"Considered by Application"

Only cars built up to and including 1948 would be considered as it is now. I don't really see this changing. It used to be 1942, this is basically a prewar club. some 46-48 cars were later let in due to the fact that they are basically identical to 41-42 cars. Being a european car collector, it seems to me it took the manufacturers over there a bit longer to recover, for obvious reasons. There are jags, alfas, Rolls, and probably your riley, that didnt get substantially redesigned until the early 50's, but there doesn't seem to be much support in our club to expand the list any further toward the present.

The Milestone Car Society would probably recognise your car as a milestone car. I used to be a memeber and may have their apporved list laying around somewhere. They are kinda small these days, but I think their time may have come here, and with some new input it could be a really great club. they honor post war cars that like the CCCA were fine or unusual.

Shawn Miller

Indiana Region

Hi, John:

I am vaguely familiar with Rileys, so I can certainly understand why you are proud of your car. Its essence has many, if not most of the quality attributes that we look for in determining whether a car is a true "classic".

I certainly can't speak for other members or the CCCA itself, but my personal impression is that us "hard liners" represent the overwhelming majority of the Club, which is fiercly opposed to changing our focus. BUT, remember, we just recently permitted cars made BEFORE 1925 to come in, provided that they are IDENTICAL to cars that were previously accepted as "classics".

Using that logic, if I was on the Board, and if the pre-war version of your car was already on our "list of accepted CCCA classics, I would see no conflict with existing CCCA policy to "bring your car in". The YEAR your car was manufactured is apparently irrelevant so long as it complies with our over-all guidelines.

Problem is - I dont see any Rileys on our list. Why is that ? Now we get into the question of where our focus is. And this has caused heated discussion long before the ink dried on our first membership paperwork!

And of course that opens up a mine-field of contradictions - no question your car is a durn good one. But that is the problem. Being a good car, even an excellent high quality car, as yours certainly is, simply isnt enough to bring it within guidelines of this particular Club.

There is an excellent article in our recent club publication by member John Lee, explaining with some technical detail what we look for in deciding what cars are classic, and what cars are not. If you are interested, and cannot get a copy elsewhere ( THE BULLETIN OF THE CLASSIC CAR CLUB OF AMERICA - May 2002) contact me with your mailing address and I will "run off" a copy of his article and mail it to you ).

The 'bottom line' is, there is no "nice" or "politically correct" way to put this - our Club was formed to preserve and focus on the most expensive, most powerful luxury cars of a given era. Granted our "list of accepted classics" is a maze of contradictions, but the over-all theme is clear. Being a good car, even an EXCELLENT car such as yours, is not enough for our Club. Of course that sounds cruel and mean-spirited, but life isn't fair!

You mention that some Rileys MAY apply on an individual basis. My knowledge of our regs. is not current, so you may well be correct. IF that is correct, AND you can establish your car is virtually IDENTICAL to previously accepted PRE-war Rielys (again, applying the same language to our recent rule change allowing pre-1925 cars to be considered), I can't see the logic in objecting to your car coming in ( even tho I personally disapprove and will scream and yell and turn blue if they let you in ! ).

Be assured that ownership of a classic car is NOT necessary to enjoy our events if you would like to come. For some years we did require ownership of a classic to participate in Club management - I do not know if this is still the case.

Remember, the word "classic" is now in wide use, anyone can and does use it anywhere....to describe just about anything. Although the "old bunch" such as myself, most definitely WILL smirk at you if you call your Riley a "classic", in the over-all scheme of things...who cares !

Pete Hartmann

PH,

Look again, RILEY [color:"red"]is on the CCCA list of approved vehicles. He asked IF his Riley qualified. Nor did you answer his question about "considered by application" which is clearly stated on the CCCA website.

Let a qualified person answer these questions. Your 10 paragraph diatribe didn't.

Peter

P.S. This is your last warning. Contribute positively to this forum or be banned.

I think I have to plead ?guilty? of an editing error on the Web Site. It?s true that Riley?s were on the list of CCCA Approved Classics on a ?Please Apply? basis. Last year in a housekeeping move, the Classification Committee removed several cars from the list because none had ever applied or been approved. It seems Riley was one of those marques, and I missed it when I last edited the Web version of the list. I apologize for any inconvenience that has caused anyone.

For whatever reason, there are no Rileys listed in the CCCA Roster. Perhaps nobody ever applied. This doesn?t mean that CCCA wouldn?t ever consider one if it is of the appropriate year to fit into the Club?s guidelines. This would be especially true if the car sported custom coachwork, built by a recognized coachbuilder.

Mr Gariepy:

I am unclear how you feel my response to this fellow's inquiry was hostile in any way, in any way fell below accepted standards for communicating over the public telephone system, or in any way mis-stated CLASSIC CAR CLUB OF AMERICA policy. If you do, I will be pleased to discuss it with you.

Please immediately cease and desist in your defamatory and threatening posts. You are welcome to challenge any CCCA member as to issues relating Club policy, but your personal threats and attacks on me shall stop now.

I suggest you make "print-outs" of our respective posts, and review them with counsel, before responding, or taking any action prejudicial to my right to communicate with fellow car buffs in this site. Do not under-estimate my determination, or resources, to insure this site remains open to all who have a serious interest in the Classic Car CLub of America, and who are willing to confine their remarks to some minimal acceptable standard of communication.

Peter F. Hartmann

PO Box 148

Paulden, Az 86334

Mr. Hartmann,

I'll do exactly that.

You no doubt will recall you?ve been banned before for the same activity. My position is very clear. Feel free to read the rules of this forum for details.

http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/newuser.php?Cat=

Peter M. Gariepy

AACA Webmaster

440 N. Placita Mira

Tucson,AZ 85712

520-991-7940 cell

520-881-8101 office

Thats it Peter, you were warned.

Everyone wave goodbye to Peter.

Back to this thread. Even though Rileys are on the please apply list, i think that no cars have been accepted that were built after 1948. I know some foreign car collectors have questioned this for the rerason I stated above, but i was unaware that the "virtually identical" rule had been applied to any post 48 cars?

Am I right? Jon?

Shawn Miller

Indiana Region

According to a recent CCCA Bulletin, the classification committee specificially rejected a "virtually identical" standard for post 1948 cars. Such a standard was apparently proposed and rejected.

Why look forward when you can always look back?

Bill

Albuquerque, NM

I can understand why. It seems like a big can of worms to open, and many other organizations use 48 as a cut off for certain things. I think you cant run a post 48 car in the newport hillclimb, and a hotrod buddy of mine has told me that real hotrods were made prior to 48!

Think about it. this club was formed in 52. what if we suddenly have 52 Alfa 6c2500's in the club. they would have been NEW CARS when the club was formed! HA! as it is 48's, would have just been another used car in 1952!

shawn miller

I know a guy who had a couple of 1949 Alfa Romeos which are "virtully identical" to 1947 & 1948 models and had them listed w/ the CCCA as 1948's. I also know of a couple 1923 - 1924 Model A Duesenbergs that were listed as 1925's in the Directory. A couple of the Duesenbergs were even Senior cars. I wonder if now the owners of the Duesenbergs will list their cars with the proper year since they are allowed in now.

Thanks for the opportunity to step onto my soapbox as the Chairman of the Classification Committee. The Riley is an interesting "Case" for the Classification Committee. As Chuck mentioned, Riley was listed as an "Applications Considered" make until this past year. There was at least one Riley approved, back in 1966. This was an MPH model with a Bertelli body. Other applications for Riley have been submitted but not approved. Riley would be considered with Custom Coachwork, but the past actions of the Committee indicate that a factory bodied car would not gain approval.

Now to the Actual car in question. The post-war Riley was quite different from the pre war models with hydraulic brakes, independent front suspension and a totally redesigned body. The engine, however, remained pretty much as the pre war car. The 1948 date is the equivalent of our recently instituted "Virtually Identical" pre-1925 acceptance program. As stated in a policy statement of September 9, 1986, "Classic status for post-World War II cars up to and including 1948 models will be considered for cars that are representative of the pre-war Classic era." This has been officialy interpreted as meaning that a post war car must have a direct pre-war antecedent to qualify for Classic status. Therefore a new post-war design, even a very nice and significant one, does not fit the designation of Classic by CCCA published guidelines.

One more note concerning the pre-1925 program. It is designated as "Virtually Identical to 1925 Full Classics." Virtually, meaning "Nearly" or "Almost", realizes that there are going to be some small changes year to year, but there must be no major alterations.

Thanks.

Jon Lee

The wording in Club By-Laws, Article 1, Name and Purpose is "...fine or unusual foreign or domestic motor cars built between and including the years 1925 and 1948, but including cars built before 1925 that are virtually identical to 1925 Full Classics..." With the definition of "Virtually" being nearly or almost, some models are very easy to determine. The Cadillac V-63 and 1st Series 8 cylinder Packard began production in 1923 and continued into 1925 without even a serial number break.

Other Series that have been approved include Duesenberg Model A and Wills Ste Claire, both beginning in 1921. Other Series being considered include Pierce-Arrow Model 33 and Springfield Built Rolls-Royce, Hispano-Suiza H6 and Isotta-Fraschini Tipo 8.

Others are not so clear cut. An anomaly is the Locomobile Model 48, of which two 1917 cars have recently been approved. Locomobile possesed a very advanced chassis design right after WWI and then left it pretty much alone through the end in 1929.

The Committee has determined that no one single feature, if not a major design change such as 8 cylinders vs. 6, would determine Virtual Identical status. Consequently there will be cars approved with two wheel brakes, just as there are 1925 and newer cars with two wheel brakes, or high pressure tires instead of Balloon. The standard will be the 1925 Model of the car in question, so, regardless of the fact that it is a magnificent car, an early twenties Packard Twin-Six cannot qualify, as there was no 1925 model with which to compare. The Committee is still learning and doing the best to avoid mistakes.

This program should add some very interesting cars to our Grand Classics and CARavans. On the "O Canada" CARavan in September, Jim Kaufmann drove his 1922 Duesenberg Model A Fleetwood bodied coupe. It was a very popular car on the tour.

I hope this answers some of your questions.

Jon Lee

John:

I am confused as to when my question to you was interferred with, so permit me to propose it again.

I am puzzled by your statement that the Committe's determination is that 'virtual' means "ALMOST" or "NEARLY" and not "exactly".

So that we may better understand the Board's decisions ( for those of us who are not familar with the CCCA, our National Board is the final authority for what constitutes a classic car, after acting on recommendatons from a COMMITTE set up for that purpose ) can you give us some examples of "nearly" ?

For example, does that mean a pre 1925 car can have different headlight shells? Different bumpers, if so equipped ? Different braking systems ? What SPECIFIC technical features that are DIFFERENT, have been approved ?

Obvously, you can tell from the tone of my inquiry, that it was my own understanding that this whole thing got approved on the belief that 'VIRTUALLY IDENTICAL' meant just that. Apparently, my impression is in error.

Can you clear up my confusion, with some specific examples of pre 1925 car technical features that were "almost", but still approved for classic status by the Board ?

My handy-dandy Oxford Dictionary, Tenth Edition defines Virtual, the adjective, as: ":almost or nearly as described, but not completely or according to strict definition." Virtually, the adverb is defined as: "nearly; almost." That is the guideline the Committee has used.

You are correct in the statement that the Committee Recommends to the National Board. In the matter of a Series the recommendation is published in the Buletin for comments from the general membership. Individual applications can be approved or disapproved by the Board.

Some of the differences that the Committee has considered acceptable have been two wheel brakes vs four wheel brakes, changes in brands of components (Locomobile changed from, I think, Lovejoy to Delco shocks about 1922), High pressure tires vs Balloon. Minor changes in body or fender design would likely be considered acceptable, such as the change from Beaded edge to crowned fenders on Lincolns in 1924/25. Bumpers have not been considered because many manufacturers did not offer them as standard equipment by 1925 and there were so many accessory items readily available.

The intent is to include cars that are virtually (again) the same as those already accepted. Again using Locomobile as the example, if we were to park the recently accepted 1917 Locomobile Model 48 of John McAlpin alongside the 1920 Locomobile Model 48 of Bob Joynt and drive alongside with the 1925 Locomobile Model 48 that Peter Saccocio just sold, one would be hard-pressed to say one was newer or older than the next. Yet, if we do the same thing with Charlie Wallace's 1918 Packard Twin Six and Gene Grengs 24 Packard Single 8, the differences are obvious and many.

The Committee is currently trying to pick out some of the "easier" series of cars, to gain experience and encourage the inclusion of these cars that are so similar to those already in the club. Of course there is another side benefit to all of this. We have already seen a couple of cars that have been listed in the Club Roster for some years, come out of the closet to be identified as what they correctly are! Ah! yes, the truth shall set you free!

Jon Lee