A fresh model lineup?

[calypsocoral]

Hi guys,

The thread about the potential emergence of a new American car company got my brain rushing, and I decided to think of what I wanted to see from such a company.

So, the question is this: If you were to start a car company (and you had billions to invest in it), what would you include in your model lineup, and why?

Specifics on powertrains, chassis, and suspension make the answers more interesting, IMHO...

[Madman]

I have been thinking about this idea for years. Since I don't have billions of dollars to invest in a start-up car campany, I have yet to put my plan into action. (Hey, I can dream, can't I?)

So, here goes.......

First, we need a name. Since reviving long-dead monikers seems to be all the rage these days, I say we use the name of a now defunct, but fondly rememberd car company. I have always had a soft spot for the Studebaker-Packard Corporation and think a revival of both these names (Studebaker for mass-market cars and trucks, Packard as a luxury line) would make a lot of sense. In the 1920's, Studebaker also owned Pierce-Arrow and I think this name would be perfect for an ultra-luxury brand to go head-to-head with the likes of Rolls/Bentley/Maybach. We could also field a range of affordable Erskine minicars (think Mini, Smart or Scion) that would appeal to younger buyers. Erskine, BTW, was a sub-brand used by Studebaker to market low-priced cars during the depression of the 1930s.

Next, we need to design the cars and determine what they will be like. I favour using an Audi-style longitudinal engine layout; one that can easily be adaped for front-drive, rear-drive and all-wheel-drive. I think it is important to differentiate between the Studebaker and Packard brands and one of the best ways to do that is by making the Studebakers front-drive (in accordance with most mass-market cars) and make the Packards rear-drive. By making both front and rear drive vehicles off the same platform, HUGE economies of scale can be realized.

Entering the lucerative truck market with a line of Studebaker trucks is a no-brainer. Studie trucks were once highly regarded and a modern day Champ (small truck; Tacoma, Frontier, Colorado, you get the idea) and Transtar (F-Series, Ram, C/K-Series) would fit the bill nicely.

The car line would look something like this....

Studebaker:
Lark- small economy car like the Chevy Aveo
Daytona- small nimble roadster a la Mazda MX-5
Champion- Focus/Civic rival
Avanti- Sport coupe/cabrio built on Champion base.
Would do battle with Mitsu Eclipse and the like.
Hawk- Ford Fusion/Mazda 6/Pontiac G6 alternative
President- Ford Five hundred/Toyota Avalon rival
Speedster- large sport coupe built on president base

Starburst- small mpv built on Champion base
Starlight- Minivan built on President base
Starliner- large van for cargo or passenger use

Cruiser- small SUV
Commander- mid-size SUV Oops, Jeep has already cribbed this name!
Dictator- large suv

Packard:
Clipper- BMW 1-Series/Audi A3 alternative
Constellation- BMW 3-Series/Audi A4/Merc C-class
Caribbean- BMW 5-Series/Audi A6/Merc E-class
Patrician- BMW 7-Series/Audi A8/Merc S-class
Executive- Stretch-limo version of Patrician

Panama- Sports roadster; BMW Z4/Audi TT/Merc SLK
Panther- High performance sports car

300- Mid size luxury SUV
400- Large luxury SUV


Idea, comments or suggestions?
This could be very interesting!

Madman of the People

[nixon]

I think Dodge owns the rights to "Daytona", but thats just nitpicking on my part I like the plan though. Any engines in particular you'd use?

I have to go to class, but no doubt I won't hear a thing about Third World Politics as I create my car company

[HondaBoy9602]

Sounds like a good lineup madman. The only problem I see is DCX might sue you over some of your names (Daytona, 300, and Commander). Cruiser might also be a problem because of the PT Cruiser. It looks like you have a very diverse lineup that has every type of car you could ask for, with out any overlap.

[HondaBoy9602]

My lineup would be.

Mainstream brand:
1.Subcompact car (4door and 5door versions)
2.Compact car (2door, 3door, 4door, and 5door versions, sport version)
3.Midsize car (2door, 4door, and wagon, and convertible versions)
4.Fullsize car (4door)
5.Sports car (coupe and roadster versions)
6.Compact SUV (FX style SUV only a little smaller)
7.Midsize SUV (Pacifica style vehicle)
8.Minivan
9.Midsize Truck (regular, extended, and crew cab versions)
10.Fullsize Truck (regular, extended, and crew cab versions)

I would use 4 platforms. One platform would be expandable so it could be used on the Subcompact, Compact, and Compact SUV. One platform would be able to be used on the midsize car and sports car. It would be able to be used for FWD, RWD, and AWD. Another platform would be used for the midsize SUV, fullsize car, and minivan. It will also be able to be used for FWD, RWD, and AWD. Then I would use an expandable truck platform to build the midsize and fullsize trucks. All cars in this brand will be FWD, except the two trucks and the sports car both of these will be RWD. The Trucks will have an optional 4WD system. The fullsize, midsize, minivan, and both SUVs will have an AWD option.

Engines will be as follows:
1.1.6L 4-clyinder for the Subcompact car (around 115 HP)
2.2.0L 4-clyinder for the compact car (around 140 HP)
3.2.4L 4-clyinder for the sport version of the compact car (around 200 HP)
4.2.4L 4-clyinder for the compact SUV and 4-cylinder version of midsize car (around 170 HP)
5.3.0L V6 for the midsize cars (around 245 HP)
6.3.5L V6 for the midsize SUV, minivan, sports car, and fullsize car (around 270 HP)
7.3.8L V6 for the midsize truck (around 270 HP and more torque then 3.5L)
8.5.0L V8 for the fullsize truck (around 350 HP)

Luxury brand:
1.Entry level car (think TSX)
2.Entry sports sedan (think G35, 3-Series, A4, and IS350)
3.Midsize sports Sedan (think 5-Series, GS, A8, and M)
4.Fullsize sports Sedan (think 7-Series, S-Class, and A8)
5.Entry level SUV (think RDX, and X3)
6.Midsize SUV (think MDX, X5, FX, ML, and RX)
7.Coupe based around entry sports sedan priced between entry sports sedan and midsize sedan (coupe and convertible)
8.Super car.
Platforms:
The Entry level car would a version of the midsize car platform and be FWD. The entry sports sedan and coupe would use a RWD version of the midsize sedan and have optional AWD. The midsize sports sedan, fullsize sports sedan, and midsize SUV will use a RWD version of the fullsize car platform and have optional AWD.
The entry level SUV will use the midsize car platform and be FWD with optional AWD. The Super car will have its own platform.

Engines:
1.Entry level car 200 HP 2.4L 4-cylinder and option turbo version making 250HP
2.Entry sports sedan 3.5L 270 HP V6
3.Midsize sports sedan 3.5L 280 HP V6 with option 4.2L 320 HP V8.
4.Fullsize sports sedan 4.2L 320 HP V8.
5.Entry level SUV 3.0L 245 HP V6.
6.Midsize SUV 3.5L 270 HP V8 and 4.2L 320 HP V8 option.
7.Coupe 3.5L 280 HP V6 and optional 4.2L 320 HP V8.
8.Super car 6.0L V10 making 500 HP-600 HP.

[LadaLover]

I would build a midsize car, a small wagon (Subaru Forester-like), possibly a pony car, and a truck. All multivalve, all RWD and all with AWD capability to target the niche that Subaru has.

[Akuma_supreme]

What a great thread! Here's my "virtual car company"

I'm in agreement with Madman that a new car company could do well if they resurrected an old (but respected car company). My favorite brands from the olden days are the Auburn-Cord-Duesenberg family of cars. Cord had kind of a bad reputation in its day do to its highly advanced (yet problematic) front-drive design. Plus, it sounds too much like "Ford" IMO and could cause confusion in the marketplace. Thus, my lineup would include two brands- Auburn- "premium-quality" cars, vans, trucks and SUV's and Duesenberg- "high-line" luxury cars.

For my lineup, I would use five-basic platforms that by design could be stretched or widened slightly to accomodate a host of different products- like Honda can with both the Civic and Accord platforms. Of these four, Duesenberg would have two dedicated platforms, and Auburn three

My brands would avoid competing directly in the pick-up truck and truck-based suv markets. Trucks in general are pretty much a North American phenomenon, and the resurrected Auburn-Duesenberg empire would have the world market as its target.

So here's my lineup:

Alpha Platform:

Small Auburn Roadster
Auburn soft-roader SUV (like a bX only a little more butch)
micro-van/wagon (similar to Renault Modus)
Conventional hatchback and sedan for South America and Europe.

Engines would range from a 1.0 liter three-cylinder to a 1.4 liter four cylinder engine. Diesels would also be offered in similar displacements, as would hybrid- and flex-fuel drivetrains.

Beta platform:

Auburn-

This would be my company's bread-and-butter model range- it would be offered across the globe and available in both hybrid and conventional drivetrains. These cars would be at the heart of the global market- around the size of a Corolla or Civic. Due to low manufacturing costs and a highly flexible manufacturing system, this car would be offered in a total of 12 bodystyles: 4 door sedan
5-door hatchback
3-door hatchback
2-door coupe
coupe-cabriolet
5-door wagon
soft-roader SUV
microvan
extended length microvan
mini-truck
two-seat roadster
kammback two-door wagon.

Several models would be offered in fleet derivatives under another name (possibly Cord) so as to avoid sullying Auburn's reputation. Engines would range from a fuel-sipping 1.2liter four cylinder with about 85hp to a 240+hp 2.3 liter four-banger. Also, due to certain regional differences in tastes, trimlines available for each model would vary based on region of sale (hatchbacks and microvans would have a plethora of trim-lines and engine choices in Europe, while the Sedan and coupe would have more options in North America). Diesel, hybrid, and flex-fuel options would of course be offered in all markets.

Gamma platform:

Auburn. This is the largest platform in the Aubrun lineup. These models would tend to be focused more towards the US, Canada, South Africa, and Australia- typical customers for large cars. This platform would feature all-wheel drive across the range as both a safety and handling feature. Engines would range from a large-displacement four-cylinder (~2.5 liters) to a small V-8 (~3.5 liters). The most common engine in this platform would most likely be an I-6 (used instead of a V-6 for better balance and smoothness of powertrain) of around 3 liters. Size-wise, these cars would be on the large-side of the US midsize market (or Aussie full-size market). The Gamma platform would come in seven bodystyles:

Sedan
Sports Coupe
Speedster (think budget XLR or SC430)
“Estate Wagon”- a station wagon with a raised roof and seating height, and an oversized moonroof.
Minivan
“Vista Wagon”- minivan more in the flavor of the Renault Espace- smaller than the conventional minivan, with fewer seats, but more luxurious accomodations.
Soft-Roader SUV- more rugged than the Estate Wagon, but similar in execution.

In addition, my company would also offer certain models in this range to fleet sales under our fleet channel.


J Platform:

Duesenberg Models:

This platform would host the “Junior” Duesenberg models- similar in size to the 3- and 1-series BMWS. This platform would feature a rear-biased all-wheel drive and engines ranging in size from 1.8 liter four cylinders to the previously mentioned 3.5 liter V-8. In addition diesel, flex-fuel and hybrid options would also exist. Although these cars would be capable for blistering performance, the ultimate emphasis is on a luxurious ride, and an interior ambience that guarantees the utmost isolation from the outside world. The J platform would come in the following bodystyles:

3-door “fastback”
5-door hatchback
5-door wagon
4-door sedan
2-door coupe
2-door hardtop convertible
Soft-roader SUV


SJ Platform:

Duesenberg Models:

This platform would host the “Senior” Duesenberg line-up. Once again, these cars would combine remarkable performance cpabilities with sumptious interiors. Although designed as rear-drive platforms, all-wheel drive would be available across the line-up. This platform would also come in an extended “SSJ” wheelbase that would serve under the largest and most luxurious models. Engines would range from a 3.0l I-6 to a 5.0 liter supercharged V-12. These models would be available:

Sedan
Coupe
Coupe/Cabriolet
Wagon
“Vista Wagon”
SUV

SSJ Sedan
SSJ Grand Touring Coupe
SSJ Grand Touring Coupe/Cabriolet
SSJ SUV

[justin]

Well I guess I weigh in now.

I had thought awhile back for Mercury to have a lineup of cheap performance cars, but to keep costs down options are down too.

2 sedans made, both off the same RWD platform, but distinctly different in size. The smaller one is 6-cylinder powered, and for fantasy's sake let's say it's a straight 6. It would make in the range of 250 hp, the larger sedan has a standard V8 at about 300hp. Both come only with a tiptronic style transmission. Only a few colors would be available: Black, Silver, Bright Red, Royal Blue. The only interior available is grey leather. No wood trim available; only aluminum look. Sunroof and alloy wheels are standard. There would be no factory options. I'd envision them selling at $23,000 for the smaller I6 sedan and $28,000 for the bigger car with the V8.

The idea is to keep configurations to a minimum so that costs are kept down, too.

The problem is that someone in effect took this idea and went with it, namely daimler chrysler in the dodge charger. The problem is that looks-wise, inside and out, the charger does very little for me. It's particularly crappy inside.

[calypsocoral]

I'm glad to see we have some excellent answers, so far. I especially like the resurrection of Studebaker, Packard, Deusenberg, and Auburn!

I got my company name from watching football, keeping in mind that the NFL is divided into the AFC and NFC. So, I figured, if we already had an American Motor Company, why can't we have a National Motor Company? I think it has that generic ring to it, like "General Motors", for example...

NMC, as it will likely be referred in shorthand, will start out with motor development. I find it pointless to have a pretty exterior and a good chassis if the car doesn't have the guts to back it up.

The first engine program will concentrate on 4-cylinder motors ranging in displacement from 2.0L to 2.4L and will be DOHC. Aluminum block and Magnesium heads would be the most likely materials configuration. They would feature direct-injection, for a compression ratio north of 10:1, and utilize variable valve timing and lift on both cams, similar to BMW's Dual-VANOS and Valvetronic systems. Adding an extra cylinder would increase the displacement to 3.0L, and would likely serve as an entry-level powerplant for midsize cars and trucks. A 3.0L to 3.6L inline-6 may be considered for longitudinally-mounted truck or RWD car applications. Turbocharging would be a substantial consideration in this motor's engineering.

The second engine program would be a range of 60-degree V6's and V8's, designed for a transverse mount in FWD and AWD applications. Standard V6 displacement would likely be around 3.5L, making it a contender against the Nissan VQ and Toyota's new V6. Space would be a major issue, as the V8's in this family may have to fit transversely in some potential cars. If demand exists for a more compact V6, a 30-degree program may be considered, seeing as how VW's VR6 is only 15-degrees...

The third and final engine program would be an architecture for 90-degree V8's and V12's (the 90-degree cylinder angle would be great for aiding in the cancelling of vibrations, should a V10 be considered). Having a wide cylinder angle would prevent this motor from being mounted transversely, so it would have to be reserved for RWD, longitudinal-mount applications. These engines would likely be aluminum-magnesium alloy, like BMW's N52 program to save weight.

I'll comment more on this thread later. In the meantime, I gotta get to bed.

[calypsocoral]

Originally Posted by calypsocoral

NMC, as it will likely be referred in shorthand, will start out with motor development. I find it pointless to have a pretty exterior and a good chassis if the car doesn't have the guts to back it up.

Since I went into extensive detail on the motor developments, I'd like to go into some detail on chassis developments as well.

The first chassis architecture -- Digamma -- will feature MacPherson struts in front, with a multi-link rear suspension. This platform would be used for compacts and "global" midsize cars (think Acura TSX and Mazda6). This architecture is FWD/AWD, with a transverse engine mount.

Digamma cars:

- A compact with 3-door and 5-door "Euro-hatch" (think Ford Focus and VW Golf) configurations. Unique configurations may include a 3-door hatch-coupe (think Scion tC) or 5-door fastback (think Mazda6 5-door, but a touch more sedan-like in appearance). Drivetrain will be FWD with AWD as an option. Engine options will likely include a peppy 4-cyl of a total displacement around 2.0L, making 150 horses. Step-up engines may include a 2.4L rated at 180 horses, and a 200+ horsepower turbo-charged 2.2L i-4. Names like "Pacer" and "Gremlin" are being considered.

- A "global" midsize car available in Coupe, Cabriolet, Sedan, or Avant configurations. Again, FWD would be standard, with AWD as an option. Engine options could include a 2.8L i-5, rated just below 200hp, as the base engine, which can also be turbo-charged to 250+ horses.


The second chassis architecture -- Koppa -- will feature a double-wishbone front with multilink rear. This platform would be used for American midsize cars (Accord, Camry) and full-size cars (Toyota Avalon, Buick Lucerne). This architecture is also FWD/AWD with a transverse engine mount.

Koppa cars:

- An American midsize car, definitely available as a sedan, but could also spawn a crossover/tall wagon, as per Nissan Murano or Subaru Tribeca. Engine choices may include the 2.8L five, but the bulk of these cars will probably sell with a 3.1L V6, putting out more than 230 horses.

- A full-size car, probably sedan-only. Base engine will be the 3.1L V6, but can also step up to something like 3.7L, pumping out over 280 horses. The top-tier motor in this car will be a 60-degree V8, likely 4.2 liters, pounding out 320 horses.


The third chassis architecture -- Vau -- will feature a 4-link front suspension, with upper and lower control arms, with a 5-link rear suspension. This platform will underpin sportscars and luxury performance cars. This platform will be primarily RWD, but can be adapted for AWD. Engine mount is longitudinal.

Vau cars:

- 2+2 Grand Tourer. Fast and agile, with the 3.1L V6 as standard equipment. The 3.7L V6 will be optional, as will be a 90-degree V8 with a displacement in the upper-four's. The V6 versions will be called the "NMX", whereas the V8 version will be called "Javelin"!

- Full-size performance sedan with same powertrain options as the GT, but will also likely include a V8 with a displacement in the mid-five's, which will be released as special editions in the GT.

- May consider a "ute", throwing back to the days of the Ranchero and El Camino.


The final platform -- Sampi -- will be a body-on-frame, mid-sized truck platform, as per Tacoma and Frontier. Powertrains will be horizontally-mounted, with RWD or 4WD drivetrains. This will serve as a mid-sized pickup truck, and will also likely spawn a mid-sized SUV. I won't even bother with full-size trucks and SUV's, because that market will soon be impossible to break into. The base powertrain will likely be a version of the 3.7L, stroked to 3.9L, with a 90-degree V8 option.

[Doohickie]

"Studebaker:
Lark- small economy car like the Chevy Aveo"

I'd buy that. As it is, I'm in the market right now for a small hatchback to replace a recently sold Ford Aspire. Something just a bit bigger would be nice, with 5 doors and a stable yet smooth ride. (The xA is stable, but WAY too stiff for this forty-something guy, and the Aveo is smooth but feels like it's mounted on rubber bands, especially in corners.)

The closest I've found is the 2006 Kia Rio, but the 5-door isn't available in my area yet and no incentives will be offered for a while. I'll probably go for a Hyundai Elantra hatch or Kia Spectra5.

But enough about reality-- back to the thread subject. One thing I've noticed while traveling in Europe is that small cars are superior to their American counterparts in several ways:

- Quieter, and what noise you hear from the engine has a sweeter note.
- Ride better without feeling harsh
- Fitted better on the inside with higher quality materials.

If I were the multi-billionaire wanting to start a new car company, I would emulate these traits, creating premium subcompact and compact segments. Right now I think the Mazda3 and 06 Kia Rio, and oddly, the Daewoos sold as Suzukis in the States, are the best examples I've seen lately.

I think this was Daewoo's strategy prior to bankruptcy; their new products, sold mostly as Suzukis (Reno, Forenza and Verona) continue this. I love the Reno to death except for two things: the corporate situation (coming out of bankruptcy and selling through a dealer network with a different name), and the gas mileage (22/30 for the Reno is about 4-5 mpg too low for a car with less power than virtually all its competition). But the selling price, interior fit and finish, Euro-style ride and sound quality, feature content and overall styling make it hard to turn away.

[Madman]

I have refined my plans for the Studebaker car line and now have more details as to what most of the models will be like.

Small Platform:
This would be a transverse engined, front-drive platform for the smaller Studebakers. My plans for these cars includes exports to Europe and other international markets. As a result, quality and refinement MUST be top-notch so as to compete with the best small European cars. The currently weak dollar would guarantee profitability for a US-built car made up to European standards. There would be two versions of this platform; a short wheelbase variant for a small B segment (VW Polo/Chevy Aveo/Renault Clio) hatchback and a long wheelbase variant for a C segment (Ford Focus/Opel Astra/Honda Civic) Hatchback, Sedan and Wagon. Engines and powertrains would be bought in from outside suppliers but the rest of the car will be built in-house. Engine/drivetrain combinations must already be EPA certified so as to avoid the costly certification process.

Short Wheelbase:
Lark- 3 door and 5 door hatchback and possibly a cabrio version of same. Mini Cooper will be used as a benchmark for quality and refinement.

Lark GLS- 115 horsepower 1.6 litre (from Mini Cooper), 5 speed manual or 5 speed manu-matic.
Lark GLX- 150 horsepower 1.8 litre Turbo (from VW Beetle), 5 speed manual or 6 speed manu-matic.
Lark TDI- 100 horsepower 1.9 litre Turbodiesel (also VW-sourced), 5 speed manual or 6 speed manu-matic.

Daytona- Small 2 seat sports roadster built on lark floorpan. Can be either front engine/front drive (like Fiat Barchetta) or transplant the drivetrain over the rear wheels to make it mid-engine/rear drive (like MGF/MGTF).

Daytona Roadster- 150 horsepower 1.8 litre turbo, 5 speed manual or 6 speed manumatic.

Long Wheelbase:
Champion- 3 door hatchback, 5 door hatchback, 4 door sedan, 5 door wagon and possibly a cabriolet. Will do battle with VW Golf/Jetta, Honda Civic, Opel Astra, Peugeot 307, Ford Focus and Renault Megane.

Champion GLS- 115 horsepower 1.6 litre, 5 speed manual or 5 speed manu-matic.
Champion GLX- 150 horsepower 1.8 litre Turbo, 5 speed manual or 6 speed manu-matic.
Champion GLX-R (hatchback models only) 180 horsepower 1.8 litre turbo or 197 horsepower 2.0 litre Turbo? (from new Audi A3) This would be the performance variant of the Champion.
Champion TDI- 100 horsepower 1.9 litre turbodiesel.

Avanti- 4 seat sports coupe/convertible built on long Champion platform. Styling based on original 1963 Avanti but not too retro. Mitsu Eclipse drivers are the target demographic.

Avanti R1- 180 horsepower 1.8 litre turbo or 197 horsepower 2.0 turbo?
Avanti R2- 250 horsepower 3.2 litre V6 (from Audi TT), 6 speed paddleshift transmission.

Starburst- High-roof 5 door MPV (similar to Renault Scenic/Opel Zafira). A sort of mini-minivan. Will resemble a tall Champion wagon but be different enough to be a unique model in it's own right. Will have lots of clever storage options and will feature versitile seating and cargo combinations. Will have 5 full size seats plus two smaller jump seats for children in the third row.

Starburst GLS, GLX and TDI- same drivetrains as equivlent Champion.


Large Platform:
Studebaker's large car platform will form the basis for a mid-sized sedan/wagon and an upper-medium/large sedan as a flagship model. This platform will utilize a longitudal engine and will be offered with front drive or an optional all-wheel-drive system. This platform can also be easily converted to rear drive for the entry-level Packard models. Like the small car platform, the large car platform will also come in short and long wheelbase configureations.

Short Wheelbase:
Hawk- 4 door sedan and 5 door wagon will go after the huge mid-sized mass market. Ford Fusion and Chevy Malibu (in the US) and Ford Mondeo and Opel Vectra (in overseas markets) will be the primary competition.

Hawk GLS, GLS AWD- 200 horsepower 2.0 litre turbo (from Audi A4), 6 speed manual or 6 speed manu-matic.

Hawk GLX, GLX AWD- 255 horsepower 3.1 litre V6 (from Audi A4), 6 speed manual or 6 speed manu-matic.

Hawk TDI- 134 horsepower, 247 lbs.ft. torque, 2.0 litre Turbodiesel (from VW Passat), 5 speed manu-matic.

Long Wheelbase:
President- 4 door sedan to rival the Ford Five Hundred and Toyota Avalon. This will be Studebaker's top of the range, semi-luxury model.

President GLS, GLS AWD, GLX, GLX AWD and TDI- same as Hawk.

Starlight- Minivan built on President base will challange Chrysler Minivans, Honda Odyssey and Toyota Sienna. Will rival Renault Espace, Peugeot 807 and VW Sharan overseas.

Starlight GLS, GLS AWD, GLX, GLX AWD and TDI- same as Hawk and President.

Speedster- Large coupe and convertible built on President/Starlight platform. Toyota Solara and Chevy Monte Carlo are likely challengers.

Speedster GLS, GLX- same as Hawk, President and Starlight.


This covers the entire Studebaker car line. Trucks, large vans and SUVs to come later, when I feel like typing some more. (note: It may be a while!)
Packard luxury cars and Pierce-Arrow ultra luxury cars also to come later.

As you may have noticed, I have tried to use classic Studebaker model names in their orignal context (Lark on a compact, President on the top model) wherever possible. Other names I have had to reassign to totally different types of cars (Starlight on the minivan, for example) that didn't exist prior to Studebaker abandoning car manufacturing in March 1966. Despite wanting to revive all these glorious names from the past, I do not want these cars to slavishly ape the retro themes so common on many of today's cars. The modern-day Studebakers should be throughly modern and up-to-the-minute. I do like the Mercedes-Benz infuenced grilles of the early 1960s Studebakers (this was no accedent, Studebaker-Packard Corp. was the US distributor for Mercedes-Benz) and think this theme would be appropriate for the reborn Studebakers, too.

Whew- I think I've had enough of typing now.

Madman of the People