1929 Studebaker President 8 Roadster

[nzcarnerd]

On the subject of Studebakers I have been going through the batches of old photos taken at Hershey that have been posted on the AACA facebook page.

 

These two from the 1973 event I thought interesting.

 

The roadster is a President I presume. Series F??

 

The cabriolet I am not so sure - maybe a GJ Commander? Looks to have a 'later' style body.

 

[1937hd45]

Just took this photo off the AACA Hershey photos thread. Note the door tops. Bob 

[29StudiePrez]

7 hours ago, nzcarnerd said:

On the subject of Studebakers I have been going through the batches of old photos taken at Hershey that have been posted on the AACA facebook page.

 

These two from the 1973 event I thought interesting.

 

The roadster is a President I presume. Series F??

 

The cabriolet I am not so sure - maybe a GJ Commander? Looks to have a 'later' style body.

 

The top car is a 1930 President FH Roadster (125" WB) The "FE" President was on a 135" WB and wasn't offered in the Roadster body style.

[nzcarnerd]

1 hour ago, 29StudiePrez said:

The top car is a 1930 President FH Roadster (125" WB) The "FE" President was on a 135" WB and wasn't offered in the Roadster body style.

 

Yes I thought it might have been a short wheelbase car.  Any thoughts on the cabriolet? From the photos in the Moloney book I think it might be an FD Commander.

[29StudiePrez]

11 minutes ago, nzcarnerd said:

 

Yes I thought it might have been a short wheelbase car.  Any thoughts on the cabriolet? From the photos in the Moloney book I think it might be an FD Commander.

The Cabriolet is what's referred to as a Convertible Cabriolet. Which is also what I have but in a FH. The other Cabriolet had a fixed top which didnt fold down. So it had all the looks of a rag top without the ability to actually fold down. I had one of these I found rotting away in an Almond orchard, bought it and then let a friend have it, who restored in back to mint condition.  Will attach a photo of his Dictator 6Cabriolet (fixed top)

As far as the photo in question it looks to me like after zooming in on it best I could, it appears to have a "6" in the badger bar making it a 6 cyl Model. I know they offered the Commander in both 6 and 8 cylinders, I'm just not sure if they offered the Convertible Cabriolet in both 6 and 8 in the Commander series. If they didnt offer the Commander Cabriolet in a 6cyl then the car in the photo would be a Dictator.

[nzcarnerd]

25 minutes ago, 29StudiePrez said:

The Cabriolet is what's referred to as a Convertible Cabriolet. Which is also what I have but in a FH. The other Cabriolet had a fixed top which didnt fold down. So it had all the looks of a rag top without the ability to actually fold down. I had one of these I found rotting away in an Almond orchard, bought it and then let a friend have it, who restored in back to mint condition.  Will attach a photo of his Dictator 6Cabriolet (fixed top)

As far as the photo in question it looks to me like after zooming in on it best I could, it appears to have a "6" in the badger bar making it a 6 cyl Model. I know they offered the Commander in both 6 and 8 cylinders, I'm just not sure if they offered the Convertible Cabriolet in both 6 and 8 in the Commander series. If they didnt offer the Commander Cabriolet in a 6cyl then the car in the photo would be a Dictator.

Having another look through the photos in the Moloney book I see the yellow cabriolet is a GJ Commander as I first thought. That model used the newer shape body than the GE Dictator did. According to The Standard Catalog the GJ was introduced in December 1928 and ran concurrent with the FD 8 from December 1928 to April 1930. The staggered introduction times add to the confusion of dating the Studes of this era. I have never seen a GJ but from what I have read the engine is just a long stroke  - 4 5/8" vs 4 1/2"  - version of the Dictator unit . 

[Buffalowed Bill]

The black roadster with red trim looks to be a 1931 Dictator.

[29StudiePrez]

9 minutes ago, nzcarnerd said:

Having another look through the photos in the Moloney book I see the yellow cabriolet is a GJ Commander as I first thought. That model used the newer shape body than the GE Dictator did. According to The Standard Catalog the GJ was introduced in December 1928 and ran concurrent with the FD 8 from December 1928 to April 1930. The staggered introduction times add to the confusion of dating the Studes of this era. I have never seen a GJ but from what I have read the engine is just a long stroke  - 4 5/8" vs 4 1/2"  - version of the Dictator unit . 

Well to further add to the confusion when talking about 1928 Studebaker's and the rolling changes made to the cars on the production line, you often hear the term thrown around 1st series, 2nd and 3rd series. But the reality is that when Studebaker changed the look of the 1928 style from a rounded radiator shell using the screw on Atalanta Goddess hood ornament look to the style change of what I refer to as the squared off "Model A" style, with the "Wing Motif" which was having a winged twist on radiator cap, wings on the top of the headlights and cowl lights, the new change of style which everyone often refers to as the "3rd Series" 1928 Model, that is actually really the 1st series of 1929. Let me explain this, even though Studebaker came out with that new style in 1928, the Corporation sent a letter out to all the Dealerships advising them they were to consider the new design to be 1929 Models and to be sold as such. They continued through 1929 and 1930 with the Wing accents and squared off radiator shell but still making slight rolling changes to fender beads, beltlines and other slight changes but the beginning of that Wing accent style, even though they came out in 1928 with it, were all supposed to be considered 1929 Models by Studebaker Sales and Marketing. So I guess if you look at it in that aspect, by design style (Rounded Shell vs Squared off shell) it would mean you really only had a 1st and 2nd series 1928 and then you had a 1st and 2nd series 1929. (1st series having come out in 1928 and Regarded as the new 1929 style)

So I'm glad to add to the confusion of 1928. On the subject of the Mooney book, you have to take lightly many of the photo descriptions and identifications throughout that book and be careful, and cross reference information you see and read in it by double checming with other publications and sources. When they put that book together there were a lot of mistakes made and not as great of care and review was made for accuracy as should have been done before publishing. I dont know if they were down to the wire on the publishing deadline to go to press or what, but there are many inaccuracies throughout the book. Just say'n 

[maok]

Regarding the accelerator pedal, my '28 Chrysler RHD is also in the middle between the clutch and brake pedals. A very simple adaption, a metal (8mm) rod bent around the steering column and exhaust attached to the carb linkage with a split pin and resting on the fire wall. Yours looks to be much better conversion with a pivot bar setup. As Edinmass mentioned, it maybe a common conversion for many RHD vehicles.

 

Yes, you get familiar with it very quickly.

[nzcarnerd]

1 hour ago, 29StudiePrez said:

Well to further add to the confusion when talking about 1928 Studebaker's and the rolling changes made to the cars on the production line, you often hear the term thrown around 1st series, 2nd and 3rd series. But the reality is that when Studebaker changed the look of the 1928 style from a rounded radiator shell using the screw on Atalanta Goddess hood ornament look to the style change of what I refer to as the squared off "Model A" style, with the "Wing Motif" which was having a winged twist on radiator cap, wings on the top of the headlights and cowl lights, the new change of style which everyone often refers to as the "3rd Series" 1928 Model, that is actually really the 1st series of 1929. Let me explain this, even though Studebaker came out with that new style in 1928, the Corporation sent a letter out to all the Dealerships advising them they were to consider the new design to be 1929 Models and to be sold as such. They continued through 1929 and 1930 with the Wing accents and squared off radiator shell but still making slight rolling changes to fender beads, beltlines and other slight changes but the beginning of that Wing accent style, even though they came out in 1928 with it, were all supposed to be considered 1929 Models by Studebaker Sales and Marketing. So I guess if you look at it in that aspect, by design style (Rounded Shell vs Squared off shell) it would mean you really only had a 1st and 2nd series 1928 and then you had a 1st and 2nd series 1929. (1st series having come out in 1928 and Regarded as the new 1929 style)

So I'm glad to add to the confusion of 1928. On the subject of the Mooney book, you have to take lightly many of the photo descriptions and identifications throughout that book and be careful, and cross reference information you see and read in it by double checming with other publications and sources. When they put that book together there were a lot of mistakes made and not as great of care and review was made for accuracy as should have been done before publishing. I dont know if they were down to the wire on the publishing deadline to go to press or what, but there are many inaccuracies throughout the book. Just say'n 

 

Regarding your comments on the Moloney book, I agree. I have made many notes in my copy, especially in the 1928-30 era pages.

 

I agree re the Third series GE Dictator cars being '1929's, even tough most were built in 1928.  When it comes to the bigger models I am not so familiar with them. 

 

I presume no production records exist so actual build dates can only be guessed from chassis numbers. I am sure there is much more research to do on that subject. My own interest is in the Dictator models but I am sure someone will sort the bigger cars.

 

In NZ we have the luxury of carjam - https://www.carjam.co.nz/ - so that any current plate can be searched for chassis and engine numbers - as long as they have been recorded. Unfortunately for many older cars the information is incomplete or incorrect. The records were computerised in the 1990s and I think the translation from handwritten cards to digital was done by non-car-people so many mistakes were made.

 

Just as one example is our very messed about with and scruffy sedan - https://www.carjam.co.nz/car/?plate=pa4460      I registered it in 1990, using the build year rather than 1929 (March) when it was first registered,  so the info is what I provided.  I think the engine number I recorded then is the one that now has a big hole in the side so there is another one in the car.

 

For comparison the cabriolet I have just purchased is this one - coincidentally registered at about the same time (1990) after it had been restored - https://www.carjam.co.nz/car/?plate=Pd4754

[mike6024]

Based on the picture, Franks pedal arrangement looked like you would need to fully extend your right leg and use your heel on the accelerator pedal. Then if you wanted to brake, lift your right foot, get it caught under the brake pedal, causing you to be pulling up on the brake pedal when you intended to press down on it.

 

Edited March 29, 2020 by mike6024 (see edit history)

[maok]

Seeing the pedal arrangement zoomed in, it looks like you access the accelerator pedal from right and underneath the brake pedal rather than between the clutch and brake pedals. It would  have made more sense to have it bent to the right of the brake pedal...lol

[29StudiePrez]

Frank,

I spoke to my brother and other than the "Made in USA" radiator emblem you need, we have extras of everything you need plus stuff you need you didnt put on that list. I sent you a message. I will be going over to his place in the next day or two and gathering together everything and will send you pictures.

I will need you to message me your address to figure out shipping costs.

[Ozstatman]

Great of you, 29StudiePrez and your brother, to make parts available to Frank. Well done! 

[Ozstatman]

Another thing, and you probably need Facebook to view, popped up on the AACA Facebook page. Not the same but interesting.

 

[Mark Huston]

44 minutes ago, Ozstatman said:

Another thing, and you probably need Facebook to view, popped up on the AACA Facebook page. Not the same but interesting.

 

Nice 1931 President Four Seasons Roadster.   The correct term for this model you referenced in the Facebook post.  Someone is confusing the 1933 President Speedway models with 1931 President Four Seasons  Roadster.  Another way of mixing the truth with hype.   

[1937hd45]

52 minutes ago, Ozstatman said:

Another thing, and you probably need Facebook to view, popped up on the AACA Facebook page. Not the same but interesting.

 

 

 

Could whatever that is be posted here for the people that are not, and never will be Facebook people? Thanks. Bob 

[8E45E]

46 minutes ago, Mark Huston said:

Nice 1931 President Four Seasons Roadster.   The correct term for this model you referenced in the Facebook post.  Someone is confusing the 1933 President Speedway models with 1931 President Four Seasons  Roadster.  Another way of mixing the truth with hype.   

The 1931 President Four Seasons Roadster with the "Speedway" option was identifiable by its RED chassis and underbody components. More here:    https://forum.studebakerdriversclub.com/forum/your-studebaker-forum/general-studebaker-specific-discussion/29712-more-eye-candy-12-16-prewar

 

Craig

[Touts]

1 hour ago, Ozstatman said:

Another thing, and you probably need Facebook to view, popped up on the AACA Facebook page. Not the same but interesting.

 

 

I apologise however I am not familiar with Facebook as I have not had any use of it to date.

 

I have heard good things about it but haven’t worked it out yet. I’ll ask my kids.

frank

[Ozstatman]

47 minutes ago, 1937hd45 said:

Could whatever that is be posted here for the people that are not, and never will be Facebook people? Thanks. Bob 

Lets see if these work.

 

Link to video

 

Link to another video

 

EDIT - Looks like you need Facebook to view the short videos, but the photos came through OK.

 

Edited March 30, 2020 by Ozstatman (see edit history)

[Touts]

49 minutes ago, 1937hd45 said:

 

 

Could whatever that is be posted here for the people that are not, and never will be Facebook people? Thanks. Bob 

 

Thank Bob, I concur 

This Forum Post is a great 

reference for the Studebaker community, A BIG Well Done to all of the contributors 👌🏻🇦🇺 

Frank

[Touts]

Apologies for the slight deflection however as my car is what it is, I would like to restore it to the level as previously mentioned.

 

As you know the 1928 131” vehicle came with no I.D Plates and is not truly original.

 

I have purchased a period Acid Etched Reproduction of the I.D Plate that was on the Chassis under the LHS front guard.

 

As the only confirmed number found on the engine was FB 10366 I’m not sure what should be stamped on it🤔

 

Q: Is the FB 10366 the only number that should be stamped on that Plate for the benefit of future reference? 

Frank

 

 

 

[29StudiePrez]

44 minutes ago, Touts said:

Apologies for the slight deflection however as my car is what it is, I would like to restore it to the level as previously mentioned.

 

As you know the 1928 131” vehicle came with no I.D Plates and is not truly original.

 

I have purchased a period Acid Etched Reproduction of the I.D Plate that was on the Chassis under the LHS front guard.

 

As the only confirmed number found on the engine was FB 10366 I’m not sure what should be stamped on it🤔

 

Q: Is the FB 10366 the only number that should be stamped on that Plate for the benefit of future reference? 

Frank

 

 

 

Frank,

Well the good news I think we might have some stuff for you ...lol

And to answer your question No, you cant use the engine number on the frame. That number is the engine number. What you need to do is find an original data plate that already has the corresponding 7 digit number that is for a 1928 FA 131" President, its the frame number. A lot of cars have been destroyed, bought as parts cars etc and you can find a data plate with the correct 7 digit number for your car. When you do, buy it, and stamp that number in the new data plate. This will keep your car true to original.

Same with the data plate on the firewall. Get one off a parts car to use as a pattern, find a place that can create an identical looking metal tab with the same raised embossed letters and have them stamp "FA T2 001" on it. I know of a person who has just whats left of a firewall with an FA tag on it I'm going to try and get for you to use as a pattern.

Also here are some pictures of a few extra parts we pulled out of the shed. The radiator is 40lbs. I will message about the rest and some other info.

Edited March 31, 2020 by 29StudiePrez (see edit history)

[Mark Huston]

46 minutes ago, Touts said:

Apologies for the slight deflection however as my car is what it is, I would like to restore it to the level as previously mentioned.

 

As you know the 1928 131” vehicle came with no I.D Plates and is not truly original.

 

I have purchased a period Acid Etched Reproduction of the I.D Plate that was on the Chassis under the LHS front guard.

 

As the only confirmed number found on the engine was FB 10366 I’m not sure what should be stamped on it🤔

 

Q: Is the FB 10366 the only number that should be stamped on that Plate for the benefit of future reference? 

Frank

 

 

 

The 1928 FA chassis serial numbers (with a FB engine) US factory production started with 6,008,601 to 6,013,000. Canadian production with the FB engine had a serial number range starting with 6,950,351 to 6,950,900.   

Edited March 31, 2020 by Mark Huston (see edit history)

[Touts]

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.

 

[29StudiePrez]

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.

 

 

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 

[Buffalowed Bill]

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/

[29StudiePrez]

My other brother 😉

The one that's not broke. 😂🤣

Edited March 31, 2020 by 29StudiePrez (see edit history)

[coachJC]

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 31, 2020 by coachJC (see edit history)

[Touts]

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 

 

[Big Beat]

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. 

[Touts]

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

 

 

 

 

[29StudiePrez]

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 April 1, 2020 by 29StudiePrez (see edit history)

[1937hd45]

Just posted on the Anti Stress photo thread. Bob 

[29StudiePrez]

14 hours ago, 1937hd45 said:

Just posted on the Anti Stress photo thread. Bob 

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

[Ozstatman]

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. 

[Touts]

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 

 

 

 

[8E45E]

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

[edinmass]

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 April 2, 2020 by edinmass (see edit history)

[29StudiePrez]

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