Advertising Last completed movie pages
1964 Studebaker Daytona 
Ep. 1.01Class: Cars, Sedan — Model origin: 
![[*]](/res/star.png){kind=small}
Vehicle used a lot by a main character or for a long time
Comments about this vehicle| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
◊ 2010-01-18 22:26 |
I thought the Daytonas were two doors, or is that just the Australian ones |
|
◊ 2010-01-18 22:41 |
No, there were 4-door USA Daytonas, too. The pictured car might be a 1965. The '65 Daytonas had light-colored inserts within the side sweepsepear trim while '64's had a dark-colored insert. 1964 Daytona brochure photo: Link to "www.oldcarbrochures.com" 1965 Daytona brochure photo: Link to "www.oldcarbrochures.com" |
|
◊ 2010-01-19 03:30 |
OK. In Australia the only Daytonas we saw were two doors. They were specially imported for the Victorian Police for use as Highway Patrol cars, and several were later used for racing after finishing their police duties. The Victorian Police had their own Motor Sports Club within the ranks. |
|
◊ 2010-01-19 03:32 |
This would appear to be correct if you look at some of the other shots where it appears in the background |
|
◊ 2010-01-20 00:15 |
But the '65 also had an additional chrome strip at the base of the C-pillar, which the Wonderfalls car does not have. Another way to settle it would be if we had a good view of the rear. In 1964, Studebaker was spelled out in individual chrome letters between the taillights, whereas in 1965 Studebaker was written as a smaller chrome badge on the lower left. |
|
◊ 2010-01-24 03:21 |
Don't think so, Cougar. I believe that nameplate change came with the introduction of the '66 (and last) Studebakers. I don't believe there was a C pillar change either between '64 and '65. |
|
◊ 2010-01-24 03:33 |
A few more shots: ![[Image: Studebaker.jpg]](http://pics.imcdb.org/0pb/Studebaker.jpg) ![[Image: ep_Studebaker_3stars.jpg]](http://pics.imcdb.org/0pb/ep_Studebaker_3stars.jpg) -- Last edit: 2010-01-24 03:35:16 |
|
◊ 2010-01-24 04:36 |
OK. Believe I owe Cougar an apology. Chalk it up to trying to work entirely from memory again instead of consulting my resources. The photo car cannot be a '65 Daytona as in that year, there were no Daytona 4-door sedans (or convertibles, for that matter) only a 2-door coupe and station wagon). Since the photo'ed car has 4-doors, it must be a '64 IF it is a Daytona. Both the '64 and '65 Cruisers used the bright-insert side trim while Daytonas used dark insert side trim in '64 and bright insert side trim in '65 (matching the Cruiser). If the photo'ed car is a '64 Daytona, it must have been retro-fitted with a '65 bright side insert, something I have seen done before. Couger also appears to be correct about the '65 Daytona adopting the '64/'65 Cruiser bright panel at the base of the "C" pillar, which the '64 Daytona did not have. (Identifying '64 vs '65 Studebakers is tricky business!) For the record, the Challenger was dropped after the '64 season (as were the GT Hawks and the Avantis). The '65 Cruiser did not have the bright panel on the rear trunk lid edge which the '64's did have. All '65 Studebakers sported dual headlamps while duals were optional on '64 Commanders. I believe all '64 Challengers had single lamps but don't know that for sure. All '64 Daytonas and Cruisers used dual lamps. There was a change from white to amber parking lamps but that was a running change. Can't recall if it was done late in '64 or early in '65. Whew! -- Last edit: 2010-01-24 17:23:29 |
|
◊ 2010-01-24 06:16 |
Can this be upped to 4 Stars? When i posted it, i based it off of how prevalent it was in the first 1 or 2 episodes... Now 8 episodes in, I can safely say this car is seen at least once in every episode, and the main character of the show is always driving. So, I think it deserves 4 Stars. |
|
◊ 2010-01-24 06:53 |
^Having seen most of the first season, I agree. To Crown 85: No apology necessary; we all make mistakes. Thank you for taking the effort to make sure we got it right. I knew there was a really good reason why it couldn't be a '65 Daytona, but I couldn't remember what it was (no Daytona 4-doors in '65). Making it easy for people to distinguish their model lines 45 years later was probably the last thing on Studebaker's mind in 1964. |
|
◊ 2010-01-24 17:21 |
In fact, they advertised in 1965 that they weren't going to worry about annual model changes and focus on making changes whenever needed. (Translation: they were running out of money!) Actually, I think Studebaker did and excellent job of producing quality cars over the years considering the tiny budget they had to work with compared to what the big 3 had. -- Last edit: 2010-01-24 17:25:24 |
|
◊ 2010-01-25 18:14 |
Preliminary note: I am both Commander 57 and Crown 85. Somehow, I wound up here under both names. Long story. I have been trying to enter notes under Commander 57 but sometimes I forget and log in under Crown 85. That said, I pulled out my August 1988 issue of "Turning Wheels" (the magazine of the Studebaker Drivers Club) this morning and did some reading in that issue which covers 1965 Studebakers. I was looking for info on the parking lamp change. According to the article, that switch was a running change done late in the 1964 model year. As such, cars with white lenses can be definitively ID'ed as '64's. Those with amber lenses are either '65's or late '64's. While it was not covered in the article, from reviewing the photos there and on the internet, it appears all models changed the placement of the rear nameplates. They were on the edge of the trunk lid in 1964 and moved to the rear panel between the trunklid and bumper on 1965's. The nameplates varied in '64. Challengers and Commanders had small nameplates in the corner of the lid while Daytonas and Cruisers had large block "STUDEBAKER" letters all the way across the trunklid edge. In 1965, all models went to small nameplates on the rear panels over the bumpers. -- Last edit: 2010-01-25 19:16:15 |
|
◊ 2011-09-06 05:31 |
You guys may or may not like what I have to say here, but I am good friends with a man who worked for Studebaker from late 1963 till the very end in 1966, he installed the dash in the very last car, During those years he did headliners, body trim and dashes, he has told me they put what ever trim they had on, did not matter dark or white, 64 or 65, Cruiser or Daytona, " Just put it on!" is what they were told, and that is what they did, they used up and 64 trim on 65 cars, so it can be hard to tell the two years a part because of this, also, Cruisers in 64 came with an aluminum plate that went across the rear of the trunk lid, which had the large block letters on it spelling out " STUDEBAKER" |
|
◊ 2011-09-06 15:58 |
Interesting to have a perspective from the inside. I have seen some Daytonas that are '64's but have the brigher side trim that was used on the '64 Cruisers and was supposed to be used for both series in '65. We can only post here what was intended when we see the cars visually so I feel it appropriate to call a Daytona with the darker side trim a '64 unless we have specific evidence it is a '65. (There is actually little trouble with Daytonas anyway except for the station wagons. In '64, all non-wagon Daytonas were either 4-door sedans, 2-door hardtops or convertibles. In '65, all non-wagon Daytonas were 2-door coupes - no hardtops, 4-door sedans or convertibles.) I have never seen a '65 Cruiser with the bright aluminum plate on the trunk lid. There were no '65 Challengers. I doubt that Cruiser/Daytona trim was placed on Commanders. As such, there is little to be concerned about as far as '64/'65 ID's are concerned. |
|
◊ 2012-07-23 14:49 |
Hey this is definitely a 1964 Daytona 4-door. It has less then 70,000 km on it and is forsale right now near Toronto Canada lol. This exact car. Guy said it was the car in some Tv series from 2003-2004 called Wonderfalls so I decided to search it up lol. There she blows! I bet I have the best pics of it .gif ";)") . |
|
◊ 2012-07-23 14:55 |
![[Image: kgrhqfhj0e-bktndr9bppwhr4q48_20.jpg]](http://pics.imcdb.org/15276/kgrhqfhj0e-bktndr9bppwhr4q48_20.jpg) |
|
◊ 2012-07-23 15:01 |
Thanks, BuickBoy. Nice extra photo - and you can even read the Daytona script. Again, the bright side trim seen on this car was INTENDED for the '64 Cruiser only, with the '64 Daytonas carrying dark insert side trim. Compare: Link to "2.bp.blogspot.com" However, I have seen many '64 Daytonas with this style trim. I know some are just incorrect restorations but other were no doubt dealer altered or perhaps even built that way originally as the factory wound down and they wanted to use up trim. -- Last edit: 2012-07-23 15:04:34 |
|
◊ 2012-07-23 17:47 |
nice .gif ":)") |
Add a comment Advertising Advertising
