@Dynaflash8

After Long Thread, a majority opinion?

Dynaflash8 · 2009-12-04T15:40:24.000Z

Okay, "edinmass" started a thread that is now up to 47 comments; quite a large number considering the other threads. Many thoughts have been expressed, mostly it seems by people concerned about "diluting" the intent and purpose of the CCCA. Now I'm a brand new member (albeit for the second time),…

Dec 4, 200914.4K views

Reply to Dynaflash8…

Replies (87)

· Dec 4, 2009

Earl,

Both are beautiful cars. If they are not already and it was up to me, Buick factory semi-custom bodies on top of the line chassis prior to 1942 would be admitted. How many of those open front town cars did they build? Not many I would imagine. The conv sedan is trickier but I would be inclined to admit it based on it's comparison to the Cadillac. I would see this as minor in the dilution argument - especially when compared with the outright atrocity that the Town and Country admittance is.

When you mention great cars after WWII, such as the Halo cars, I have an easy answer. It was a mistake admitting anything after the Classic Era ended prior to WWII in the first place. So anything after WWII should not even be part of the conversation.

regards,

A.J.

· Dec 4, 2009

Certainly the top Buick's of that era are everything you say. But you are dealing with people that sees the Auburn 8 as a classic, when a 1933 and on ford V-8 looked better and performed better than the Auburn 8. This is not a club based on Fact or rationality, or even the preservation of history, but overly supportative of the status quo, often based on odd perceptions, and misstatements of fact.
When General Lyon, owner of close to a dozen Packard 12's, chooses to park his Ford V-8 and Chrysler Town and Countries in the middle of his display of Packard 12's, Caddy V-16's, and other top end Classics, and they do not look out of place, it is easy to see how these cars compare. And they do very well. I might add, these cars also compete very well as to value in the market place, the only real, over time, authority on value.
If there is a dilution of anything, it is the quality of the hobby by the constant bickering of what is and isn't a classic. It gets old, like fighting over baptisim, communion, predestination. Let's work toward streinghtening the hobby, before these cars are all street rodded.

If you are insinuating that the 32 Ford should be considered a CCCA Classic then what cars would say are NOT CCCA Classics?

You make the same argument that all the "open minded" "inclusive" types make which is point out the border line cars or mistakes then compare them to some other car that is a few degree more removed and say what about this one?

· Dec 4, 2009

Special to alsancle. There just the ONE 1940 car built, and shown at the Waldorf Astoria. It was like a test car for the proposed 1941 Brunn-bodied Limited cars that Curtice had on tap. It was then put into Buick zone service in New York state, and thought lost to time. Quite by accident a man in a Chicago, Illinois suburb found the car, owned by an unappreciative collector who advertised it as a "limosine" in Hemmings, having no idea of what it was. I visited that man, who remains current owner, this summer and took pictures of this fabled car from the National Geographic ad of 1940. The body, paint and interior is absolutely original and there is no body number, only the Brunn emblem. Somehow it had gotten out of Buick ownership and into the ownership of a Ms. Libby of Libby Owens Ford Glass. She had an estate in New York.

· Dec 4, 2009

OK, here's how this should work. Put together a comparison, item by item, of the Buicks in question, along with the closest vehicles now accepted by CCCA. Engine size, original cost/price, wheelbase, production numbers, engineering features, etc. See how they compare, then ask the question again. I don't know a reasonable answer without seeing the facts.

· Dec 4, 2009

Mr. Coco that will be easy for me to do, except maybe the cost. I am unsure if I have that information at hand, but can probably get it. Weather here in Central Florida is lousy, bet it's worse in Winchester. My first car event was the Apple Blossom Festival parade in Winchester in 1958, and I have it on 8mm here somewhere. Took my wife there for a date and broker her in right before we even got married. If you know Art Bragg, Bob Pierce, Bill Sandy and Tom Rissler tell them all I said hello. There is also a nice light green 1932 Pierce Arrow there in Winchester, if it hasn't been sold. I'll try to put up that information before 24hours. Thanks for your response.

Whoops, wait a minute....if you want those facts back to 1931, then I'll need longer. I was thinking about just 1941. I can do most of it though. But if I do all the years, I might as well make the submission.

· Dec 4, 2009

Dynaflash8,

In response to your original question regarding the admittance of the “the 1931 through 1939 Buick Series 80 cars and the 1941 Buick Series 70” I will have to plead ignorance to their qualifications. I am a Studebaker guy, always have been since I bought a 1929 Studebaker when I was 17 as my first car. This does not detract from my appreciation of other car makes and models. I think Buick made some fantastic cars in the 1930s. From what you have stated here in the forum it sounds like you have the knowledge and skills necessary to put together a comprehensive application to the CCCA nominating committee for acceptance of these two series of Buicks. Will it fly? Who knows, but you won me over on there merits and maybe you can win over the nominating committee. Nothing ventured, nothing gained?

· Dec 4, 2009

Thank you Mark Huston. If Steve Moskowitz hadn't thrown out all of those old issues of Antique Automobile in the basement, with my 1971 Buick Straight 8 history in the May-June issue, heck, I'd just mail that to the committee. Now I will have to clear all the cobwebs from my brain to come up with all the answers Mr. Coco has asked for. Lots of work. Guess that's why I'm testing the waters. Have a friend in Baltimore with a '29 Studebaker President....what a car. Years ago he ran the socks off of my '39 Special coming down I-95 from Havre de Grace to Baltimore. I know you have a real car there.

· Dec 4, 2009

Philosophically, I have much less of a problem adding cars that are well within the Classic Era 1928-1938 then going past WWII. The CCCA is as much about the times the cars were made as the cars themselves (at least to me). This is why the halo cars, or the RR or Bentleys of the 1950s do not belong in my opinion.

· Dec 4, 2009

as far as the comparison, I think it's informative to consider (with no "right answer"):

41 Cadillac 62 (wearing the bullseye)

41 Packard 160

41 Lincoln Continental

41 Buick Limited

41 Buick Roadmaster

40 LaSalle 52

41 Buick Century

41 Packard 120

41 Lincoln

41 Chrysler New Yorker

There's room for a number of opinions , but I think this is a pretty good sample of the border zone. Of course "none of the above" is another opinion.

· Dec 4, 2009

I don't have time for a long post right now, but all of you consider this. If you're going to let 80 series Buicks in, then what's the arguement against 61 series Cadillacs? They're the exact same chassis as the 62 series, and the interiors are just a little plainer. See, you're sliding down that slippery slope again. Also consider late 30's up to 1940 LaSalles. Almost the same engine as the Cadillac (slightly less HP), and in many cases shared the same body & frame. Again, we're sliding down the slippery slope. Then why not model 120 Packards? Need I say more? You 're letting the "best of the average" in instead of "the best of the best."

· Dec 4, 2009

Thank you bkazmer for your opinion. I respect it, although my opinion does differ with your selection. This would be mine. Notch #1 full classic. I would agree with moving the LaSalle down a notch, but not up a notch. Just my opinion, and you know what they say about opintions..

41 Cadillac 67

41 Buick Limited

41 Packard 160

41 Lincoln Continental

41 Cadillac 62 and 63

41 Buick Roadmaster

step down to

40 LaSalle 52

step down to

41 Buick Century

41 Chrysler New Yorker 8

41 Lincoln Zephyr

step down to

41 Packard 120

41 Buick Special

· Dec 4, 2009

K8096. I will put both you and bkasmer in the "NO" column. However, let me comment that you're upgrading the Packard 120 in my opinion anyway. I contend that the Buick Roadmaster is superior to the late-thirties LaSalle and equal to or better than the Cadillac V8. Nobody has to agree with me. We are into a period of GM slopping over one brand into another and in 1941 Buick under Harlow Curtice set out out to surpass Cadillac and got their knuckes rapped for the effort. However, that was done by GM after the cat was out of the bag, so the car still was produced and existed. Beginning in 1942 Buick was put back into it's place in the lineup.

· Dec 4, 2009

Where are you putting the Cadillac 61 in your ladder?

· Dec 4, 2009

I contend that the Buick Roadmaster is superior to the late-thirties LaSalle and equal to or better than the Cadillac V8. Nobody has to agree with me. We are into a period of GM slopping over one brand into another and in 1941 Buick under Harlow Curtice set out out to surpass Cadillac and got their knuckes rapped for the effort. However, that was done by GM after the cat was out of the bag, so the car still was produced and existed. Beginning in 1942 Buick was put back into it's place in the lineup.

That's my opinion in a nutshell, Earl. As Al said, we are basically talking about the Classic Era here (albeit at the very, very end if not over the line) with the car in which you want to get accepted. And in the opinion of those knowledgeable about the two cars (Cad V8 and Buick RM), the Buick would probably be picked in a blind taste test.

So... No, I don't think the car should be Classic (Neither should the Cadillac). But since the definition of Classic has been changed, Yes it should now be accepted by the CCCA.

· Dec 4, 2009

Have a friend in Baltimore with a '29 Studebaker President....what a car. Years ago he ran the socks off of my '39 Special coming down I-95 from Havre de Grace to Baltimore. I know you have a real car there.

You now know why I love driving my President.

What I find interesting about this discussion is that there is no line in the sand with non-Classic on one side and Full Classics are on the other side. What there is a lot of grey area and somewhere in the center of that grey area is an imaginary line. What we must decide is how far from the center of the grey area do we want to wander in our acceptance for what is, or is not, a Full Classic? There are many obvious choices for exclusion, but there are many cars that fall within the grey area that make exclusion a difficult choice that results in a lot a passion and sometimes bruised feelings.

· Dec 4, 2009

It shouldn't be taken personally.

· Dec 4, 2009

Hi- yes, Art, Bob, Bill, and Tom are still here and I know them all. My point about the specifications can be applied to the Packard 120. To say that they are "Classics" is a generalization that could not be supported by facts. Yes, they are 8 cylinder, but they were smaller, cheaper, higher production numbers, etc. One has to go back and look at the criteria upon which the CCCA based decisions at some point in time, and that had to do with the, as mentioned, "best of the best." This is not necessarily a super exclusive club, however, as there is a study that was done of production numbers, and over 1,366,000 cars were produced that met the previous guidelines. This study can be found on the CCCA website.

Again, not saying that the Packard 120, for instance, wasn't a nice car, but it does not meet the definition of Classic. If you intend to fight the fight, and at least attempt to get another model of Buick classified as such, then you need to have the statistics to back it up, if indeed the numbers show the right thing.

· Dec 4, 2009

K8096 I didn't think of the Cadillac 61. With the Buick Century, or on an equal scale with the LaSalle 52, okay? The 1941 Buick Century was basically an early "Muscle Car" or racer, not a high quality prestige car alone. It was a souped up Special in other words.

· Dec 4, 2009

West, was that "you voted yes before you voted no" or "you voted no before you voted yes".

LOL - it just struck me funny

· Dec 4, 2009

Yes, Mr. Coco, you and Mr. Huston make important points. I've said where I place the Packard 120....I was with my Mom & Dad on Rt 236 in 1947 between Annandale, VA and Arlington when he decided to race a 1939 Packard 120 with his 1939 Buick Special, over my Mother's loud objections....I was 9 years old. I personally watched the needle exceed 100 and the Packard was left in the dust. A hotrod 37-38 Chevy joined the race and couldn't keep up but hung in for awhile. My Dad was never into excitement and I don't know what hit him that one time, but it thrilled me, even if I did live to tell about it. I think that tells you why I put the Packard 120 where I did in my lineup.