On Mar 5, 8:12 pm, John Poulos <ava...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Bob wrote:
>
> Not great paint
>
> translation: Not much better then factory, but a 5K plus clear/coat
> color coat
>
> Poor fitting panels
>
> translation: I have no idea what you are talking about unless it was the
> hood which I did align.
>
> vinyl on dash
>
> Translation:
>
> true, but it is the vinyl wood grain as used by the factory back in 63
>
> No doubt your car may be nicer in some area's, but the red Hawk was not
> exactly a turd. maybe a condition 2. Some folks might even prefer a
> everything rebuilt/upgraded in the last 5000 miles car to a nice
> original one. I did not knock your car, just commenting on current
> market value.
>
>
>
> > Have you seen and compared both cars? The red '63 is a patched up
> > 'restored' car with not great paint and poor fitting panels, vinyl on
> > dash, etc. etc. NO COMPARISON! and it still brought more than $30k ...
> > and about $20k more was spent on it? Good investment? I don't think
> > so. 1 of 9 ???? ... right, whatever.
>
> --
> JP/Maryland
> Studebaker On the Nethttp://stude.com
> My Ebay items:http://www.stude.com/EBAY/
> 64 R2 GT Hawk
> 63 R2 GT Hawk
> 63 Lark 2 door
> 57 Wagon
> 51 Commander
> 39 Coupe Express
> 39 Coupe Express (body)
John, I was not trying to disparage your car but only paraphrasing the
few shortcomings you mentioned in your listing and what I observed
regarding the fit of the passenger door and trunk lid. I don't doubt
it was a very nice car indeed, not a turd, and the auction showed its
worth. I think what this spirited dialogue boils down to is this -
'most' people may prefer an absolutely 'perfect' car like your green
'64 (I'm drooling all over my keyboard) while a very few others,
myself included, appreciate a 'survivor' simply because they are SO
hard to find and impossible to duplicate regardless of how deep one's
pockets. Different strokes ....
Bob
|
