Bill

It's just my opinion, but I don't think that 1955-1957 cars ever went out of vogue. Personally I like all 1955-56's, and most 1957's. Sorry Terry, but I couldn't think of one car, from that era, that has lost any interest, that had to be found, or rediscovered.

I have been cleaning out a garage at a former rental. I found, just the vary front portion of an Opel Manta Rally, that my, then, 16yo nephew, and a friend parted out, almost forty years ago. I believe that the car was a 1972 or 73. I'm posting this in hopes that there might be someone out there that needs something like this for a project car. There is no bumper or grille, but there was one of the unique running lights, which I think Mary is putting on eBay. The sheet metal is solid with only vary slight body damage. The bracing is all intact and undamaged, with original paint and everything is absolutely rust free . The front end was somewhat rudely cut, and separated from the body, about two feet back of the vary front of the car, leaving part of the inner fender and a stub of the sub-frame. There are also nice hood hinges. I'm just trying to find out if there is any need for this. I just want to find a good home for this. I really would rather not have to scrap it.-Bill

That should have read carb needs a rebuild.

Before you go to far, check your needle valve seat. Sometimes a piece of dirt will get in between the needle and seat. Almost immediately the float bowl will fill up to overflowing, and flood the engine. Car will run rough and black smoke will be visible out the tailpipe. If the car was running OK prior to the incident then I doubt that you car needs a rebuild.

sum of the ideas presented are wonderful, but to say it will ruin the car to paint it is absurd. I don't think that anyone here has indicated that painting the car would "ruin" it. It's more a case of whether paint is going to make it any better. Changing the car from the way it has survived, for more then sixty five years, will probably not make it better ( more valuable) monetarily or historically. This forum provides a wonderful cross section of the present and historical attitudes, of real car people. We would be remiss if we failed to pass on what we've learned.

Sad point of fact, we all have to make our own mistakes, at least once.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/j448mcjytx0twat/AAAjuNwAW4q_IiRZVgf70uWXa?dl=0 Here you go Rod, just go get it. As a good friend used to say "all there is to it is just to do it."

It's certainly the owners choice, but there are some very knowledgeable people on this forum who feel that it might be in the car and the owner's best interest to maintain it as an original. I fear, that this maybe a case of a one time whimsical choice, by an owner who needs to be educated. When a noted restorer like "Restorer 32," and a specialty car dealer like Matt Harwood, indicate doubt as to any advantage to painting, I think that the owner should take heed. I really think that the owner needs to call a timeout, take a deep breath and listen.

I agree with Rusty on this one. Detail it to the the best that the car's ability will take it. Drive it and enjoy it for awhile. Learn to live with what you have. If you just jump into a protracted period of paint work, you are loosing time that you could be enjoying it. Chances are that after you put a nice paint job on the car, the chrome and interior will not be good enough. Many of us have already been there. An alternative, find another car on which some poor guy has already bit the bullet restoring. He has already done the work, and paid the bills, now you might be able the reap the benefit. Then you can keep or sell your car, as you see fit. Surprising how good your unrestored car might look when you have something that's really nice to alternate with it. You might be surprised by the response that your car will get, from real car people. The hobby has come a long way from the time when we thought that everything had to be restored.

I'll try to tread lightly here. When I tried to make the point, on the SDC forum, that a redesign of the block would have been required, I was taken to task by some claiming more knowledge then I had. A point well taken, I might add. I was told that it would only have entailed changing the block, and that the engineering work had already been done, but that the company dragged it's feet, and failed to carry through. I hate to spread rumors, but here I go doing it again! I'll try to narrate some company attitudes and how it played out in the 40' through the mid 60's. In the 30's Studebaker was part of a dyeing breed, the independent auto makers in the US, and they knew it. The company's successes with the economical Champion, in 1939, made it clear that their survival depended on their economy offerings. I'm sure that they also realized, that they had to modernize to compete. I'm also sure that the successes of Kettering's V8's, at GM, helped them plot their course. Being first in it's competitive market was considered essential. They were first with their OH V8, and it turned out to be a good engine, and the right choice. I don't think that there can be any argument so far. Studebaker made some assumptions when they designed their V8. First that it's displacement had to be limited to that of it's competition, where they knew they would have the advantage, in performance and fuel economy, which they were consistently able to prove. They also assumed that the post war era, would usher in the availability of gasoline of better quality and higher octane. The displacement of the original 232cu" V8 (not 239 cu" that was Ford) was designed to take advantage of the higher octane fuel. The engineers felt that the engine would be able to easily handle, compression ratios as high a 13:1, with no design changes. The company felt that the engine would still have a comparative advantage in fuel economy, with no drop in performance. I should add that no manufacturer did a better job of utilizing the Warner overdrive. It might also be argued that their " Studebaker Automatic" trans. which had features like the lock-up torque converter, that made it among the best in the industry. I don't think that they got it wrong in 1950, but they didn't anticipate the changing attitudes of the buying public. The American buying public became caught up in the horsepower race, fueled by the Big Three. For a time, I think that, many buyers were, more then, willing to sacrifice fuel economy, for the romance, that power and comfort seemed to offer. Studebaker did redesign the block for 1955 to incorporate 259cu," in response to it's competition. the engine was not limited to 289cu." A 304cu" performance engine was produced in limited numbers in the 60's. There was also design work done that would have increased the displacement to 320cu">. Rather then lose the economy of the 259/289 they opted for supercharging instead of cubic inches. When evaluating Studebaker's almost seventy years of auto manufacture, I don't think that the question should be how they got it wrong, but rather how did they get it so right? When three thousand independents had already failed, they must have been doing something right! Phew! sorry got carried away.

Lionel has retired, and is now living in Bellingham Wa.

Not trying to beat a dead horse, but debunked by whom? I've been a Stude guy since I started driving in 1961. Sometimes I think that I have learned a great deal, other times I'm humbled by what I don't know. One thing that I do know is if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it's probably a relative. The similarities, alone, tells me something about the Cadillac/Studebaker relationship. I had a good friend, since deceased, who worked in the technical writing area in Studebaker in the late 40's and early 50's. In the center of his work area was a 1949 Cadillac engine. My friend said that throughout the workday engineers would, come and go, taking measurements, and generally using the engine as a reference. From the moment that the Stude came out, with their V8 in 1951, the relationship was obvious. There were many differences in the two engines, as would be expected from a manufacturer focused on fuel economy, but the similarities are unmistakable. There has always been the unsubstantiated rumor, that GM threatened a lawsuit, that was settled out of court. I doubt that Cadillac would want to do much more then make a point, about something that most thought was obvious. After all, Cad had nothing to fear from Studebaker. In the final analysis both engines proved to be successful, with both surviving well into the 60's.

Rusty, Got a chuckle out of the sample, 1932 Studebaker that you indicated might be a better buy. That car is one of two extent, and has just won it's class at Pebble Beach. Plus I doubt that the owner would sell, anyway. If the gentleman inquiring about a convertible sedan, with "reliable classic lines," and "high end marques,", would be willing to define his terms. All the big Studebaker Presidents 1928-33 (less the 1933 Model 82) and the larger Nash offerings are CCCA "full Classics." They are also are more rare, then a similar Pierce, Packard or Cadillac. One of the smaller offerings of these companies, might be less expensive, if one can be found.

Sorry to hear about your loss. None of that could have been easy. Healing from something like that could take a lifetime, I hope that you have been able to move on. No doubt your memory is better then mine, but one thing that I can assure you of "run of the mill six that somebody stuck President lights and bumpers on," are not my words, but other then the words "run of the mill," the rest may have been the conclusion that we reached. I'm sorry that our efforts to help you understand what you had, were misunderstood. I don't know how you could feel the need now to slam our efforts, by inferring that our attitude was surly, or demeaning. None of the rest of us shared your memory of the meeting, the same way you did. You couldn't have gotten it more wrong, if you tried. As Strother Martin said "What we've got here is failure to communicate." I admit to being disappointed at your failure to respond to Mary's invitations. However you choose to think of me, she deserved more consideration then you were willing to give. I apologize for letting my irritation spill out, in my comments. It's really not like me, but I really do think that she deserved better. Enjoy the ride, and take comfort in the fact that you were able to do it your way.-Bill

During the 70's a friend and I made yearly pilgrimages to Harrah's. We would spend about three day's there at each visit. It was like a huge car guy's theme park. In those days there were numerous restorations, in process. On the premises Bill had everything a chrome plating shop, an upholstery facility, wood working etc, it was a real production line, and all visible to the public. Three thousand cars, on display in five or six huge warehouse like buildings. The cars were so closely packed in some buildings, that there was scarcely room to walk between them, and nary a post war car to be seen. It was impossible to prepare yourself for what you would see on your first trip. Bill had a special love for the Classics Pierce Arrow, Duesenberg, Franklin, Packard etc., and a dozen or more of each on display. But maybe his biggest contribution was in teens cars and earlier. He was restoring these cars irrespective of value. Virtually no one was doing this, on that scale, at that time and will never be seen again!

Rod, Sorry for my abrupt response, but it may still help answer some forthcoming questions. These are only my opinions and you can take them for their face value. Unfortunately your car has been so altered that coming up with a definitive answer is going to be difficult. It's going to require some assumptions that may be true, but may not. Is the chassis Studebaker, and if so, was it originally married to that body. You indicate that you have discovered the stamped number on the frame, this is all important. My 74 yo brain can't recall what our wheelbase measurement that we took. The longer wb would have immediately excluded the larger Commander, but I do not remember it as being a 54R, either and we know that it is not a President. The body always seemed larger, then would have been on a 54, but that's just my opinion, and I am no "expert." As you indicated, the bumper is not the double bumper, as used on the 54R. The President bumper would be larger top to bottom, then that used on the Commander and the Dictator. Another obvious fact is that the oval headlights are not for this car. They are probably from a President, since the optional oval headlights used on the Commander and the Dictator, were considerably smaller. 1931-33 Presidents all use the oval headlights but they changed manufacturer every year. Unless the plating process removed the inscribed script on top of the housing, or the lenses have been changed, you should be able to determine what you have. If it turns out to be a Dictator or Commander it may be more rare then the 54R, but I don't think that even matters. Whatever the car began life as, it is not now, and only an extreme amount of dedication and resource allocation, could restore it to that condition. What it is now is a street rod, fashioned fifty five years ago. That is where most of it's interest is going reside, and that is going to be where the value is. Most street rodders could care less if the car is a Studebaker, to them it is what it has become. My opinion is that you should hire a certified appraiser, someone familiar with this type of car, to set an insurance value, that will protect your family. It was obvious from our visit, that you were part of a busy family, and that you personal interest was in exotic cars. The Studebaker was an obvious departure from your interest and comfort area. You were invited to attend a number of chapter events. Mary sent you Emails, for several outings, to which you failed to respond. Good luck on your quest, solitary enjoyment of your car, but we'll be here when you need us.

Bernie, You're a real kick, you always make me laugh! I hate this LOL thing, but your words of wisdom really make me laugh out loud. I have to admit that sometimes I have to reread them, before I get it. My old brain just has some trouble catching up. EBay has worked for us. I don't pretend to be an expert, one car bought and another sold. The first was a car bought more then ten years ago, not well bought! I took the responsibility for making a bad choice. The number of mistakes I made on this transaction could fill a chapter, on what not to do, but lessons learned have been invaluable The second was the sale of a car, to a buyer in Florida. The transaction went off without a hitch. We couldn't be happier with the outcome. EBay's dispute resolution process, has gone a long way to making the process safer, for both buyer and seller. Vetting of the seller, and trying to weed out the scammers, has made for a much better environment. It seems to me, that the cars that sell on eBay, would probably sell on any sales forum. Many cars of the independent manufacturers, and cars in poor condition, are in for a struggle.

I believe that it used to be called Pegasus. Some years ago, the most recent owners purchased the yard, and tried to sell parts on line. There are defiantly cars there worth saving, but with the hobby the way it is today, few are going to find a new home. Sad to say, they lost out on any chance for success twenty five years ago.

i know your car very well. We were down in Olympia about ten years ago to see it. I believe that all your questions were answered then. The car has not change and it is, what it is. If you are asking about selling, this is the wrong forum for this car. If you are wondering if the value has gone up, it has not. If you are asking, if restoring it to original will be sustainable, in today's market, it will not. If you are asking whether refreshing, what was done years ago, will increase it's market value. Only God knows, and he doesn't reside on this forum.

I completely agree with whats been said. Two things that I would like to add. 1) Plating is only as good as the polisher. The reputation of the company is dependent on his work. I have seen a good company go down hill, when they lost their polisher. If need be, get to know him personally. Make sure that you are familiar with his work, and make sure he knows how much you respect him for his work. A tip can't hurt, either. 2) Make sure that your shop is willing to guarantee their work. If they decline to guarantee, walk away, you are in the wrong place!

Lots of weather misinformation, lets at least get it right. Spokane get about 17" of rain a year, which makes it as dry as LA. It's not as dry as the central part of the state, parts of which only get about 3'' a year, but by most standards it's dry. It does get snow and, they have used salt for years, so some care advised. Seattle is not a rain forest! Protected by the rain shadow of the Olympic Mountains the city gets 37" a years, and with the mild climate, salt was never used, that is up until the last for or five years when politicians decided that it was necessary, if there was even the threat of black ice conditions. For you Canadians Seattle is climate wise about in the middle between the harsh extreme of Vancouver, with the Fraser River outflow, and the milder Victoria, which is protected by the Olympics. The whole of the area is affected by micro climes, caused by proximity to water and mountains. The weather differences that thirty miles can make, can be just staggering. Phew! got that off my chest. Upshot is that this is a better place to get a car then about 3/4 of the country.

Was the recent huge tide of American iron, exacerbated by any knowledge of the this impending legislation? If not, how do you Australians, characterize the movement, and how do you foresee the future?

Thanks for whomever chose to share. I really enjoyed the photos, and enjoyed the comments too, I think. I chuckled when I saw the comment regarding the six hundred mile, one way, trip. I only wish that the show was driving distance from me!

Dave, Think Pierce when you are cross referencing, 19"-1931,18"-1932 and 17'-1933.

The government's problem is, more then likely, the exorbitant import duties, not just the smuggling. The smuggling would be of no real value, if the duties were not so high. High import duties, always seemed silly, especially when there is no domestic production that the govt. seems to want to protect.