(first posted 5/23/2017) We (OK, mostly I) here at CC have given a lot of love to Studebakers over the years. But looking over our archives, it seems that of the 1960s models, the sexy cars have gotten most of the love. We have given lots of attention to Avantis, Hawks and even a Wagonaire. But what about the regular, bread and butter sedans that provided most of the volume to keep the men busy on the lines in South Bend? We have not covered those nearly so thoroughly, so I thought it might be time to give one of these plain Lark sedans a little affection.
There are plenty of years that mark the beginning of a “modern era” of this or that. It may be my age showing, but I consider 1963 as the start of the modern era of American cars, or at least the warmup lap. What was it that made 1963 such a starting point? Maybe because the intermediates were just beginning to get rolling as a major force. The V8/4 speed/bucket seat triumvirate that would dominate the muscle car era was getting widespread traction. Or maybe it was the styling that had clearly moved on from the “Space Age” 1950’s into the neoclassic style of the Camelot era. Whatever it was, almost every line of cars in America (alright, maybe every line that wasn’t being styled by Virgil Exner over at Chrysler) got itself dressed up and ready for a steak and a martini.
And then there was poor old Studebaker. It was actually kind of amazing that the struggling company from South Bend, Indiana was able to put as diverse a line that it did. The previous decade or so had seen the company on a roller coaster of giddy highs (like a 100th anniversary in 1952 and the stunning Loewy coupe in 1953) to the pits of dispair (like a 1958 line that looked like the product of some Eastern Bloc committee). The ’59 Lark began a resurgence that seemed to be gaining steam in the Kennedy years. We all know now that the steam valve was abruptly shut off in December of 1963. What nobody knew then was that this 1963 line would be Studebaker’s last realistic shot as an American vehicle manufacturer.
The received general wisdom is that Studebaker designed some new cars in 1953, suffered poor sales from then on, and let the old 1953 car soldier on with some fresh lipstick and hairspray applied as needed. As it turns out, this wasn’t exactly true. Yes, the basic layout and construction technique was little changed from the last time Korea was on the minds of Americans. However, Studebaker’s engineers kept making changes and improvements in an effort to keep the cars modern.
I came across this low end Lark Regal at a summertime show in a small Indiana county seat town maybe four years ago. There was something appealing about this plain Jane sedan (I’m a sucker for anything with a V8 and a three speed and I loves me that metallic silver-blue paint), but I struggled with something to say about it. “Here, a nice blue Studebaker. Just look at it!” did not seem like the level of coverage we are used to here, so the car has sat in my e-archives, waiting for me to get some inspiration.
I don’t know what made me remember it recently, but I did, which caused me to take a look at the brochure. Even I was surprised by what this car offered. Let’s first look at the (not so) obvious stuff outside. Had you ever noticed that the entire roof and greenhouse area were all new from ’62? Howabout the fact that the center part of the body lost that exposed central pillar between the doors and finally got modern thin frames around the windows?
But underneath is where the car really shone. Everyone knows that you had a really wide engine choice, ranging from a six to some really potent V8s (like the R-2 Supercharged version with a power output that Studebaker declined to publish but which was probably around 300 ponies.) But what about the fact that you could get a 3 speed (with or without overdrive), two different automatics or a fully synchronized 4 speed, and up to six axle ratios to match with them? Or the availability of the limited slip Twin Traction differential and the first successful use of caliper disc brakes in an American car? About that diff, please don’t call it a “Posi”. Packard invented it and Studebaker kept it alive until Chevy could sell it in numbers to make it’s Positraction name synonymous with limited slip. If it makes you feel better, go back to yesterday’s piece about the Chevelle SS and comment about Positraction to your heart’s content.
I’ll also bet you didn’t know that all Larks and Cruisers got a dual circuit brake system as standard equipment. I had known that Cadillac and the AMC Ambassador offered that feature in 1963, but never that it came standard on every ’63 Lark. Or that every ’63 Stude came equipped with an alternator and fifteen inch wheels? Safety padded dashboard? 2 speed electric windshield wipers? Even this Regal, the most basic of ’63 Larks, was a nicely equipped car. No Scotsman, this.
But as we all know, none of it mattered. We have all heard about that left brain/right brain thing where the left is the side of analytical folks and the right is the side of the sensitive and the artistic. Those of us who tend to be left-brainers appreciate the inner workings of a car like the ’63 Lark, which offered a combination of attributes difficult to match anywhere else, certainly for the price. Like the full set of gauges that not even Cadillac or Lincoln offered.
But that is not what sells cars. Beauty and image sells cars, a lesson learned the hard way by Chrysler about ten years before this Studebaker rolled out of the plant. It is a car’s style that makes its buyer feel ten years younger and fifteen pounds lighter when he or she gets behind the wheel. It is that elusive thing called “presence” that makes a car’s owner feel successful when the neighbors or the mother-in-law see the proud person park a shiny new car in the driveway.
The attractive new dashboard with its standard glove box vanity might have been a bone to throw at Mr. Pocket Protector’s wife to make her feel a little better about bringing home another homely, stubby car, but it was never going to seal the deal with the kind of customer most of us secretly want to be. That customer bought Buicks. Only your eccentric old Uncle Clem bought Studebakers.
This car was Studebaker’s last real shot at success. You might argue that the heavily restyled 1964 model was that car, but management pulled the plug on the American manufacturing business maybe four months into the ’64 model year. Unfortunately, the first two months of that period of time had to contend with too many leftover ’63s in dealer lots while the last two months were effectively assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald. The end of Studebaker as an American auto manufacturer was viewed by most buyers as the beginning of the end, with the final 1964-66 cars wearing the stigma of being an impending orphan. So that would leave the 1963 cars as the last ones to be sold for a full year under circumstances that bore any resemblance to “normal”.
By 1963, Studebaker was offering us a very good car. It was durable, economical and offered a lot of car for the money. Unfortunately, its beauty was just too well hidden for most of America to see.
Further reading:
1959 Studebaker Lark (Paul Niedermeyer)
1960 Studebaker Lark (Jim Grey)
1963 Lark Daytona Wagonaire (J P Cavanaugh)
1964 Studebaker Challenger (J P Cavanaugh)
1953-64 Studebaker Styling (J P Cavanaugh)
Studebaker: Probably the best example ever of the idea that, once the market decides you’re old, stodgy and undesirable, your next shot is either a wildly successful miracle, or inevitable oblivion.
And betting against the latter is a sucker’s bet.
Buick, are you listening?
I’m 52. Buick isn’t on my list at all. Nothing from Buick makes me want to set foot on their lots. Not even huge cash rebates would seal the deal for me. The same with ChryslFiat. Only Ford and Chevrolet interest me
The Avanti was supposed to be the wildly successful miracle. We know how that turned out.
I do like this year’s roof. Pity it lasted but one year. The ’64’s roof isn’t as lovely, to me.
It’s hard to credit them changing the roof a year later. With their volumes, the cost must have been enormous!
I remember reading in the Turning Wheels magazine (Studebaker Drivers’ Club magazine) some years back that it actually cost more to make the ’63 from the ’62 than it did the ’64, from the ’63. They definitely got more ‘bang for the buck’ in the ’64.
It’s interesting that in the late ’70s two of the Big Three resorted to the “Studebaker Facelift” where changes are spaced out over a couple years to have something new to announce (Chrysler did everything but the nose of the Dodge van in ’78 and the new nose in ’79, GM gave the Chevette a facelift for ’79 and a butt-tuck for ’80).
For Stude itself, perhaps they’d have been better off throwing all their advance plans at the ’59 Lark and then making “no annual changes” a feature. It wasn’t what the mass market wanted, but it woulda been a matter of carving out a big enough niche.
It’s not often when, upon reading an article here, I find myself scrolling back and forth looking at the subject car.
Yet today is one of those days.
There is simply so much positive going on with the Studebaker, it’s hard to take it all in. An honest representative of a ’63 Stude in a great color and with a three-speed – there’s nothing but good here.
” there’s nothing but good here.”
The only thing that keeps it from being virtually perfect is the lack of that little chrome pull-handle under the dash that would signify overdrive. OD-equipped Studes are relatively common, and going back to these pictures made me surprised that this one lacked it.
did these appeal to Quakers? They do to me
I had forgotten that Studebaker beat Ford to market with a smaller than full-sized car that heavily aped the look of a Mercedes-Benz. If ever a car could (also) have gotten away with those ridiculous print and tv ads that proclaimed “my car is often mistaken for a Mercedes”, it’s this car.
As has often been speculated: did these mini-Benz lookalikes really start the automotive world towards luxury compacts?
Studebaker had the US rights to distribute MB products, so the resemblance makes sense. They would not have had any problems with copying the look of a product they already had some control of, so it was an easy choice. Ford was famous for blatant copies of other marques, such as the RR front on the Mark III as well as the MB look “borrowed” for the Granada.
I always found the ’63 Lark in hardtop form to be the most Benz-ish of all Studes. These look alot like a Mercedes W114 coupe to my eyes, yet it predated them by five years!
The only thing I’d change is the rear wheel arch, to remove that awkward (to my eyes) angle at the trailing edge where it turns sharply down – needs a radius instead of an angle IMHO. But I suppose if I customized one, the Studebaker faithful would shoot me!
Brooks Stevens wanted to make just that modification to the 1965 models before the order to shut down the South Bend factory was issued. This clay would have been another of Studebaker’s one section at a time facelifts, this time replacing the carryover 1962 rear fenders with a new design that had a rounder, more symmetrical wheel opening and straighter, more subdued creases (and fewer of them). There was also a new trunk lid and full-width taillights (as on Stevens’ 1962 Sceptre concept car) that eliminated the end cap needed to graft the 1964 taillights onto the ’62-’63 fenders; the backup lights appear to be carryover from ’64. I think this ’65 mockup would have been a very clean looking car that could have stayed fresh looking well into the ’70s without any more major facelifts, leaving Studebaker the funds it needed to modernize the underpinnings and the factory the built it. To my eyes this could-have-been 1965 model looks newer than an actual 1976 Valiant.
A little too close a resemblance. MB complained about the look-alike nature of Brooks Stevens’ designs, and asked that they be changed.
King pins. Vacuum powered windshield wipers. Slow, numb manual steering. Dreadful automatic that started in sluggish second gear. Balky brakes. Power steering? Factory air conditioning? Fuggedaboudit.
When I looked at and drove these early 1960’s Larks; they were middle/back row 10 to 13 year old cars. Many were low mileage cars, in surprisingly good shape, showing the benefits of geezer ownership, perhaps?
They drove SO old fashioned, dowdy, slow and creaky! An early 1960’s Valiant or a Corvair seemed like futuristic space ships compared to the Conestoga wagon ancient Larks. Even a Rambler American, hardly “cutting edge” technology, seemed new and fresh and modern when compared to a Lark.
And then there was the “Street reputation” of a Lark. Only a looser, a geek, a dweeb, a twerp drove a Lark.
“They drove SO old fashioned, dowdy, slow and creaky!”
That didn’t seem to hurt the popularity of Chevrolets of that era. 🙂
Ha! Quite true, JPC.
Yet another reason why I was a Mopar Man in the early 1960’s.
Pity Studebaker didn’t have access to the well oiled public relations/bullshiote factory that Chevy had at the time, hey?
🙂
Google up the 63/4/5 Bathurst 500 mile race several Studes in that until wheel cracking put the too far behind to compete, The police in Victoria had V8 Studebakers, I always thought they were quite good cars.
Agreed. They had a very good reputation here, and being used as police pursuit cars didn’t hurt one bit!
Of all the cars to compare styling cues to, the 1960 Valiant is the LAST one to use, what with it being given entirely Lark derivative. They had electric wipers for years by the 60s, and you were the stereotypical 98 pound weakling if their manual steering was a challenge. smdh.
“…entirely Lark derivative”??
Huh-WHAATTT???
The only resemblance was the wide mouth grille.
We have covered the connection between the original Valiant and Lark styling before. The fact that Virgil Exner Jr. was involved with Studebaker styling as the Lark was being developed (when his father was in charge of Chrysler styling) make this unlikely to be a coincidence.
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/automotive-history-why-the-1959-studebaker-lark-front-end-looked-so-much-like-the-1960-valiant-front-end-it-was-stolen/
Meh, all cars from their eras resemble one another. I think Audi started the modern “fishmouth” (or monkfish) era with the gaping maws.
I can remember reading articles published from the 1920’s through the 1950’s complaining about how all of the cars looked alike…
Wrong on the vacuum wipers, Mark.
And while Larks could be had with 289 hp in ’63, what other compact could? That’s right….none.
I had a ’63 with the 240 hp non-supercharged engine–only 10 hp short of a Chevy 327. It had a factory sunroof, Twin Traction, and factory air. People would always come back, and back, to look at it at local shows. It looked bone-stock.
I like Larks of the era had large rear wheel openings. Falcons and Chevy II’s of the period look dumpy in comparison, IMHO. For ample evidence of this, google on youtube, ’63 Stude commercial about Lark disc brakes. It’s shown next to a Falcon. Now THAT is dowdy.
The only thing I could complain about in the above Lark, is that the front bumper guards are one bolt in too close. The brochure makes this evident.
Bill, your Lark sounds like one of the best examples possible from the option sheet. A very rare and unusual car to be proud of and shown off!
Unfortunately, none of the used car Larks that I looked at and drove were as enticing as yours. Six cylinder engine, automatic tranny or 3 on the tree, cheap vinyl bench seat interiors, no outside chrome and faded down blue or green paint was the norm in the early 1970’s on used car Larks. “Dowdy” personified!
Were the early (1960-ish) Larks always equipped with electric wipers as standard equipment? I know that early Corvairs & Valiants had electric wipers always, Falcons could be equipped either way, Rambler Americans and later Hornets had those dreadful vacuum wipers thru the early 1970’s. Perhaps the passing of 40 years has dimmed my memory!
Every Lark from the first to the last had electric wipers.
Used AMC cars from the similar era (10-13 year old cars on a used car lot) were mostly from similar ownership. That being usually older, more thrifty than extravagant, and often ordered with more deletes than add-ons. AM radios, heaters, with the 6 and no power steering or brakes, and that would be about it on most, even (or especially) here in central Florida of the mid 70s. The funny thing is now, you are told that the best used car to buy is an older Buick, as that same set of owners tend to have Buicks now, albeit slightly more luxurious, but that mostly due to how they came on the dealer’s lot, not ordered as such. These thrifty owners tended to care for their cars, so they made great used car purchases. Exciting? Hell no. But then, if you wanted a car to get you to and from school or work, these were bulletproof.
I think you could get power steering. But yeah, the 1953 chassis which was probably about the same as the postwar late 40’s chassis was the last American car with kingpin front suspension. And flat floors because of the straight frame so they were taller than other cars for the same interior height. No integrated AC, although when they turned into Larks they lost the little vent intake doors on the side.
Actually those little vent doors in the front fenders just behind the wheels disappeared on the 1958 models a year prior to the Lark intro, when Studebaker was still trying to make their cars look like huge tailfinned Detroiters dripping in chrome. One of the great unsolved Studebaker mysteries is why they used those awkward grafted-on headlamp pods that allowed quad headlamps to fit in fender holes obviously sized for the larger single lamps (quad headlamps were THE identifying new feature for 1958 American cars). The usual reason given – the one that stylist Duncan McRae is on record stating – is that the money just wasn’t there for new fenders. The only thing is, they *did* ante up for new front fenders for ’58 to get rid of the vent doors. As long as they were tooling up for new fenders, why didn’t they reshape the headlamp surrounds too?
The ’58 hardtop shown here is yet another one-year-only roof design.
The Lark never got integrated A/C, but that wasn’t all that unusual in 1963. The Dart and Valiant still didn’t have integrated A/C in 1976.
The only thing is, they *did* ante up for new front fenders for ’58 to get rid of the vent doors. As long as they were tooling up for new fenders, why didn’t they reshape the headlamp surrounds too?
The hole in the fender for the vent door was probably made on one die, so only that die had to be modified or replaced. Making a completely new fender would require replacing all of the sets of dies used to form it, usually about 6 sets. Sometimes Studebaker tried to cheap out and form a panel in only 4 or 5 steps, and the result was usually a lot of torn or wrinkled stampings.
What irks me is even Checker spent the money for new fenders to accommodate quad headlights…the last styling change Checker made.
A 57 Checker A8 for comparison.
That makes sense – I don’t really know much about the process of fender-making. I had assumed the dies were modified to eliminate the vent door before the decision was made to adopt quad lights and by then it was too late to change them again. Your explanation seems more likely.
But that just leads us into another mystery – the low-end Scotsman and Champion models retained one single 7″ headlamp per side, allowing the Scotsman to do without the awkward headlamp pods. But the Champion DID use the pods even though they didn’t need them to house the single headlamps, and actually needed trim pieces to fill the resultant empty space. So what you had were fenders designed for single lamps modified to accept twin lamps, only to be modified again to accept singles! Utter insanity.
So what you had were fenders designed for single lamps modified to accept twin lamps, only to be modified again to accept singles! Utter insanity.
Ah, the minds of marketing people. They were probably thinking the Scotsman was the cheapest, so needed to look old fashioned, while the Champion needed to look upmarket from the Scotsman, so had the housings, but still needed to look downmarket compared to the Commander, so single headlights.
Crazy/thoughless design is still with us. I am fascinated by the Astra H as sold in the US as a Saturn. A pleasant looking car, often loved by it’s owners, but with shockingly poor detail design: horrible access for replacing headlight bulbs, terrible door wire harness design, who in the mid 2000s would design a 5 passenger car with only 1 cupholder?
I believe Mercury added chrome pods for the quads in ’58.
I sure wouldn’t kick that blue Stude out of my driveway!
Isn’t it quite unusual that the ignition key is on the left? I’m not sure, but it seems they were the only U.S. OEM to do that.
Too bad that Studebaker was so hit-and-miss throughout the last 15 years of its life. AMC kind of went down the same path.
Nope; Ford still had the ignition key on the left in 1963, at least on their full-sized cars.
Yep!
My aunt always disliked the “left handed ignition” in their “65 Pontiac”.
Nice, a V8 and three on the tree. Very well kept car too, most of the 63’s I see on my usual Kijiji searches are rather neglected.
These cars have a very sad sack look when poorly maintained.
Yup!
If you haven’t been, the Studebaker Museum in South Bend is the second best thing to visit in the city.
What’s the third best? 🙂
I thought that Crosley was the first American car with caliper disc brakes, in 1949. (Unfortunately that experiment didn’t last long since the calipers, taken directly from aircraft, locked up when exposed to road salt. Crosley wound up going back to drums in 1950.)
Also, AMC went to dual-circuit master cylinder across the board in 1962. Pretty sure Studebaker did as well. Both companies probably bought the system from the same supplier.
The ’63 Lark may have been old-fashioned under the skin but the Rambler American for that year had an even older design, still being a 1950 Nash Rambler under the squared-off body panels – and of course the Rambler did not offer a V8.
Good catch on that Crosley disc brake system. I have amended the text to call Studebaker’s use of discs the first successful application, as the Crosley discs quickly failed in use due to corrosion, as you mention.
I learned that Cadillac went to a dual brake system in 1963 in the fall of 1979 when a brake line rusted through in my 63 Fleetwood while I drove home from college for a weekend. I remember thinking at the time that had I been in any other car (not made by AMC) that I would have been in some deep caca. Everyone else waited until the Feds mandated the dual system in 1967 models.
Meh – that dual system is highly overrated and I’ve never owned a car with it that it actually seemed to work on.
I lost both the front and rear brake systems on my 1969 Cadillac M+M ambulance (thanks to midwest road salt building up on the clips holding the steel brake lines to the frame) at different times, and both times I had no brakes (or not enough to feel like there were any brakes).
What did work? The differential valve pintle in the proportioning valve did move due to a pressure imbalance between the front and rear systems, illuminating the oh-so-helpful “BRAKE” idiot light.
Fortunately, Cadillacs had an automatic-release parking brake (vacuum dashpot, controlled by a vacuum switch inside the PRNDL neutral safety switch) which gave you foot pedal cable-actuated rear drum brakes, which were far better than no brakes at all.
Your “eccentric uncle Clem” is my eccentric friend Charlie. He didn’t have new cars, but had a Lark. And a Cushman. And a Gremlin. And several Benelli motorcycles. And a Moto Guzzi Eldorado.
My “eccentric uncle” Axel lived in Germany and drove a manual Beetle with one arm in Nuremberg traffic. His left arm… That was a helluva show!
It was my great-uncle Joe who had the 1962 Lark VIII, a silver four door that was pretty tatty when he passed away in 1970. My oldest brother was of driving age and was offered the car.
He passed on it. What 17 year-old male passes on a FREE car???
These cars had such a strong reputation as a car for old men and weirdos.
Since I’m apparently working on becoming both of those adjectives, I’m finding I like a lot of things about the “end times” Studes. There are a number of models of 60’s Studes I would have in my MM garage.
But it would have been really great to have Uncle Joe’s Lark.
I am guilty of the same thing. I could have bought more than one Stude for dirt cheap in the 70s. But I was in my teens and wanted something cooler. I was just reflecting on this the other day myself: Why did I only really fall for these cars when I was well into adulthood?
I’d love any of the V8s, 4-speed manual, and Twin-Traction.
With the rising hood-lines of recent years this car doesn’t quite look as hopelessly old-fashioned as it did in the 1970s. People talk about the “Aston Martin” grille on the Fusion but I’d say there’s an eco of the Lark in the front end too.
This one is almost exactly like the old Mennonite farmer who still lived on the place he had sold to the Mennonite family I used to stay with. Same color even. But he had the six and overdrive, natch.
Studebakers were fairly common in the large Mennonite community around Kalona, Iowa then. I had quite an immersion, everything from early 50s right to the end.
But then Studebakers were also over-represented in the university community in Iowa City too. I can count off a good number of German immigrant families who drove them, one had a MBZ 220SE for him (a professor) and his wife had a beautiful new Daytona coupe. Families of more modest means had Larks like this. At one time there were at least three on our block. An English expat family drove a pinkish Lark too. This was all not a coincidence.
The very clean and thorough dash on these is attractive indeed. Love those off-white plastic rocker switches. You’ve transported me back to a time, in a good way! 🙂
At the Mennonite Publishing House, however, there was only one Studebaker owned by an employee, an early green Lark. It was replaced by a small green Mercedes at a certain point in the late 60’s.
Most of the cars in the PubHouse lot were kinda boring, but there were Corvairs early and late, one of which caught fire while parked, I was skateboarding by and went to tell someone a car was smoking.
They also had a growly and stiff 40’s Ford box truck –in black and grey panels like a buggy– for a company hauler, and for a while a 60’s Fury wagon.
I still buy cars based on practicality first.
Agree about the switchgear and dash, the spec says that they were earnest to give the buyer a great value.
http://www.studebakermotorcompany.com/overview/overview/
One can always hope of a return.
http://www.carscoops.com/2012/02/new-owner-plans-to-resurrect-studebaker.html
Oh my, what a sweet car! I have a very soft spot in my heart for Studebakers as the very first I ever rode in was a ’60 Lark VI ex-taxicab my father bought at auction. He was pretty cheap… heck, even the Scotsman would have been too pricey for him, he would have waited until he could get one used 😀 !
I own a ’66 Cruiser now, and it’s a beautiful, 26K mile non-restored example…but for looks, the ’63 four-doors, like the car above, are my favorite four-door Studebakers. That rear-door cut says “’77 Caprice Classic” or “Seville” to me.
I mostly agree with you on the 63 roof, but think it would have been better with a more Hawk-like treatment with a wider sail panel and rear glass that was recessed instead of slightly wrapping around.
The 64 fixed some of those problems, but ended up too upright and just a shade awkward. I usually prefer the 64 overall, but am really warming to these 63 sedans. I agree with those who see some Mercedes in them. The funny thing is that 12 years later, a car of this size and shape was what everyone wanted.
Funny, in two-doors I prefer the ’64, but in four-doors, I prefer the ’63. If you’ve ever seen a ’63 Cruiser with the optional Broadcloth interior, it was a pretty amazing compact to be driving in, at that time. Cadillac-level seat trim.
Yes! We’re talking early Brougham here….
I have not seen one in person, but have seen pictures. Studebaker did a really nice job on its interiors over the last few years. The Avanti interior was amazing considering the lack of time and money during its development.
But they still had little old style arm rests and very outdated window and door handles. They had cooler handles in 1953.
The broadcloth seats were gorgeous but juxtaposed to the cheap, heat-seamed vinyl door panels, their complete luxury affect was badly diminished.
A few comments on the armrests and door panels, but the lower carpeted sections were still unusual on a ’63 car…and I think we’re forgetting, these were compact cars priced with Chevy II, Falcon and Valiant. Take a look inside those cars for ’63.
I actually did notice the restyled midsection on the ’63s (particularly the new windshield that replaced the out-of-style wraparound fishbowl type still used in 1962). Those changes, along with the retained new-for-’62 extended rear section and front clip went a long way towards making the ’63 the first Stude sedan that really looked like a 1960s car. It looked almost European from some angles, mainly side or side/rear.
What I find so weird is that with so little cash available, they redesigned the roof, rear window, and rear side window AGAIN in 1964, making the ’63 a one-year style.
Thanks for this. I’d never thought of being a “left brain” thinker. Now I realize I’m a Studebaker buyer in a Nissan Juke world.
I look at houses the same way: screw the granite and stainless. Is the toilet going to explode when it’s flushed ? Are electrical circuits going to blow when I switch on a light? Does the roof need replacing ?
BTW: It wasn’t just the Ambassador that had dual circuit braking, but AMC’s entire line.
Born in 1959. My parents owned an exact copy of this blue unit featured.
My Grandfather a doctor, from Saginaw drove Studebakers. That’s probably where my dad got the idea to drive them too. I do not remember the 1960 lark wagon dad owned before the blue 63.
I’m guessing the 63 was the smaller V8. I know it was a V8. It had the automatic on the column.
My 2 brothers and I got to see quite a bit of middle America, from the backseat. 2 trips to Alabama, and a trip to Muncie to spend a summer, while dad worked on his Masters at Ball State. The single safety belt strapped across the backseat did not engender brotherly love. We even met a studebaker dealer that almost sold my dad a black 1963 Avanti. My brothers and I voted yes. Mom voted no. Mom won. drove home in the 63 Lark.
I remember on 1 of the returns from Alabama, dad wanted to stop in Ohio to visit his older brother. It must of been before I-75 was completed, we had to take very scary, twisty, no guard rail roads through TN and KY. We learned what horseshoe turns were
in that 63 Studebaker. I think my mother carved 10 fingernail claw marks in that padded dash.
The 63 Studebaker was a solid car until 1967. One night a drunk drifted off the road, onto our driveway, slammed into the Studebaker’s trunk, and shoved it onto the neighbors front porch.
A summer in Muncie? This BSU grad (who knows something about the place) says that you have paid your dues, sir. 🙂
And that’s a real shame about missing out on the Avanti. The father of my childhood best friend had a red 64 R-2/4 speed which I got to spend a bit of time in. Cool, cool cars.
Staring at that jet black Avanti, the round headlights, the entire shape of that car, made us think we were looking at a space ship. And that interior with the rocker switches…… cool.
Some friends of my dad talked him into installing a oil filtration system on his 63 Lark. It was a cannistor with a screw down top. You opened it up and shoved a virgin roll of toilet paper inside, screwed the lid back on. This thing was somehow installed inline to the oil system. I assume the Lark already had an oil filter system from the factory. Does anyone know anything about this?
I wonder if that accessory filter was a variation in the older style of partial oil filter that had been used on many engines until being phased out in the early 60s for full-flow filters. Studebakers got full flow filters in 1962 as I understand it. I know my college roommate’s 62 Chevy Bel Air with the 6 had an old-style partial filter on it. Your father’s 63 would have had a modern filter, but maybe an old-style partial filter was added, adapted to the toilet paper “filter element”. Or else, I know that folks sold kits in which a toilet paper roll was to be used as the filtration element in an adaptation of the normal spin-on filter. That is one of my favorite old car-maintenance fads. For other peoples’ cars, that is. 🙂
The old Mennonite farmer I mentioned earlier put on one of those toilet paper filters on his Lark; swore they were better than genuine oil filters. I was only 11, but dubious. I couldn’t help but think that the engineers at Fram or Purolator knew better. It was kind of a seminal moment: realizing that older folks didn’t always know better about stuff like this.I could tell they had been “sold” on something.
There was a guy on YouTube (The Corvette Ben) who does some old car rescue jobs. He did one on a 58 Studebaker Commander sedan. One of the first things he found when noodling around under the hood was a toilet paper element in the oil filter canister. Maybe frugal Studebaker owners were particularly susceptible to the lure of the toilet paper oil filter. 🙂
I’ve seen those toilet paper oil filters occasionally. In my mind, I imagine those things just disintegrating and then clogging up the oil galleys in the motor…
I remember always seeing ads for the Stlko toilet paper filter in Motor Trend in the early 70s
The folks on “Garage Squad” found one installed on a Datsun 240Z. The amazing thing to me was that they were able to remove the roll of toilet paper virtually intact other than being soaked in oil. I would think the toilet paper would disintegrate.
Hey, anybody that read J.C. Whitney catalogs back then knows full well about those toilet-paper oil filters – I distinctly remember the ads for them (“never buy another oil filter again”), and also found a few installed on cars (usually inline 6s because they had the room under the hood) during my earlier junkyarding days.
(“never buy another oil filter again”)
If it says it on the box, it must be true, right? Just like stuff on the internet today? /sarcasm
No one in my family ever had a Studebaker but growing up in Israel they were everywhere given that they were assembled in Haifa by Kaiser-Ilyn, so this car brings back the memories. They were the best-selling US-designed car on the market for a while due to lower price than the equivalent Ford/GM/Mopar/AMC compacts – duties were significantly lower because it was locally assembled. They were still offered on MY 1967 but then Mr. Ilyn had enough of fighting the government and closed shop. What a waste.
This is a typical Israeli street in the 60s. The Lark nearest the camera looks like an unmarked police car.
I posted above about how European the ’63 Larks can look, and this Isreali one illustrates exactly what I meant. If you didn’t know, would you guess that’s a 1963 *American* car? For some reason the styling reminds me of the Rover P6 although there’s only a vague resemblance.
Fab fact: the last Studebaker ever built came off that Isreali final assembly line.
When we heard Dad was shopping for a convertible in the mid 60s, we were excited! When we saw the 62 Lark in the driveway, we were embarrassed! Just not what 6 “cool” kids wanted to see. A few years later, the old man offered the Studey as an option for my older brothers first car, and I’ll never forget my brother struggling to politely and respectfully turn down the offer. Dad was barely 40, but let’s face it, he thought crew-cuts were cool! Now, we all wish we could get that little rag top back. Thanks for the memories, JP!
In a local car club, someone has a 63-ish Studebaker Lark with its order sheet. The frugal owner had the ‘back-up light delete’ option, to save a few pennies. The rear has cut outs filled in.
That’s the Cheapskate 1950’s Depression Dad syndrome.
I imprinted on the first gen Lark at an early age. Vividly remember rolling down Michigan in West Dearborn and watching it’s reflection in the storefront windows. Andy Beckman of the Studebaker Museum usually brings his red 64 to the Motor Muster each year. A nice car to be sure, but it’s a 59 or 60 that makes me light up.
On the wipers, electric wipers had been SOP on Studebakers for years. Our 56 Commander had electrics. Mom was shocked, Shocked! that her 64 Rambler, which replace the Commander, had vacuum wipers.
Somehow, this is the only pic of Dad’s 60 Lark that has survived, and only a corner of the car shows, as I was preserving for posterity one of the many amusements that used to populate the Irish Hills in Michigan.
That looks like it’d make a good indie-rock album cover.
My ’54 Champion Real Starlight Hardtop, purchased in 1979, had the terrible vacuum powered wipers.
The first time I drove it in the rain I swore “Never Again!”
My ’54 Champion Real Starlight Hardtop, purchased in 1979, had the terrible vacuum powered wipers.
The electrics may have been standard by 56, or an upgrade that was on the Commander. Our Commander was the bottom trim, the interior looked like a Champion, including the steering wheel that only had a button for the horn, rather than a horn ring like a higher trim Commander.
Some manufacturers that persisted with vacuum wipers added a vacuum pump so the wipers would not stop at the slightest attempt at acceleration. Packard had it’s vac pump piggybacked on the oil pump. Rambler had a vac pump piggybacked on the fuel pump. The wipers never stopped completely on that 64 Rambler, even when pulling one of the notoriously long and steep hills in Kalamazoo, but they would run pretty slow, then flap like dervishes at a stop light.
I was talking with the owner of an early 30s Franklin at a show at the Gilmore last weekend. His vac wiper was completely on strike, a leak somewhere in the tubing to the wiper. This was of considerable concern as rain was moving in as we talked.
You know, reading this article makes me wonder why my dad never owned a Studebaker. If he ever did, it was before my time.
I don’t have the old auto mechanics book in which he listed all (well, most) of the cars he owned, but if memory serves, not one Stude.
I’ll take a ’63 with the 4-speed V-8 combo, please. Preferably a 2-door.
Today I see it as a handsome enough vehicle , but , as a 12 year old boy in 1963 and a car-nut, I remember not giving them any thought at all. A car for the not very hip grandpas out there. Your so right , it’s the quantity of sizzle , not the quality of the steak , that moves cars. True then , still true today.
Great stuff, as usual, JP.
Some of you L.A. high schoolers during 1963 will remember that L.A. Unified Schools got a fleet of 1963 Lark 4DR’s in white as system-wide drivers ed cars. Unlike schools nowadays, particularly here in the East, drivers ed was an official elective, just as maybe print shop would have been in high school. In my case, the classroom portion was one of the periods during the day just after homeroom, and the practical in-car training took place on several Saturday mornings, first with simulators in an on-campus trailer, and then moving on to driving the Larks.
Any fans will appreciate seeing that a ’59 Lark Regal is used as Saul’s ride, on the current show, “Grace & Frankie”. It’s shown pretty often- most episodes. Enjoy!
http://www.imcdb.org/vehicle_915709-Studebaker-Lark-Regal-1959.html
Thanks for this article, J. P.
One of the most enjoyable ones in quite some time!
Why, thank you. I had fun writing it and sharing this delightful little car with everyone.
Although the floorpans, lower cowl and interstructures were carried forward from the 1953 sedans, annual incremental changes to front and rear clips as well as greenhouses and upper cowls affected as much refreshing as Studebaker could afford. From the radical reductions of the wheelbases and overhangs to create the ’59 Lark, subsequent changes were often subtle but done to mask the 1953 sedan origins. For ’60, a four door wagon based on the longer Y-body sedan shell appeared as well as a convertible, the first since the ’52 MY. For ’61, the C-pillar and rear door changed from the reverse slant, the top of the cowl flattened for a deeper windshield. For ’62, the rear overhang lengthened five inches to create more trunk space, the front panel projected forward to render a more ‘important’ look visually evocative the Mercedes-Benz. A major change ’62 was to rationalize all four door models on the 113″ wheelbase Y-body, dropping the 108″ wheelbase W-body four door sedans. For ’63, the greatly modernized greenhouse which was so badly needed to banish the stuck-in-the-’50’s look finally appeared. With its appealing thin window frames and conventional A-pillars, it made the generally-carried-over ’62 body below the belt-line look as new as possible.
For all the restyles and progressive mechanical features engineering incorporated, they were up against a compact/intermediate segment that had either all-new or significantly updated cars. Dealer representation had become spotty and internal documents details that only about a third of those were affective at volume selling. Too many were in rural and/or small towns, handled Studebaker as a sideline. The loss of faith extended to lenders who became reluctant to make floor-plan loans for retail inventory. They feared should the end come quickly, the remaining inventory would lose value to the point of being unable to sell for enough to cover the loans. That key factor left many dealers, who were underfinanced to start, with little choice to either quit or purchase mininal inventory out of their own resources to keep operations going. The public could plainly see the pall of demise hung over the car. Only staunch loyalist bought in the face of this. An August 1966 NADA Used Car Guide list a Lark Regal 6 at $750, the V8 at $825 retail. For comparison, a Rambler Classic 6 at $1,185; an Ambassador V8 at $1,235. Small wonder that some areas outside of the rust-belts, price-shopping used car prospects found well-cared-for Larks a decade after the close of South Bend for give-away prices. Many new and used car dealers refused to even take a Studebaker in trade by then.
A major change ’62 was to rationalize all four door models on the 113″ wheelbase Y-body, dropping the 108″ wheelbase W-body four door sedans.
That was an interesting move, as they essentially took the 4 door Larks out of the, by then crowded, compact class and made them one of the first intermediates.
Dealer representation had become spotty and internal documents details that only about a third of those were affective at volume selling.
Dealer attrition had been a problem for a long time. Dad bought the 51 Champion at a dealer in West Dearborn. When he bought the 56, the Dearborn dealer was gone, so they went to Ann Arbor. When he bought the Lark, the dealer in Ann Arbor was gone, so he had no choice but to go to Husak in Detroit. He hated Husak as that store had rogered him quite vigorously on the 47, but there were no other dealers around. I rode along with him one day to Husak, in the Lark, around 63 or 64 and the dealership, while still servicing Studebakers, had switched to selling Dodge as I remember the red Dodge signage everywhere.
When the Lark first came out, a lot of big three dealers picked up Studebaker as their main line did not having anything like the Lark. As soon as the big three came out with their own compacts, the dealers dropped Studebaker like a bad habit.
The public could plainly see the pall of demise hung over the car. Only staunch loyalist bought in the face of this.
There weren’t many stauncher loyalists than my dad, but the end was too obvious by 64. Mom got a Rambler in May or June of 64 and Dad bought a Galaxie in Feb 65, trading in the Lark, which was starting to develop “typical Studebaker rust”. The 56 Commander survived as a winter beater until early 68. The body was a crumbling pile of oxide, but the 259 still ran like the hammers.
I recall that there were changes made to the floorpan somewhere along the way. Also, while they didn’t have money for proper quad headlights in 58, they had money to redesign the roof stamping for a flatter, less crowned look.
I recall that there were changes made to the floorpan somewhere along the way.
Yes, some small revision that lowered the floor a fraction of an inch. Not nearly enough to keep up with the falling rooflines of the time.
they had money to redesign the roof stamping for a flatter, less crowned look.
And the two door hardtop roof, and the bolt on tailfins.
This pic illustrates the problem Studebaker had trying to build a car to 1963 proportions on a 1953 frame. The front seats have been dropped nearly to the floor to maintain headroom with the lower roof, so the occupants have their legs sticking out in front of them. In the back seat, there is no room to stretch out legs, so the seat is higher so occupants aren’t folded up like a jackknife, severely limiting headroom.
When mom was shopping for a new car in 64 the Olds F85 got a thumbs down because of the low seats. “I’m not sitting on the floor” she declared. The Rambler won her business because the unibody construction allowed footwells to give a more upright seating position, with a fashionably low roof. Dad’s 64 Galaxie had a flat floor in front, with very low seats, but the frame design allowed footwells in back so the back seat was low enough to have decent headroom.
Front seat of a 61 Lark, which sits several inches higher than the 63
So were the seats lowered in 1958 to maintain headroom under the new lower, flatter roofs??
The wagons had to wait one more year for the lower roof, still using the ’57 roof in ’58.
So were the seats lowered in 1958 to maintain headroom under the new lower, flatter roofs??
I don’t know. It wasn’t until I saw that pic of the 63 that I realized how much Studebaker had lowered the front seat. In the early 50s, cars were designed so the average size man could wear a fedora inside. It was no big deal to flatten the roof an inch as occupants could simply take their hats off.
Headroom got very tight in a lot of cars when rooflines first dropped at the end of the 50s as everyone was facing the same problem as Studebaker. iirc the frame under my dad’s 64 Galaxie dated from 57. My dad was 5′ 8″, but short legged so sat rather tall in the saddle. He barely had enough headroom in the Galaxie. My uncle was about 6’2″ and, when shopping in 59, could not find any normal passenger car that he fit in, though he had fit fine in his early 50s Ford. He ended up with an International Travelall, because he could fit in it.
If you ever saw the original pilot of “Adam 12”, the first time the guys got in the car, Malloy tells Reed to take his hat off, because there isn’t enough headroom.
I assume you are quoting NADA prices for ’63 models. What was the price of the Cruiser? I know with Rambler, one had to go to the Ambassador line for any V8 at all–no hardtops in the Classic or Ambassador lines, either.
What did they give you extra for the supercharged engine? Is it even listed as an option in NADA then?
Funny, my ’66 Cruiser was bought in April ’66, after the shutdown. I have to believe the buyer probably wanted one more new Studebaker, and the dealers were probably dealing. The Studebaker Museum should have the form that shows what was traded in on the car. I’ll have to order that up.
Bill
Yes, the NADA prices are for a ’63 Lark Regal such as the subject here. For comparison at retail, a ’63 Cruiser was $900 versus $1,085 for a ’63 Ambassador 990 sedan in August 1966.
Superchargers aren’t mentioned or listed as an extra added to prices. But, additional charges are noted for power steering ($50), air conditioning ($120), whereas deductions for overdrive ($60) and manual transmission ($90) are listed for each MY to the last.
These latter two deductions must have warmed the heart of any skinflint searching the back lots for used Larks, delighted to find a good example so equipped for a great price! Unfortunate, then the car usually got run into the ground.
Sorry, quoted the ’63 Ambassador station wagon price in my first posting. The 990 sedan is listed above.
My first car was a 62 lark, given to me when I was 14 from a friends aunt. It only had 44,000 miles on it when she threw a rod through the block on #1 cylinder. Tore it down but could never get proper parts for it. So I put it together as a 5 cylinder and drove around back lanes of town. But it ran and I was pleased!
It was the 144 cu in 6 cylinder with 2 speed auto, reverse in the bottom. Color was a sandy grey with matching interior. She wasn’t pretty and she wasn’t faithful but she was a real good time!
Studebaker does these “hail mary” cars that are admirable. Fact is, the 1953 Studebaker was just another one of those. By 1955, it had a chromed aardvark snout and not a player in the auto industry anymore. The Lark was another last resort that lasted a couple of years, and then finally the Avante, which really failed to get off the ground. We admire those last ditch efforts, but we really need to recognize that if it wasn’t for Packard’s dough, Studebaker would have never made it to the Lark.
It’s kind of fun to watch rabbits being pulled out of hats, but we also have to recognize that you can’t keep on doing that with the same hat. At some point, you need a new trick and Studebaker was pretty much a one-trick pony out of South Bend Indiana.
AND NOW THE BRAND NEW 1955 STUDEBAKER: TAH-DAH!
One-trick pony? Only in its later years, Vanilla.
Remember, this was a firm that started in 1852; that at one time was the largest manufacturer of vehicles in the world (alright, during the wagon/carriage days); That had many innovative and sharp cars, including the classic era rigs, the ’39 Champion, the ’47 coming-or-going car, and the superb ’53 coupes; That had Hill Holder decades before Subaru started crowing about it; and the first mass-production cars with four-wheel brakes and , later, with disc brakes, the Wagonaire sliding roof (only now being copied). The company built so many reliable Lend-Lease trucks for the Red Army in WW II, that the Russian slang word for truck remained “Studebaker” even through the 1960s.
One-trick pony gives the venerable automaker short shrift.
What a preposterous idea, that cars were just meant to be practical, reliable, economical transportation devices! Well, it wasn’t that off the mark in the early days of the automobile, but even Old Henry learned that people get tired of the same old thing. Though he didn’t want to believe it about his T, and it took others in his company to get the A off and running.
After WWII, the automobile industry really became a fashion industry. The Big Three were able to get the public to crave something new and different, or at least different looking. There was just no way for the smaller Independents to keep up. When they found a niche in compact cars, it didn’t take long for Detroit to jump in that market and blow the little guys out of the water!
Practical, mundane cars get disparaged in the enthusiast press, and even here, the CamCordia crew doesn’t get much love. If only the independents could have lasted until even Detroit started to adopt much longer product cycles.
“Six transmissions”
3-speed manual, 4-speed manual, lightweight auto, regular auto, Avanti auto… what was the 6th?
Overdrive was optional on the three speed.
“That customer bought Buicks.”
Yeah, and sometimes your marque’s prestige hides the fact that they, too, sell dumpy, homely compact cars. The ’63 Riviera is, of course, stunning. So is the ’63 Avanti.
Now line up a Buick “Special,” and you’ll see it is no less dumpy than the Lark Regal is here. And I’d go for that Lark in a heartbeat over the Buick.