I’m trying to not go down the road of talking about the patina, or worn-paint, or whatever the current term is for the finish on this 1962 Studebaker GT Hawk, but it’s hard not to. This looks like one of those cars that a person could get working like a Swiss watch and drive it as it looks now and be a legend in your neighborhood. It can be found here on craigslist in the beautiful Casa Grande, Arizona area, about halfway between Tucson and Phoenix. The seller is asking $4,900!
I absolutely love the look of this car, other than this one part of the front end. It would take one of them-there Mike Angelo guys of the paint world to be able to match the worn and faded red paint on the driver’s side of the grille opening, but it would be worth it. The seller has this car listed as a 1962 Studebaker Golden Hawk, but the Golden Hawk was made for the 1957 and 1958 model years. The seller doesn’t give a VIN for this car, but I’m reasonably certain that it’s a 1962 GT/Gran Turismo. The ’61s still had tail fins and the 63s had little mini-grilles where those two openings are above the front bumper.
I would love to see this car in person, as if I needed another excuse to go to southern Arizona in March. I can’t tell if the rear “grille”, which covered the same ribbed trunk lid used on previous Hawks, has holes in it on the left side or what those two black things are? It looks like just about everything is there on this car, it just has very faded paint and chrome that could use a good polish. It looks like all four “S” logo wheel covers are there which is nice.
This is the only interior photo but at least they included one. Believe it or not, some craigslist sellers don’t include interior photos! I hope that you were sitting down when I revealed that newsflash. As with the exterior, things look good inside. Not great or perfect, but mostly complete and fine for a local driver-quality car until the next owner can slowly bring it back to its former glory again. This one has a Flite-O-Matic automatic transmission.
The seller has also included an engine photo! They say that this car has a 259 V8 but, for 1962, the 259 was stroked a bit and it should be Studebaker’s 289 cubic-inch V8. I don’t see an oil filter next to the oil filler tube, and this car has AC! They mention that it comes with “uninstalled AC”, but the compressor is clearly installed. This car is very enticing. Are there any Studebaker Hawk fans out there?
If the floors are not rusted out, this could be the bargain of the week. For 1962, the 289 was standard for the U.S. and Canada and the 259 was standard for other countries. So either the seller is mistaken about the engine or the car is a repatriated export model, which seems less likely but is possible.
looks like floor patch by gas pedal
This is Barnfinds getting back to it’s roots. Great find, great car. It looks like the perfect car to leave as-is.
What is your issue and others of your ilk? Why is it so hard for you understand that there aren’t that many Barn finds in the world. They have to keep this site going and are doing a great job. Go back to bat.
Down boy. I’m not the one who named the site Barnfinds.
Barnfinds is just a domain address. Not all cars on BAT require a trailer.
Yes yes I get it! My comment was intended to say that I liked the Stude because it actually looked like a car you might find in a barn. OK???????????? Geez, go out to your garage and fix a car.
you mean BAP – Bring A Porsche? Ack…
Casa Grande….Big House? Is that where the Federales send the Bad Hombres?
Casa Grande is named for an ancient Native American structure that is actually in Coolidge AZ.
I have a low mileage black on red ’63 GT out of CA. These are nice driving cars. Looks pretty stock with the correct ’62 parts and full dash with clock and tach. Front left grille looks replaced rather than faded. Parts are plentiful for these cars and reproduction interiors are also available. Join SDC for excellent club member support. Hope it finds a nice home.
I never understood why Studebaker took that gorgeous aerodynamic front end from the 53-54 coupe and put that pig’s snout on it. At least by 62 they had gotten rid of those god-awful fins and went back to the original design.
BTW, that 289 was a great engine: could be bored out to 0,90 if need be, had 50% more swept bearing area than the Chevy 283 and Ford 289 of the era, and had a very heavy crankshaft. Its worst feature was the small drain holes for the oil to return to the oil pan. You could have a quart in each valve cover, causing early valve seal deterioration. Some folks took to installing external drain lines. I had one of these in a 54 coupe and had to redo the heads as a result. Sorry I ever got rid of that car with its 3 on the tree, OD, and hill-holder. Ex-wife forced sale.
Different strokes, right? My wife and I LOVE the finned Hawks, we own 4of them, all different years. She saw one several years ago, and thought it was the coolest car she’d ever seen. Had to have one. Whenever we drive one, we get showered with compliments and jealous admiration. So… “god-awful fins”? I think not.
Fair enough. One person’s floor is another’s ceiling.
I can see the influence on the Avanti’s design. Was the Hawks V8 from Packard?
Not the 289 and its variants – they were a Studebaker design that first hit the market in 1951 as a 232 cid. The only Packard engine that made its way into a Studebaker Hawk was the 352 cid in 1956’s Golden Hawk.
Agree that the 53 and 54’s had great front end styling but they really dropped the ball in 55 and this one in my opinion an improvement over the 55. Parents had a 53 Commander 2 dr. V/8 automatic. Great car but lost reverse while my older brother borrowed it!
The grille on the hawks is evident testimony to Studebaker’s dealership relationship with Mercedes-Benz, back in the day.
My biggest issue with Studes of this era was the position of the fuse block- better not have a big ol’ metal belt buckle when you are leaning into the engine bay. Bzzap!
With respect to the Mercedes connection in your comment, I always thought that they were trying to copy the Chrysler 300 letter car front end. I say that without any knowledge in fact. It just seemed likely to me that they were trying for the hot car look rather than the stodgy M-B look.
What you refer to as the fuse block is just a junction block for the headlights and front turn signals— nothing more. Don’t know how you could shock yourself on that… I never have… :)
I’m with Ikey, it’s a great buy at that figure of the whole car is present. Ask the Seller to give you pictures of the car up in the air so that you can its bones. If they are good, jump on it, taking Ikey’s advice about floorboards.
You won’t be disappointed.
Very nice Gran Turismo. If it were closer, it would probably be in my barn.
I was just in this area yesterday! Drat. Could’ve driven it to Kansas. :(
I know Studebaker was in financial stress , but those god awful fender vents on these cars should have been eliminated many years before this . They just made a seek modern looking car look dated, IMO. I really liked the last years of the Hawk with its T bird styled roof . I saw a triple black 62 Hawk in Yuma years ago at a car show. the only non stock part of the car was some chrome period style mags , but with the cars distinctive lines it looked like a custom car !
For the life of I don’t get why leaving a car like this looking like a rust bucket is considered cool. I live where anything over 5 years old looks shabby and just looks ghetto, my daily drivers are like that. So why on earth would I want my hobby car to look like that. I say fix the rust and paint this car, they’re much nicer looking even with just a single stage paint job.
I agree with canadianmarkseh, at this price, if it’s not a total pos, you would have a little meat on the bone to give it a decent paint job. This ride deserves to be shiny!
Sure does make me miss my Olds powered ’53. I can tell you that without air conditioning those side vents were great to have down there. Hated to see the original nose go too. Saw a ’53 retro rod not too long ago with a totally stock body, black on black and slight lowering and it was as good looking as anything being built today.
The Stud Baker’s Flight O Matic was a Borg Warner copy of Ford’s Ford O Matic, which was itself designed and built by……….Borg Warner. :-) Terry J
The beauty in the 50’s / 60’s Studes is that with the same basic platform, there’s something for everyone; styles that some love & some hate. The same chassis was used from the bullet nosed icons all the way through to the Avantis. The main body from the gorgeous ’53 was used one way or another through to the GT’s, albeit with a squared off roof. My ’59 Silver Hawk was a factory black beauty with a maroon-ish red interior… loved that car! I had comments like: “That’s the coolest car I’ve ever seen”, to: “That’s the ugliest car I’ve ever seen”… But people on the sidewalk would see it driving by and smile. It was quick and was a blast to drive. One of my “Kick myself for selling it” cars.
When I was in Vietnam 1968-69, I searched classified ads in the back of Road &Track, finally settled on a 1962 GT Hawk, black on black, 4 spd with TT rear. Seller met me outside Travis AFB, completed the deal for $700 and I drove it home to nw Oregon. The GT and the Avanti were last ditch attempts for Studebaker to live on.
Never been a big Studebaker fan, but Hawks of all years are an exception. This car is cool, but much to the chagrin of most readers on this site, I would definitely go for a paint job.
God bless America
Lack of oil filter could be that it is a mid year 62. Mid year Studebaker switched to a full flow filter located at the bottom of the block.
Yup,in rust prone So.Bend, In. the engineers/designers wanted to get rid of the side vents as snow/ice/salt would pile up over the tops of them, and very soon would rust thru, management didn’t so they stayed until the Lark. The lack of $$$$$$ showed up after
The white GT in the 8th ad down today does look the same, but without pic’s side by side and the experience a lot of you folks have I can’t say for sure. I could be missing something. The white one’s in finer shape and will probably bring better $$$$ in the end. A friend in the early 70’s had a commander R3 or R4. It was a two tone blue and white two door post. 289ci with a Paxton or mac super charger, 4speed. If I’m not remembering some of this right please let me know. Later……………………………………………JIMMY
Sounds like your friend had a R2. The R3 and R4 were 304 cubic inches. The R3 was supercharged the R4 had 2×4 barrel carbs.
The 289’s first appearance was in 1956 in the President and was the standard engine for the model. Most know the Golden Hawk got it the next year….and that thing was – Supercharged !!!!!
All of the RHD imported GTs were 289 ci and autos but none of the bells and whistles like P/steer and A/C and limited slip this one is very attractive if it’s an original desert car although the holes in the chrome on the boot lid are a bit concerning
Easy to tell cubic inches – on the block on the left front engine pad – P should be a 289 and V was 259 down. It came down to that # on my 1955 paper route Stude – that was the # on the title and not the door frame.