Studebaker wasn’t going to go out with a whimper–at least not if its youthful and energetic President, Sherwood Egbert, had anything to say about it. He wanted a sports car, and Raymond Loewy gave him one. From day one, the Avanti was as doomed as the company itself, but certainly no one in 1962 expected anything like it from Studebaker; a parting gift, one might say, for which I thank you! And it’s a lasting gift at that: It made my day in 1962, and it continues to do so today.
At least in America, the introduction of the Avanti was one of the most unexpected events of 1962. You see, this car, like the 1953 Studebaker coupes, was the work of Raymond Loewy (seen here, in the foreground, with Studebaker President Harold Egbert). Loewy always kept one foot in Europe, and it showed; who else would work so hard to eliminate the traditional bold front grille decades before the aero-look cars of the ’80s?
I am including Loewy’s ‘53 coupe here since it and the Avanti are so quintessentially Loewy (regardless of who did most of the actual design work), and also rather similar. They share a wind-splitting front end whose center crease rises from those delicate front bumpers, a looong front hood, a beltline that drops down from the windshield and, of course, that forward-slanting C-pillar.
Could the backdrop in the top photograph have been deliberately chosen in recognition that Loewy’s team designed the Avanti in just 40 days, working at a rented house in Palm Springs? Although the Avanti was a team effort, Loewy himself contributed many of its signature features, including its Coke-bottle shape, bladed fenders and no grille. Here’s an excellent article on those eventful 40 days.
The Avanti was a true Studebaker, inasmuch as its design and execution both suffered from certain shortcomings. The Avanti looks fabulous from certain angles, yet a bit awkward from others. Nonetheless, it was a noble effort to revitalize Studebaker’s ailing mid-’60s image.
The original Avanti’s profile had a decidedly NASCAR-ish rake. It’s odd that among the first changes made for its revival as the Avanti II was a jacked-up the front end that took away the original’s beautifully faired-in round headlights.
Although you won’t find a single “Euro-sport” badge anywhere, the Avanti was as close as America got to producing a truly European-style GT coupe, an achievement that likely wasn’t necessary, or even desirable, at the time. If Loewy’s sensibilities had a decidedly European bent, the Avanti was ultimately an all-American experiment that was thoroughly confident in both attitude and execution. Soon that confidence would dissipate, as the rise of Mercedes would scatter seeds of insecurity throughout the great American automotive industry.
But in 1962, the Avanti shone brightly, if somewhat unsteadily, as a brilliant attempt to redefine what an American sports-luxury coupe could be. Despite its inability to somehow spark a miraculous, last-ditch turnaround at dying Studebaker, its coming was a completely unexpected and delightful gift. Looking back, who could possibly have predicted the Avanti? The spice of life is surprise, and in 1962 this was a big one. The big one.
To each his own, but to me, one of the most beautiful automobiles ever designed. Sherwood H. Egbert is my hero for what he tried to do with the Studebaker Corporation.
Mr. Bill
I second your opinion. Mr Egbert tried like hell to save Studebaker’s auto division, and when he couldn’t, he sent it out with style and grace. I went with my father to see the Avanti at it’s 1962 introduction, and a sense of marvel about this car stays with me. I also loved the elegant GT Hawk that bowed around the same time.
This is one of the classiest designs I know of. I was born in ’71 so I never experienced the statement these cars must have made when they came out.
The roof is a little weird — I imagine a convertible version of this would be breathtaking.
Avanti II did make some convertibles (good luck ever seeing one, though):
The Avanti has always been my favorite car, even if the mechanicals were rather dated.
Stylistically there had never been anything like it before or sense-although the ’53 Starliner did forshadow it to a certain extent. The fact that a small group of designers lid of Lowey designed this automobile in forty days simply reaffirms the old addage that a small group of highly dedicated individuals can always out-perform any committee.
Didn’t the Avanti was introduced as a ’63 model year?
Another good cotenter would be the GT Hawk, Brooke Stevens menaged to give a big and major facefilt on the 1953 platform. http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z1745/Studebaker-Gran-Turismo-Hawk.aspx
Then let’s consider this a head start on the 1963 CCOTY.
I can still remember how impressed I was to see a metallic gold Avanti in the little showroom of the Studebaker dealer in Corvallis, Oregon, when I was a graduate student. It was absolutely amazing to me, a complete departure from anything I’d seen until that time. I also remember that no one from the dealership bothered me while I was looking at the car – they were probably very familiar with the typical financial status of college-age young men.
The Avanti was introduced as a ’63. And yes, Brooks Stevens did a masterful job on a meager budget with the old Hawk – removing the fins and fitting an in vogue Thunderbird style roof to create the Gran Turismo Hawk. Again, this was done at the request of Sherwood Egbert who came in like a cyclone and shook the old Studebaker Corporation thoroughly by the scruff of its neck.
Mr. Bill
Hamlet, NC
And on a startlingly short timetable. The GT Hawk was finished in a couple of months.
Of course I would nominate the 1962 Bubble top Chevy, BUT……………The Avanti was the car I lusted over for 20 years until I started liking Corvettes again.
The very first Avanti I had ever seen was at an E.J. Korvette’s in the STL area – a gold one as my buddy and I were walking into the store from a rear entrance. It was parked right in front of the door and we slobbered over it for a good ten minutes adoring the lines, interior, the body, etc.
What a beaut!
Avanti, based on design alone, wins it for me…with the Chevy in my back pocket, of course!
Yes, the Avanti was introduced as a ’63. Studebaker paced the Indy 500 in 1962 with a Lark convertible, but race winner Roger Ward did get an Avanti…
The Avanti has been described as “a Lark in drag,” but oh! what drag! It is based on a Lark convertible chassis — the “x” cross members were necessary to provide enough stiffness in compensation for the fiberglass body. Since this was Stude’s halo car, you could order any Studebaker with “Avanti Power,” from the hotted-up 289 4-bbl R-1 V8, the super-charged R-2, thru the bored-out R-3 and R-4 engines prepped by Andy Granatelli for Studebaker’s Bonneville record-producing runs. (Super Larks and Super Hawks were “package” cars with with optional engines and transmissions, suspension upgrades, and badging.)
As for the question of round vs. squared headlights on the Avanti, the squared fairings were introduced sometime near the beginning of MY ’64, though some some ’63s have the fairings, and some ’64s do not.
I believe that the Avanti was planned for 1962 and was supposed to be the Indy pace car that year, but the car was not ready in sufficient numbers by the time the race was run in May of 1962. The Larks were a last minute substitute.
Yes, it was introduced in ’62, but delays, mostly due to the fiberglass supplier, led to no actual production ’62s. That was why a Lark convertible paced the Indy 500 and not an Avanti.
And I didn’t even have to nominate it! 🙂 Regular readers know my love for these and how my childhood best friend’s father owned a red 64 supercharged R-2 with the 4 speed stick (and round headlights). Absolutely the coolest, most exotic car in the neighborhood. The owner drove it for years and still owned it, the last I knew some 15 or 20 years ago.
I must honestly admit that it was certainly not influential over the entire industry like the BMC transverse fwd car previously nominiated, or even like the Buick V6. But it was a bold stoke of originality, something in short supply both then and now.
This was what I loved about Studebaker – they were the polar opposite of AMC. Every 7-10 years, they would do something really audacious, but would then spend the rest of those years messing up. But the occasional flashes of absolute brilliance overshadowed (for me, at least) the many flubs and failures.
Hate to go against the grain here..
40 days in a rented house most likely swilling Martinis, Manhattans and Rob Roys does not make a beautiful car. Whenever I run across one of these all I can think of is that almost every aspect of the car is a few degrees away from being just right.
That Interior on the other hand is very attractive.
The only thing about the Avanti that confuses me is where did it fit? Price-wise it was closer to a Thunderbird, but size/performance wise it was closer to the bucket seat brigade. The closest natural competitor to a base or supercharged Avanti I can think of is the Olds Jetfire. Once the Avanti II came online it became more obvious that it was more of an expensive Grand Tourer.
I think of it as more a milestone car than car of the year, given that the original Loewy Coupes forecast the personal coupe boom better 5 years in advance of the ’58 Squarebird. Although a halo car, it didn’t attract people into the showroom to anything particularly inspired around it other than the GT Hawk. It’s a sadder “what could have been” for me.
What a car! However, in 1962 (age 10) I didn’t know Avanti existed. Although I was car crazy since a toddler, (Cadillacs were my make of choice) I don’t think I was aware of an Avanti till the 80’s (?) when the Avanti 2 came out. I can’t ever recall seeing one in person, except for one in pieces at a garage sale some 10 or 15 years ago.
A golf buddy I know has two Studes, a 54 2 door sedan and a 56 4 door sedan. The 54 has a good many styling cues from the Hawk, and the 56 looks (to me anyhow) more like a Packard. The guy belongs to the Studebaker club, and several years ago, I bought 10 tickets on a chance to win an Avanti, I think it was a 2 model.
A born cheapskate, I must have really wanted to win that car. Alas, no luck.
Both this article, and the Hemmings article you linked to, hint that the Avanti was somehow flawed — so what were the flaws (other than styling which is completely subjective and debatable)? Did it have major driveability/reliability problems? I think they’re beautiful and I’ve always admired them, but I don’t know much about them and I’ve never driven or ridden in one.
The flaw was that it was mechanically still mired in the 1950s. The chassis was from a Lark convertible, which was a stiffened version of the chassis that went back to 1953. The front suspension was still using kingpins. The ancient frame design necessitated a high floor – this was not a step-down design as had been most everything else from the late 1950s-on. The old Stude V8, while a tough old engine and a decent performer, was size-limited to 289 cid, which was quite small by 1962. Studebaker tried a 304-305 cid version in 1963, but had a high scrap rate because there was so little room for error in the castings.
The car was basically a 1953 Starliner on a shorter wheelbase with power from the ’57 Golden Hawk and with a really cool fiberglass body. Studebaker deserves some credit, however, because they did not cheap-out on all of the visible hardware. Things like door handles, steering wheels, etc were all new (or looked new) so that the car did not scream 1953 at you. The interior really was first-rate. But from a driving experience, I recall reading at least one period road test where the testers felt that the car’s road composure was not all that it should have been.
Interesting! So basically, it was a coverup job to modernize an old platform. As such, it was well done! In this way it was a bit like the 1964 Imperial, which did its best to hide a chassis that went back to 1957 and even shared that old car’s windshield.
In their review of the Avanti, Road & Track made a “Lark in a gilded cage” joke, which is apt, if obvious.
This is accurate. The Stude engine had been enlarged over the years (239-259-289), and the R1 Avanti engine featured forged crank and rods, so it took to the Paxton easily. It was heavy, and the heads were hopelessly inefficient. The steering design and kingpins were ancient tech. And no production IRS further suggests Studebaker in its death throes. But front discs and Mercedes-sourced burst-proof door locks, along with integral roll bar and padded dash, were significant advances for American cars of the era.
I loved my R1/3- I bought it sight unseen, having never seen one “in the plastic”- and don’t regret the purchase for a moment. Thx., Mr. Egbert, for a great effort. If only Stude had been capable of matching the exterior/interior design to a more advanced drivetrain and suspension…
My favorite ’62, the one this car-crazy kid got very excited about when it came out. I remember Loewy’s brag that there was not a single straight line anywhere on the car.
It did indeed pioneer the grille-less front-engine front end, common today. Boldly, with no hint of a grille. Would the ’86 Ford Taurus have been quite as widely accepted without Avanti’s having planted a little seed in the cultural consciousness a generation before?
Pioneer is sort of a strong word — Citroën adopted a completely grilleless nose for the DS19 in 1955, which almost certainly had more of an impact in that regard.
The NSU Ro80, which in some respects is the direct ancestor of the Audi C2/C3 styling that so influenced the Taurus, was designed in 1962, although it wasn’t released until 1967.
The Citroen was much sleeker, and had a very slim air intake above the bumper – I can’t think of any other car (not van or truck) that has such a bluff, featureless face as the Avanti. I don’t consider that to be a bad thing either…
The car just seems slightly dis-proportioned to me, which is borne out by the sketch in the Hemmings article linked above. It is like a concept car that loses its pizzazz when production/real-world reality sets in.
I think the vast majority of the new car buying public in 1986 was had likely never seen an Avanti and if they did they probably had forgotten about it.
Along with the Cisitalia 202, wasn’t the original Avanti the second automobile to be displayed in some famous museum (maybe the MoMA)?
It’s easy to see why.
The thing is….in 1963, when the Avanti finally came out….there was this.
It didn’t have a chance…….
My vote for 63.
Mine too.
My screenprinting studio Hollywood Loser does a couple of Avanti T-shirts.
Both designs are available with either just the car, or car-plus-logo:
http://www.hollywoodloser.com/shirts/Avanti_1.html
http://www.hollywoodloser.com/shirts/Avanti_2.html
I believe I sent one or two of these to Paul a while back.
One of the great go-for-broke designs in automotive history. A company in Studebaker’s situation and of Studebaker’s size could never have made it a lasting success. A company that would have been able to make it a lasting success would have never needed to build it.
I always thought these were kind of ugly until I saw one at a cruise-in this summer. I walked around the car a few times and it grew on me, quickly.
I’m in my 20s and the owners were impressed that I knew what it was.
Being a Studebaker nut (like JP!) I have seen many of these at SDC meets and shows. I love them! They even came in metallic aqua with an aqua interior. An AACA member here in town has one in that color combo and the first time I saw it, I had to immediately inspect it! I really like these, but was surprised to read that they never sold well. A lot of writeups on the Avanti imply that all the production holdups were the cause of its failure, but according to Richard Langworth’s book on Studebaker in the postwar years, even when the car became readily available, it did not sell.
But the automotive landscape is all the richer for its appearance.
I dunno…I talked it to death two years ago when the Avanti first graced these pages.
It was truly a brilliant try. Better, ferchrissakes, than Iacocca’s MUSTANG – which was just a rebodied Falcon with mass-market styling.
Of course this is a reskinned production car, but what a body! What a real attempt, to do the best on a tight budget…make a statement; make a driver’s car…use the best of the production chassis and mitigate the flaws?
The problem is, it was created at Studebaker. The company had a board which desperately wanted out of the auto industry; its only champion in management was about to take terminally ill with cancer; the cost of American manufacture and the militancy of the UAW were about to doom the large American plant, leaving room for only one basic model in their Canadian satellite assembly plant.
How many things can go wrong all at once?
The car was resurrected, true – but by people without Lowey’s vision of style; without Egbert’s drive. Immediate changes to ride height corrected handling problems but messed with appearances. Later modifications to comply with law, exhausted Studebaker parts inventories, cost limitations and bankruptcy-court rulings…destroyed the product to where it became one more Fiberfab assembled kit-car.
I have a set of hubcaps supposedly only 4 set exist,origionaly made for the 1962 pace car daytona 500. They have the hawk bird emblem in the center. I cannot find any info on them. The Hawk emblem is like the one on the trunk of the 1962 GranTourismo hawk. I have never seen any like these. Any help out there?
Who dosent love the a avanti it was doomed from the off,but what a way to go a truly heroic effort from studbaker and all those involved nesesity is the mother of invention and studbaker realy pulled all the stops out with this car and that’s why people love it what other manufacturers should have the balls to do a car like the avanti.