(first posted 11/1/2013) I realized I needed to do something with a ’56 Golden Hawk I shot over a year ago. Yes, folks, here indeed was a sign to show this Stude–which, incidentally, is also a sign.
I am quite sure most of you are familiar with the Loewy coupes, which debuted in ’53; in spite of their remarkable beauty, they promptly fell face-down due to teething, production and quality issues. The chrome catfish mouth added in ’55 did nothing to help either looks or sales, although the ’55 Speedster was a cool version.
Yet another attempt came in 1956, when the fish mouth gave way to a triple grille treatment in which a somewhat classic-style center grille sat front and center, flanked by outboard grilles that recalled the 1953-54 Starliner and Starlight.
An extensive line of Hawks replaced the outgoing Champion/Commander/President coupes. On the bottom rung perched the $1,986 six-cylinder Flight Hawk pillared coupe.
While a hardtop Flight Hawk was also available, only 560 were built and no pricing is listed in my Standard Catalog. I suspect that the six-cylinder hardtop might have been an export-only model–can anyone confirm? Next up was the V8 Power Hawk, also pillared, which started at $2,101.
The pillarless $2,477 Sky Hawk was quite a nice, plush vehicle, but there was still one final step up the Studebaker coupe ladder: The Golden Hawk.
The Golden Hawk was to Studebaker in 1956 as the Avanti was a half-dozen years later: a top-of-the-line sport coupe whose mission was to restore a little luster to Studebaker’s steadily tarnishing image. It also happened to be quite an attractive vehicle. True, the ’53 Commander Starliner was cleaner, but in the mid-1950s, flash was in order if you wanted to sell some cars.
Power was also a big plus during the horsepower race of the ’50s, and for the Golden Hawk Studebaker pulled out all the stops. In lieu of the Sky Hawk’s 289 CID, 190-hp V8, the Golden Hawk received the Packard 352 CID V8, which made a healthy 275 hp at 4,600 rpm.
As you might expect, the 352 gave the Golden Hawk a healthy dollop of speed, most of which was good only for 0-60 straight-line runs, since the heavy Packard mill–designed for use in Patricians and Four Hundreds–made the Stude’s steering a bit clumsy. Still, it was quite a fast car compared with the supercharged Thunderbird, 300B, and a few other American-made “bombs” of the day.
At $3,061, only 4,071 Golden Hawk hardtops were bought in 1956, which was the only year the GH got the Packard mill. In 1957, the somewhat complicated ’56 Hawk line would be pruned to Silver Hawk and Golden Hawk models, and the GH would get a supercharged 289 in place of the Packard engine.
All in all, the ’57 was probably a better car; the much lighter Studebaker V8 made it much less nose-heavy, and with a supercharger compensating for fewer cubic inches, the horsepower stayed at 275–but this time at 4,800 rpm, 200 higher than with the ’56. As you can see, new steel fins had replaced the fiberglass fins of the previous year.
Now, I would have gotten the classic CC “through the glass” shot of the interior, but this car was about 15 feet off the ground. Here instead is a shot of the seating, as well as that most excellent, engine-turned instrument panel. Could this have been the best instrument panel of the ’50s? It even had a tachometer, which was quite rare for an American car back then. And look at all the upholstery choices!
I am probably as big of a Studebaker nut as JP Cavanaugh, so you can understand the double-take I did when I saw this rare car being used as a sign at a local junkyard. Until last year, a 1949-52 Chevrolet had been the yard’s “sign,” but now they had a much more interesting one. I had to stop.
I went in to ask the guys behind the counter if it was OK to take some pictures (it was) and ask if they knew what a rare car they had (they do). It is not getting parted out, and will likely remain a sign of Studebaker’s past glory for some time to come. Apparently, some guy came in wanting to offload it. The yard realized what a cool car it was, and decided to display it out front to replace the old Chevy.
They did give the impression the car was for sale, and it’s still there as of this writing–needing only a little love, if you’re so inclined!
Wow – this car appeals to me on so many levels. (Big surprise.) First, what a rare car to find out in the wild somewhere. Fabulous!
Second, the 56 Hawk is so unique with a fin treatment never used on any other year of Hawk. Then, there is that Packard V8. I have read that the Golden Hawk was one of the very fastest cars made back then, and would run right up there with a Chrysler 300B on the dragstrip. The 300B was a 340 hp car, but a much heavier one. But that engine went away when they closed the Packard plant in Detroit. Too bad, as a genuine Packard V8 might have made the Packardbakers of 1957-58 a little more appealing (not to mention the Golden Hawks).
Finally, as long as the original Hawk hung around (through 1961), I always wondered why they dropped the hardtop models after 1958. For a car that was supposed to be the style leader, why not keep the hardtop and drop the pillared coupe with those fat door uppers? A mystery. As for this one, I hope someone comes along and rescues it.
I did not know that you couldn’t get a hardtop Hawk coupe from 59-61. I agree — why not drop the pillared coupe instead?
I do know that Studebaker planned to dump the Hawk when the 59 Lark came out, but dealers screamed loud and long. It seemed that having a second car in the showroom was more important than the fact that that second car was selling well under 10K units a year. Maybe the pillared versions were outselling the hardtops in 1957-58? Or maybe it was about price.
What a find and so much nicer looking than the Packard with it’s face looking like a cross between a cat fish and a vacuum cleaner.Never seen a Golden Hawk in the metal despite attending many shows.I’d like to see this car rescued too
It’s going to be a weird day: You bring up a Studebaker Hawk, and I start digging thru the old movie suppliers looking for a copy of “200 Motels”.
Love the car. Wish there were more of them on the road. The Hawks are probably my favorite Studebaker’s of all time.
Hope someone saves that beautiful beast.
Those tires and the higher-than-stock back end look wrong, but otherwise the body looks solid. Wonder why it was junked instead of sold for restoration.
The Studebaker hierarchy of cars was very confusing. Nothing like the clean three trim lines concept that the majority of Chevy cars were sold under at the time. Dropping their standard coupe for the Hawk was a mistake, and their handling of the Hawk was awful, and consistent with their confusing way of handling hierarchy.
The Hawk name meant nothing in terms of prestige – like the later (Square) Thunderbird, Grand Prix, and Riviera that it preceded. The name was more accurately a reference to a body style. The result – who wants a loaded “Golden Hawk” when the same car comes in a dowdy stripper two door sedan as well?
The two door sedans were pretty awful. The artist renderings take some license, and slim down the door frames, while adding a two tone most of the strippers probably didn’t get. Think thick frames, monotone white, little trim and you get the picture.
I really like the higher end hardtop Hawks from just about all of the model years. The car should have been hardtop only, and offered only in mid level and high trims. That could have cemented into place a higher margin halo car for Stude that might have sold in higher numbers if they had given it a firm identity.
Sometimes marketing is everything, and Studebaker was terrible at it. As JP pointed out, Stude bizarrely dropped the hardtop entirely for a few years. When they finally gave the Hawk a significant refresh in ’62, they went to hardtop coupe only. But, strangely, they still looked at the Hawk as starting with their Series 62S cars including the Lark, and grouped the base Hawks right along with the Lark strippers.
I think that Studebaker, after its successes with the Champion lines going back to before WWII, always sold a higher proportion of low-line models and strippos than some others did. I agree with you on how they should have treated the Hawk. They should have handled the Starliner the same way instead of adding the pillared Starlight Coupe in 1953 (which became the base Hawk). I suspect that the problem was that they were chasing volume, and a lower priced Hawk (often with a flathead 6 and a 3 speed) got those production numbers up. I am amazed at the number of 6 cylinder Hawks I see listed for sale various places.
Putting some glitz and prestige into the Hawk should have been all the more important when the only other choice was the Lark. Instead, the 59-60 Hawk became a barely more sporty version of the Lark (which came as a hardtop and a convertible by 1960). I’ll bet that if Sherwood Egbert had been running things sooner, he would have done more with the Hawk. As it was, the 61 model at least got offered with bucket seats and a 4 speed (beating most of the rest of the U.S. auto industry in this trend, if only by a year or so.)
Your sense of Stude history I’m sure is correct, and identifies the mindset that was prevailing.
I don’t think the Hawk had to be too high priced, and they probably could have started with the 6 cyl. engine. Chevy stamped SS on some 6 cyl. cars, but at least they were nicely trimmed hardtops.
Reading more about Stude here at CC has shown me that they did have a strange performance and engineering streak – I saw a recent reference in Motor Trend to I think a ’63 Lark – one of the hottest cars going at the time. But, the packaging and marketing was not reaching the right people.
I think part of the reason they were chasing the lower end was that there was a widespread feeling even as early as 1956–57 that Studebaker-Packard was not long for this world. When you get to that point, entry-level buyers might still be willing to take a chance if the price is right, but middle-class customers tend to stay well away. That was part of the downfall of the (Studebaker) Avanti as well.
The expression you’re looking for is “Stude frugal.” in ’58, when the recession tanked the auto industry, Studebaker had a big hit with the stripper Scotsman — even the second sunvisor was an option.
1958 Chevy Delray/Yeomans had one sun visor, no foam in the seats, no arm rests or door pulls, no oil filter, and rubber on the floor. Cheap was really cheap in the fifties. If you splurged for the cheap AM radio it didn’t have any station buttons. But it was GM so they got non-black rubber front and back window trim and a shiny strip down the sides and a bit of rear fender trim. And dog dish hub caps with the blackwall tires.
Several years ago I was driving down the road and saw a Golden Hawk sitting on the shoulder. Turning around, I pulled in behind to see if he needed help. The driver, a very calm gentleman in his mid-60’s, said he did indeed need help but added he was afraid I couldn’t offer to him there. In chatting with him, he said the car had just dropped a valve and he wasn’t about to move it and was going to let AAA worry about it.
I admired his calm. He was from Indiana and was a considerable distance from home (and he was still heading away from Indiana as he was westbound). What was striking was his wife was just as calm as him.
That’s a nice story. They must be retired. I imagine they just shipped it home, rented something interesting and continued on their way west. Life without a schedule….sweet.
I like that the car is being used as an advertisement for a junkyard. Not that the car is junk, it’s just unique for that purpose.
Up by me, we had a local pick-apart with a Henry J up on a platform, about 30 feet off the ground. It lasted until the late ’80’s / early ’90’s when the lot was cleared out for new tenants.
The Studebaker Loewy coupes are one of the saddest stories in automotive history, primarily because the original car was such a beautiful, timeless design that really never had a chance. Compared to other mainstream cars of 1953, the ’53 Starliner hardtop could have set the industry on its ear. It could easily have been the fifties’ version of the Mustang and carried Studebaker for at least a decade longer past the mid-sixties.
But, alas, Studebaker management fumbled it, badly. After an abysmal start with horrible quality, then reversing themselves by limiting production due to misjudging popularity, proceeded to mangle the styling of the pretty little car with each succeeding year, managing to foul up both the front and rear ends until it quickly became a rolling cliché.
Agreed. I can appreciate the Hawk for what it was on some level, but they were also a bit of a sad joke. As a kid, it was so obvious how they didn’t really have a proper vision for this exquisite car, and kept mangling it up by tacking on new appendages and trim. They should have taken a “Mercedes” approach, and just kept refining it. Oh well…they didn’t ask me.
+1 as a Ford fan compare it to what the big 3 were making in 53,looks wise the Stude wins hands down
Horrible quality? Well, perhaps if you count the engineered-in propensity for rust-out in fenders and rockers. But I don’t think Studebaker’s quality was much different than any other manufacturer at the time.
The real problem with the ’53 coupes was a frame, purpose-designed to allow flex for a smoother ride. May have been a great idea in theory… but when it came time to drop the body on the frame, the flex prevented the front fenders from mating with the body cowl! Get the gap right at the top, and it was too wide at the bottom. Get the gap right at the bottom… well, you couldn’t get the gap right at the bottom.
So there was a lot of head-scratching and considerable delay before the cars began trickling to the dealers, And a lot of would-be buyers (Did I mention what a stunningly gorgeous car this was? How it made other marques look so fusty?) settled for something less attractive, but available?
So how DID Studebaker solve the flex-frame problem? Pretty simple — drop the body, let the frame flex, then shim up the body and the front fenders until they aligned. This was achieved on the line, vehicle-by-vehicle, shim-by-shim, combining approx. 1/8″-thick steel plates (about 1″ x 1 1/2″) and similarly-sized sections of tire sidewall. These pieces all had holes drilled in their centers, and were held in place by the body bolts.
The mounting point at the front of the fender might have had six shims (DAMHIK); four at the front of the body cowl; perhaps only a rubber shim at the last mounting point in the trunk if you were lucky. The number of shims at any given attachment point was variable, depending on how closely the body build-up had matched the jigs.
This remained the solution through the last of the Hawks, although the frames had become more rigid every year after ’53.
As for the question on the Flight Hawk, my Standard catalog claims a production number of 4,389 examples of the pillared coupe, 560 for the HT, with no price given for the latter. I’ve seen at least one of the pillared coupe; don’t think I’ve seen the hardtop. I’d have to go dig through some photos.
BTW, the Golden Hawk perched (how apropos!) on the sign has a GT Hawk hood.
Whether it’s called poor quality (classic Studebaker fender rust) or poor engineering, the flexible-frame of the ’53 Starliner was a really bad idea that definitely hurt sales (as well as slowing down production due to all the band-aids on the line that were required to get the cars put together). Worse, the flexible-by-design frame took a convertible version completely off the table.
A Hawk is the only later-model Stude that I never got to spend any time around. I always understood that these had a fairly willowy structure, much worse than the Larks. In the 80s, I remember that there was an old lady who would occasionally drive an old pre-GT Hawk coupe in the area of my office. One day I was outside and watched her hit a pothole. Now the car was old and quite rusty, but that thing shivered and rattled like nothing I had ever seen before when it hit that hole.
I recall that the 71 Ford employed that same “flexible front frame” theory in an effort to dissipate shock before it reached the body mounts. Same result, the 71-72 Ford suffered from that same floppy structure, quite a difference from the 65-70 models that had been very tight cars.
Outstanding, Tom, I love this article and I love that black Hawk. (Blackhawk, now there’s a good name.) It looks great all black without the bumpers, especially the front.
I too am a lifelong Stude fan (not withstanding what I said yesterday) and I had no idea the ’56 Hawks were so varied and one-year-only different. Here’s a closer shot of that ’56 fin feature I never noticed before, cropped from a photo on the web. Looks like the ’56 Hudson wasn’t the only ’56 with V-Line styling.
Hindsight can be a terrible thing, especially to the Studebaker faithful. If only the Starliner was a high-end high-performance coupe from the very beginning.
I really like that “check mark” trim. Ironically, I don’t think I’ve seen another ’56 Golden Hawk, despite all the SDC shows I’ve attended in the past.
I have a hard time deciding which I like best: the ’56-’58 Golden Hawk hardtops, or the ’62-’64 Gran Turismo Hawks. Both are beautiful cars.
That’s a tough decision, but I’ve always leaned towards the GT Hawks. Something about them has always tugged at me…
The GT Hawk may have been the best looking of all the Hawks because (save for the roof line) it was the closest in simplicity to the original ’53 coupe. Bob Bourke was a design genius; Brooks Stevens, who did the GT refresh, at least recognized good design and knew where to swipe a cue or two. The roof line was T-bird; the chrome fender caps that ran the length of the car were an admitted lift from the ’61 Continental. Removing Bourke’s scallop from the door also captured something of the Continental’s slab sides.
Still, as someone noted here this week, the Gran Turismo design suffers front and — especially — rear; it’s just too narrow. Low as the ’53 sat, the GT looks too tall from those views.
It is, in the final analysis, nothing short of amazing to realize the change Stevens pulled off with so few alterations, not to mention so few dollars.
Removing the scallop wasn’t Brooks Stevens’ work; the scallop was gone starting in 1957 before Stevens was involved. That was one year after the scallop was removed from other Studes. CEO James Nance disliked the scallop and thought it made it too obvious the facelifted 1956 models were just warmed-over ’53s.
The rear grille added to the 62 and 63 were also lifted from the ’61 Continental.
Well, I think I’m doing my part– me and a buddy went and bought two 56 Golden Hawks that we sitting in a guys back yard here in So. Calif.’s San Fernando Valley. The have been under a tarp for the past 20 years. The seller wanted to sell both of them at the same time, so we teamed up and made it happen. We’re picking them up this week (that is, dragging them out of the yard, after we move a couple ’53 Packards that are in the way.)
The Golden Hawk will be joining a ’53 Commander, a ’63 Avanti, and a ’63 Wagonaire in my collection. All three of these are restored and show quality, but I’m not sure if the Golden Hawk will be restored. Maybe fixed up a tad and taken to car shows, surface rust and all.
And yes, I do consider myself a very lucky guy,
Just sold my 1957 Studebaker Golden hawk it needed restored but had a balanced and rebuilt 1960 motor, orginal motor had a cracked block.
Sorry to see it go but it needed to be back and running, sure going to miss her.
That “triple grille” treatment is the nicest look on the Studebakers I my view. It recalls for me a small Stude dealer that we had here in Toronto where two of those kind of cars were displayed.
I have been to South Bend and have gone through the Studebaker museum. I highly recommend it for anyone who is in that area, it is a great show.
Great shots, great story. I too like that check mark trim treatment.
Grille is from a 1962 model, no?
For years I’d occasionally hear a reference to a “Packard Hawk” and thought it was a reference to this car; certainly it would have been a more appropriate moniker than for the misshapen ’58 model that was actually called that.
There clearly was a market for cars like the Golden Hawk – this was basically a personal luxury coupe before its time. The ’58 four-seat Thunderbird was cut from the same basic cloth, but was a hit. Perhaps people shopping for upscale cars at the time just didn’t think of Studebaker, but then Ford was a low-budget brand too. But Ford was able to separate the Thunderbird aura from that of standard Fords in a way that Studebaker couldn’t.
Given the about-to-be-released ‘Suddenly it’s 1960!’ campaign & all that that led to industry-wide, the Hawk could have in retrospect countered with ‘Suddenly it’s 1961!’. 🙂