Could-have-been #336 - Proposed Studebaker Hatchback Design for 1950

Started by Otto Puzzell, October 12, 2012, 05:59:09 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Print
Go Down Pages 1 2
User actions

mymokke

#25
October 28, 2012, 10:07:38 PM
Is there an Exner connection?

Otto Puzzell

#26
October 29, 2012, 04:30:39 AM
Exner was part of the design team
You wanna be the man, you gotta Name That Car!

fyreline

#27
October 29, 2012, 10:00:08 AM
Sometimes it's the simplest things that are good clues . . . in this case, the number of letters on the rear deck led me to think it had to be a make with a LOT of letters in it's name, such as "Studebaker". Now, having said that. I am having the same search dilemma as Ray. All of that just means this is a great puzzle - we kind of know what we're looking for, we just can"t find it (yet). I guess I have to ask, although I think I already know what the answer will be . . . seeing as it's a Studebaker, is there any Raymond Loewy involvement in this particular design?
"You are entitled to your own opinion, but you are NOT entitled to your own facts"

Otto Puzzell

#28
October 29, 2012, 03:18:56 PM
No more or less Loewy input than any other Studebaker styling models of a similar vintage, as near as I can determine.
You wanna be the man, you gotta Name That Car!

RayTheRat

#29
October 29, 2012, 08:58:29 PM
Could this one have doubled up...like a scale model for the 1947 Studebaker Champion kustom by Albrecht Goertz?

Otto Puzzell

#30
October 30, 2012, 05:17:43 AM
Not a custom; I don't think Goertz had anything to do with it.

This a s proposal for a production Studebaker, but this configuration didn't make into production.
You wanna be the man, you gotta Name That Car!

Tuckeroo

#31
October 31, 2012, 11:42:00 AM
I would describe it as a late 1940s mock-up, not full size, that forecasted the 1950-51 bullet-nose Studebakers.  Probably a Robert Bourke design under the direction of Raymond Loewy...

Otto Puzzell

#32
October 31, 2012, 12:15:28 PM
Sure - but what is different about this one, versus other mock-ups from the same company and time?
You wanna be the man, you gotta Name That Car!

fyreline

#33
October 31, 2012, 05:20:59 PM Last Edit: October 31, 2012, 05:24:27 PM by fyreline
QuoteSure - but what is different about this one, versus other mock-ups from the same company and time?

Well, it's a fastback like the GM Sedanettes, but I don't think that's it . . . . it also appears to be a hatchback, and that's pretty significant even if Kaiser was thinking along the same lines. I think the integrated rear bumper and tail lights are pretty forward-thinking, as well. Also no "A" pillar to speak of, and it looks as if it could have been a hardtop although it's hard to tell if that's supposed to be a "B" pillar or not from this angle. Lots of little things that make it "different" from the numerous Studebaker styling clays we all CAN find . . . good job by you turning up this one, I haven't been able to find anything  specific on it yet.
"You are entitled to your own opinion, but you are NOT entitled to your own facts"

Otto Puzzell

#34
November 01, 2012, 04:34:50 AM
Quote from: fyreline on October 31, 2012, 05:20:59 PM
. . . . it also appears to be a hatchback

That's the missing piece.

One point each for RtR and the fyreman
You wanna be the man, you gotta Name That Car!
Print
Go Up Pages 1 2
User actions