We’re all pretty familiar with the 1962 Gran Turismo Hawk, with its low-cost but effective redesign by Brooks Stevens. Turns out Studebaker began using that Gran Turismo name on the Hawk starting mid-year 1961. It’s probably no coincidence that this happened very shortly after Sherwood Egbert took over as CEO, and immediately focused on establishing a fresh, new performance image for the ailing brand.
These two celebrity-owner ads are from pretty late in the model year.
This one is a bit earlier, and refers to the “Gran Turismo tradition” and not yet as the actual name of this limited production version of the Hawk. Things were happening quickly at the time…
Related reading:
1962 Studebaker Gran Tursimo Hawk – A Beautiful Death (Paul Niedermeyer)
1962 Studebaker Gran Turismo Hawk – Irrational Exuberance (J P Cavanaugh)
I would never want my name festooned on my dashboard, and does anyone care in what order my car popped off the assembly line? Studebaker was a bit ahead of the curve offering bucket seats and four on the floor in 1961 though, which would soon become a hot must-have for any halfway sporty American coupe in the next few years.
Ive had my ’61 Hawk four speed for over 20 years. The engraved name on the brass nameplate reads Richard E. Newburg, Hawk Number 1080.
As I understand it, new owners got a card to send in with what they wanted the engraving to say. The plaques were sequentially issued in the order the cards were received and had nothing to do with the production order. The body number on my car is 1313, probably because not everyone sent in the card.
My two 1977 Lincoln MkVs also have a gold name plate on the dashboard, with the original owner’s name (“R. Baker” on one). I think it’s a neat touch, a bit of personalization in what was then a very impersonal, mass – produced world.
If I were the type to wear jewellery and draw attention to myself, I’d appreciate this touch on my expensive new car.
As a car collector, I’d appreciate it more if these particular name plates included “E. Presley” or perhaps “F. Sinatra”.
I remember these ads when I did a piece on the 1959-61 Hawks. I don’t think the Gran Turismo name was anywhere on the car, but it certainly worked its way into the ads.
And it was certainly limited production, but probably moreso than Studebaker had intended. 3660 cars was the lowest production for any year of Hawk (other than the extra-short 1964 year).
I am a big fan of the 61 Hawk. Most don’t realize that it was the very first entry in one of the hottest configurations of the 60s – the V8, bucket seat, 4 speed 4/5 passenger car. But with such low production, hardly anyone noticed.
Good call on the first V8, 4-speed, bucket seat, 4/5 passenger car. Looks like 1962 brought competitors in that regard, mainly GM with a few full-size ‘sporty’ Pontiacs and other GM senior compact cars becoming available with that combination. The Ford Falcon got buckets and a 4-speed for 1962, as well, but a V8 wouldn’t be offered until the following year.
Of course, the configuration really exploded in 1964 with the GTO and Mustang.
This 1960 Bonneville with Tri-power 389, factory four-speed manual (T10) and bucket seats would like to have a word with you…
I guess I should have added “less than full-sized”. 🙂
I had not actually known about this one before, and had thought that the 62 Impala SS was GM’s first such effort – I stand corrected. Now I want one of these Pontiacs!
It It looks from the brochure that the buckets were only available on the Bonneville convertible, but brochures are not always right – and the brochure does not mention the 4 speed. Another source says that the 4 speed was available starting in January 1960. It would be interesting to see which sold more when equipped with buckets/4 speed, the Bonnie or the Hawk? I could see that one going either way.
This was indeed a harbinger of things to come: Buckets, 4-on-the-floor, back seat where you could stow the kids if you had to. It should have sold a zillion, but it was a Studebaker, which by then was seen as a potential orphan make.
As someone said about another independent make (Kaiser?) slap a Buick nameplate on it and it will sell like hotcakes. (But please ditch those awful fins, which was done the next year).
Indeed, if the much cleaner-looking, finless 1962 Gran Turismo had been introduced just a few years sooner, it might have given Studebaker a few more years of life.
But by 1962, Studebaker was seen by just about everyone (other than the few remaining Studebaker diehards) as “dead car company walking”. Few were sold, regardless of how good the cars might have been, otherwise.
An earlier release 1962 Gran Turismo, as well as putting the much cheaper to build Sceptre into production instead of the stylish (but typically inept) Avanti, might have meant a Studebaker that lasted at least until restrictive government regulations would have surely killed the company.
Studebaker had an ‘up’ sale year in model year 1962. Larks went from 66K to 93K, Hawks from 3900 to 9300, and even pickups were up, all despite a 40-day strike.
The bottom really fell out in 1963.
I grew up in a Chevy family, but I really admire what Studebaker offered, especially in the ’63-64 model years. Options not offered on similarly-sized cars, and even a pretty complete truck line, including big trucks.
I’ve owned four Studebakers over the past 34 years (’63, ’64, and two ’66’s) and I’ve enjoyed every one.
Yes it was Kaiser. I think if one spent time with the Studebaker, it would be apparent that it’s not a Buick. But as a long time Kaiser owner, I think you could believe that a Kaiser is a Buick product, sincerely the quality is comparable. I’m referring to a 1953 Manhattan. And I’m a decades long 1951 Buick owner as well. Both are in my garage. I can hear Buick guys screaming already.
There was a rather ostentatious pink color available on those also.
Flamingo!
Too cool!
That car looks just like mine which sadly I have to sell due to loss of my eyesight the only difference is mine is the only hawk in existence
I’ve always seen the 3,929 production number for ’61 Hawks, per Studebaker records. The ’62 Hawk, with 9,335 produced, may have been small-beans for the big boys, but was a nice increase from ’61.
For quite awhile, I didn’t care much for the ’59-61 Hawk series, but they’ve grown on me. With the 4-speed and buckets introduced for ’61, they’re more interesting. I know people whose favorite Hawks are ’61’s. Mine would be a ’64.
Was the 4-speed built in-house or externally?
Studebaker never built transmissions, except possibly in its very early days. They were all Borg-Warner units. This was the T10, the only four speed being made in the US at the time, except for the Corvair’s.
Same with all the independents, IIRC. Building transmissions required a big investment that they just couldn’t justify. Packard was the exception, building its own automatic; its post war manuals were B/W units; quite likely also earlier ones.
Independents relied heavily on suppliers for many major components, including engines, transmissions, axles, brakes, steering, etc.. It was similar to truck makers, in that they were more “assemblers” than “manufacturers”.
Studebaker’s early-fifties “Automatic Drive” was its own build. They later just went to Borg-Warner.
No; that was built by Borg Warner’s Detroit Gear Divisions (DG). Studebaker collaborated to some degree on its concept, and had an exclusive on it. When Ford wanted to buy it from DG too, Studebaker said no. When Studebaker’s sales volumes dropped in 1955, DG demanded a higher per unit price, and it became too expensive for Studebaker, so they started buying the simpler automatic built by Borg-Warner’s other division, essentially the Fordomatic, because it was cheaper.
The tooling for B/W DG automatic was sent to their British unit, where it was used in several European cars for some time yet.
Full story here:
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/automotive-histories/automotive-history-studebakers-automatic-drive-borg-warner-dg150200250-advanced-in-some-respects-not-so-in-others/
Studebaker simply didn’t have a plant to build transmissions, and was in no position to build one.
Too small and short-lived to be considered a real independent automaker I suppose, but I’ll note that Tucker designed and built their own automatic transmission (a CVT!) for their ’48 model. Only four or five were made, and only two were installed in their cars.
I wonder how much money Packard saved, if any, by designing and building their own automatic transmission instead of buying one off the shelf from another company. Seems their R&D money would have been better spent on a V8 engine or updated bodies.
Nowadays even the huge automakers often turn to other companies like ZF or Getrag/Magna for their transmissions.
Just wondering, because I was pretty sure all the Packard manual transmissions were built by Packard up through the 1956’s. At the very least, there is not a known interchange to any identifiable Borg-Warner transmission. They all have Packard casting numbers on them, and have a direct line at least to the 1941-1947 “Clipper” models. They were, however, available with Borg-Warner overdrives, which had been true since the late 1930’s. I don’t know, maybe Packard outsourced assembly, perhaps at the same time it outsourced body-building to Briggs in 1941? Packard built it’s own rear axle assemblies as well, up until 1956 when the axles were built by Dana, and featured as an option the “Twin-Traction” limited-slip differential developed with Packard.
I did a quick search this morning about Packard manuals, and kept coming up with the BW/OD combo. I rather assumed they made their own manuals, especially going back a ways. And they may well have still been making them up to the end.
T10 same as corvett
I believe it is a T-10 transmission, built externally.
In the first photo, do I see an Allard to the left of the Rolls-Royce?
Lucius Who?
The side view really shows the age of the platform used – especially the door .
-Nate
Aside from the windshield frame, the Hawk would have been a fresh and appropriate look as a new car in 1961. Two-door coupes with stylish rooflines were hot. The doorskin actually was updated in 1957 to eliminate the 1953 sculpturing. The post coupe roof was expedient in 1959 when Studie was in survival mode.
Now if only Lucius Beebe – which has long been possibly the best name ever – wrote the copy here.
The pretty but somewhat recycled Stude’s no Union Pacific double-header, but I’m sure he had the wordsmithery to make it sound as if it was.
As for James Mason, wasn’t he near-always a sinister bad guy? You want to share a numbered list with HIM?
Just yesterday (May 1, 2022) I saw James Mason as Professor Humbert in the film version of “Lolita” on Turner Classic Movies, which he made in 1961 (the same year as this ad) and was released in early 1962. A couple of years before he was the villain VanDamm in my favorite Hitchcock film, “North by Northwest”.
James Mason was a terrific actor but like you say did not always play the most savory characters.