Topper car and Cord Beverly/Westchester

Gearboy: I hate to rain on your parade as far your statements go about the second generation Cords. Having read the Malks book twice there is is never any references to the Cords being named after Beverly Hills or Westchester County. From what i have been able to piece together the names originated from the style of interiors that came in both models, that orginated from two Duesys built by Murphy in LA one of which was built for Buehrig. In no way was the was the second generation Cord merly a front wheel drive Auburn. While people here consider the Cord as being an advanced car for its time in two areas styling and engineering. The first one styling is certainly true, however not on the second point of engineering. The second generation Cords drive train layout aped a little French built car called the Citroen Traction Avant which was introduced the French masses in 1934 and built until 1957

Murphy bodied a third of all Duesenbergs. E. L. Cord continued an existing A-C-D name. Beverly and Westchester in either car was intended to conjure images of posh Beverly Hills and Westchester County wealth. This isn't rocket science, whether or not it's examined in the latest book. Anyone with an understanding of US business history, marketing, the tone and tenor of the times gets this. But since you can't find a documented quote from E. L. Cord, if it makes you happy, believe that automobiles intended for the few rich folk left in 1930s America were named for some mystery woman (Oliver Stone Conspiracy Syndrome) and what, a horse named Westchester?

The wealthy executive, playboy or daughter of trust funds seeing an ad for a novel new automobile in 1936 couldn't care less whether some previous A-C-D product had a body style of the same name.

A sad trend in vintage cardom these past 20 or so years; the hobby's increasingly populated by fellows with decreasing knowledge of the culture, history, sociology, literature, art of our cars' times. They can tell you to the last lock washer HOW some car was built, but not WHY.

Of course the 1936-37 Cord was a front-drive Auburn. It used a Lycoming engine, was built in the Auburn factory, by Auburn employees using Auburn tools. A name is just that. The blown '37 Cord even used the same Switzer-Cummins supercharger as the blown 1935-36 Auburn 851-852. The Cord's electro-pneumatic shift was a four-speed version of the Bendix unit used in the '35 Hudsons, where it was called "Electric Hand," and came with a shift lever clipped to the kick panel, just in case.

None of this disparages the 1936-37 Cord, but let's skip the clubbie reverence and see the cars as what they were, underfunded Depression-era, more rationally sized sub-luxury cars. Properly rebuilt and upgraded, they're good, very long-legged (for the times) road cars, but don't kid yourself they're in the Duesenberg/Packard/Pierce-Arrow/Marmon 16-quality class.

Why are you so quick to assume being a front-drive Auburn is a bad thing? Auburns were good, perhaps a notch above a Buick or Hudson, other than the high-quality Auburn 12, which was probably the best buy in auto history for the buck.

I have several friends with Cords. Have driven and worked on them. I like them; they're a nice, manageable size, with snug but roomy cockpits even for tall folks. But a little perspective helps. Even E. L. Cord moved on. Once, in 1955, some rabid car buff stopped him coming out of an office building in LA to show him a rebuilt (no one "restored" cars back then) '37 Cord. Cord glanced at it, asked, "So what?" and walked quickly away.

Isn't it possible to enjoy industrial artifacts without the reverential bowing and scraping, let alone elevating them above and beyond their original intent? Please, spare me the "gotchas." They're just cars, built to return a profit in their day, never intended to be rebuilt, driven and argued over 60, 70 years later.

The best way to enjoy these old cars, and keep the HOBBY fresh, is drive them occasionally, and see them in perspective, without blinders or through rose-colored glasses. [color:\\"black\\"]

Gearboy:Let me ask you one question do you know who Josh Malks is? I think that maybe you should bone up on your automtive history. First of all Murphy didn't body a third of the Duesenbergs as you have stated they bodied about half of the Duesenberg, which would put the number around 240 units.

If we go by what you say about the Cords being front-drive Auburns then they are cartainly not in the same quality or class as the Marmon 16's or the Classic Packards. The Cords where of a poor build quality having many problems inclding the transmision, front ujoints, overheating engines, just to list a few. The 810 and 812 series Cords didn't even have as good a build quality as the Classic Auburns. Packard built better quality cars than Auburn ever built. So don't try feeding me the BS that the Cord 810 and 812 are in the class as the Classic Packards and the mighty Marmon V16's.

Gearboy,

Thank you for the information on the Topper Car. I have found two photographs of the car while used by the "General Petroleum" Company for a promotional tour. Knowing the chassis used is very helpful.

As for the other debate concerning the Cord/Auburn. 1st point, Murphy bodied 125 of the approximately 480 Duesenbergs made, which is closer to 1/3rd than half.

Although the Cords were built in Auburn Indiana, at the same facility as the Auburns, they were two distinct companies. Yes they both used Lycoming engines, but so did Duesenbereg. Reason being? E.L. Cord owned Lycoming as well. He was using the resourses at his disposal to produce all three automobiles. Which explains why Gordon Buehrig was used to design many of styles of the three car lines.

As for Cord being a front drive Auburn, I must disagree there as well, as the manufacturing process is completely different. The second generation Cord utilizing a Unibody style of construction, while the Auburn continued to use a conventional rail chassis with I-beam and leaf spring suspension.

Cord may have incorporated many engineering features used on other manufacturers products, but didn't everyone back than? (They still do today).

Cord may not have been of the overall quality of Packard, etc., but for the time and given the market circumstances of the era, E.L. did OK. Had the financial circumstances of the country been different in 1935,6,7, who knows what may have been for the A/C/D.

Just my opinion...

Kevin Marsh

OlChev: I am sorry if I quoted the wrong number of Duesys bodied by Murphy. I though I had read a figure of over 200 hundred. If am wrong then I stand corrected. The second generation Cord and Auburns were built in Connersville. The operation was moved there in over a four month period in 1936. Cord purchased two complete cars that had front wheel drive before they built thier own version. A German Adler and the Citreon and studied these very carefully. My point in bringing up the Citreon was that every body makes out that the second gerneration Cord was such and engineering marvel and years ahead of its time, which to me is hogwash.

Lycoming Motors is located in my home town of Williamsport. This wasn't the only business that E.L. Cord owned in Williamsport the other being the Spencer Iron Works. This building is still standing today and doing business under another name, which I forget right now. The building is located on Maynard Street.

Cord 810/812 does rank as a bit of an engineering marvel, in the plain sense that it came about in such a short time, with really rather paltry funding from a company that was very much on the financial ropes.

Was it a high-quality luxo car? Not really, particularly when compared to the major classic marques of the era. Was it a highly reliable car? Not according to much of the literature of the era, even Josh Malks and others record this, as do many books and magazine articles. Much of this I chalk up to this car's having been rushed to production and market with little time and money available for proper testing and evaluation.

However, if one really looks at the Cord, then fast-forwards into the early 1950's, one can see a number of similarities, I believe, in the overall concept, that being a car of much lower profile than anything else that appeared on American highways in its day. For example, the Convertible Phaeton is far more the inspiration for the convertibles that followed it than any other car before.

The 810 did pioneer, at least on American roads, the unitized body with separate front subframe that later became the norm for such cars as the Chevrolet Nova and Camaro of the 1960's, and is still with us today. Much of the Cord's planform became the benchmark used by Oldsmobile when the 1966 Toronado was under development.

The 810's transaxle setup was, and still is a good bit of engineering wizardry, even though, due to the lack of adequate development time (little in the way of funding was available as well) they didn't at first perform very well.

The Cord automobiles simply "flew into the face of conventional wisdom", and yet they did point the way to the future, in an albeit flamboyant way, in an era when such outlandish ideas simply didn't happen anywhere else in the industry.

Art Anderson

Having owned an 810, I was very impressed with the ride and drivability of the cars. Having driven many Classic Era Cars, the 810-812 Cord is without a doubt the best driving prewar car i have driven, then again I tend to like sports cars versus large vehicles. Many of my opinions in favor of the car have been stated here by others in the above posts, but one thing for sure is that these are not simply FWD Auburns. This was an entirely different and new design. In fact it was originally conceived as a "Baby Duesenberg". These cars were light years ahead of their time. Sorry Packard 53, but I think if you got behind the wheel of one of these sometime you might change you tune <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> Of course, it might just stop shifting on you, thus becoming the worlds most beautiful paperweight, and you might be vindicated! HA!

Shawn

Shawn: First of all let me say that I admire the Cord 810/812 for the style of the body and the front wheel drive layout, the same as I admire the L29 Cords. Howerver the Cord 810/812 was light years ahead of thier times as far as cars in the United States goes but to me that as far as it goes. The little Citroen introduced to the French public in 1934 had a front wheel drive system with the transimsion and drive assembly mounted infront of the engine. The little French car also pionered the use of unit body construction. The car had independent front suspension and four wheel torsion bar suspension. The engine was overhead valve nothing startling there, but had removable wet cylinder liners. The styling was low slung no running boards, and the wheels at the extreme corners, made for exceptional interior room , smooth ride,fairly broad tracking dimensions, thus producing good handling.

Now I will be the first to admit that compairing the Cord 81/812 to the Citreon is like comparing apples to oranges. Here was a car that was produced for the masses in France that was more advanced than the Cord 810/812 series and introduced two full years before the Cord 810.

Yes I would agree that there are many european cars that were way ahead of American cars during this era and many subsequent eras, being primarily a collector of European cars. In fact, my roommate in college bought a traction avant from my early mentor in the car collecting world and we were simply astounded at how well it drove and particularly how well it went through very deep snow. But I stand by the Cord. While having another Cord is way up on my to do list, I am not dying to get a traction avant. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> I just think that the Cord is one of the most beautiful cars ever made. The Citroen while interesting technically, doesnt light the same fire in me.

Actually Lancia pioneered the use unitized body construction in the 20's I beleive.

Those wacky Europeans! always looking for ways to cut corners, reduce weight, balance weight, save fuel, save space, it goes on and on.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yes I would agree that there are many european cars that were way ahead of American cars during this era and many subsequent eras, being primarily a collector of European cars. In fact, my roommate in college bought a traction avant from my early mentor in the car collecting world and we were simply astounded at how well it drove and particularly how well it went through very deep snow. But I stand by the Cord. While having another Cord is way up on my to do list, I am not dying to get a traction avant. I just think that the Cord is one of the most beautiful cars ever made. The Citroen while interesting technically, doesnt light the same fire in me.

Actually Lancia pioneered the use unitized body construction in the 20's I beleive.

Those wacky Europeans! always looking for ways to cut corners, reduce weight, balance weight, save fuel, save space, it goes on and on.

</div></div>

In point of fact, unitized (or more correctly "monocoque) body/chassis unit construction goes back to at least 1915! That year, one Louis Chevrolet designed, engineered, built AND drove the Cornelian Special in the 1915 Indianapolis 500 Mile Race. Fully monocoque body, even had 4-wheel independent suspension too, and they weren't merely sliding kingpins in a tube either.

Art Anderson

Hello, I am posting in these forums because I have some essential information on the topper car. There has been some incorrect information as to the current owner and other facts about the car. I am in contact with the true current owner of the Topper Car and we may be auctioning this car or making it available for purchase in the near future. Please e-mail me if you are interested, I can furnish you any further information you need on this famed Topper Movie Car. My e-mail address is diamondlon@hotmail.com

Thank you

Lon,

I have sent several e-mails to you since your post. If you have not received them, please e-mail me. E-mail address is OlChev@aol.com

I would like to talk to you about the Topper car.

Thanks, Kevin