Re: scuff plates '49 - 2 dr

Posted by Fish'n Jim On 2013/11/3 10:15:08

That's why I like to work from drawings/specifications not hearsay. Eliminates alot of confusion. I'm feeling I'm at the 23 series learning curve spot where I need Schaum's outline for Packard restoration and Packard restoration for Dummies!
I posted a separate correction on the removal. A second or third look is often telling. Our brains fill in the spaces.
I can only go from what the Studebaker archivist said on the phone about the P/Ns.
I was sure I was on the right track because the SS trim drawing (copy in my possession) shows the 396540's assembly numbers which are in the '54 parts list. Technically, if it's a separate unrelated part it would not be listed or referenced on/to the assembly drawing. Neither PAC nor Studebaker could find the right drawings under that P/N? (but it's on the drawing?) So I hope I get the "right" drawings this week. Or they'll be another correction post. I'll get it right. Keeping quiet til then on this...
Again shows the value of this site but also the pitfalls of too many views. My first hunch, put roll rubber on it is still looking good.