Touts

1929 Studebaker President 8 Roadster

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Touts said:

OMG REALLY !!  

And it’s not even Christmas.

 

I’m speechless.

 

I can’t thank you enough StudiePrez and Brother. 👌🏻

 

This Studebaker is coming back to the streets in all its glory, come and enjoy the journey with me ,

frank 

 

Photo : The Original Lights ,  Light 8 Bar and Correct Radiator Cap .

 

I sincerely couldn’t imagine a better home for them.

B1D04764-0339-4B75-842E-FC12435F19D2.thumb.jpeg.e408b635724bfe8357b8681eff9489a9.jpeg

 

54AE3A8A-4D94-4397-B963-AE94D28A4E57.thumb.png.b0c75099180d76de57157aaf6f5e47d8.png

 

Frank,

I'd be more than happy to come there and be the "Technical advisor" on the Restoration journey....lol

Here is a pic of my Brother and myself with our Studebakers taking our Mom for a drive and out to lunch. My mother has remarked with pride that her ranch property has never been without a running driving Studebaker since she's owned it. ...lol

 Studebaker on the left is his 1929 "FE" President Brougham and the car to the right is my 1929 "FH" President Convertible Cabriolet w/ Rumble seat. Both are in unrestored original condition. The Cabriolet has 60k miles and I'm the 2nd owner 

20190721_093524.jpg

20190907_171756.jpg

20190624_124637.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since we're somewhat all over the place on this thread, thought that I would drop this on you.

 

Most of you have seen this car, but probably don't recognize it. The car is in the very first scene of the the movie "The Sting," but it doesn't look like it does now. The car was then owned by Tom Sparks, who had quite a collection in LA which he would rent to movie studios. The word rare could be defined by this car, the only survivor that I know of. I'm sure that Dick Q, or Rex M will correct me if they know of another. Anyone know who bought it?

 

Bill

https://www.goodingco.com/vehicle/1932-studebaker-president-state-coupe/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just want to say just how much I have enjoyed following this tread. So many wonderful cars out there and great people that are so willing to help like 29StudiePrez and others.

 

Touts- your car has had a very interesting history and I hope you are able to find out what that history has been.

 

28-29 Studebakers are not in my wheel house so I don't have anything to add to this great thread but I will add a pic of our 1933 Studebaker Speedway President for you to see, it also shows

the golf club door and to see what an anomaly yours is with its size and location.

 

Good luck with your car......Jeff

 

 

 

image.png.4e3336a9085511f99ca7a96520294169.png

 

 

 

 

Edited by coachJC (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jeff,

Thanks for showing us your sweet 1933 Studebaker Speedway President.

 

The subtle styling done by Studebaker looks clean.

 

It’s interesting that the Golf Door by 1933 appears Squared Off and the Main Doors are Suicide opening, very cool.

 

Looking at your car confirms that I have a long road ahead albeit a scenic road, I hope.😏

Regards, Frank 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great car and great thread! I absolutely love following "detective stories" like this. And the level of both expertise and goodwill is amazing. I know nothing about these Studebakers, but have some experience doing similar "forensics" in a different field. I restore musical instruments, and sometimes it takes Sherlock Holmes skills to figure out what exactly had been done to some guitar or drum over the years and what it originally started out as. And with the evidence presented, I would tend to agree that this was a touring car that got damaged and rebuilt into a roadster after sitting around and losing some bits and pieces, and that this work is decades old. If this was my car, I would definitely keep it a roadster. For a car with this much history, restoration back to a tourer or a chassis swap back to a shorter wheelbase would only detract from it. I would also attempt to track down the previous owner who sold it in 1997. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you BigBeat for your valuable contribution.

 

I confess that this car goes back further than I’m used to.

 

The assistance given from passionate people has really motivated me.

 

My Big break was understanding what I have and what to do with it.

It’s obvious that there are people who care. That’s the important part.

 

Having the opportunity to bring this Studebaker back to a period, that is for me when the Tourer became a Roadster, and locating the original parts was absolutely amazing.

 

There is so much more to this story, somebody must know.

The problem is the long periods it spent in storage and time just keeps on going.

 

I’m always optimistic though that someone will come forward with some information.

frank

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Big Beat said:

Great car and great thread! I absolutely love following "detective stories" like this. And the level of both expertise and goodwill is amazing. I know nothing about these Studebakers, but have some experience doing similar "forensics" in a different field. I restore musical instruments, and sometimes it takes Sherlock Holmes skills to figure out what exactly had been done to some guitar or drum over the years and what it originally started out as. And with the evidence presented, I would tend to agree that this was a touring car that got damaged and rebuilt into a roadster after sitting around and losing some bits and pieces, and that this work is decades old. If this was my car, I would definitely keep it a roadster. For a car with this much history, restoration back to a tourer or a chassis swap back to a shorter wheelbase would only detract from it. I would also attempt to track down the previous owner who sold it in 1997. 

Well here is the other thing to take into consideration based on what we've learned through this investigation of the  car;

We know it originally was a 1928 President "FA-T2" Tourer on the original 131" wheelbase with the original FB President motor. Now its probably the only example of a FA-T2 in existence. I'm fairly certain of this because as the owner of a 1929 President "FE" Seven passenger "L2" tourer, #57 of 60 built with only 3 remaining. I've made it a point of keeping track of the President tourers from 1928 - 1930 and with their owners. 

So with that said here are the choices

1. You could get rid of the rear roadster section and restore it back to a Tourer. Then it would have the correct body to match the 131" chassis with the corresponding engine.

 

2. You could modify the Roadster body to fit on a 121" wheelbase chassis, which would be the correct size for an original Roadster, but then you now have an incorrect 131" Tourer body with a non original Roadster body so then neither makes for a correct car.

 

3. Or 3rd, you restore whats remaining of the only 1928 President FA-T2 Tourer (that was converted to a custom bodied rumble seat Roadster decades if not longer ago) back to how it would have looked had it originally been shipped to Australia and had a custom coach builder put that body on it when new, as was often the case back then.

 

This 3rd option would be my choice because then not only are you preserving the integrity of the year it was built and making it as historically correct with all the parts being original on it, but you are also preserving the unique history that made it into what it is today. That would be my perspective. 

 

And not only do you have the bragging rights to having remnants of the only existing 1928 President FA-T2 Tourer but you also have the luxury of owning the only custom bodied 131" wheelbase 1928 President Roadster.

 

The best of both worlds. The preservation and ownership of a truly unique car. 

Edited by 29StudiePrez (see edit history)
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, 1937hd45 said:

DW-1930-03-08-48-03-L.jpg.44d38880f3790b6eefea6d7a73f5d37d.jpg Just posted on the Anti Stress photo thread. Bob 

Unfortunately that's not a Studebaker. Wrong tail light, dash and running board aprons. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/1/2020 at 2:54 PM, 29StudiePrez said:

Well here is the other thing to take into consideration based on what we've learned through this investigation of the  car;

We know it originally was a 1928 President "FA-T2" Tourer on the original 131" wheelbase with the original FB President motor. Now its probably the only example of a FA-T2 in existence. I'm fairly certain of this because as the owner of a 1929 President "FE" Seven passenger "L2" tourer, #57 of 60 built with only 3 remaining. I've made it a point of keeping track of the President tourers from 1928 - 1930 and with their owners. 

So with that said here are the choices

1. You could get rid of the rear roadster section and restore it back to a Tourer. Then it would have the correct body to match the 131" chassis with the corresponding engine.

 

2. You could modify the Roadster body to fit on a 121" wheelbase chassis, which would be the correct size for an original Roadster, but then you now have an incorrect 131" Tourer body with a non original Roadster body so then neither makes for a correct car.

 

3. Or 3rd, you restore whats remaining of the only 1928 President FA-T2 Tourer (that was converted to a custom bodied rumble seat Roadster decades if not longer ago) back to how it would have looked had it originally been shipped to Australia and had a custom coach builder put that body on it when new, as was often the case back then.

 

This 3rd option would be my choice because then not only are you preserving the integrity of the year it was built and making it as historically correct with all the parts being original on it, but you are also preserving the unique history that made it into what it is today. That would be my perspective. 

 

And not only do you have the bragging rights to having remnants of the only existing 1928 President FA-T2 Tourer but you also have the luxury of owning the only custom bodied 131" wheelbase 1928 President Roadster.

 

The best of both worlds. The preservation and ownership of a truly unique car. 

Agreed 29StudiePrez Option 3, would get my vote. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/21/2020 at 2:47 PM, FLYER15015 said:

Touts,

You need to tell us where you are and how you came by the car.............

"Extensive research " ? = where, how, when, who ?

We would love to help, but right now we are flying blind.............

 

Mike in Colorado


Thank you StudePrez for your valuable insight into the car’s history and your recommendations for any future restoration decisions.

 

I have Quoted from the immediate initial forum reply posted  from Mike in Colorado.

 

”car.............

"Extensive research " ? = where, how, when, who ?”

 

With all the extensive information that has now been provided, his comments still remain relevant when one considers the transformation from a 131” FA-T2 President Tourer to a 131” President Roadster.

 

Of course I accept that this information may never be revealed due to the age of the vehicle.

 

As I would be probably the least qualified contributor,  the “Who” 

question still remains unanswered..


“Standing on a branch with saw in hand ”  .... love it !

 

It remains feasible to me the possibility that the car may have had it’s origins as some sort of Experimental design or a Prototype not necessarily conducted by the Studebaker‘s Indiana or Canada plants.

 

My unqualified opinion could explain the “Roughness” in construction of the Rear End with the attention to detail  in other   visual cosmetic areas .

 

The car is what it is and remains for me a great project and a car to eventually cruise around town in or go up to the local cafe as previously mentioned.

The only difference now is that I have a great story to tell at the local cafe. 

 

With the current health restrictions escalating and the use of Social Media on the increase , I’m cautiously optimistic and hopeful that Mike’s question will eventually be answered. 

frank 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎3‎/‎31‎/‎2020 at 9:54 PM, 29StudiePrez said:

Well here is the other thing to take into consideration based on what we've learned through this investigation of the  car;

We know it originally was a 1928 President "FA-T2" Tourer on the original 131" wheelbase with the original FB President motor. Now its probably the only example of a FA-T2 in existence. I'm fairly certain of this because as the owner of a 1929 President "FE" Seven passenger "L2" tourer, #57 of 60 built with only 3 remaining. I've made it a point of keeping track of the President tourers from 1928 - 1930 and with their owners. 

 

3. Or 3rd, you restore whats remaining of the only 1928 President FA-T2 Tourer (that was converted to a custom bodied rumble seat Roadster decades if not longer ago) back to how it would have looked had it originally been shipped to Australia and had a custom coach builder put that body on it when new, as was often the case back then.

 

This 3rd option would be my choice because then not only are you preserving the integrity of the year it was built and making it as historically correct with all the parts being original on it, but you are also preserving the unique history that made it into what it is today. That would be my perspective. 

 

And not only do you have the bragging rights to having remnants of the only existing 1928 President FA-T2 Tourer but you also have the luxury of owning the only custom bodied 131" wheelbase 1928 President Roadster.

 

The best of both worlds. The preservation and ownership of a truly unique car. 

I also agree with this third option, considering it is not 'case closed' and documentation from an obscure coachbuilder could still turn up in some of the most unlikely place.

 

Craig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not coach built...............IE: not done by a recognized shop in the field.........likely done in a truck repair or fleet shop, as there were many commercial truck body companies who had tin knockers and wood guys looking for side work. The rear woodwork shows more cabinet style workmanship than it does body building or coach building. The amazing thing is how good the lines turned out............I would like to see it in person to see if they got it 85%, 90%, or 95% right. Photos just don't tell the tale.

Edited by edinmass (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, edinmass said:

It's not coach built...............IE: not done by a recognized shop in the field.........likely done in a truck repair or fleet shop, as there were many commercial truck body companies who had tin knockers and wood guys looking for side work. The rear woodwork shows more cabinet style workmanship than it does body building or coach building. The amazing thing is how good the lines turned out............I would like to see it in person to see if they got it 85%, 90%, or 95% right. Photos just don't tell the tale.

Well it sounds to me like the guy Frank has pulled out of retirement to work on correcting the imperfections of the body that weren't done right the first go around, is going to make sure that margin or percentage or poor craftsmanship is narrowed down so it ends up looking like they did get it right ....lol

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, 29StudiePrez said:

Unfortunately that's not a Studebaker. Wrong tail light, dash and running board aprons. 

It's a LaSalle Touring car  - but the collection of photos that it is from is the holy grail of Studebaker photos from the period - a good hundred plus of them (some indexed as Studebaker's and also some poorly indexed - it takes hours upon hours of detective work).

 

https://usclibstore.usc.edu/Whittington

 

DW-1931-09-21-134-10-L.jpg.62c4df8d2b99db6d7698df225f6e63da.jpg

 

DW-1932-01-26-142-01-L.jpg.b1ea5cb47b5a655a21bf75d431d32044.jpg

 

DW-1931-09-21-134-07-L.jpg.f9551938b0dfd2248cafadd1a0315396.jpg

DW-1931-09-21-134-01-L.jpg.4e162d9f6667a63bd91b54fc902f7fa2.jpg

 

DW-1932-09-09-37-05-L.jpg.6e010ee6cb8a2609f39245e6c8334428.jpg

 

DW-1931-13-17-104-01-L.jpg.600ca3fe00743232242d3dcc26797b7a.jpg

 

DW-1930-10-02-12-01-L.jpg.aa78c86bacd3f617bb24cfb856e81577.jpg

 

DW-1934-01-10-40-02-L.jpg.69f4a4df5ca7a03e40f53071a77ccdc7.jpg

 

 

 

 

Edited by John_Mereness (see edit history)
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bet RQ doesn't have any of those ones above in his collection of pre-was Studebaker photos!!

 

Craig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/1/2020 at 2:54 PM, 29StudiePrez said:

Well here is the other thing to take into consideration based on what we've learned through this investigation of the  car;

We know it originally was a 1928 President "FA-T2" Tourer on the original 131" wheelbase with the original FB President motor. Now its probably the only example of a FA-T2 in existence. I'm fairly certain of this because as the owner of a 1929 President "FE" Seven passenger "L2" tourer, #57 of 60 built with only 3 remaining. I've made it a point of keeping track of the President tourers from 1928 - 1930 and with their owners. 

So with that said here are the choices

1. You could get rid of the rear roadster section and restore it back to a Tourer. Then it would have the correct body to match the 131" chassis with the corresponding engine.

 

2. You could modify the Roadster body to fit on a 121" wheelbase chassis, which would be the correct size for an original Roadster, but then you now have an incorrect 131" Tourer body with a non original Roadster body so then neither makes for a correct car.

 

3. Or 3rd, you restore whats remaining of the only 1928 President FA-T2 Tourer (that was converted to a custom bodied rumble seat Roadster decades if not longer ago) back to how it would have looked had it originally been shipped to Australia and had a custom coach builder put that body on it when new, as was often the case back then.

 

This 3rd option would be my choice because then not only are you preserving the integrity of the year it was built and making it as historically correct with all the parts being original on it, but you are also preserving the unique history that made it into what it is today. That would be my perspective. 

 

And not only do you have the bragging rights to having remnants of the only existing 1928 President FA-T2 Tourer but you also have the luxury of owning the only custom bodied 131" wheelbase 1928 President Roadster.

 

The best of both worlds. The preservation and ownership of a truly unique car. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yesterday I decided to have a chat to my “Old School” mechanic, John.
 

I wanted to get him on board.
I ask him if he would prepare the car for an engine start and assess the general pre-engine rebuild running condition.

 

He looked at me with a very worrying look and asked me if I had turned the engine to see if it was seized, I hadn’t. 😳

 

Today, much to my surprise I manually turned the engine and it rotated fine, life is grand again.

 

I’ve been looking at Studebaker 8 Cylinder engines on the web for weeks now. There are some great examples 

 

There has been little discussion in relation to the Engine and Ancillary Components. 
 

I’ve seen engines with what appears to be factory engine accessories like multiple Carburettors and Oil Filters .

 

Keeping with the Maintaining the Originality theme , It would be great if it the cars performance reflected  Studebaker Roadster history in performance.

 

I also spoke to a Coach Builder in regards to the Studebaker’s timber work .


I felt the need to keep Edinmass happy.

 

He informed me that he is one of only two Coach Builders in Australia and his services are in high demand and is also in lockdown mode.

 

Areas of his initial concerns are the “A” Frame Piller that the door hinges screws into and the back of the door where the Lock screws into . 

They don’t look too bad but need to be replaced in my opinion 

The saga continues. 

 

I am spending this time preparing and learning in anticipation

frank 

 

Photo : Not my Studebaker 8 cylinder Engine . Note Oil Filter
0DF24A45-EAEF-45CF-9D51-AEFD684F3C6A.thumb.jpeg.47dc11010caec0d73e12624da23a20f0.jpeg

 


Photo: Multiple Carburettors

87439594-2981-478F-A1CE-AB7E0A2F4A66.thumb.jpeg.2f63dc8d51c24c90f320bc70d58ac1df.jpeg

 

 

Photo : Coach Builder’s Work.

FF90FC39-92EA-430E-88C3-EAD18CE10DFF.thumb.png.57a2dac29182578300e59cfe08ffdc81.png.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WoW! FOUR SU carbs, they look to be 1-3/4" or 2" models.

Edited by maok (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, maok said:

WoW! FOUR SU carbs, they look like to be 1-3/4" or 2" models.


Hi Maok, I’m Not suggesting that my preference is to modify my 131” Studebaker President 8 Roadster or deviate from it’s modified original Roadster history.

 

My point is that Studebaker appears to have had a rich and successful racing history.

 

Having said that it would be great if I could achieve acceptable modern performance without detracting from it’s heritage.

 

I have not driven the car or a straight 8 cylinder car.

Frank 

 
Photo: Studebaker’s rich racing history.

 

2ADE3464-4996-48EB-BD1A-14B628C5078C.thumb.png.84227eb6de32c082fa271ec252740f66.png
 

Photo: Studebaker’s Racing History.

C773FC23-8E78-450E-AEE0-7250FEF31FD5.thumb.jpeg.1b773708ca4478237f2ad5b95ca88754.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now