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

[edinmass]

I was informed that the classification comitee has approved Chrysler Town And Country post war cars as an approved Classic. If it is true then the current board members are not keeping the high standards of the club that have remained intact for the last 50 years. Post war cars DO NOT BELONG IN THE CCCA. It is not part of the charge and charter of the club. It should be recinded at once. If I was interested in post war cars I would join a club that caters to them. It seems that all standards across the board in this nation are being corrupted. It is truly tragic that it has come to this....... Edgar Minnie CCCA life member, master judge #24,

[Buicksplus]

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.

[mrpushbutton]

Will it matter in 15 years?

[alsancle]

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.

[K8096]

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.

[dep5]

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.

[Dave Mitchell]

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...

[West Peterson]

<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!!!)

[Dave Mitchell]

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.

[West Peterson]

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

[Dave Mitchell]

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.

[West Peterson]

This is the car that I'm curious about. I don't know who owns it or where it was from?

[R W Burgess]

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!

[West Peterson]

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.

[Dave Mitchell]

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.

[Guest bkazmer]

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.

[West Peterson]

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.

[Dave Mitchell]

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.

[Guest BJM]

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.

[K8096]

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.

[West Peterson]

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

[K8096]

The only post war cars allowed in the CCCA are supposed to be carryover's from pre war. 1946 & 1947 Caddy's are the same as 1942, The Packard Clipper design came out right before the war, and while the front sheetmetal changed, the Lincoln Continental body & underpinings were the same as 1940 - 1942.

[Guest BJM]

Thanks for the clarifications. Without looking, I wasn't entirely sure on the 60S, but it did get the "new" body in 1948. OK, so it's a carryover on the coattails of a limited number of 42's built. I guess it was up to the membership leaders then to allow the T&C's. I don't think it's a slippery slope issue. How many other cars qualify after WWII? It was a benchmark - the classic era can't really be confused with other periods of auto production. I don't think the posters against this exception have anything to worrry about.

[West Peterson]

But some people just love to worry. You don't want to take that away from them do you?

[Guest BJM]

West,

There are just very few cars that come to mind from the fifties that MIGHT qualify, and even then, I thought that was why the Milestone Car Society was created.

Back when I was a young pup in 1979, my 1st magazine I picked up was Car Classics and Langworth had an article in there about the 1949 GM hardtops. It really made an impression but I remember how important the notion was that these cars were Milestone CS accepted.

As a 15 year old I had no idea about CCCA or MCS - it was like Algebra to me. But reading that article and subsequent Car Classics articles making reference to "full classics" accepted by the CCCA and so forth, helped give my hobby interest a foundation back then - things became clearer to me as a neophant youth.

When many of my friends growing up were into street rods and muscle, I was giving speeches on the Duesenbergs and Packards to classmates who were yawning and looking out the window.

Long live the CCCA and it's mission but there are bigger fish to fry then clamoring about acceptance of a truly worthy post war car as part of the classic era.

[JWRider]

Gentlemen.Lets get something straight. The Approved Cars List was,is, and will always be a "Work in Progress."The Addition of the Chrysler Town and Country is an apppropriate Addition.The 1946-47 Eight Cylinder Sedans are very rare.Only a 150 at most were built and very few Survive.The Convertibles were very expensive and highly prized by celebrities. Leo Carillo's 1948 Town and Country Convertible was famous for the Steer Head with eyes that blinked with the turn signals. The Town and Country was built for the Wealthy Gentlman Farmer who wanted a vehicle that would look clasy in either environment. I would like to remind you that Woody Wagon or Shooting Brake Bodies were mounted on Rolls-Royce and Daimler Chassis in the Classic Era.I have a picture of 1936 Brewster Ford wih a Wooden Station Wagon Body.I have Seen a Wooden Station Sedan built in 1947 by Coachcraft on a Cadillac Chassis.So while Some Woodies were workhorses. Others were built for wealthy owners who wanted something special.

[alsancle]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JWRider</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Leo Carillo's 1948 Town and Country Convertible was famous for the Steer Head with eyes that blinked with the turn signals. </div></div>

No offense, but this isn't exactly what comes to mind when I think of a "CCCA Classic". The town and country is a great car and I wish I had 6 of them. It's still not a "Classic" in my mind but I guess it is now within the CCCA.

[Restorer32]

Can the '46-'48 Buick Estate Wagon (Woody) be far behind?

[Guest BJM]

Why not? The pre war models probably are (sorry didn't check before commenting) and by association (i.e. Cadillac 60S, T&C) they should be.

These were largely hand massaged cars. I believe Ionia made them. Built in limited numbers, based on a pre war chassis and body for sure, rare then and now, pre war drivetrain.

Unless CCCA makes a rule, then I can see this popping up from time to time.

[CBoz]

I just finished reading the book, "The Classic Era", and it really clarified the idea that many have said, that it's not just the automobiles, but the era they came from, that defines what a full classic is. I think the T&C convertibles are wonderful cars, but I just can't see how they reflect the classic era. And neither do a lot of other great cars -- Gullwings, Mark IIs, Ferraris, etc., etc.

[Guest BJM]

Cecil,

You are correct. America kept making great cars but it was a whole different ballgame. The CCCA has a valid and worthwhile mission and should simply stop accepting post war cars, even if they are carryovers. The few they have accepted now, OK, let it go, quit bashing those decisions - but basically close the door quietly now.

[boblichty]

I am personally pleased to see the CCCA accept the Town and Country's. It was long over due. If one was to be exclude it might have been the 6 cyl. but I am fine with that too. These cars are certain darn bunch rarer and more interesting that garden variety, production line Cadillac's from '42-47. One might even argue, that while the barn door T&C's didn't make it from 41-42 to 46-48, it was still a carry over car as well.

I have been around AACA long enough to remember when there was a outcry of narrow minded folks who didn't want the club to go past 1939 for acceptance. Any year cut off is alway unfar to the identicle cars that overlap the next year. The hot rod community has claimed for years a 1949 car was not a hot rod and 1948 was. Like as if there is any difference between a 48 Hudson and 49 Hudson as an example. The NSRA was so ridged that GoodGuys can thank them for their lack of vision and GG's created a whole in industry. Not much different, as the famous story when Chip Miller was turned away from Hershey by the AACA when his 1954 Corvette was declaired "too new" to be admitted and he and buddy Bill Miller started Carlisle as a result. All fun stuff to reflect back on.

Let's hope the handful of CCCA folks who helped pass the Town & Country have the vision to recognise the few postwar cars that share the Classic era vertues of high quality, engineering, and limited production.

[Buicksplus]

I think the T & C represents a long overdue tiny crack in the glass ceiling called "The Classic Era". There was another crack in the glass floor with the admission of some pre-1925 classics.

I have never understood the notion of The Classic Era being defined as rigidly existing from 1925 to 42. What happened in 1925 that started the era? What happened in 1942 that ended it? Did extravagence, grandiosity, and quality in car design and production end after WWII? I don't think so.

Seems to me there are plenty of candidates built outside the classic era that meet the spirit and quality of the traditiional classic cars built in 1925-42. The T&C is just one of them. Bravo to the CCCA for taking this small step, I hope they open up and take more like it.

[boblichty]

Well said, Buicksplus. There are so many examples of great cars that carry the "Classic" qualities both pre 1925 and post 1942, that the rigid cut-offs seem childish. Other clubs suffer from the same narrow mindedness.

[CBoz]

We can agree to disagree, but let's not call it narrow-mindedness. I also used to think that the CCCA should be expanded for all the reasons stated above, but after joining the club, reading and gaining a better appreciation and deeper understanding of what the classic era was about, my opinion changed. I don't consider myself narrow-minded, just better informed than I was before.

[Mark66A]

The best definition of the classic era, it's demise by 1948 and an overall argument for the narrower view thus excluding the Town and Country,is the forward written by Michael Furman in his book "Motorcars of the Classic Era". (I should get applause for that long sentence) Additionally the photos tell the story of why is a car a classic! In am a fairly new member of CCCA. My impression so far is:Great Magazine, persnickity arguments over classificaton, exclusive not inclusive, snooty, expensive events, no compelling reason to participate. As to this "public airing of dirty laundry" seems to me like some T&C owners didn't know the meaning of "no" and kept asking until the wore the board down.

[Dave Mitchell]

Hi Mark66A, Welcome to the CCCA. I hope that you will go to enough events - not all are expensive, and you can go to a grand classic on a budget if you don't go to the banquets and perhaps stay at a less expensive hotel, but at least you can go and see the cars and meet people, which is the fun part of the club. I have eaten a lot of banquet food, and it isn't that great, but it is fun to meet new people, so the banquets can be fine too. If you can only do one evening event, do the one where the group goes to a collection or destination, that will be more interesting than the awards banquet and it is usually easier to talk to people. I have made some great long term friends in the CCCA, and gotten to see some places that I wouldn't have if I weren't with the group or the people that I met in the CCCA. A lot of the snooty image is from other people's views of the club, or from 20 years ago. Sure there are a few people like that around, but I haven't seen many groups that didn't have a few people like that - once you get to know the active members in the CCCA, you will probably find, like I have that the majority are down to earth regular people. They are from varied walks of life, from working class to wealthy, but when it comes down to it, they all love big, old, luxury cars and the "era" of the 20s to the 40s that goes with them. The T & C was the real big argument over classification, which has been going on for 20 years, other than taking pre 25 cars that are the same as later cars in the club, which really turned into a non issue, there haven't been many big debates on classification. Also I think that you will find that the club is exclusive in the cars that it takes - but not the people. As far as being persnickity, well, I don't think that the CCCA has exclusivity on that - the Mopar, Corvette, Model T or Model A guys get pretty picky too.

I do hope that an event will look interesting enough for you to participate; I am sure that you will see some great cars, and meet some people who love them and will be very happy to share them with you. Most members will be happy to share the history of their cars with you, show you the car and maybe even give you a ride in it. You will also find that a lot of the great automotive historians are members of the club, and you might sit down with one of the great Duesenberg, Rolls Royce, Packard, Pierce or Mercedes Benz historians and authors. You might even meet West Peterson's famous father!

[Guest Chuck Conrad]

Dave, I couldn't have said it better. Through CCCA, I've visited a lot of places us "mere mortals" don't usually get to go. There is some amazing stuff out there, and CCCA is a great way to discover it. Over the years, I've made some wonderful friends as a result of my association with the Club, and I wouldn't trade that for anything.

The key is you have to be proactive and go to the events. You really can do that on a budget.

[Buicksplus]

Dave Mitchell's point about the lack of debate about classification is true -- and this is what has disturbed me about the CCCA. With few exceptions most suggestions for expanding or revising the CCCA list are met with LOL.

I was a member of the CCCA for many years, and then I sold my classic. I had a couple of borderline classics that I thought might be accepted someday. Indeed, the club seemed then to regularly name new production cars to their list.

I finally let my membership lapse when I realised that the club was getting more rigid and they were unlikly to expand their list in any major way. I could see no point to staying in a club without owning a car that I could use to participate in club events.

Obviously, the CCCA is a great club and its members are going to guide the club as they like. It's exclusivity is probably OK to most members, but it does create a problem for some potential new and previous members.

[Dave Mitchell]

Just to clarify what I meant - I remember when I first went on the classification committiee in the early 90s that I was told that there were no major changes to be made in the list of accepted cars - maybe a custom bodied car here or there, but the guys in charge couldn't see any new series being accepted. I would have to point out that there has been a lot of change since then, and it has been orderly and thoughtful, and other than accepting pre 1925 cars and the 1934 LaSalles, pretty free of major debate and with almost no members upset to the point of making it into a debate. In fact when a series would be presented to the membership for comment, we rarely got a letter at all, and most of those were positive. I haven't been on the committee or board since Jan of 2004, but I think that they have been open to looking at new cars and series, and a good deal more liberal than previous committees and boards, and by and large it has been good for the club. Also when I went on the board Grand Classics were closed, private and not publicised before the event outside of the club. I, along with Chuck and lot of others pushed to open up the events and I think that has been a great success, some are now held in very public locations and lots of people get to see the cars and the club in action, and it all serves to preserve the cars and their history.

The members of the CCCA do great work in keeping the cars and their stories alive. So again, I will say that the cars in the club are exclusive, but not the membership. I know a good number of people, including one of the greatest auto historians of all time, who don't own a classic car, but are long time members. I have been to a lot of events where I couldn't take one of my cars, but I still enjoyed the event a lot, so I would really encourage you to rejoin the club and give it a try. I had great fun riding with other people in interesting Classics when I went to events without a car. People were always happy to give me a lift on a tour or to a dinner. I think you will find that the club has changed and it is for the better. Maybe you should apply for classic status for your "borderline" car - perhaps the committee is just waiting for someone to bring that series up.

That said, the CCCA isn't the AACA (which is all inclusive as long as the vehicle is 25 years old), and I hope it never will be. I belong to both, and I think both are great organizations, but I think a club for the really special cars is appropriate, and I like to see, read about and hang out with people who like cars of this type from this era. To me it is magical. I like other types of cars too, but they just aren't the same, and I like to have one place that is just for the "Classics". There are clubs for all types of cars, and to be honest most are somewhat exclusive since they are single marque clubs, or just for race cars or sports cars or "cruisers" and they all have their own rules that define them. I think that the CCCA is pretty close with the core list of cars as things are, and I also think that current and future boards will expand its base slowly and carefully, but I don't think that should deter anyone from joining that likes the fine and exclusive cars from 1925 to 1948. So Buicksplus, think it over and maybe try the CCCA for a year again. You or any other potential members might make some new friends and see some great cars.