Could or would this car be considered a classic

From the Classic Car Club mission statement at the top of this forum....

"What exactly is a CCCA Classic?" The club defines CCCA Classic cars as "...fine or unusual motor cars which were built between and including the years 1925 to 1948.

By the way, there are "no" Oldsmobiles listed in their group!

Wayne

The term "classic" as defined by the CCCA should have absolutely no bearing on a car's value. I own two Franklins, one is a "classic," and one is not. The "classic" is worth about a quarter of what the non-classic is worth, and they are both probably worth less than many Fords of the same era.

So, to answer your question, your car is not a "classic," and never will be in the eyes of the CCCA. If you would like, I will take this non-classic off your hands for you.

Joe, I looked at your website, these cars are buried treasure! They may not be considered "Classic" but they are definitely "Historic"! Obviously a lot of work to finish them but if you are up to it the end results will be great. If you are not already a member of the OCA join up, they may be able to help with info and parts.

...............and all journalists and media people today, Petey.

Merriam-Webster defines classic as: serving as a standard of excellence : of recognized value; historically memorable.

No mention of the CCCA in there.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 6686L</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Mr. Sdbravenetey - you are RIGHT. What you point out in reading a modern Websters, is how much our language and culture has changed. Reminds me of what a liberal California Governor said when voters complained about the declining highways, educational quality, etc....'LOWER YOUR EXPECTATIONS'.

When we formed the Classic Car Club Of America, we were an entirely different country, where exaggeration was considered dishonest, and PRECISION OF SPEECH was considered worth-while. Obviously, the third-world country we are becoming, has no need of precision in speech and thought.

In the 1950's, the Websters published for that generation had a far more precise definition of "classic". We picked this word for our Club, straight out of Websters, because we felt it reflected the particular era, and price class of the cars we felt were historically interesting. The exact definition ? Well..it had TWO parts. First, it said " UNIQUE, OF FIRST RANK, REPRESENTING THE HIGHEST STANDARD OF EXCELLENCE". Thus an ordinary middle class 8 cyl. Packard or similar upper-middle-class car from the 30's was not of interest to us.

We liked the BEST. Meaning, of course, the largest, most elegant, most powerful multi-cylinder super luxury cars.

Of course we were car buffs and liked ANY old used car. But for our particular Club, we knew PRECISELY what we were interested in.

The word "classic", when used PRECISELY, also meant a particular "school of design". Meaning..FORM FOLLOWS FUNCTION (from the greek word "classicus".). So a CLASSIC super luxury car would be one where the hood, the headlights, the grill, the fenders, each stood out representing its own function. The "stream-line" era beginning around 1940, was the very antethesis of "classic", which is why the idea of having a '41 or later Cadillac or Packard in our Club would have not occured to us.

It never occured to us in those early years that our cars would have value, so concern for selling them was not of interest - we got em and drove em and worked on em cause we LOVED em.

As the 50's became the '60's, somehow, much to our surprise, people started seeing the REAL value WE saw in these "engineering exaggerations, magnificantly over-done", and the race was on by the used car dealers to get any old car they wanted to sell, called a "classic".

But, you fellows are right - times have changed. In a country where the youth of today have no need or use for precision of speech, since our technical jobs are going to China, all they need to know, is how to ask "DO YOU WANT FRIES WITH THAT? ". So why NOT abandon "precision of speech" and call EVERYTHING "classic" ? </div></div>

Well said! When I was a kid I used to ask my dad why the CCCA didn't let in some of the upscale cars of the 50s. In my older age now I fully understand why not. The reason is exactly as you describe it.

Full Classics are unique enough in their own way be be one of the seven commonly recognized genres of collecting. I just received my first issue of Hemmings Classic Car (well, "classic", right..)with two separate editorials suggesting CCCA is not inclusive enough. Not sure, with the mountains of organizations & clubs out there, why the push for this. I think the inclusion of "virtually identical" pre-1925 makes sense, and understand what change there has been has been very slow, and this is probably about it. I think that is fine - diluting this genre further makes no sense.

BTW - I am not a member, I just admire the CCCA for an outstanding job of identification of those special cars from a special era - true Classics.

Getting back to this gent's post, he can choose from AACA, HCCA, and probably several Olds or brass clubs, which will add value in terms of networking for parts, knowledge, etc. He has a desirable car in it's own right.

Your car is better than a classic, it is an antique!

The Antique Automobile Club of America was founded for the preservation and enjoyment of Antique Automobiles, defined as cars from the pioneering era before 1915.

These cars are typically open cars with brass headlights and accessories. They represent the era when cars were uncommon, expensive more or less hand made luxury items.

After 1915 cars became common everyday transportation and a lot of the character of the early models disappeared. This was the time when Ford was in the ascendent and every car maker aped the Tin Lizzie to a certain extent. Brass disappeared, bright colors went out of fashion and cars became more practical but dowdier.

So be happy you have one of the relics of the early days of motoring, a genuine antique, and enjoy it to the full.

Rusty,

The AACA is about cars 25 years and older, not pre-1916.

Peter

BJM - If you buy your Lincoln but do not join CCCA I think you are just missing out on an opportunity to get more enjoyment out of the experience of owning a Classic.

I just think CCCA just gets a bad rap. This is no different than any other specialty club or group - they are not just marque specific. Consider the "traditional hot rod" clubs. If you show up in a Corvette, the guys with the 32 Ford highboys may appreciate your car, but honestly that is really not what their particular group is about. Nobody questions this rationale. At the same time, if I bought a traditional hot rod I would get involved with one of these clubs for the same reason I joined the A clubs - knowledge, fellowship and people who really hone in on your car. Just my 2 cents...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Steve_Mack_CT</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

I just think CCCA just gets a bad rap. This is no different than any other specialty club or group - they are not just marque specific. Consider the "traditional hot rod" clubs. If you show up in a Corvette, the guys with the 32 Ford highboys may appreciate your car, but honestly that is really not what their particular group is about. Nobody questions this rationale. At the same time, if I bought a traditional hot rod I would get involved with one of these clubs for the same reason I joined the A clubs - knowledge, fellowship and people who really hone in on your car. Just my 2 cents... </div></div>

Well put. There is a certain amount of reverse snobbery at work that you see all the time which feeds in to what you are saying.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BJM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Likewise, all the CCCA needs to do is have a list of what they accept in their club, and if you are then so inclined - join and enjoy the comaraderie. </div></div>

Why not Google for CCCA list of cars or CCCA approved and see for yourself what cars are accepted. You could do that in less time than what it took to compose your post.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BJM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

If I restored it and was able to show and drive, I would still feel inferior . .</div></div>

I know of several proud Continental owners who are quite at home in CCCA and aren't smitten with class envy and self esteem issues.

I for one am pleased that CCCA has found a way to protect the term 'Full Classic' against the pretenders.

The assault on CCCA by the Vermont activists editorializing in the HMN periodical classic car is offensive and unwarranted. I refuse to subscribe to it because the crowd from Bennington shows disrespect to a major faithful segment of the hobby (CCCA).

My deceased Duesenberg owner friend Al Bennett was fond of saying, "This hobby was started by mechanics and was ruined when $$$ took over."

The first post in this forum pinned by PeterG has the Classic Car Site attached at the address below........

http://www.classiccarclub.org/

Wayne

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BJM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

I just checked out the list. I have some definite disagreements. No 1937 Chrysler Imperial Airflow C17? I can understand not including the Desoto Airflows and the grocery getter 34 to 36 Chrysler 8 Airflows but the 1937 Imperial C17 Airflow was a work of art, was built in limited and final year production, was powered by an aluminum head 8 cylinder and had power brakes, as well revolutionary styling that led the aero styling race. Yet is excluded.

On the other hand I was surprised to see ALL Cadillacs from 1936 to 1947 included. Did I read that right? I owned a 1040 60S and another 1941 model, not a 62S, but it was a new model that year. That seems like a broad brush to include these cars. </div></div>

One problem that I do have with (our) CCCA is ~loose quote here~ <span style="font-style: italic"> a vehicle has to be approved on its own merits and not because of another.</span>

This sounds great but in actual practice it means democracy, majority rule, the Cadillac lovers can get all their cars admitted but the Chrysler Town & Country supporters cannot because the approval committee is stacked against them. <span style="font-style: italic">(Sorry I cannot think of any politically correct wording here)</span>

Another example is the Auburn 8 vs. Chrysler 8. Ever compare a 1932 Chrysler CP 8 or 1933 Imperial CQ with a 1932-33 Auburn 8? Nope, not allowed in CCCA, can't compare and approve . . each car must stand on its own merits. (Sorry, I don't think the Auburn 8 qualifies either.)

Another example, only in recent years was the 135" wb 1932 CH Imperial accepted. Same engine, essentially same powertrain as CL, production body.

I was the editor of our regional CCCA magazine for a while and the folks that came out of the woodwork to criticize me because I ran some Imperial Lore was unbelievable. They wanted ACD, Packard or Cadillac.

Ok, the CCCA has some problems but so does your car pool, your lodge, your church, your spouse . . everyone but you and I and I worry about you sometimes.

We have had some wonderful times and made lifelong friends in the CCCA and I will probably remain a member for life regardless of its quirks.

From an outsider's viewpoint I agree CCCA is probably not perfect in it's selection criteria, and Dep5's insight is interesting to me. Still, there are many affordable cars that do qualify. In terms of bringing these cars out for the public to enjoy, I would like to see more also but like many other pre-war cars they may be more selective about what shows they go to or the owners may just not be as active anymore in some cases. Getting more of these cars out to our local AACA chapter show next year is one of my goals.

As far as I know, CCCA is about driving as much as many other clubs. I have been able to get up close and personal with some of these cars after visiting with owners. Once they see your interest is genuine, and not based on "what is it worth?" etc. it seems as informal as anywhere else.

That said Dep5's comments on HMN are also interesting. I am more than a little dissapointed in the HMN stance on CCCA, and the new "classic cars" magazine is a bit of a dissapointment for me so far. Turns out to be the same editorial staff who only write about rat rods, entry Brit sportscars and GM cars of the 70s in the main publication (not bashing but I am just not interested in these.) Thought I would try the "classic car" magazine thinking there would be some good coverage on American pre-war. Very little pre-war coverage let alone Classics. Too bad - but will probably use that slot to join CCCA. (truthfully I am over the "limit" in terms of magazines, national and local club membership - but I figure there are worse ways to blow money, right??!!)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BJM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

My point there is that if I own a car that can be shown, my 1st goal is to be able to enjoy driving it, next is to be able to show it, followed by interacting with the public with it. In a restored "Full Classic"'s lifetime, how many times do you suppose it get's shown, driven, enjoyed by a broader circle then just an immediate few folks.

That is what I meant most by stating I would participate in other club settings. I'm a poor guy monetarily, and the 46 Connie I mentioned I can afford - it's a project. If I restored it and was able to show and drive, I would still feel inferior to the hoi poli that owned Full Classics in the $100,000 to $1,000,000 range. I'm pretty sure, I couldn't even 'fake' it if I showed up.

</div></div>

Well I drive my full classic 2-3 times a week in nice weather.

Also you can get full classics in the 30K range. In fact a lot of full classic are less than these 60s muscle cars.

Why would you attempt to enter a show where your car was the accepted margue? Plenty of non classic car show out there. I would enter my Packard in an all Ford show.

I know a guy who owns mostly full classics, but has a weekly coffee meeting with friend who owns both classic and non classic such as chevys, fords etc.

Your argument against the CCCA is IMHO vey weak.

where the last Packard vs Cadillac cut offs are is always a subject for interesting debate. The 1941 Cadillac 61 and the 1948 Packard Custom 8 are interesting cases to consider.

"CCCA Recognized" or "CCCA Recognized Classic" still seems to have favor with many sellers - I think the guys who sell a lot of cars know this phrase is pretty clear. I just received another issue of HMN classic car today(???) with an editorial on acceptance standards in it that may be of interest to those who are reading this thread.

Steve B - that is a great pair of Franklins!! If the sedan was anywhere near the condition it is in your picture, I would say very well bought! Nice lines, too, sort of makes me think of a bigger '31 A slant window!