GTP Cool Wall: Studebaker Starlight Coupe

[TheBook]

Studebaker Starlight Coupe

General specifications
Country of origin South bend Indiana USA
Produced in 1950-51

Engine
Configuration Inline 6 or V8
Location Front engine rear drive
Displacement 169.6cu inline 6 or 232.6cu OHV V8
Aspiration Naturally Aspirated

Drivetrain
Gearbox 3 speed manual or automatic available
Drive rear wheel drive

Performance figures
Power 85hp/120hp I6/V8
Torque 190lb/ft V8
28 MPG with manual transmission

(P.S. Apologies for the delay on this one, as my computer's been down since Monday.)​

 

[Eric.]

Seriously uncool. You'd need to be about 76 to be seen driving one, there's no redeeming performance. And I find it incredibly hard to believe that a car from 1950 gets almost 30mpg.

 

[Rotary Junkie]

Sub-Zero for looking neat.

It's from 1950, stunning performance is not expected.

 

[Keef]

It's the Stud, which means it's a cool car even if it isn't a good car. Some very interesting qualities about this one. Though the chicks may not be impressed upon first glance, you can tell them a little story about your Stud and they'll come to appreciate it. Then maybe they'll let you tell them a little story about your stud...

 

[Cano]

It's a freaking bulletnose Studebaker. Come ON.

 

[xNEVER-ONEx]

The front windshield looks like the back windshield and vice versa.

 

[Time_Attack]

You could get this car with a regular rear window and even without the bullet nose. But why would you do such a thing? The styling may be a love it or hate it type of thing but its so unique how could you not enjoy it? Plus when someone says Studebaker this is the car you're automatically going to think about. It makes that powerful of a statement.

 

[Zenith]

This isn't some offensive, attention whore "look at me!" sort of unique. It's classic and quirky.

Very cool, but not quite Sub Zero.

 

[Stotty]

I'm normally a fan of this era of car... but the proportions on the Stud are terrible!

Uncool

 

[NLxAROSA]

This car has the same level of coolness as collecting stamps.

 

[Vince_Fiero]

I agree I would not want to drive one.

On the other hand if I saw it in the street, I would park to take pictures of it.
Unconventional design => Sub Zero can not come to other conclusion, the V8 might be needed to drive a bit with fun.

 

[Paulie]

Meh, it's nothing special really, but a classic like this can hardly be called uncool.

 

[Stotty]

A bad car is a bad car IMO, irrespective of how old it is.

 

[Time_Attack]

I'm not sure what made it a bad car. It was a reliable, economical and affordable with outstanding styling.

 

[Stotty]

Sorry, to clarify...

If I think a car is bad I'm not going to make allowances for it just because it's old

Just like I don't make allowances for old people driving around at 20mph below the speed limit... get off the road FFS.

 

[Small_Fryz]

First time I have voted seriously uncool.

 

[TheCracker]

Pig ugly, even when flattered by the bigger more modern wheels on this example. Seriously Uncool.

Had it been the slightly later '53 Studebaker Champion, then it would be Sub Zero...

 

[Time_Attack]

Heh. I was thinking of nominating the 60s Lark next time around.

 

[Jim Prower]

Cool. The rear window's unique design sells it for me.

 

[LP670-4 SV]

yeah you have to be 96 and on a ventilator to be scene in one of these...and then you'd have to explain to your wife why the rear window looks like a windshield and that not cool......

 

[GT_Prologue5]

Seriously uncool. That's just awful design.

 

[C-ZETA]

. That's what looking at that actually makes me feel inside. Uncool.

 

[SohnVonStig]

I honestly think the car would be cooler if the design was flipped around. The rear is actually quite unique and attractive. The front "3 nipple" grille just rubs me the wrong way. But on the other hand it's a stud....so I voted meh...

 

[Leonidae@MFT]

Meh. Tucker Torpedo>this.