Could the 1941 Studebaker President be the most obscure car from the late pre-war years? It could very well be, which is a shame. While “Every Car Has A Story”, this one tells several. And they are all good. So those of you who often tune out the pre-war stuff, stick around because I think you will like this one.
If there is a car from the years leading up to WWII that is more obscure than the 1941-42 “big Studebaker” I would like to know what it is. Automotive history has many oft-told stories that most of us can recite by heart. From Henry Ford and his monoblock V8 to the thrilling Chrysler Forward Look of 1957 (and GM’s panicked reaction to it for 1959) there are great tales to tell. It could be argued that the Studebaker Corporation provides more than its fair share of those familiar yarns. Which could be this car’s biggest problem.
Most older readers knows that the 1939 Studebaker Champion burst onto the scene to create an alternative to the “low priced three” – and that may have saved the company in the process. And then there is the famous story about the company being “First by far with a postwar car” with the groundbreaking 1947 line that put Virgil Exner on the map (and off of Raymond Loewy’s payroll).
This car, however, slots right smack between those chapters and has been overlooked as a result. We here at CC have a dwindling list of cars that have not received their fifteen minutes (or more) of fame and the Studebaker President from before WWII is one of them.
In 1927 the line-leading Studebaker Big Six (as in 354 cubic inches big) split itself into Commander and President trims. The next year the Big Six morphed into the Commander while a new President 8 was king of the hill.
The Studebaker 8 was a marvelous engine. Aficionados of pre-war engineering are well familiar with Delmar G. (Barney) Roos. We wrote a bit about him from later in his career when he changed the fragile Willys Whippet four cylinder engine into the famous Go Devil four that powered so many Jeeps in inhospitable climes around the world from 1942 and beyond.
In the 20’s, however, Roos had become Chief Engineer of Studebaker following stints at Locomobile, Marmon and Pierce Arrow. He would hold that role from 1926 until he left in 1936. His President 8 was an inline design initially displacing 312.5 cubic inches (5.1 L), enlarged to 337 cid (5.5 L) in 1929. A 1931 redesign made a jump from five to nine main bearings – something few straight eights other than Packard employed. Even the great Dusenberg 8 employed only five main bearings to support its long and heavy crankshaft.
The President of that time was a first-rate automobile that could stand toe to toe with anything in its general price range. And it was expensive, priced about ten percent above Buick’s flagship 90 series cars.
This big straight 8 powered Studebaker’s five-car Indianapolis 500 racing teams in 1932 and 33. In that 1933 race half of the fourteen cars to finish the five hundred mile race were Studebaker-powered, a record that still stands.
Sadly, the automotive President died not long after actual company President Albert Erskine, who committed suicide as the company slid deeper into the red. As the company entered receivership (the state law equivalent of a bankruptcy reorganization) the 1934 President got a demotion when it took on the smaller 250 cid (4.1 L) eight that Roos had designed for the 1929 Commander series. Also a nine main bearing design, it was still a good, if less powerful, engine in a car that was now priced (and powered) roughly in line with the mid-level Buick 50 series).
In one final parting gift before Roos left Studebaker’s employ (OK, other than the design of the little Champion six that would power cars until the bitter end) he designed the unique-to-Studebaker “Planar” semi-independent front suspension that combined a transverse leaf spring which served as each wheel’s lower mounting point with an A arm and shock absorber which located the upper suspension to the frame. This arrangement survived on Studebakers through 1949 and on two wheel drive Willys Jeeps through 1955.
The next big story involves two of the most famous automotive stylists out there – Raymond Loewy and Virgil Exner. Upon its successful exit from receivership in 1935, Studebaker was ready with a new 1936 line which included the low-ish priced Dictator, the mid-range Commander and the flagship President. Industrial designer Helen Dryden is credited with the 1936 Studebaker, she being one of the very first women in that male-dominated field. That same year Studebaker hired a bigger name in Raymond Loewy & Associates, which got the contract to do Studebaker’s styling work beginning with the 1938 cars. Loewy then hired Dryden to do interiors and shortly thereafter lured a young Virgil Exner away from his promising start as chief stylist for Pontiac.
It is well known (at least among automotive history nerds) that Raymond Loewy did not draw cars. As the “Big Name” stylist, he signed off on designs of those under his supervision and, and as the guy who cashed the checks from Studebaker, got the public credit. But from 1938 on it was Virgil Exner who had day-to-day control of Studebaker styling, allowing him input late in the process for the 1939 Champion and more for the 1940 updates to both lines.
About those lines – it is not well-enough appreciated that the Champion shared virtually nothing with the much larger Commander and President. Although, from the time of its mid-year 1939 introduction Loewy and Exner tried to maintain a family resemblance. A more modern analogue would be Nash after the war when it built Ramblers in addition to the big Nash. The difference was that the Champion even got its own engine.
And now we get to the new 1941 big cars. Although there are some who have suggested that the 1941 program was a facelift of the 1938-40 cars, this is simply wrong – only the Champion was an update on a prior model. The 1941 Studebaker Commander and President were all new bodies on mostly carry-over mechanical components (as was common for the era). As such, these cars would be the first clean-sheet design opportunity for Virgil Exner at Studebaker.
Virgil Exner Jr. was interviewed at length in a 1989 session for the Automotive Design Oral History Project through The Henry Ford. This is a very interesting read (and is found here) which confirms that the ’41 President and Commander were primarily Exner designs. Exner even owned a ’41 President as his personal car, which Virgil Jr. remembered very fondly.
The Commander and President were very similar. The differences were the lower priced Commander’s 119 inch wheelbase, which was significantly shorter than the President’s 124.5 inch span. Also the Commander used a 224 cid (3.7 L) flathead six that dated back to Studebaker’s 1932 Rockne. This is the mill that would see duty through 1950 in the longer wheelbase cars and through 1960 in trucks. The President continued to use the Roos-designed 250 cid eight, which by 1941 was good for 117 bhp at a fairly lofty 4,000 rpm. The President also offered a higher level of trim for its $130 price premium over the $985 Commander.
In a unique move, the new 1941 big Stude was offered in a truncated model lineup that was made solely of two distinct four door sedans. There was the six window/suicide door Cruising Sedan . . .
and the four window Land Cruiser which featured front-hinged doors . . .
. . . unlike in this early brochure illustration that got the back doors wrong. Each sedan style came in “Custom” ($1,115 for the President) and “DeLux-Tone” ($1,180) trim.
The styling of the Land Cruiser sedans bore an unmistakable resemblance to more expensive cars. It was either a sleeker version of a Cadillac Sixty Special or a more formal rendition of the Packard Clipper.
There would be no two door sedan, no convertible and no station wagon. And there was no coupe until midway through the model year when the “Sedan Coupe” joined the lineups. The latter is interesting for sporting the first curved one-piece windshield in a U.S. volume production car.
The DeLux-Tone was notable for its unusual two-tone paint treatments that featured a second color for the roof and in a prominent side stripe that augmented the relatively thin-pillared greenhouse. The stripe was supposed to suggest motion, but you can be the judge of that. Exner Jr. recalled that both his father’s and Raymond Loewy’s personal Presidents were painted in a Tulip Cream and deep green two-tone. He did not say which sedans they drove, but one would suspect the Land Cruiser, being the more expensive and stylish of the two.
It is possible that the DeLux-Tone was a little “out front” in its styling because in the middle of the 1941 model year Studebaker added the new Skyway series as the high-end trim on both sedan styles. The Skyway series perfected the 1941 Studes (at least in your correspondent’s humble opinion) by ditching the contrasting color stripe and by adding fender skirts and rocker trim, along with the large fender-top signal lamps. It is probably no coincidence that most of these changes echoed focal points of the stylish Lincoln Continental. The ad above depicts the Skyway Land Cruiser while our feature car is the Skyway Cruising Sedan.
And about those Lincoln Continental influences. Loewy was known to be a fan of the Continental, as he owned one himself that had been heavily customized, notably with the ’41 Studebakerish low and wide grille. Could the Skyway have been Loewey’s attempt to tone down the original Exner concept for the car? This would be a fascinating dive into history to know which stylist was responsible for which bits of these cars’ looks. We know that Loewy retained ultimate control but we also know that Exner did most of the actual styling.
The grille design is particularly interesting. Beginning with the 1938 Lincoln Zephyr, the styling trend was to move the grille lower and wider, away from the traditional upright shape of a radiator. The ’41 Studebaker seems to have taken this trend as far as it would go. Designs like the 1942 Cadillac (amd ’42 Stude, for that matter) would begin to move grilles upwards again as the sleek prow began to disappear in favor of a more blunt front end look.
One issue which the Skyway model did not address is the highly unique contour of the rear fender. This is the feature that carries the burden of proof as to Exner’s hands on this design. Virgil Exner became well known for his love of the classic wheel shape and this fender bulge follows the rear wheel’s contour. Personally, it is my least favorite part of the design in that it visually shortens the car and detracts from the otherwise graceful shape.
Pardon my poor photo editing skills, but isn’t this better? Then again, perhaps my opinion is influenced by being steeped in Harley Earl’s and E. T. “Bob” Gregorie’s concepts of what a 1941 car should look like.
Something else to note is that the styling of the six window Cruising Sedan with its relatively upright roof and its abbreviated deck followed the general shape of the ’39 Champion sedan more than a little. This would have made the small inexpensive car the style trend setter of the lineup. In this as in all things, Exner, Loewy and Studebaker marched to their own drummer(s) even then.
One note about this interior – is this not the most fabulous pre-war steering wheel you have ever seen?
Here is a better view. Studebaker was nothing if not stylish in 1941.
This ’41 President Skyway Cruising Sedan is a rare car with only 6,994 Presidents of all styles having found owners in 1941. I have not been able to locate a source that breaks out production by body style, but this $1,230 Cruising Sedan was the second-most- expensive Stude in the catalog that year, running only $30 behind the four window Land Cruiser version of the same President Skyway series.
The slightly cheaper six cylinder Commanders sold considerably better, at 41,996 units. The little Champion, which started at just $660, was good for 84,910 cars, for total Studebaker production of 133,900, not counting trucks. These may sound like low numbers but they were better than the independent competition. Hudson moved 91,769 units (seven series’ and three wheelbases), and Nash was good for 80,408 (including the new economical 600 series). Among independents only Packard’s volume models did slightly better, with around 53,000 units spread between the six cylinder 110 and eight cylinder 120, both of which were price competitive with the Commander and President. Even with the prestige of the grand old Packard name that company outsold the big Studes by only about four thousand units. Would the South Benders have sold better with a more conventional looking rear fender? We will never know.
The eight cylinder 1941 President (with overdrive, no doubt) won its class in the Gilmore Economy Run, boasting of a 22+ mile-per-gallon trip from Los Angeles to the Grand Canyon. And beyond being thrifty they were stylish enough to appeal to celebrities of the era, such as golfer Byron Nelson.
I have been trying to think of another brand-new 1941 design that had a shorter lifespan than this Studebaker. After a total run of one and a third-ish model years (1942 vehicle production ran about five months) the President died. Where every other relatively modern body came back for a postwar encore, the big Studebaker was toast. Only Champions would find their way into dealerships in 1946.
At first blush, it is tempting to chalk this up as one of Studebaker’s unending series of management blunders. After all, the postwar seller’s market would have guaranteed that the company could move every highly profitable President it could push out the doors. Instead, Studebaker offered only the inexpensive Skyway Champion on its diminutive 112 inch wheelbase as the only 1941-42 car to make it back from the war.
Even considering that the new postwar design would not include an eight cylinder President, it is hard to imagine why the six cylinder Commander could not have been the car to carry Studebaker’s flag until the new cars came several months later. But neither the Commander nor the President would see a return engagement.
The President name would return in 1955 for a final run at the top of the brand’s hierarchy (for a four year term, oddly enough) but that car would be a pale imitation of the last “real” President seen here.
Some U.S. Presidents had consequential terms and jump to the front of the line whenever history is the topic. Others have been largely forgotten. Studebaker Presidents have had similar fates. There are the pre-’34 cars that have become revered full classics and even the late ’50s models that are remembered if only because they served as raw materials for the final Packards.
The 1941 (and ’42) Studebaker Presidents were both excellent and fascinating cars, not least because they display some of Virgil Exner’s earliest work. But beyond that they offer a rare bit of variety from the prevailing styles and a package that combined good looks and high quality. This is one President that everyone ought to be able to support.
Special thanks to Paul Niedermeyer for sharing these photos, which he took in San Mateo, California a number of years ago. I had been wanting to write about one of these but had not found an appropriate car to photograph.
Further Reading:
1938 Studebaker Commander Convertible Sedan (John875)
A Trip Through The Studebaker Museum – Part 1, Pre War (Jim Grey)
Wonderful article!
The wrong illustration shows nicely why those 4-window Town Sedans had to switch to front-hinged doors. Clearly the illustrator didn’t appreciate the reason. It wasn’t really about safety, because passengers in the 6-window sedans were cozily contained by the body. You could fall out of a town sedan more easily.
The ’41 Champion I’ve seen around my neighborhood has the same light tan color as the pictured President.
Very enjoyable post – and that light brown President is a beauty…Jim.
Since Exner was gone it may be a coincidence, but those twin low grills remind me of the ’52-54 models.
“those twin low grills remind me of the ’52-54 models.”
That had not occurred to me but now I totally see it.
They have the vent doors on the side that are also on postwar Studebakers until they shrank into a Lark.
Fun fact: those little vent doors actually disappeared on the 58 models. That’s right, they pinched pennies in the most visible way with the badly integrated headlights and the woeful dash panels but redesigned the fender and ventilatiin structure in ways virtually nobody noticed. Not even me until it was pointed out by someone else awhile back.
Brenda Frazier in the ad. Look her up – the portmanteau “celebutante” was coined in her honor. Claims she invented anorexia.
Oh, and she couldn’t drive in real life – despite what the ad said. Had an unhappy, it seems, life. Died relatively young. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brenda_Frazier
I noticed her appearance as a spokesmodel, too…I first saw her billed as “Brenda Diana Duff Frazier” in The Preppy Handbook.
I would imagine that appearing on the cover of Life, merely for her notability as a debutante, was no small feat. As you stated, her life both before and after her celebutante phase was not a happy one.
Wow, thanks for this. I wondered who she was but did not make the effort to find out. I guess “famous for being famous” is not new.
She was a proto-Kardashian. I’d never heard of her before today.
Likewise, I had to look her up as well. Other than her figure, Kardashian is a good analogy.
First rate writeup, JP.
+1. What a lovely car!
Jim, this was a terrific dive into a very forgotten Studebaker. I’ve been looking forward to this article. Thank you.
Your question about the President not reappearing after the war does bring about a great question. If it had returned, it would have definitely gotten sales but would it have proven to have ultimately been a drag on Studebaker as a whole? It would seem resources to update it around 1949 to 1950 would have been scant at best. Perhaps it would have withered away naturally but it would have been great had Studebaker exploited it for a few more years.
And davis is right; the Brenda Frazier story is depressing.
You raise some great questions. My take is that the Champion could be described as The Car That Ate Studebaker. It made most of the prewar volume and would be the greatest influence on the 1947 line. Late Packards were designed as Packards and simplified and detrimmed to make less expensive Clippers. Postwar Studebakers were designed to be Champions and were then stretched and trimmed to compete with bigger cars.
Another interesting thing is that there were two different cars being built from 39-42 and again from 1953 to the end with the standard cars and the C/K designated coupes (although there was certainly more commonality in the later offerings than in the prewar cars). I wonder how it might have worked to build the 1947 cars in two widths by using different roof/hood/deck and floor panels so that the higher priced cars would have been more differentiated from the small one. A larger car would have been a godsend as the 50s progressed, and may have made for a more effective manufacturing synergy with Packard (as the Stude plant was not set up to handle a full-width 1950s American car).
A two-tiered body program would have better served Studebaker postwar when, as you correctly point out, every car from the 1947 on were extensions of the Champion, It became the star to which they hooked their wagon (no pun intended).
The decision not to return the President postwar was likely influenced by the scheduled early introduction of the new 1947 line and its sales returns pre-war. Here are the President percentages of total sales for 1939: 9.5%; 1940: 5.3%; 1941: 5.2 %; 1942: 7.0%. The length of the straight eight would have required a third chassis, front fenders and hood, ancillary parts, not worth the cost for what small numbers it might have been projected to sell.
The long-wheelbase Y-Body Commander Land Cruiser filled the bill quite nicely, 1947 and beyond. It sold in numbers much greater than did the pre-war President and became the basis for the revived top President sedans 1955-’58. Ironically, the 1948-’49 Commander six had a 3/8 inch stroke increase to 245.6 ci within 5 ci of the old 250 ci straight eight.
Oh yes, I figured there would be no way to shoehorn a straight eight under the hood of a 47+ Studebaker. And that’s a good point on the similar displacements between the Commander six and the older President 8. And keeping the old six would not have been very viable as it was actually bigger than the 232 cid V8 they introduced in 1951!
But oh – a wider car with a V8 engineered to run up to around 335 cid – this is what sad daydreams are made of. 🙂
I can also see the argument that to introduce the Commander after the war and then follow it up with a smaller, narrower Commander could be seen as a downgrade. To start with the Skyway Champion and move to the bigger 47 cars would be an upgrade.
It’s also important to remember that bringing back auto production after the war was not quite as easy as it might seem. The tooling and lies all had to be moved out and then brought back in and all the other parts put back int production. A major commitment and investment.
My point being that since the President accounted for such small percentage of Stude sales, and that the company had committed to a very early new post-war car, it really wouldn’t likely have paid off to resume President production. Yes, they would have sold, but whether it would have paid off the effort is very questionable.
A great idea on the differing widths and it would surely have made a difference, but I remember reading somewhere that Studebaker were constrained in car width by the layout of the South Bend plant – something about the setup of the lines not being wide enough?
Otis Romine, Studebaker engineer involved with these programs told interviewers that efforts were made to convince executives to widen the bodies to industry standard widths to no avail. The cost of larger dies, heavier stamping presses and wider raw sheet metal were the reasons given they wouldn’t be doing so. Budd was Studebaker’s supplier of major body stampings, may not have wanted to go the additional expense either. It was a decision that as the 1950’s unfolded would handicap their cars in the market.
I understand the issue to be the paint booth width. But what was woefully unaffordable in 1956 would have been easily done in 1946 when new models were planned and they were flush with cash.
Studebaker paint booths from another post here:
Let’s not forget that Loewy was adamant about his “Weight is the Enemy” crusade. He was all about lighter and trimmer cars. The original Champion was his type of car, and he pushed very hard to keep the new post war cars light and trim. His influence cannot be discounted.
I agree that the styling is gorgeous, except for the rear fender bulge which makes it look like the car has a double layer of metal. That said, I can’t help but wonder if the real reason why sales weren’t higher for these Studebakers was the smallish grilles. And I agree, they seem to point the way to the style of the 50s Studebakers.
Wow — this is an outstanding look at a very alluring car. Very interesting history that I knew little about before reading this.
Now here’s something that I can’t quite figure out. The image below shows one of the 1941 Studebaker brochure pictures being staged (the photographer is noted Los Angeles photographer Paul Hesse, who Studebaker hired for 1941). This is the same image of the President Land Cruiser that you show above and noted that the suicide doors did not make it into production… however, the car being photographed does NOT have suicide doors.
So does that mean that the brochure image was doctored to show suicide doors, but then production Land Cruisers wound up having conventional doors anyway? Or do you think production started with suicide doors and then switched early in the model year?
Confusing stuff, but either way, I love these cars. Thanks for all the effort you put into this piece.
Those Studebaker promotional shots have long fascinated me. I have decided that they began with a photograph and then did massive coloring/retouching to end up somewhere between a photo and a rendering. The 1955 brochure cover looks to be the same style. Maybe that was their way of going for realism but making the car pop at the same time.
I think the suicide door version in the brochure was a screwup. Everyone was so used to that being normal that nobody noticed. Could it be that the artist just the thought it looked better that way? It even took awhile for me to see it.
As you likely know, this brochure cover was
photoshoppedairbrushed mid-year to depict the new fishbowl windshield; everything else stayed the same.Also, I wonder if it wouldn’t have been much cheaper to just use color film, even though it was very expensive at the time (having only been available for five years)
I love the look of pre war cars. That have a style I rilly appreciate. I do like the stripe down the side.
Great writeup, but I think the 1934 Chrysler CW Airflow Imperial Custom Eight had the first one-piece curved windshield on an American car. Of course I don’t imagine they built many of them.
https://ateupwithmotor.com/model-histories/chrysler-desoto-airflow-history/view-all/
This was why I said “production car”. I know the Custom Imperial used it but it seems that the biggest “production year” for that car was 125 units. I have made a change to the text that clarifies.
Fair enough.
The ’41-’42 Studebaker Sedan-Coupes did have production contemporaries in the ’41-’42 Chrysler Crown Imperial lwb models which also have curved glass windshields. Production, yes; common, no:
1941
6-passenger sedan 179
8-passenger sedan: 205
limousine: 316
1942
6-passenger sedan 81
8-passenger sedan: 152
limousine: 316.
I changed the text to “volume production” – which may still be a little optimistic with this Studebaker. I remember something about 450 +/- of the President Sedan Coupes being made and there are probably another couple thousand or so Commanders? But still . . . 🙂
Richard Quinn, Studebaker historian extraordinaire and editor emeritus of the Antique Studebaker Review of the Antique Studebaker Club researched the Studebaker National Museum archive for the 1941-’42 Sedan-Coupe production numbers:
1941
Commander: 5,195
President: 477
1942
Commander: 4,063
President: 605
Its worth noting that all 1941 President Sedan-Coupe are only in the Skyway trim level but for 1942 all three trim levels: Custom, Deluxstyle and Skyway.
Pure eye candy.
Thank you so much for this post, JPC.
That Boeing 307 Stratoliner in the Studebaker ‘skyway’ picture was an abbreviated production model, too. Boeing only made 10 of them, mostly orders from Pan Am and TWA. Based on the Model 299 B-17, it used the wings, landing gear, tail and horizontal stabilizer of the B-17C. It was the first airliner to be pressurized. With a crew of six, it carried 33 passengers in comfort above the storms compared to the unpressurized DC-3 which at the time made up almost 90% of the airliners in service in the USA. Production was abruptly terminated by WW2 and the voracious demand for the stepbrother B-17. I think it’s the best looking of all the pre-jet airliners. There’s only one in existence now.
As a side note, later B-17s often used copies of the Wright Cyclone…built by Studebaker!
Yeah, I spotted that beauty as well.
Here’s a pic I took of her when my Dad and I visited the Air & Space museum back in 2011.
The poor thing had to be restored twice, as they splashed it near Seattle in its last flight before sending off to the Smithsonian….
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_307_Stratoliner#Surviving_aircraft
I know Jim… Off topic, but I must say this was one fine write-up on a car about which I knew nothing. Thanks for a great article!
It’s a shame that Loewy got all the credit for a mostly Exner design.
Yes! Another Savior from South Bend that turned into just another interesting footnote. Thank you for doing this wonderful piece. However, I must ask, how did these fare during the 60s, 70s, and 80s? Were these regarded as cheap bangers or were they actually recognized as being something a bit special?
“how did these fare during the 60s, 70s, and 80s? Were these regarded as cheap bangers or were they actually recognized as being something a bit special?”
This is hard to say because so few of them were around. I think one reason they have remained so obscure is that they were practically all 4 door sedans. When cars of this era were really popular with collectors everyone wanted convertibles, or at least coupes. They were popular with Studebaker fans but not more widely. I am struggling to remember ever actually seeing one, either President or Commander.
One other thing is that these are so confusing that it is easy to jumble up the variations. There were two different sedans, and both versions came either with stripes or without. There are almost 2 or 3 years worth of styling changes smashed into a single model year and there was no single style that makes everyone remember them.
When I looked at the pictures, JP, I also was amazed by the resemblance to the Lincoln Continental (particularly the Sedan Coupe). I also see a lot of the 1940-’41 GM C-body, which was of course based in large measure on the 1938 Cadillac 60 Special. It’s very sad that this Studebaker never got a “second chance” at the end of WW II. I wish they had continued to produce it alongside the ’47 new models. It had a lot of potential as an elegant luxury car, and would probably have sold well with minor changes until the 1953 Loewy new designs. I think it’s better looking than a 1949-’50 Chrysler New Yorker, and the Skyway’s lack of extraneous chrome trim makes it a timeless design. Thanks, JP, for an informative article on an overlooked automotive gem.
You are right, the Packard Clipper looked good in 1946-47 and this one could have as well. I don’t doubt that Loewy/Exner could have done a better job on an update than Packard did with its 48.
The other shame for we fans is that the Cruising Sedan would have formed the basis for a gorgeous convertible sedan. That straight, defined beltline just cries out for a big, long folding top! But I understand the business case. The leadership team (Paul Hoffman and Harold Vance), having just steered out of financial disaster were going for the most bang for the buck and saw that sedans were the way to do it.
Good to see an appearance from Stan and Ollie! Nice piece.
Laurel & Hardy took several poses with that 31 and also posed with this 32 President St. Regis Brougham. I don’t know whether they were paid for publicity work or if they just liked their Studebakers. Count me as a fan.
I had stumbled across these a few weeks ago when I wrote about that great comedy pair recently. https://jpcavanaugh.com/2019/04/05/celebrating-laurel-hardy/
The pic you have posted here is inaccurate, the roof of the car can not be black if colorized from the original B&W. Here is my colorization using colors for a 1932 Studebaker President.
Very nice, another car I had no idea had existed. I like the grille, still undecided on the rear fender.
Interesting business about Loewy and Exner, ain’t it true that the famous one gets all the credit. Still true today.
“still undecided on the rear fender”
Here, let me help you. I just put this into the body of the piece for contrast.
Oh, definitely looks better without the additional curve, but it is endearing in a goofy sort of way.
Since there were only 7,000 made and it didn’t catch on as a trend I cast my vote for liking it, if that makes any sense.
Well, the Commander was blessed/cursed with that fender too, but even with 50k units a year it was still too far “out there” to ignite a trend.
That looks much better, JPC. I’d delete that rubber rear fender shield and carry the chrome from the bottom of the skirt back to the bumper. Might make it look longer, which can only be good for a range-topper in the forties!
Besides Studebaker, Exner would get overshadowed, once again, after his unfortunate exit from Chrysler. While he was the main scapegoat for the 1962 downsizing debacle, the very attractive, cleanly styled 1963 Valiant was almost entirely an Exner design, yet Elwood Engel gets the credit for it.
To be fair, Engel did clean up some Valiant details quite nicely for 1964 which, to me, makes it the most attractive A-body.
A related point not often noted is this: Exner did the 63 Valient and Engel cleaned it up for 64. However, Exner also did the 63 Chrysler which was far cleaner than the Engel-ized 64 that replaced it.
I can also see in this car Exner’s sense of proportion (long hood/short deck) that was a near-constant in his career (the 57-59 Forward Look cars notwithstanding).
That’s funny about Engel tidying up Exner’s ’63 Valiant for ’64, but doing the opposite with the big Chrysler. I never really noticed those changes, either, but once pointed out, they can’t be unseen.
Great article on a largely overlooked but interesting cars. To pick a couple nits, the large ’28 to ’30 President eight was 312.5 for only the ’28 FA model, bored 1/8 for 337 ci ’29-’33. It was five main bearing for ’28-’30, becoming nine main bearing for the ’31-’33 models. Why this change is a mystery, though all President and Pierce-Arrow blocks were cast in the Studebaker foundry. Much as been written to debunk the theory that both engines were the essentially same, which they aren’t.
Exner’s design genius shows in these cars, notwithstanding the somewhat odd rear fender sculpting, he headed a stellar group for the Loewy Studebaker studio. The four-window Land Cruiser was in response the ’40 GM Torpedo C-Bodies which were immensely popular as well as the style-leading Cadillac 60 Special. Note how much the ’41-’42 Sedan-Coupe resembles the concurrent C-body club coupes. The one-piece curved windshield and clean 60 Special/Continental-inspired trimming are just icing on the cake.
The Cruising Sedan and Land Cruiser share parts in common through the B-pillars, only the rear doors and quarter panels are different. Even the top shell of the Cruiser is common, with a fill panel to frame the rear door of the Land Cruiser. Forward-hinging was necessary as the wheelhouse cut further rearward leaving little vertical surface for sufficient strong hinging.
Thanks again for the great article.
Thank you for the clarifications. The other thing I should have noted is that the body engineers were successful in concealing every door hinge except for the bottom hinge on each front door – almost matching Packard who managed to conceal all of the hinges on the Clipper.
Since I became a fan of these I have continued to harbor the suspicion that had the rear fenders been more conventional in their appearance these cars would have sold much, much better.
Both Exner and Loewy placed a special emphasis on the circular form as a pure design element. The rear fender sculpting does that but is stylistically inconsistent with the front fender therefore is an aesthetic clash. Either both should have been handled that way or neither.
Loewy had the two ’41 Lincoln Continentals customized by Derham in 1946. There are circle forms all over those including that bull-eye grille piece, circled monogram and formal top porthole windows. The front fenders were bobbed to the circular form of the ’41-’42 Studebaker rear fenders, again strangely inconsistent. Iirc, one had the continental spare concealed…hiding its most important circular feature!
For me, the Exner round rear fender presages the Exner toilet seat, just in a different place and cut in half.
This is a truly excellent and well-researched article.
Kudos to the author.
As an aside, I have written a book about Raymond Loewy’s automotive efforts, and more information can be found at the website:
http://www.loewylancia.com
It is sad that Loewy,who was considered one of 100 most important people of the twentieth century in the media, is virtually unknown today. I wrote the book to remedy that.
Thank you. Yes, he was a fascinating guy who left a ton of work behind. Among Studebaker fans Loewy is revered almost to the level of deity. Virgil Exner is interesting in that he is well known in the context of Chrysler. But Studebaker people ignore Exner in favor of Loewy while Chrysler people ignore Studebaker altogether. As important as Loewy’s role was, Exner’s early work at Studebaker does not get enough credit.
Loewy was the consummate design talent organizer and (self)-promoter, a persuasive individual who could sell recalcitrant auto executives on radical new designs. All while billing them quite steep rates for the service, a genius!
I didn’t know that Rockne had a car named after him. Now Saban needs Mercedes to name one after him. They’re in Tuscaloosa after all (the decked out Sprinter he’s offering doesn’t count).
Haha, yes, the Rockne was a 2 year thing in 1932-33. Maybe Saban wouldn’t want one because Knute was killed in a plane crash after the car was named after him (and before it even went on sale).
If I remember right, Rockne was the first civilian “celebrity” plane crash victim and the following outcry led to new airliner regulations and the huge success of the all metal DC-3.
Thanks for that additional info. Appreciate it. You’re probably right then. The Rockne is cursed.
I know the Continental made the full fender skirts necessary but I wonder if that unusual rear fender would work better with a full wheel opening. As it is the fender is both trying to emphasize and hide the wheel.
In any case it’s an early example of Exner’s interest in styling the rear of the car as much or more than the front.
Also features the vent doors on the sides which continued in postwar cars through two generations, until they shrank the second generation into the Lark.
Superb stuff, Counsellor Cavanaugh. And I, the jury, am duly convinced of Studebaker’s neglect.
I have long loved the ’42 Packard Clipper, and the Caddie, and it is arguable that this President integrates the thin-pillared roofline thingy better than either. It’s a very good-looker, and a Stude I’d certainly never known of before. (Forgive my sins, but I always associate the brand’s styling with resolute…..ok-ness in this era). I also heartily agree on the rear wheel bulgette – it really is altogether better with some modesty applied, as you display. Pretty clear the art department guys thought it a bit naff too, as it is somewhat de-featurized (or plain misrepresented) in most of the pics. Except the green one where Ms Frazier leans her low-cut self, where it, ahem, bulges fully.
The only other quibble is the slightly-off C-pillar on this body style: Land Cruisers without the third side window and a large C-pillar, like the red and the ’41 blue ones above, are the best of all. Was this an optional thing, or is it wheelbase related?
I have learnt three things new today. One is that ’30’s – ’40’s Studebaker made a really beautiful car, two is that Raymond Loewy did not draw cars. Three is that Studebaker built a successful racing motor. (I’d place money that half the finishers being powered by Stude engines being “a record that stands to this day” could safely be said to be a record that stands forever, as rumours of Studebaker’s rise from the dead are greatly exaggerated).
Here’s to ex-Presidents. May there be at least one more very soon. (Why, Studebakers, on CC, I mean, ofcourse…..I’ll see myself out, Counsellor).
“Was this an optional thing, or is it wheelbase related?”
That may be the most bizarre aspect of this car. Each wheelbase got each sedan style (or each sedan style came in each wheelbase, if you prefer). I wonder if this was the President’s biggest handicap – that it was almost indistinguishable from the cheaper Commander. I think we all know that more expensive cars will sell as long as it is clear to everyone around you that the car is more expensive. Had the company offered the six window sedan as the Commander and the 4 window Land Cruiser as the President I suspect the result would have been more Presidents and fewer Commanders sold.
Ah, thankyou for that. It is quite strange. Perhaps in 1940-odd, the “better” (ie: newer, future) look of the two-window was seen as a bit forward (in the old-fashioned sense) for a top-liner necessarily aimed at the conservative better-off.
Studebaker was quite democratic in its distribution of various body styles throughout its lines, no instances of exclusive use come to mind. In that, they were similar to Buick and Chrysler, their main competitors who generally practiced the same policy except perhaps for the lwb Buick Limited.
Distinction of appearance from the lower priced wasn’t a Studebaker practice either, relying on simply the longer front end to denote a President. This probably was a mistake, even if only for a richer grille treatment or other styling clues readily to separate the President from the Commander. For most all years, one has to notice if the hood is longer and what the badge states.
Stunning beauties, those pre-war Studebaker eights! My great uncles bought a used President touring early in the Depression, removed the back seat and used it to deliver pails of milk. They did not have the optional Wig-Wag tail lamps though.
Jim, I’m getting to this late, but what an exceptionally satisfying read. I’m so glad I passed these pictures on to you; why I didn’t think of it sooner is a good question, but it was well worth the wait. I love Studebakers and would have enjoyed writing it up, but I just don’t have that special passion that you bring to the subject.
But then it also reflects out respective orientations. Not surprisingly, I hold the ’39 Champion in very great esteem, as proof that a lighter and slightly more compact car can do just about everything as well as the bigger competition. I would have loved to find a Champ and brought some real passion to that.
But the bigger cars are your thing, and this has been a real education as well as a good story very well told. Thank you for finally doing these pictures justice.
Thanks! Your pictures gave me the excuse to take a deep dive into a car I knew a little about but not a lot.
The Champion was indeed an important car. I think my modest enthusiasm for them is more about their doomed strategy than the cars themselves. Studebaker was never going to generate volumes necessary to compete effectively against Ford Chevy and Plymouth. Doing so was a sort of slow motion trap of costs to high to compete with inexpensive cars and not enough prestige or size to sell in higher-price segments.
If I come across an early Champion I will give you a shot at it.
The problem was that focusing on the medium-price market would ultimately have proved to be a dead-end for Studebaker, too.
By the eve of our entry into World War II, GM was already dominating the medium-price segment with the triple-play of Buick, Oldsmobile and Pontiac.
In the early 1930s, GM had three separate marques in that segment, but the independents, as well as Dodge, DeSoto and Chrysler, were still competitive with at least one of them in volume. It took the combined total of Buick, Oldsmobile and Pontiac to keep GM dominant.
By 1941, EACH GM marque was pulling away from the competition in volume (with the exception of Dodge). Put all three together, and it was effectively no contest.
Chrysler Corporation, the number-two manufacturer by volume in those days, was having an increasingly hard time keeping up with GM in the medium-price segment.
Things would only get tougher in the postwar era with the advent of the Oldsmobile Rocket V-8 and GM’s leadership in the adoption of automatic transmissions. The only way for an independent to survive was by taking the Nash route – offer something that buyers couldn’t get at a Big Three dealership, and market it appropriately (i.e., the first Rambler was a small car, but not a cheap car).
I am a little late to the game but I finally got the time to catch up on some articles. Well researched and a great read JPC! I am not overly well versed on the history of Studebaker, in particular the pre-war models, so diving into the President was just awesome. This type of material is what is best about CC. Thanks again!
Very late here. Excellent article, glad this generation President was given its just due.
“I think we all know that more expensive cars will sell as long as it is clear to everyone around you that the car is more expensive.”
Absolutely. One option would have been to buy the remains of Pierce-Arrow when it folded in 1938. Studebaker was casting Pierce’s 384 Eight block to the end and Pierce in the early Thirties used Studebaker bodies for some of its models, initially even built in South Bend.
A longer axle-dash to package Pierce’s Eight and/or to give the Twelve added elegance would have made the car fully competitive with the best that Cadillac and Packard had to offer.
This article is amazing! And clearly lovingly prepared.
Your strong affinity for Studebaker convinced me a long time ago that Studebaker was the leading independent that deserved to survive and thrive.
A very attractive and engaging presentation. I believe JP could write the definitive history of Studebaker.
When I was in the old Soviet Union, an older person praised the Studebaker trucks were that the U.S. furnished the Red Army during World War II.