alsancle

Dupont

Recommended Posts

The Ascott would have been Steve Antine's car, in the family from New as I remember. It was the first Springfield P1 I ever drove. It recently was sold by RM. That would have been a VMCCA meet, possibly at the Quabbin  Reservoir. I'm sure the Fred Roe photo collection would have more photos and photos of the individual cars.

Edited by edinmass (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have more photos also. This is from Alden Handy's photo album. Handy was a friend of Waldor and an accomplished photographer himself. I know he was at the opening of the Lars Anderson museum because I have his photos of the event and his admission ticket.

 

I knew Steve Antine as a member of the local VMCCA chapter in the 70s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎9‎/‎19‎/‎2017 at 5:38 PM, jeff_a said:

If the one that´s at The Nethercutt is not a Classic Car, I don´t know what is.

 

Where you been ?    EVERYTHING must be called a "classic" these days.

 

 What are you telling us...that you are one of those knuckle-draggers who dare still use the term "used" car, or " neat old" car,  or "car from the 1920"....or "car from the 1930"  ?

 

Shame on you....wake up.....I bet you cant go to a fast food joint, a plumber's shop,  or even a grocery store without finding more and more things are called "classic".

 

Go back under your rock..i know where you are coming from...you are probably one of those  silly old grouches who thinks the word "classic" means something OTHER than      " I have this thing I want to unload".....!

 

Yes - there WAS a time when the term "antique car" meant a car that had "antique" features...such as a "T" head motor....only "external contracting" brakes on the rear wheels only,  carbide operated headlights ( who remembers how to turn on the headlights of a REAL antique car...hint...carefully...!).  and the word "classic" was limited to only the "top-of-the-line"   largest, most powerful  super luxury cars of the late 1920's up to the start of World War II.

 

But those days are gone, along with the way  folks used language then.  So stop asking questions on how folks like to use the words "classic"...or, for that matter "antique" these days.

 

P.S.   Who remembers when Jack brought that thing to his first GRAND CLASSIC...all so pretty and perfectly restored...( no...not JB..i am referring to the Du Pont....!)     and then...at judging...the durn horn wouldn't work......!

Edited by SaddleRider
apple sauce (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I appreciate the traditional term Classic Car, but I just drove downtown to have a Classic Coke (TM). For some reason, I´m attracted more to the earlier part of the spectrum of Classic Cars. I would rather have a ´22 Leland Lincoln or a ´26 Packard Single Six than a ´38 Cadillac or ´41 Lincoln(not that I could afford any of them). That reminds me of a story I read once you might appreciate. In a memoir of a WWII infantryman, American soldiers somewhere in Europe were taking five. A bunch of them were exchanging pictures of their girlfriends or wives, but this guy was showing his buddy a picture of The Most Beautiful Car Ever Built(in his opinion), a 1941 Lincoln Continental. To his surprise, his pal countered by showing him a photo of a 1936 Cord 810. I guess it´s all a matter of taste.

Edited by jeff_a (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

His pal nailed it, maybe not the absolute most beautiful car ever, but the Cord 810/812 is surely in the top five.  Everyone loves the looks of a Cord, love of the looks of a Lincoln Continental is really more of an individual choice.

 

What a gearhead: alone (figuratively speaking), across the ocean, fighting for freedom and your life, not knowing if life or death awaits, and one carries car pictures in one's pocket......wow.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not really any of my business what other people like, but I have the exact opposite view of both the Cord and the Lincoln... I've never like any of the coffin-nose Cords and never understood why they were so much admired. I'm not quite as put off the the '41 Continental but I'd take a '22 Packard or certainly any Silver Ghost or PI over either of them regardless of body style.

 

I'm reminded of something my former employer told me. His brother had a Cord roadster. Ted (my employer) loved the way it looked... he'd say "It was a magnificent car. A crowd would gather everywhere it broke down."

Edited by JV Puleo (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joe,  a well maintained Cord is as reliable as any other prewar car.  The key issue being "well maintained".   There is quite a styling spread between 1930 and 1936.  Compare the differences between just about any 1930 car and any 1936 car.  For me,  1932 is the prime prewar year for general esthetics.   Just about everybody made a good looking car that year.  

 

As the saying goes:  "There is an A** for every seat".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that 1932 was an extremely good year. Actually, I tend to feel it's all gone downhill from there. But, that requires that the main focus be on what it looks like rather than what it works like... I tend to feel the great age of automotive engineering was over by about 1925 and that most everything since has been an improvement on existing ideas. But... How boring would it be if everyone liked the same thing?

 

Back in the 70s I did business with a local company, Palmer Spring, in business since the 1830s. At the time, the "old timer" (he may have been a member of the Palmer family) that ran the place had been there since the 20s. One day he reminisced to me about an beautiful L29 he could have bought for a pittance when it was only two or three years old... after the 4th or 5th time it had broken a front spring and the owner was so disgusted with it that he was ready to just about give it away. It seems it couldn't handle car tracks very well, especially if you hit one when turning. We don't have many car tracks left to run into - or railroad tracks either so I'm not sure a modern driver would even be aware there was a problem. I suspect there is a lot of that where conditions have changed radically in the last 100 years. We probably have a fairly distorted vision of what driving in the mid 30s or earlier was like.

Edited by JV Puleo
error (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, alsancle said:

Joe,  a well maintained Cord is as reliable as any other prewar car.  The key issue being "well maintained".   There is quite a styling spread between 1930 and 1936.  Compare the differences between just about any 1930 car and any 1936 car.  For me,  1932 is the prime prewar year for general esthetics.   Just about everybody made a good looking car that year.  

 

As the saying goes:  "There is an A** for every seat".

As far as drive-ability, I would tell you that a 1935/1936 Auburn 8 to be the second finest driving pre -1953 cars made and a well sorted Cord 810/812 is the first finest driving pre-1953 car.  One of the keys of the Auburn was that in the process to make a cost effective car they deleted a lot of unessential weight (which allows for very nice handling feel) matched to decent horsepower and gearing.  As to the Cord, it too is lighter weight than comparable cars it's size and also good horsepower and gearing. 

Edited by John_Mereness (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The key to what John is saying is "well sorted", or maybe a better way of putting it is "restored to new".

 

I have a Cord 812 that has never been restored, and while it runs and drives fine, you can tell by the way it handles that it's worn...heavy steering, doesn't like sharp turns, and so forth.

 

On the other side of the coin, I've driven a perfectly restored Cord 812, and it was an absolute delight.  Easy steering, very responsive, and, as John states, one of the best driving cars of the 30's.

 

It ALL depends on condition of mechanical components.

 

We just got a '27 Dodge cabriolet back on the road, a car that someone would probably say is "trucky" driving.  This car has rebuilt mechanicals, including a refurbished steering gear, and it is an absolute delight to driver, easy to steer and comfortable to drive, not "trucky" at all...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Drive-ability "as new" is a concept few people ever "get right"  in a restoration - they may make the attempt, but it takes plenty of additional work to get there - it is not uncommon for me to tackle something several times until it is right (and it is usually not for lack of a comprehensive first try - it is some sort of anomaly that happens when restoring 30's cars).   A good example is that you generally at some time or another will find my cars on the local race track front end engineering guys Hunter alignment rack - he has set several up per the owner's manual to say "what were they thinking, I think they wrote this wrong or ... - this must be a guide for a starting point when you are at zero ground") and then he tweaks and it is the difference between night and day (and my guess was it was day or close to day to begin with).

 

So, when we have an Auburn out a lot of people shift the conversation to Cords:  When they ask about Cords my dad has a line of Questions/Answers:

 

1. Are you an engineer ?

If answer is no, then

2. Are you handy ?

If the answer is no then

3. Do you have a lot of disposable income ?

And, if the answer is no, then reply is:

"You really need one of the three to successfully own a Cord or you will never be happy with anything other than its looks"

 

By the way:  Given this is the DuPont page, I would tell you what I like about the DuPont appears to have a component part manufacture mentality as to its drivetrain  and I would think you could get one to do what it is supposed to and have an easier time of it than most other of its peers. 

 

I can imagine a Cord being pretty mind blowing to the average mechanic when new matched to such as a RRPI or .....

Edited by John_Mereness (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like you father's questions, but I'd probably say they pertain to most old cars or, at least those that aren't the cookie-cutter mass consumption products. It would be pretty near universally true of brass cars too (except maybe the Model T, which has been studied ad nauseam). I'm always surprised by the number of people involved with old cars that seem to only be interested in what they look like.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Beautiful car pughs had for a while. Same as the illustration in every way. I had it posted because it shows in print the 140 h.p. the 322 Continental straight eight is capable of, according to Du Pont Motors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, edinmass said:

The 140 HP was a pipe dream. Maybe 115, maybe.

 

Eddy, you are not as appreciative of the Dupont as you should be.  Those Continentals were completely torn down and rebuilt to higher spec by Dupont.  140 may be a bit high, but everybody was guilty of that including Duesenberg.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like your new avatar. I have played around with one of the DuPont cars, (speedster) they look nice. I would like to own one. They float my boat in many ways, but as a chassis and platform, I am underwhelmed. Think early Auburn eight, and toss on a very heavy body in the Waterhouse instance. The carburation and ignition were Stude President in their approach. I would call them good lower to mid range chassis of the era for their level of quaility as compared to most other Classics. I have recently inspected the Waterhouse car, it seems to be a twenty year old restoration that has been driven several thousand miles. The body seems to overpower the chassis. I like it, and would own it in a heartbeat. I think the biggest reason it suffers the way it does is production was almost nil. Put the body on a 385 CID Pierce, Packard, or Chrysler, and the engine and chassis upgrades look substantial. Ed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Model H was a 1928 design, sold 28-30.  So it is earlier than the big eight cars you are comparing it to.  I know drivability is king for you, while I fall for rarity and coolness.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/1/2017 at 1:24 AM, pughs said:

DCP_0418.thumb.JPG.a8bdb5e53b7695e9e10ee13e702e5fcf.JPG

 Here are a couple of photos of a 1930 DuPont that I had for a time while selling it for the family of a friend who passed away.DCP_0522.thumb.JPG.d41317c94360d2aa52af0f6aa2c64597.JPG 

I thought this Dupont had a really good look to it in the Dark Brown (all be it's re-restoration is much more flashy and shows off the body lines more) a really good period look - fell in love with it when featured on CCCA magazine cover eons ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A few more comments on the Waterhouse from the CCCA article:

 

1.  The gentleman that restored it the first time bought it in the early 50s when he was still a kid.  He went to look at a car that was supposed to be a 540k but ended up bring a K, but this was sitting nearby.  He owned it a long time.

 

2.  It was built for the 32 NY autoshow and was shown along with the only 2 model H DuPont's built.

 

3.  There are no other known Waterhouse Victoria survivors.

 

4. Originally it was all brown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now