Post War Car is now a CCCA Classic......

Sorry Ed, but I respectfully disagree. I left CCCA quite a few years ago partly because I felt the classification committee had become calcified and rigid.

No sweat CCCA, you aren't going to be swamped with Chrysler T&C's, there aren't enough of them. And I don't expect them now to approve the Ford Sportsman. If they go further and consider updating and expanding the current prewar list along with including other important postwar classics, I just might renew my membership.

Will it matter in 15 years?

Ed, the town and country is a great car and sells for more then many classics. However, you are right about the club losing focus. Many people still don't get the purpose of the club i.e. the "classic era" which in my mind lasted from about 1930 to 1940 or so max. The problem is that once the mass-produced standard bodied Caddys were let in, that kind opens the barn door. People have a hard time getting their arms around the difference between a great car, and one that falls into the "Classic" category as original defined by the club.

A.J.

One problem with the CCCA is that almost no one drives cars from the 1920's anymore. Go to a CARavan and the parking lot almost looks like a 1948 or so used car lot. The older people in the club are too lazy to drive the stiff steering, crashbox transmission cars of the 1920's so they drive "modern" cars from the late 1930's & 1940's. Their wives doesn't want the wind in their hair from riding in a roadster or touring car. I'm in the CCCA, but basically to get the magazine, which has remained excellent. Once in a while I'm go to a national meet, but usually don't register. I show up, look at the cars, & go home. I know a lot of people who do this. The guy who restores a car himself doesn't stand a chance going up again these guys who give a blank check to one of the big restoration shops. Without naming names, look at who's on the board now. It's pretty easy to tell the difference between who's a lifelong car person versus who's in it for more of the social aspect. That's how the T & C's got in. You have people on the board who aren't real car people. T & C's had been voted down numerous times before, it just took the right amount of people voted onto the board who don't know a lot about cars to finally get them accepted. Grand Classic's used to be the premier event to see Classic Cars. Not anymore. I believe the 10 - 12 major Concours events across the country have gotten to the point where they'll beat any Grand Classic hands down.

There is a generous list of undeserving automobiles accorded CCCA Classic status.

As I recall, each candidate for Classic status has to be accepted on its own merits and not because a similar vehicle is recognized. This sounds noble and high minded but it only means that the majority rules. ACD, Cadillac and Packard.

For example, this policy and the way it is administered allows an inferior car (1932 Auburn 8) to be exalted while a superior automobile (1932 Chrysler 8) is scorned.

I don't think this will make much difference either way - except that now the board will have to find something new to have endless discussions about! I guess it came up about 4 or 5 times in the years that I was on the committee. There are a lot of T & C owners who wanted the cars to be classics and if they now bring them out, it may increase attendance a little bit, but there aren't that many around. They weren't doing it to increase the value as they already were worth more than a lot of classics - they thought the cars deserved it. They are nice, well built cars, loved by those who own them and have reached a rather iconic status, which is part of the criteria that should be used in deterining if they fit into the club. I voted against them the last time it came up to a vote - and got some very nasty feedback - but I did so because they included the prewar 6 cylinder cars to give them the prewar foot in the door so they met the club rules. I don't think that the 6 cylinder cars should be classics - if so, why not 41 Packard 120 woodie wagons? I have nothing against the 8s being classics, and even made a motion to that effect - which failed. At some point the board, no matter how true they want to be to the ideas of those who set up the club in the 50s, needs to listen to what today's members want them to do, be it in what cars should be accepted or what type of events should be part of the schedule.

The club, for me, isn't about just cars of the 20s or 30s exclusively, or just about the biggest and best, it encompasses a great deal more than that. I enjoy the wide variety of cars in the club. It is the one place that you can take a car and have it judged on an equal basis with other cars of the same basic year and style. You can take a sedan or limo, or something frumpy and still win, which you almost can't ever do at a concours. Most concours today are slanted towards swoopy foreign cars, and even if they aren't perfect in terms of cosmetics or authenticity, they will get all the attention and prizes. I would have to respectfully say that most of the cars that I see at grand classics are average to above average condition and include some nice "drivers", with a few 100 point cars there too, and not a lot of big check book restorations. However at most concours you will see a majority of big check book professional restorations, with only a few lesser cars as fillers. The club judging is not political - sure sometimes a member may get a break from his pals, but overall nothing like the politics you will find at concours, given the greater competition there and the fact that the concours need to take care of their big donors who allow them to put on extravagant events. This just doesn't effect CCCA judging - in fact most people who take the time to get their car to a grand classic and do a fairly good job of preparing it will get some sort of trophy. I would say that the CCCA is the one place where a regular guy DOES have a chance to win. The nice thing about the CCCA is that you are still judged on points and you can still strive to get 100 points (and everyone knows your score), and what the guy next to you has won't take that away.

Yes, you may see a fair number of 41 - 47 Cads and 41 - 47 Packards on a caravan, but you are likely to see at least a few 20s cars, a fair number of 30s cars, and at least a few big and exotic cars too.

I would also have to agree with DEP - there are plenty of cars that deserve consideration for classic status within the traditional CCCA year range. If you consider the Auburn to be a low end yardstick - I heard several classification chairmen say that we couldn't do that! - then there are certainly other cars that should be classics. I have personally driven and ridden in a 32 Auburn 8 on a caravan and that same exact car, made it through the entire European caravan. It is a car that attracts attention and looks very good, and certainly qualifies as a classic for me, and it drives fine. It certainly isn't a Model J, Packard 12, Cad 16, Phantom III or Chrysler Imperial, but not all classics can or should be. Now that I have driven the Auburn on a tour, I think it should be a classic and I would think that any car that can prove it is the equal should be too, if that includes a Chrysler 8, that is super as far as I am concerned. The committee has taken a lot of odd cars that we will never see at a grand classic in the last few years, and this was done internally, not by requests from members who owned them. I don't recall a request classic status for 32 Chrysler 8s while I was on the committee, but some applications may not have made it to the committee. I myself like Buicks too and think that there might be some Roadmasters that would be more deserving of classic status than the very small foreign cars that have been accepted in the last few years. Perhaps the 32 Auburn isn't the low end of the standards...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dave Mitchell</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I don't think that the 6 cylinder cars should be classics - if so, why not 41 Packard 120 woodie wagons? </div></div>

I think you meant Packard 110, as the 120's are eights. Neither of which are classic.

Which leads me to my question:

On the Hershey show field this year there was a dark green 1940 Packard woody wagon listed as a "Super Eight." It has always been my knowledge that Packard didn't build a Super Eight wagon (maybe a couple). The dash on the Hershey woody was certainly not that of a Super Eight. Does anyone know the history of this car?

(There was also a 1940 Packard 120 woody wagon in the car corral ... light green ... BEAUTIFULL!!!)

West, no, actually I meant the 120s as I felt that they would be superior to a 6 cylinder car, and still not classics. I have 2 Sixes, and as much as I love them, they aren't classics, and I don't think that the 120 I used to have should be either.

I know that there are a couple of 40 Super 8 woody wagons running around, and at least one that the classification committee was duped into taking as a custom body - I know where the 40 180 sedan body went (an unusual 5 pass sedan with division window) which was the donor for that fake car.

What the classification committee giveth, so too should they be able to taketh, especially if they were duped.

West, true, but they almost never do, and I doubt they will in this case, so when the car comes up for sale - buyer beware. Do you know where the suspect car at Hershey was from?

It is interesting that there has been so little interest in the T & C topic here, so I guess that there aren't too many people upset about it.

Is that a 40? There was one listed in class 19E as owned by Jack A Barton, member #056602.

Wayne

PS, sent an e-mail!

Sorry for getting off on a tangent to this post.

Wayne. There are two 1940 Packards listed in Class 19E. There may have been more entered. They wouldn't be listed in the results if they didn't win awards, or were not judged.

To get back onto subject, I am all for the Town and Countrys being accepted as Classic. I would like it better if the only postwar cars accepted as Classic could be directly linked to prewar cars (just as the pre 1925 cars are accepted), but I think that bridge was burned a long, long time ago.

I just got my bulletin today and it looks like they took all of the T & C cars back to 1941 which would implicitly include 6 cylinder cars, and they did it by making an exception to the rule of not taking one body style that isn't a custom body, and also excluding all of the non woodie cars with the same chassis, essentially treating them as if they are custom bodies in a series on non classic chassis. I really don't see why Packard woodies shouldn't also be classics using this logic. If they were going to make an exception to a really important rule like this that they could have limited it to the 8 cylinder convertibles, which is what people really wanted in the club anyway. I think that the logic is really flawed here. The problem isn't with taking in Town and Countrys, as I think that they will be fine in the club, but with the lack of continuity. Logic is not the strong point of this organization. And you are right West the pre to post war bridge was burned a long time ago and the club still survived. One thing that I like about the CCCA is that it recognizes all body styles on a classic chassis - even ones that aren't the most popular, and judges them equally - and I hope that this doesn't lead to picking out body styles that the committee likes (or are popular) and making them classics regardless of the chassis or other bodies in the same series. (One thing that slowed down the 34 LaSalle was the plain cars they had to take along with the sexy convertible) By definition they are saying that the chassis isn't classic as they won't take any other body on it, and the bodies aren't built by a recognized custom coachbuilder, so they have created an entirely new category of classics. In the past the cars have been chosen using the rule of "the committee likes this and doesn't like that" and this is just an extension of that and the members will deal with it as usual. I think that if the 8 cylinder postwar T & C was put to a vote by the general membership, it would pass, and I guess that is what the directors thought, but taking it this way doesn't fit the rules well.

I think Dave's point on not just selecting the favorite body styles is a good one. The factory put the same care into building a 34 LaSalle sedan as they did on a convertible. So both or none.

To put it another way, although both are custom bodied, is a Saoutchik body allowed as sexy and a Rollston not as frumpy? Or is the Rollston allowed as dignified and the Saoutchik not as tacky?

I've always found that Cadillac vs Packard post war cut-off a little murky.

The CCCA has to look at each situation on an individual basis.

A custom-bodied Ford or Oldsmobile is Classic (or at least considered), while the same chassis with a stock body is not, so it's obvious that the CCCA has to swing both ways in regards to identifying a chassis being Classic or a body being Classic.

In the case of the LaSalle (and others), as you say, both bodies are made in the same shop. I might argue that the sedan has had MORE care put into its construction.

The problem for me is that a lot of members find that the rules of the club are murky. It turns people off and adds to the feeling that the club management is out of touch with the members, or bends the rules to suit their pals and logic isn't applied. I am not saying that is true at all.

I strongly feel that the club should take all body styles in a series, and I would agree that usually the sedans were better appointed and had more effort put into them in production; most closed cars were more expensive than convertibles when new. I can tell you that there were guys on the committee who liked the LaSalle convertible but were really turned off by the sedans, and that was a factor. I fear that someday a board will look at the market value of convertibles vs sedans and use that as a yardstick as part of the criteria in determining classic status. The argument has been made that the Town & Country Chryslers are today worth more than a lot of classics – should that really be a factor?

The committee usually declines to look at individual production bodied cars - they will send back an application for a particular body style of car and tell the owner to apply for the entire series, which is pretty comprehensive (not a lot of members attempt this) and it then goes through not just the committee but also is submitted to the membership for comment via notice in the bulletin. They consider custom bodied cars on non classic chassis on a per car basis. Beyond this are cars with bodies built by a coachbuilder not on the list of approved bodybuilders and of course new coachwork cars or modified in some way. This process is pretty restrictive, so taking a series of production body types without taking the whole series of cars seems like a major change.

Interesting subject. The Town & Countrys should qualify for a variety of reasons but to get into the minutae of details I'm not sure is worth it (6 cyl vs 8 cyl)

The bodywork took quite a bit of extra work and they are basically custom bodied. It got to be so expensive and time consuming, that - as many know - by 1949 and 1950 most of the real wood was gone, replaced with dynoc.

If the club allows the grocery getter Cadillac 60 Special from 1947 to 1948 then you should allow the T & C's.

The 1948 Sixty Special is not accepted, only the 1946-1947 is, which is a carryover from pre war 1942. The only 1948 Cadillac accepted is the model 75 limousine which is a carryover from 1940/1941 plus a few custom bodied cars.

Plus, each car is supposed to be accepted on its own merits, not because of "if this than that."