[trimacar]

Well, when all is said and done........I have belonged to the CCCA since 1976 or so. Have owned numerous Classics, still own 3, have gone on Caravans and been to Grand Classic shows. Figure I'm in it for life.

Then, I open up this months CCCA magazine, and there are pages of arguments about the Town and Country. For the first time, the thought crossed my mind that I might get out of the club, if this is where it's headed. Not so much the fact that they are letting another car in, but more the fact of the time and effort and ink wasted even considering letting it in. I get club magazines to enjoy reading about automobiles. If I want to read about wars, I'll pick up a newspaper.

I believe CCCA should keep it's current list of eligible cars, only add special body cars in the future, or there will be no end to it. If membership goes down, who cares. The Pierce Arrow Society is one of the most enjoyable clubs out there; best shows, best tours, best people, great cars, and it only has 1000 or so members. By definition, it won't be "adding" eligible cars to the list, and by definition, neither should the CCCA.

If I go on a Classic tour, I don't want to be following a '57 Chevy. If I go on a regular tour, then I'll follow anything, and enjoy it.

Let's get back to the hobby.

[CBoz]

I'm a relatively new member of CCCA, and am hoping to acquire a Full Classic someday (based on today's standards; not necessarily what they might be in the future). I had a chance to read the pro and con articles in the bulletin regarding the T&C. If facts and precedence matter, it's not even close.

In looking at the "pros" argument, it's noted that the T&C had "carefully matched" wood graining and "each one is unique." The same could be said about the Ford and Mercury Sportsmans, and no one's arguing for them to be included (at least not yet...). Sally Perkin's message suggests that *written* communications to the board have been overwhelmingly "pro". I intend to write a letter to help balance this out.

Whether or not the T&C becomes part of the CCCA will not affect the value of the T&C or any of the other cars currently included in the CCCA. But it will almost certainly dilute the value of the CCCA itself.

[Trunk Rack]

Originally Posted by CBoz

. . . . . . I had a chance to read the pro and con articles in the bulletin regarding the T&C. If facts and precedence matter, it's not even close. . . . . . But it will almost certainly dilute the value of the CCCA itself.

= = = = = = =

You are missing the point of Field's original comment, (which is to be a bit more flexible) but dont feel bad - I see others also miss Dave's point completely too. You are reciting old ideas from old books. Your thoughts represent the past. Dave's represent the future.

In its early years, the CCCA was formed to celebrate CLASSIC cars. We picked the word "CLASSIC" for a reason. As one poster notes, the dictionary was pretty clear...something 'UNIQUE...OF FIRST RANK..REPRESENTING THE HIGHEST ( again...HIGHEST ) STANDARD OF EXCELLENCE.

Thus the idea that an ordinary 8 cyl. middle-class type Packard or Cadillac of the 30's would be part of our club would not have occured to us.

Funny - this discussion reminds me of a yelling match between Robert J. Gottlieb and me, over his using a photo of my '34 Packard Eight sedan (next to one of the big luxury Packards) in his famous 1954 book CLASSIC CARS AND ANTIQUES. He discussed the "big" classics, but snobbly referred to my car as an example of a nice ordinary car, "the difference between the above and real classics is so great it requires no further explanation.."

The kind of cars we were interested in celebrating & saving, were the cars that would be in front of a dipolmatic mission, the best country clubs, or the opera. The largest, most powerful, most elegant cars of the super-rich.

The perfectly nice, fine, good, etc. cars of the servers, janitors, and other perfectly respectable kitchen help, the ORDINARY cars of the classic era, would be parked out back.

Many in the early years of the CCCA had college training, and thus knew the word CLASSIC, if correctly applied, also mean "form follows function'.

Thus a CLASSIC car was one with CLASSIC lines, meaning straight, and angles, with a fender separate from a grill separate from a headlight, etc. It would not have occured to us that a "streamlined" (as in post 1940 car styling) could possibly be called a "CLASSIC" car. ( well...I take that back, some dofuss got the idea we could get more membership dollars in if we "dilluted" our standards JUST a little bit, and let in the pre-war Lincoln Continentals ! - look where THAT has led ! ).

But again - you miss the point. That was a different America in a different century. In those years, a General Electric or Westinghouse or RCA appliance was made HERE IN THE UNITED STATES. "Precision of speech" was RELEVANT, because if you didnt speak and think accurately, you couldn't manufacture precision quality goods. Now that we are becoming a 3rd world country, we can enjoy the luxury of sloppy, emotionally filled speech, and not worry about being accurate. True, Dave didnt suggest my used Toyota Corolla be called a "classic" - he only wants the CCCA's standards changed (AGAIN..!) ( just this once...! ).

So - my advice to you, is recognize your thinking is out of date. Dave Field's thinking is what matters these days. Dont bother him with some old words with some old books that today's younger people dont want to know about, couldn't care less about.

They KNOW what they want. They LIKE the words "CLASSIC" and "ANTIQUE". And they now VASTLY out-number you. Strongly recommend at car shows you dont try and tell someone their air-conditioned automatic transmission car from the 40's or later isnt an "antique". Or their 50's Chevrolet pick-up truck isnat a "CLASSIC'.

Welcome to a new century, and a new way of thinking !

[Restorer32]

So seldom I agree with Pete (Trunk Rack) but this time I think he hit the nail on the head.

[TexRiv_63]

Originally Posted by K8096

Hey Dave, take a look in the AACA forum under "restoration projects" up near the top. There's a guy who just sold his 1963 Buick Riviera and who says he is "solidly pre war now" with a 1932 Cadillac and a Pierce Arrow. Now that's
what I call step in the right direction! I don't think the guy is that old either, maybe in his 50's. The Full Classic Car hobby isn't dead to that guy!

I'm that guy. Thanks for the age compliment, actually I am 60. I've been in the car hobby / obsession for at least 45 years and have lost count of how many cars I have bought, sold, modified, restored, parted out, and enjoyed. My first car related memory is sitting on the fender of a 1930 Model A Ford while my father changed spark plugs. I always wanted to own a "Classic" old car but practicality dictated 50s. 60s, and 70s. Then about 2 years ago I found my 28 Pierce at a surprisingly affordable price and everything changed. I was still in the middle of my 63 Riviera so the Pierce had to wait a while, but I finally got it into running shape for limited driving - what an amazing time machine experience! Then early this year I saw the 32 Cadillac V-12, to me the epitome of a "True" classic. All reason was abandoned and it was mine. Now the Riviera is gone and I am completely immersed in prewar car nirvana.

When I first got my Pierce my wife and I went to a CCCA Grand Classic. Many beautiful cars in a grand setting and many Pierce Arrows which I climbed all over (Without touching!) The owners were in small groups talking to each other but NO ONE greeted us or spoke to us even though I was obviously awe-struck by their cars. I left with a bad impression of the CCCA.

I later joined the PAS, AACA , and CLC and while not a big go-to-meet participant have met and corresponded with many friendly and helpful people who have helped me in my car revival. I have decided I will join the CCCA now and see if my initial impression was wrong. I totally agree with the need to preserve true Classics in their original state but my desire is to drive and enjoy my cars and not worry about judging. I have a live-and-let-live approach to what others do with their cars, hopefully the CCCA and I will fit together.

[Trunk Rack]

Originally Posted by TexRiv_63

I'm that guy.... ... All reason was abandoned and it was mine. . . . I am completely immersed in prewar car nirvana.

When I first got my Pierce my wife and I went to a CCCA Grand Classic . . . . . The owners were in small groups talking to each other but NO ONE greeted us or spoke to us . . . . I left with a bad impression of the CCCA..

= = = =

VERY VALID CRITICISM ! All of us should be more open and courteous at car shows.

I certainly have been guilty of precisely the kind of attitude this fellow is describing !

We get to a event, and become so engrossed in swapping lies with our old buddies who we may not have seen for years, and/or get involved in some technical discussion on how to keep our old "pets" running and supplied with parts, that we may seem rude to the outsider.

Let's all take this to heart, and try to be more friendly & open when out with our collector cars.

[Dave Fields]

Trunk Rack: It isn't that I want change - I didn't even vote for change, but I think we can agree on what we both really want: A strong vibrant hobby for the forseeable future.

Thank's for the correction on the membership - see what happens when I rely on my memory!

The CCCA really had a American point of view when it picked 1947 as the cutoff. By CCCA's own standards, an entire series, not just a specific body is voted on as a Classic. By rights, All Bentley MK VI should be classics, regardless of age.

We all discuss and wonder how to attract members, especialy younger members. I am working on my doctorate in marketing, and even I have no easy solution.

[Dave Fields]

Trunk Rack in you post which included:

In its early years, the CCCA was formed to celebrate CLASSIC cars. We picked the word "CLASSIC" for a reason. As one poster notes, the dictionary was pretty clear...something 'UNIQUE...OF FIRST RANK..REPRESENTING THE HIGHEST ( again...HIGHEST ) STANDARD OF EXCELLENCE.

That entire post is what I am driving at . Yes!


Let me discuss a antidotal experience I had in 1971-72, as a high school senior. I had a 1956 Cadillac 7 passenger, but one fine summer day, Tom Wells, who was so instrimental in streightening AACA judging standards and his wife either invited me (or I was bold enough to ask) my blonde girlfriend and I to ride in the back seat of his Pierce Convertible Sedan. Earlier Tom had sold every car he had to afford that car. For one afternood, in an AACA outing sponcered by the Presque Isle region, I had, what the song says, "some people wait a lifetime for a moment like this."
WE all could do our hobby future a favor by inviting a neighbor kid or a teen and their date for an afternoon like that.

[Dave Fields]

edinmass: A few comments: As to the newer cars on my ownership list - I agree, and most of those are sitting outside. BTW, the Triumph is a motorcycle. You are wrong on the Desoto chassis as these brutes ran hundreds of thousands of miles as big city taxi's, and many where long whel base heavy cars. I once had a 40 Plymouth i my garage next to the 1942 Packard 120 (It has a 160 body on it) and the plymouth was a better driving car because it was lighter.
OOPS! The Bentley IS STILL A CLASSIC according to CCCA. It is not elegable for judging, but the change of motor does not cause the cae car to loose classic standing. I wonder who is going to threaten to leave the club ver that rule that snuck by you!
OOPS again. The 1930 Nash is a full classic per CCCA.
And I feel the CCCA did a OOPS when they allowed the 160 Packard Business sedan to be a classic, when it is an inferior car to the 120 Deluxe!

[K8096]

Explain to me how the engine in a 120 Packard is superior to the 9 main bearing 356 engine in the 160 Packard?