Brooks Stevens’s rejection of brand continuity was bad for small automakers

1964 Studebaker Challenger

Brooks Stevens was a complicated character. For example, he championed ultra-simple car designs but also coined the term “planned obsolescence” to describe an industrial designer’s mission (Adamson, 2003; p. 129). One way that played out was his repeated advocacy of ditching established nameplates.

According to Richard M. Langworth, Stevens stated that, “I convinced (Studebaker) management to de-emphasize the Lark term which had its own connotations, just as I finally got Roy Chapin to dump Rambler for AMC cars, when we were involved with them on the Hornet and Gremlin” (1979, 1993; p. 150).

This strategy might have worked okay with a Big Three automaker, which had significant resources to build public recognition of a new nameplate. That wasn’t the case with tiny Studebaker or American Motors.

1970 AMC Hornet
1970 AMC Hornet (Old Car Brochures)

To make matters worse, the Lark and Rambler had been among the most successful nameplates that their respective automakers had ever fielded. All of the effort that had been invested in building the recognition of those names was flushed down the toilet — and to what end?

Is it a coincidence that the Lark’s replacement, the Challenger, sold much more poorly despite fresh new styling by Stevens? One could blame weak sales of higher-priced models because they competed with General Motors’ new mid-sized cars, but Studebaker’s bottom-end entries competed more closely with compacts. For 1964, the Challenger had more new sheetmetal than most of its competition.

Also see ‘1964 Studebaker: Brooks Stevens hammered final nail in the coffin’

By the same token, when the Hornet replaced the Rambler in 1970, output only increased by 3.6 percent despite all-new styling and a recession that resulted in soaring sales of other compacts such as the Ford Maverick and Plymouth Duster.

All of this is not to suggest that name changes were the sole reason for sales not reaching expectations. However, it arguably didn’t help. That proved to be particularly problematic for Studebaker, which desperately needed an uptick in sales to stay in the automobile business.

Share your reactions to this post with a comment below or a note to the editor.


RE:SOURCES

ADVERTISEMENTS & BROCHURES:

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*