(first posted 10/16/2013, Revised and updated 8/19/2023) We keep coming back to this topic, first with yesterday’s Comet and then today’s Falcon Sprint. That era was indeed the beginning of a new generation of potent compact cars. In May of 1963, Popular Science Magazine got onto this topic too and tested five of them. In addition to the Falcon Sprint, they checked out the turbocharged Corvair Monza Spyder, the turbocharged Olds Jetfire, the Pontiac Tempest and (of course!) the supercharged Super Lark.
Alright, you are on to me – this is just another thinly disguised excuse to flail you all with the complete superiority of my favorite car of the moment, the Super Lark. If you have a few minutes, read the article. It is a fascinating step back into time when these hot new cars were really new cars.
A couple of notes. First, I combined two pages due to a table which was impossible to read otherwise. Unfortunately, the way the pages lined up, the data on the right page is a line down from the label on the left page.
Second, there is a wide variety of engine types: 2 normally aspirated V8s (Falcon and Tempest), a turbo 6 (Corvair) a turbo V8 (Olds) and a supercharged V8 (Lark). I hope this is not a plot spoiler, but when looking at the results of the acceleration tests, note that the Tempest had the highest (numerical) axle ratio of all, by far, with a 3.90. All others ranged from 3.26 to 3.55. Pontiac Chief Engineer John DeLorean was plainly ready to race. And one of these cars topped out at 132 mph. Also, the car with the tallest rear axle was also the one with the lowest top speed. Read on to see which one.
The Corvair impressed the testers most in the inexpensive heavy duty suspension option that turned the car into a real corner-carver. Higher speed oversteer was less of a problem than before and ride was not really affected.
It was interesting that far more space was spent discussing the suspension than was spent on the turbo. But was the description of the car’s performance as “better than adequate” damning it with faint praise?
The Falcon’s 260 V8 was hobbled by having only a 2 bbl carb. However, the gearbox was described as “one of the best” and worked well with the engine. The big complaint was the lack of power steering in a very front-heavy car, which reminded the testers of driving a truck.
The Oldsmobile was another car where handling seemed more interesting than the new turbocharger. The car understeered steadily but the Borg-Warner transmission came in for praise.
The Jetfire’s turbo differed from the Corvair in providing boost all through the rev range.
The editors saved the best for last, with a shootout between the Pontiac Tempest and the Studebaker. The Pontiac was praised for its brute force power – but provided numbers that made the reader wonder if the package was on the up-and-up. A three speed transmission (that was not all that satisfying) would be expected to be a drag on performance. Pontiac built a single V8 in varying displacements – it is hard to avoid asking the question if the boys at Royal Pontiac might have swapped a 389 into the car in the months before the debut of the 1964 GTO.
The Studebaker came in for a lot of praise – power, handling and ride all got good marks. It is a good review when the biggest complaint is the way the pedals are placed. For a company that was on the ropes and with precious little in the way of an engineering budget, the Lark acquitted itself very well.
So which one of these hot little numbers would you choose? You probably already know my answer.
Great read; thanks for posting it. But it’s going to take me a while to decide….I’ll get back to later today, if ever. Can I have all five? They all have some very attractive qualities.
I wouldn’t be surprised if that Tempest was actually packing a 389.
That is an interesting question – did the Tempest have a 389 with 326 decals on the valve covers. Compared to the R2 Stude, that Tempest seemed to scoot pretty fast. Sure, it had a 3.90 axle, but it also had only a 3 speed stick. On paper, that Lark would seem to have the Tempest outgunned 6 ways from Sunday. With another look, the Tempest outweighed the Lark by 100 pounds, too. Were we looking at a GTO test mule here? Could that 280 horspower version of the 4 bbl 326 be one of those “export” packages? Maybe John DeLorean really did stick a 389 in a mid sized car. Probably not, that would have been against GM corporate policy. 🙂
Edit – a quick check of Wiki reminds me that the Pontiac “326” of 1963 actually displaced 336 cubic inches. Its bore was decreased for 1964 to make it a real 326.
Even so, I am starting to think your comment has something to it. The Tempest had 20 fewer hp, weighed 100 pounds more, had a 3 speed instead of a 4 speed, yet handily outgunned the Super Lark on every acceleration test? I am not sure a 3.90 vs. 3.55 axle difference would do this. But maybe that’s just me. Come to think of it, a 389 in a 63 Tempest would be pretty sweet!
FWIW, Delorean supposedly had an actual ’63 389 Tempest test mule built at Pontiac which was the inspiration for the ’64 GTO. If true, it wouldn’t be at all surprising to learn that the car used in this road test was, in fact, that same car with 326 emblems.
Pontiac (mainly through ad man Jim Wangers) was the leader in providing non-production ringers to the press corps and was likely the guy who supplied the 421-powered ’64 GTO to Car and Driver for the infamous ‘GTO vs. GTO’ article.
Pretty sure that the Delorean Tempest with the 389 was a 64 model year car. The GTO wasn’t introduced until later in the model year because it wasn’t originally planned.
According to Wangers book, you are correct. As others have mentioned, the early Tempest drivetrain would not have lasted past the first launch!
I certainly do recall though, that the 326(ish?)was a pretty peppy mill in that 63 Tempest.
Remembering that all Pontiac V8s have the same external dimensions, one could drop an SD421 in there, and noone would be the wiser. YEEHAW!
Not sure how long that driveshaft and transmission would stay together with a 421 in it. My guess is that it would be fun but have a very short expiration date.
Per the brochure, a 4 speed was available only with the four cylinder. The 3 speed may have been the same unit adapted from the big cars, where it was probably made stout enough for the big engine.
Don’t forget, these cars basically used Corvair components in their rear transaxles. For some reason, the three speed manual was able to be fortified enough to handle the 326, but the four speed wasn’t. Hence no four speed available in these.
Why did Pontiac sell their 336 V8 as a “326”? There has to be a story behind that.
Could be the corporate-wide 330 cubic inch limit for the compact platforms. Which De Lorean then blew away with the GTO. Oldsmobile had a 330, Buick a 300 and of course Chevy had the 327.
And massaged by Smokey Yunick.
I’ll take a BRG Corvair with a red vinyl interior and a rear sway bar please.
Falcon Sprint please,though the Tempest looks tempting.The supercharged Lark was a well kept secret,the only one I’ve ever seen was in a magazine about 12 years ago,owned by a retired American school teacher who still drag raced it.They all look and perform great I’m a Ford fan but I’m spoiled for choice.
That would be Ted Harbit you’re speaking of. He’s pretty famous inside Studebaker circles, and is quite often recognized and respected outside of the Studephile community. One detail I recall is that the aural sensation from the four speed is like that of a DCT with Ted shifting it.
Kind of funny….just read about the “anti-German sentiments in the early sixties” in the CC about the import brands.
And whose name is on the cover of this 1963 magazine ? Jawohl, Herr Wernher von Braun.
By 1963, Wernher von Braun was regarded as an American – he was what was keeping us up with the Russians in space, and the average newspaper reader knew it.
Until he opened his mouth, anyway…
….and showed his pre-1945 NSDAP membership card and SS badges.
Loved Tom Lehrer’s song from the 1960’s
‘Don’t say that he’s hypocritical.
Say rather that he’s apolitical.
“Once the rockets are up, who cares where they come down?
That’s not my department!” says Wernher von Braun.’
Never mind the space race, von Braun will forever be remembered for the V2 rockets that killed thousands in London, Antwerp and Leige Even higher were the casualties of the slave labour force used to make them.
Has anyone else clocked the sickeningly smug look on his face in the newsreel showing him being captured by the Americans knowing that they wanted his expertise?
Did anyone else notice the ad for the Dremel Moto-Tool? They are still in business and continue to sell upgraded versions of the thing, although Dremel is now a division of Robert Bosch. They do cost a bit more today, but then what doesn’t.
I have one of those old 1960’s Dremel Tools. When Mrs DougD’s Grandfather passed away in Michigan I scored a few old tools out of his workshop. Looks just like the one in the ad, and still works just fine…
Count me in for a Super Lark too.
The ad for the “new” Dremel Moto-Tool jumped out to me as well. Mine was purchased in 1999 and still works like new.
At some point, someone here will probably reproduce a 1953 magazine article with ads for the amazing new WD-40.
Some of the stuff would be useful to the home mechanic but bayonets and machetes!Handy if you’re a serial killer as well I suppose
Look at the guy on the Mercury ad on page 3 – Michael Jackson in disguise. Even his shoes look authentic 🙂
Yes that’s interesting, I had no idea they had them that far back!
I knew that I had read this article the first time through. Of the five cars make mine the Corvair please. Of course I think the Gen II Corvair is much better looking but that is just a matter of taste. A turbo Corvair would be the perfect car to drive one day a month, in good weather, when you felt like blasting up and down through the gears. Perhaps if I win tonight’s PowerBall.
That struck me too & I had to look it up – Dremel Moto-Tool intro’d 1935
The Corvair’s fuel efficiency at 60 MPH is more than twice that of the Lark! It does take more fuel to push a big box thru the air, and to turn over an engine of twice the displacement. It’s a good thing gas was 29 cents a gallon then (2.22 dollars today).
Yeah, the Vair is the economy champ of this bunch. It probably helped that the Spyder’s boost did not really come on until you put your foot into it, while the Stude’s blower was working full time.
Corvair all the way. Least impressed with the Lark and Falcon – little matter of handling.
Curiously, the test praises the high speed handling of the Falcon. It seems stiff steering was the main objection. Could it be that we are being unfairly harsh with Falcon platform handling? Empirically, with certain adjustments it achieved roadracing success as good or better than its competitors.
What was especially dissappointing was to see MacNamara still meddling in Ford’s carburetion policy, evident on this featured Falcon, starting with detuning the 1960 Lincolns to restricting them with only 2-barrel carburetors.
After relieving Ford Motor Company of his own distructive dictate, he went on to involve himself with sending draftees to needlessly die fighting a proxy war with China and the Soviet union (in that ranking order)
I’ve never been big on Studebakers but still remember a new Lark hatdtop coupe with a Paxton blower fly past my 383 equiped 62 Chrysler.like it was standing still.
Every issue of Popular Science may be found here at Google Books, organized by decade: http://books.google.com/books?id=MC0DAAAAMBAJ&source=gbs_all_issues_r&cad=1&atm_aiy=1870#all_issues_anchor
Talk about a real time waster. I could spend all day every day browsing this stuff. I’ll bet there are enough article to keep CC in business for the next five years!
I see that Popular Mechanics and Scientific American are also available. Motor trend and Car and Driver as well.
I hope JP and some of our other excellent writers will use these resources for lots of fun articles.
I’m having trouble finding Car and Driver and Road Track. Could you put up the links? Thanks!
My mistake Got ahead of myself as I found references but did not check to see if actual magazines were available. Sorry for the inconvenience. Popular Mechanics is there set up like Popular Science. Scientific American is there but you have to look for each issue.
A turbo powered V8 Olds Jetfire with a floor mounted manual trans???? Hell yeah sign me up!!
I love the $10.80 heavy duty suspension option on the Corvair.
Back when these cars were new, I would have gone along with Mr. Mann and opted for the Corvair with the $10.80 suspension upgrade. To me, it’s the coolest of the cars, with a bit of a European vibe.
Nowadays, as a Sunday-driver old car? I’d take the Stude for the oddball factor. It would be fun to surprise people with the performance of my frumpy-looking Stude.
I already have a Corvair, so, its a Jetfire for me.
Now my pick would be the Corvair if I could get one I had an early Falcon I ve been in a 389 Tempest a seriously fast car but no I’d sort the Corvair out get the swaybar yall talk about we have some great roads around the bay to have fun on even at the speed limit some are quite challenging and Paul tells they drive ok.
You could always get a ’64 Corvair, which had a much-tamed suspension (front anti-roll bar, softer rear coils, camber compensator spring) and a somewhat bigger 2,680cc engine with more torque.
Having seen how small and dainty the early Corvairs are, I think I’d spring for one as well. It’s amazing how cheap the good suspension option is.
I really like the looks and specs of the 63 Lemans, but I feel like I might need a Corvair in my life.
The Corvair and Jetfire are intriguing, although we now know that the Jetfire worked better in theory than in real life. The Corvair would be the most fun to drive, but the Falcon is better looking, in my opinion, and the drivetrain is more likely to operate without any glitches than the “high tech” Corvair or Jetfire.
So I’ll take a Falcon and a Corvair.
Love how complete and easy to read the table is. They measured the fuel economy at four different cruising speeds, today you are lucky to get an EPA combined figure in most “road tests”. I think it would be frightening to take that Lark up to 132 MPH.
I also noticed that they did not test braking. Yikes. The Stude had the only discs in the bunch, they were a pioneer in these.
Never owned a Stude, but that’s what I would take from this group. I really enjoyed reading the exploits of the “Chicken Hawk” and Ted Harbit. I was saddened when it wrecked, but it’s good that Ted recovered.
Ted came back with a red 63 Super Lark that he called the Stude Tomato. There is a YouTube video of the car outrunning a 440 Mopar B body of some kind.
The Tempest and Corvair, with their swing axle rear ends, could be treacherous under certain conditions. Ralph Nader was correct about the Corvair- I know from personal experience. It could be Unsafe at Any Speed.
Did you deflate your front tires to the factory-recommended 15psi?
Olds really messed up the styling of that 63 Jetfire – the 62 was such a beautiful car by comparison. Fortunately it was fixed the following year. I’ll take a Lemans – a friend had one new that year (traded for a new 66 – my fave) with the 326 and it was a great car.
Indeed, the ’63 Jetfire is similar to the ’63-’64 Dodge Custom 880 in having among the most plain (if not exactly bad) grilles. They all seem to have a Rambler vibe going.
Chevrolet did better with the grille on the ’64-’65 Malibu, but not by much.
I wonder if Oldsmobile did it by purpose to give us a upcoming preview of things to come with the 1964 mid-size F85/Cutlass?
I recall reading that Buick, Oldsmobile and Pontiac were not too happy with their “senior” compacts. The Oldsmobile version, in particular, was a sales disappointment. It was initially outsold by the Studebaker Lark!
Buick and Oldsmobile management felt that the cars looked too small. Hence, the effort to make them look bigger for the 1963 model year.
The success of the thoroughly conventional 1962 Ford Fairlane showed GM the way (while demanding a direct response from Chevrolet).
The Corvair hands down. Had a ’63 Monza for a short time but unfortunately without the key $10.80 option. Despite that it was the “funnest” car I have ever had and led me to buy a ’68 Monza thereafter. Iconic styling , European handling(which was later proven to be as safe as anything else on the road at the time), what’s not to like?
As a Ford fan I’d go for the Falcon. I love the simple styling of the early Falcon. The 260 V8 was a good little motor and the 17 mpg at 65 was about a good as it was going to get. Lots of contemporary hop up stuff came along for the Mustang a few years later. I had been looking for a 260 for my ’70 Mustang coupe, the 250 cube straight six only returned 17 mpg at 55 mph. Maybe I can find a 260 and save it for a future project.
The 260 V8 engine TRANSFORMED the Falcon! A harbinger of the V8 Mustang a year away from production.
Having spent time driving two V8 ’63 Falcons, I have to agree with the road test’s comments on the steering of these V8 Falcons.
Make mine a Corvair, 4 door, 4 speed, Artesian Turquoise with matching interior.
It would depend. If it was to be a daily driver, then the corvair. It would have a good all round mix of performance and economy. Plus having driven one eons ago in the snow it would be perfect for our Canadian winters.
If it was just a fun car, the super lark. Gotta love those sleepers!!
Super Lark – it is too much like Clark Kent’s friends finding out he really is Superman!
John Delorean and Royal Pontiac, located in Royal Oak, MI (a suburb of Detroit) was well known, even then, for swapping engines, final drive ger ratios and slyly installing performance parts in otherwise “stock” appearing new cars and submitting these specially prepared “ringers” to the car magazines for road testing.
And the subterfuge worked to great safes effect, too. I’ve always wondered how many eager, young GTO buyers were brought down to reality when they found out that their supposedly ‘hot’ Goats were easy prey for just about any other musclecar.
I personally know of a guy who just had to have a new 1968 GTO. He was soon shocked when he was handily stomped by a wide margin in a street race with a Charger R/T. He wouldn’t have minded so much except the Charger had a full complement of passengers where he was the sole occupant in his GTO.
Yup!
#RealWorldTruth!
Jim Wangers was quite open about these shenanigans in his book, Glory Days: When Horsepower and Passion Ruled Detroit, which was published around 1999-2000.
Pity the Valiant was not available with Mopar’s even today, still under-rated, small block 273 V8 engine and their “Reference Standard” for this time period 3 speed, push button controlled Torqueflite automatic transmission!
With this powertrain combo and the available 3.23 or 3.55 rear end gearing there could had been quite the upset in this road test’s ratings.
Ah, memories…..my father’s first new car ever was a 63 F-85 station wagon, 215 aluminum 2bbl, complete with 3-on-the-tree. I was 17 at the time and wasn’t impressed with it at all. It was a dog!
I would take the Stude, but also like the jet fire Olds. I think these were the only two interesting cars in the article. Corvair and Falcon bleh… The Tempest is OK, but not really my cup of tea.
I’m not seeing the PS article or any link to it.
Anyway, i’ll take the Super Lark, but make mine a Wagonaire with the open-air 3rd row seat. I’m not sure if the Super Lark package was available on the wagon, but all of its components were available separately as options
Fixed
I gravitate toward Pontiacs, but never embraced the Tempest’s funky rear transaxle and independent suspension. Would have been a sweet car with conventional rear end, 4-speed manual and 326 with 4BBL and dual exhaust.
A lot of people see the ’63 Tempest 326 (336) as a sort of precursor to the GTO.
The Tempest was interesting because they did not have a 4 speed transaxle that could handle the power, so they were stuck with either the automatic or a 3 speed.
As noted, I am a little suspicious of the Tempest’s results, at least with the as-disclosed equipment. This was early in the era when Pontiac was really paying attention to performance, and it would not surprise me at all that this 326/336 was either heavily massaged or was maybe even a 389 with 326 valve covers on it.
But could they have gotten those mpg numbers with a 389 and 3.90 axle, even in a 3200 lb car?
It also has a lot more torque and a significantly lower first gear than all but the Corvair. How many shifts would it need to get to 60?
How many shifts would it need to get to 60?
One, undoubtedly. People have this wrong idea that a four speed will be quicker in the 0-60. Almost never, and sometimes slower, if a second shift needs to happen.
Wish the links worked ☹️
They do now.
On redisplayed old articles here they usually don’t.
I’ll take the Super Lark, but make mine a wagon. I’ve always been a fan of wagons.
Amazing how much better the 1963 Lark wagon looked than the 1962 given it was the same basic body. Just about everything from the A pillar back was new and improved (the A-pillar and forward would get redesigned in 1964, making the car nearly unrecognizable from the ’62 model). Brooks Stevens did such an amazing job with his low-buck Studebaker facelifts bringing a 1953 design fully into the ’60s (the GT Hawk was even better). How can this be the same guy who went on to design hopelessly kitchy Excaliburs?
> The instrumentation properly included a vacuum gauge for the power output […] The remainder of the panel, we suspect, will undergo a styling renovation for ’64. For a car of this performance – take a glance at the top speed in the chart – the customer will demand more glamour.
What was their beef with the Lark’s dashboard? None of these cars have “glamourous” instrument panels but the Lark’s may well be the most upscale looking and is commonly praised, with nice padding, toggle switches, full set of gauges (including a tach that isn’t stuck on in some odd place as an afterthought, and that roll-out vanity mirror in the glovebox. It looks quite similar to the Tempest dash here. A styling renovation for ’64 was unlikely given it was completely redesigned for ’63 to fit the new cowl. For the record the only notable mod for ’64 was swapping the positions of the tach and speedometer; it carried over again in 1965 before getting woodgrain paneling in 1966.
The Corvair apparently ahead of the curve by fitting asbestos-free brakes.
At some point “naturally aspirated” rather than “freely aspirated” became the common description for a non-blown engine.
Three of the cars here use tiny 13″ tires even on the performance models. The other two use 15-inchers. None use 14s.
The Super Lark, of course.
Sure, a lot of the reason that Paxton is under the hood, was to try and buy a little more time with their long-in-tooth small displacement V8 that was a bit on the heavy side and not known for its deep breathing abilities… until a new engine could come online once Avanti sales took off and the rest of their line was renewed. Of course we all know that day never came.
But the “Super” package netted you front discs and a number of other upgrades, plus I really like the instrument panel and the no BS gauge cluster. Was a shame they didn’t put a boost gauge in like the Avanti had. BTW- The standard four wheel drums on my ’62 Lark are capable of shrugging off speed without drama, and that’s with no power assist.
Finned rear drums to complement the front disks were fitted to all cars with R-series engines too.
In an alternate universe, Studebaker would have found some way to keep the 352 (and other) Packard V8s in production as used in the 1956 Golden Hawk – maybe they should have given AMC more lenient terms to help keep their business rather than charging a stiff premium and intentionally hobbling its power output – and Kaiser needed a V8 too). They had just set up the new Utica facility to built them two years earlier. That engine had plenty of growth potential – no need for superchargers, hand-finessing to create the hot R3/R4, and the high cost that goes along with it. It wasn’t much heavier than the Stude V8 either.
It’s a real pity someone decided to have this test in 1963. If it had been 1962, the Mopar A-body had the Hyper Pak for the 170 /6. Granted, it was an OTC kit, but it was still available at any Mopar parts counter. Then, 1964 brought the excellent LA 273 engine to the A-body.
So, the one lousy year when Chrysler’s compact didn’t have a ‘hot’ engine would be the one Popular Science decides to have their comparison with the other brands.
In 1964 the 273 LA was only available in the rather modest 180 hp 2 barrel version. Meanwhile, the Chevy II was available with the 220 hp 4 barrel 283.
The “hot” 273 came along in 1965.
Nice article .
Hard to chose just one .
-Nate