"Full Classics" f/k/a "Classics"

[Ed Miller]

"Full Classics formerly known as (F/K/A) "Classics" are luxury automobiles produced between 1925 and 1948 and recognized by the Classic Car Club of America (CCCA). Anyone interest in these icons of beauty post a message. I have a 1933 Packard 12 Convertible Sedan and a 1932 Cadillac V8 All Weather Phaeton. I've previously owned a 1935 Mercedes Benz 500K Cabriolet Type B and a 1930 Pierce Arrow Model B Sedan. I have also driven or ridden in a bunch of other Classics (I prefer that name, it's simpler and is a perfect description of these masterpieces.) I hope to hear from you soon.

[1937hd45]

Classic and Antique are two of the most abused words in the English language today.There is a saying in the Harley Davidson croud "If you have to explain it, they won't understand". The same can be said with true Antique and Classic automobiles.

[Guest]

Bob ~ And after, "they won't understand" add the words, "and don't waste your breath trying." ~hvs

[Guest]

Eddie,<P>We have a forum section just for CCCA. Goto <BR><A HREF="http://www.aaca.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?category=5" TARGET=_blank>CCCA discussion forum here.</A><P>Peter

[Guest]

And for enlightened, reasonable dialogue see various postings in the Packard section.

[Guest]

Yup, lots can be said about the classics and in different places. Does the "C" in classic really stand for Cadillac? Or how about the "P"? I bet the Pierce-Arrow may be faster than the other "P" car! But you know what, those Packards are Blue chip investments! Its all just a hobby and its nice to enjoy them all, where ever we look. Al

[Guest Chuck Conrad]

It's no secret that the term "Classic" is generally used in many ways the Classic Car Club of America never intended some 50 years ago. The term has become part of American English meaning almost anything worth preservation (not just cars). As a result, CCCA decided to trademark the terms "Full Classic" and "Modified Classic." To some degree these monikers are starting to catch on. I've noticed some publications refering to cars as "CCCA Full Classics," which I think fairly well defines what they are talking about.<P>Even so, it's really not worth getting too hung up about the words. It's true, some people love to ask why their **** (pick your favorite car) isn't accepted by CCCA at their meets. In fact, it seems asking "why" has become a hobby unto itself. I guess the best explanation "why" is the same as why you wouldn't expect to get a Mustang judged at a Chevy meet. It's not that they are bad cars, they just aren't what that particular club is about.<P><BR>I enjoy old cars of all kinds. Even though I am very involved with CCCA, you'll find other cars (as well as CCCA "Full Classics" in my garage. Most CCCA members appreciate and own other cars too. It's a big hobby and there is a car to suit almost every taste. <P>We should be happy about that. Enjoy the ride.<p>[ 01-29-2002: Message edited by: Chuck Conrad ]

[Guest Chuck Conrad]

Incidentally, at next weeks AACA Annual Meeting, we will have a Classic Car Seminar, moderated by Jeff Locke. He has invited me to attend as a representative of CCCA, even though I've been an active AACA member for a lot longer than I've been involved in CCCA. Even so, the CCCA folks have recently made me their First Vice President. CCCA's President is also a long time AACA member, but he will be unable to attend.<P>Anyway, I will be available for target practice. It should be an interesting session.<p>[ 02-06-2002: Message edited by: Chuck Conrad ]

[Dave@Moon]

Chuck,<P>I've been familiar with the CCCA definition of "Classic" for decades and I've always had one problem with it. Why is 1948 given as such an arbitrary cutoff date? <P>I understand how the CCCA seeks to preserve an aspect of motoring that the privileged classes enjoyed during the era of coachbuilding and the like. However, that class and syle of motoring hardly died with the Lincoln Continental. There have been many equally exclusive automotive creations regularly manufactured since 1948, some through exclusive coachbuilders (i.e. the Ghia Imperials, Arnolt Jaguars and Bristols, etc.) or equally well made creations in house (1.e. the Aston-Martin Lagonda, the R-R Carmargue, etc.).<P>I've seen a number of cars such as these receiving treatment that they'd never see if their owners understood that they had a vehicle of such limited cachet. When will manufactured runs of cars such as these be deemed worthy of inclusion in the recognized Full Classics category?<p>[ 02-06-2002: Message edited by: Dave@Moon ]

[Dave@Moon]

p.s. In answering my question, please don't fall back on the process of accepting applications for inclusion on an individual vehicle basis. That process ignores completely the similiarity of the production runs of pre- and post-war cars of this nature, and (to those of us on the outside) smacks of an exclusive club rather than the recognition of any particular vehicle's merit.

[Guest]

Dave@moon,<P>Lets take this question to the CCCA forum. <P>Thanks,<P>Peter

[Guest]

To 1937hd45 & HVS: I am glad that not every one in the CCCA takes your view on explaining what a Classic is. Would one of you two be kind enough to explain what a Classic car is to me. Also would one of you two be kind enough to explain the Weymann method of coach building.

[Guest Chuck Conrad]

Well, since Peter seems to have moved this AACA string over to the CCCA Forum, I'll welcome your coments.<P>The 1948 date is indeed arbitrary, but, it is the date the members of our club have decided they like. Our National Board of Directors answers to the Club's members. If enough members expressed opinions that the club should make changes, then I'm sure the Board would listen. They do care what people think, but they want to hear it from our members. Most (but certainly not all) the cries for CCCA to change our dates come from outside the Club. If you are that interested and not a member, you really should join us. You might even have fun.<P>Originally, CCCA only recognized cars built before World War II. The original CCCA Constitution said that as far as the Club was concerned, Classic Cars were built "in the main" between 1925 and 1942. The term "in the main" means "mostly" but it is not an absolute. They were probably right about this. The cars you REALLY think of as Clasics, like Auburn Boattail Speedsters, Duesenbergs, Cords, V-12 Packards, V-16 Cadillacs and the like were definitely a product of the Depression Era. Many of the companies who made them failed, and soon these amazing cars were no longer being produced. The advent of World War II in America took the automotive industry to a screeching halt, so it's beginning makes it a very logical ending date. The world was never the same after December 7, 1941. <P>In the early 1970's, the Club decided to include post-war Lincoln Continentals. This was done to increase membership. It did not work. There was no huge rush of Continental owners lined up to join. Again in an effort to boost membership, CCCA decided to recognize some series of Cadillacs up to 1948. (1947 for Series 60 & 62) This seemed logical, since they had already recognized the Lincolns. I don't know if this immediately increased membership or not, but the inclusion of these cars was very popular with some members, since they do make excellent tour cars. Power steering and a Hydramatic transmission can be very appealing. Even so, some members thought the Club was selling out it's values.<P>History has a way of repeating itself. At the last CCCA Annual Meeting the membership voted to accept pre-1925 cars that are "virtually the same as" cars we already accept. This passed by a margin of better than five to one. <P>You may not think that this is a big step, but in CCCA terms it is. Things move very slowly around here. That's probably good. <P>Even though this small change passed by a wide margin, some people are not at all happy about it. They say it "dilutes the value" of the Club's Standards. I don't happen to agree with them, but they are certainly welcome to express their opinions. I think a Duesenberg will still be a Duesenberg. Allowing a few more cars to participate in our events will not make one of them any less special.<P>Like it or not though, CCCA is a niche club. It features exceptional cars, high quality events, and very interesting people. That's been a pretty good combination for the last 50 years. As long as we don't change that formula, the Club will prosper. <P>Try it, you might like it.

[Guest]

If I may add a little more background: The Classic Car Club, as I have mentioned in posts elsewhere, is as much about an era as about the cars. The Classic Era began at a time when free spending was the style of those who could afford it. Modern technology had moved society to a position where mechanical equipment and automobiles in particular were no longer considered luxuries, but necessities. Those folks who could afford more (yes, that dreaded $ sign) asked for and received just that in the auto world. The Great Depression changed much of that attitude, but it took more than a decade to finally reach a point where the differences between an inexpensive car and an expensive one were minimized. Look at the difference between a 1925 Chevrolet and a 1925 Packard and then at a 1941 Chevrolet and a 41 Packard to see what I mean. The historical end to this period was December 7, 1941 in this country and even earlier in Europe, thanks to Mr Hitler. <BR>Now to the Club: The inclusion of the Post-war Continentals actually happened earlier than Chuck mentions, during the mid-50's. And, yes, it was initially done to encourage new members. It was an absolute failure. What it did open up was the idea that there were cars built just after the war, during the frenzied seller's market, that were "virtually identical" to those built prior to WWII. It seemed logical to include those cars, such as Cadillac through 1947 and the 48 75 series, Packard through 47, Chrysler Crown Imperial through 48, Rolls-Royce and Bentley and several other Foreign built cars. By 1948 the auto industry was well on the way toward a new and different, and ultimately better, way of building and merchandizing their wares. The attitudes and life styles of the world had changed. There would never again be a market for major manufacturers to sell individually designed, coachbuilt cars or their derivatives. Yes, there were exceptions. The Coachbuilding industry hung on in Europe partly because of their ability to adapt to production design work. Some designs, particularly British and European, hung onto pre war characteristics beyond the 1948 date. So, whatever date the Club sets, is an arbitrary one. <BR>To maintain a "niche" in the Collector Car World, it is necessary to set parameters. Nearly all Clubs do: AACA is 25 years and older, HCCA is pre 1916, VSCCA is pre-1960, Buick Club is Buick, RROC is Rolls-Royce and Bentley, etc. The CCCA date parameters started as 1925 through 1942. This was blurred on the new end some years ago with the acceptance of 1946 -1948 cars that were "Virtually Identical" to 1942 models. Now the Club has taken a similar action on the earlier end of the spectrum with the acceptance of cars built before 1925 that are "Virtually Identical" to accepted 1925 models. Is it perfect? Of course not. Is it interesting and exciting? Absolutely! <BR>In my experience, the members of theis Club are a very open minded group. Most own cars that are not Full Classics™, and enjoy them immensely. I'm one of them. I enjoy Vintage Racing with our K-1 Allard. Is it a Full Classic™? Not now or ever! Is it a great car? You bet! My sincere advice is to enjoy what you have to its fullest and if you wish to participate in another portion of the Car Collecting Hobby, do so, with whatever type of vehicle fits the criteria.<BR>Jon Lee

[1937hd45]

Packard53, A classic car is discribed in the CCCA membership application. The Weymann body was a popular light weight body made by C.T Weymann. It used a fabric covering over a wood frame in place of sheet metal. Bently LeMans racers are the most popular Weymann bodied cars. For more detailed history there is a fine article in Automobile Quarterly Vol 14 #3.