hey just wondering wat some of the odd ball car makers were from back in the fifties. companys like nash, desoto, hudson that just couldnt keep up with the big three. pictures would be cool too.
DeSoto was always part of Chrysler. They just dropped them from the line-up of cars sold in America in '60 or '61. But they continued to be sold in overseas markets. For the most part all of the "little guys" had merged or were bought out by the "big guys" by the 50's. I'd say the only merging left to be done was the Studebaker/Packard combo that eventually came to p***. There were many makes that disappeared in the 50's, but most of them were already part of other corporations.
My question would be why you consider them to be 'oddball'? With the exception of Crosley, Muntz or King Midget, these other cars had been in business for years and were of conventional construction. Parts on some of these cars can be harder to come by, but a few , such as Studebaker, are easy to source parts for. Owning a Studebaker, I can tell you that it's easier to get parts than if I owned a Mercury, Olds, Buick, or Mopar.
Or even a '76 Chevy Monte Carlo........... sold one partly because I couldn't get reproduction parts or afford what NOS stuff was available. Bought a Studebaker because I COULD get repops, so far I haven't had to though, plenty of reasonably priced NOS still around!
well by oddball i just ment the lesser known companys that lost out to the big boys sorry for the confusion
The King Midgets were somewhat of an ***emble it yourself car if I remember the adds right. You ordered the car and it was shipped in and you finished putting it together. Complete painted and all the parts car in a box that looked like it was intended for those Florida and Arizona retirement communities before golf carts got popular there.
Kaiser-Frazer was an oddball marque that was later called simply Kaiser. Here is some interesting reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaiser_Frazier
If I am not mistaken, I believe Studebaker was one of the biggest, if not the biggest automotive maker in the US, if not the world, just after WWII. Largely because of the truck and other equipment production during the war effort. They had also been around since the mid-1800's making wagons, so they were also one of the oldest. They were already about 100 years old by the 1950's. Unfortunately, because of still debatable reasons, they folded US production in 1964 only a couple of years after merging with Packard. They made cars in Canada for another 2 years with Chevy motors. When they shut down, they basically closed the door on tons of equipment and parts. The parts were largely saved and are still being slowly sold off by private parties who purchased and saved the stock. That is why you can still get a lot of parts fairly easily. And because a fair number of people still have Studebakers, there is a fair amount of repo. parts as well, for cars and trucks. So, Studebaker may now seem odd, and they were from one perspective, but they certainly weren't small and at one time bigger than any of the Big 3 that we still have today. They also had quite a bit of export market all over the world.
There were a few low production sports cars built in the '50s. Cunningham, Excalibur, Devin (lasted into the early '60s), Woodill, Glaspar, Kurtis (became Muntz). Some of these companies built fibergl*** bodies but did build a few complete turnkey cars. If you go back to the late '40s you can add Tucker and Davis. Kurt O.
The Studebaker/Packard merger took place I think in '55 resulting in the '56 Golden Hawk, packard powered Studebaker. "56 was also the last year of Packard Production. Afterwards only Studerbaker powered rebadged Studerbaker cars were sold as Packards. The company did not fold but quit the auto business and continued to make money for investers with nonautomotive manufacturing to this day. I'm told. Don't know what it's called now.
Crosley made cars from '39 - '52.. everything from station wagons to jeeps to sports cars. A Crosley was even run at LeMans in '51! First US manufacturer to go to disc brakes- started in '49. The '49 and later motors were pure genius: 4 cyl 5 main bearing overhead cam with a cast-in head like an offy. 26.5 HP stock, but they can be beefed up to 60 HP or so.... neat lil cars and still relatively cheap. Lots of pics and info here: http://crosleyautoclub.com/ short video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ajc0ZOziAM
The availability of repro parts has more to do with the popularity of that model for hobbiests, than it does with anything else. Once a mediocre car model is too many years old, the non mechanical parts production slows down, because very few people see them as a desireable toy, and are not willing to buy new parts for restoration. If it is a desirable model, it does not matter whether the manufacturer survived, or how many were made, someone will spend the money to produce replacement parts. For these reasons, you can buy brand new steel early Camaro bodies, but may not be able to even buy a tail light lens for an undesirable model.
Well, it was STP corp. for a while. I think it was bought out by first brands. By the way, when they merged with Packard, Packard was the one that survived, they just changed the name to Studebaker Packard inc.
Yeah, right! So why is it the Packard Club folks have never forgiven the Studebaker Club folks? Because Studebaker survived, pal - and still survives as Studebaker-Worthington. They just decided to quit making cars, and make something else. So there.
Little known trivia: The US government asked Studebaker to help get Ford back on its feet, and they refused. (another dumb move by Stude management)
Another way to tell you are getting old. When I was a motor pool mechanic in the Army, we had some Studebaker built duece and a halfs. Also Reos and GMCs.
I have a 1949 Clymer new cars book, and that year catches the REAL oddballs...a LOT of really strange/radical/just odd cars, some of which achieved tiny production runs and some that I suspect never even made prototype...I have to bring in that book and list'em. Davis, *******, Gregory (rear engine...front drive! The worst of all possible worlds!) Powell, and others...almost all are unusual designs hoping to create a new niche. Onbe or two show only a drawing and incomplete specs, the others at least existed in metal...
Studebaker and Packard sales were down, so they merged. Eventually they downsized the big Stude as the Hawk to go after the smaller car market that developed in the late 1950s, but they never had enough money to really retool an all new car, which hurt their ability to compete. The move to Canada and the change to McKinnon (Chevrolet) motors were cost cutting attempts. Nash and Hudson merged in 1954 as well, and the 1955-57 Hudsons were basically rebadged Nashes. Nash didn't go away entirely, like Studebaker they went for the small car market in the late 50's with the Rambler - but they fared better, eventually becoming AMC. The DeSoto was done away with because it too didn't sell well. The last year of production, only 10,000 or so cars were made. It was too much like other Chrysler products. Kaiser was basically a manufactured car, and the company took over Willys - again about 1954 - before dropping the automobile lines to concentrate on the successful Jeep and truck lines. Checker began selling private p***enger cars in the late 1950s but their success was due to selling plenty of fleet cars, the p***enger car business was a sideline that really didn't cost a lot to have.
Willys Overland made cars and of course P/Us and "SUVs" into the 50s. I had a 53 W.O. P/U. One of the trick trivia questions for our rod runs back in the early 80s was... What company has produced the most transportation vehicles in history up to that date. Studebaker was the correct answer, even though they were out of business for 20 years. because they made so many horse drawn wagons for so long before anyone ever put an engine on one. I'm sure that GM has p***ed them by now. My 1960 Motors manual lists Edsel as a separate make even though it shared some parts with the Fords.
The Jalopy Journal
