DB #0025 - 1963 Studebaker Westinghouse Pickup Concept

[bubenator]

What is it?  Who built it?
Any ideas?

[bubenator]

Experts!

[kwgibbs]

Is this a prototype truck by studebaker?

[bubenator]

Studebaker did have something to do with it.
What else can you tell me?

[kwgibbs]

I believe it was a proposal by westinghouse,1963

[mymokke]

It was built by Studebaker for Westinghouse after the president of Westinghouse approached Studebaker in 1963 to manufacture Westinghouse Appliance delivery fleet vehicles in both pick-up and van format. Original styling by Randall Faurot head of Studebaker design, the prototype was built under Gene Hardig's direction using even simpler flat panels than Faurot's design drawings. The Studebaker museum lists it as Model X - Westinghouse, the last Studebaker pick-up all new for 1967.

[kwgibbs]

Its to  bad it never went further,I thought it was rather an interesting truck.

[Zerk]

Its to  bad it never went further,I thought it was rather an interesting truck.

The Jeep VIASA SV-450 is remarkably similar.

[kwgibbs]

I agree, ever since I became a member,I think autopuzzles is extremely interesting,people certainly learn alot,I have!

[Zerk]

Absolutely! It's all I can do to keep from being constantly sidetracked from research needed to solve the puzzles. The internet is a fascinating place again, seen through the lens of AP

[bubenator]

Yes, this is the 1963 Studebaker-Westinghouse Pickup Concept.
I'm feeling generous today, so I'll award both kwgibbs a point for being first and mymokke a point for providing the details.

I'd have to imagine that a truck like this wouldn't do so well in production.  Driveability would be tough with so many flat exterior surfaces.  Corrosion resistance would be awful with so many flat sheetmetal panels in the pre-galvanized era.  Power would be poor with so much wind resistance to forward motion - completely negating the benefits of the concept model's Stude 289 V8.  I don't think many fleets would even have bothered when this was compared to the standard trucks that the other automakers were offering.

[Carnut]

Power would be poor with so much wind resistance to forward motion - completely negating the benefits of the concept model's Stude 289 V8. 

Yes; its designer seems to have had a basic lack of understanding of aerodynamics...

[mymokke]

Faurot's first design drawings were better stylized as shown below.
Remember, this was conceived as an around town delivery/service vehicle for Westinghouse appliances NOT a high speed over the road transport. Power would have been sufficient to do the job.

[bubenator]

Power would be poor with so much wind resistance to forward motion - completely negating the benefits of the concept model's Stude 289 V8. 

Yes; its designer seems to have had a basic lack of understanding of aerodynamics...

To Studebaker's credit, two things to bear in mind:

First, remember though, even the greatest Formula 1 cars of the time didn't give much of a nod to aerodynamics.  Any 'aerodynamic' styling of the day generally resulted in making edges look rounded and windswept - in other words, making things 'look' fast.  While the styling thought processes of the day may have helped things somewhat, the effect was inadvertant at best. 

We now know that the rounded egg shapes of 1950's and 1960's Formula and LeMans cars were actually detrimental to their performance at speed.  The Alfa Disco Volante was a classic case in point in that the prototypes tended to lift off the ground at high speeds.  The 1968 Dodge Charger was redesigned with the flying buttress C-pillars, intending to be dominating on the NASCAR tracks of the day.  In reality, the channeled backlight resulted in a vacuum at the base of the trunklid, causing the cars to feel very unsettled at high speeds.  By 1969 Dodge had engineered the Charger 500 to combat those problems - by getting rid of the recessed window entirely.

Second, by late 1963, Studebaker's finances were absolutely dire.  The chief stylist, Randall Faurot, had long succeeded at making something interesting while reducing manufacturing costs at the same time.  Just a month after this design was put together, Studebaker packed up what was left of its operation and moved to Canada.  Studebaker likely felt that producing a utility cost with minimal costs could be their best bet at filling capacity at their under-utilized military truck plant.  One is left to wonder what would have happened to Studebaker if this had actually gone into production.