L Stellite - you are correct - lots of "mass produced" (read nice old middle class ordinary cars) are now recognized by the Classic Car Club Of America as "classics". But this was not always the case. If you had access to early issues of THE CLASSIC CAR (the magazine of the CCCA) and/or HANDBOOK AND DIRECTORY of the CCCA, you would see how we once were FAR more "exclusive" than our Club is today.

I know nothing about Daniels - I am not clear on the status of the MacFarlan..but I can tell you from personal experience the MacFarlan was one hell of a grand piece of machinery.

To summarize my previous "posts", over the years, ( in fact, as early as a few months after the CCCA's founding), people really got "caught up" in the mystique of the elegance, power..and, let's face it, "arrogant elitism" of the classic car. Thus it was not long before the National CCCA Board had people clamoring to admit this or that "almost as nice" ordinary middle class car.

This issue is really irrelevant now, given the way use of language, and "precision of speech" has pretty much gone out the window in our country. Each year we more and more each year cease to be a technically oriented one, our educational systems fail, and we fall further and further towards third world status.

As I noted in a "post" elsehwere in this forum, you can get an idea of what the word "classic" means now, by reading modern car buff publications, such as OLD CARS WEEKLY. Hot-rodded pick-up trucks, Volkswagens, etc.

We know that in today's times, people have become so obsessed with the word "classic", that most people today are incapable of describing ANY old used car without first prefacing their description with the word "classic".

Frankly, I am getting bored with this issue. It is a free country...who could argue with those who say ...."Damn the CCCA...we LIKE the word "classic", and we ARE going to use it on whatever we need to boost our ego on...". Like it or not, this IS the way it is.

May I suggest we ALL agree that this has been discussed enough. Should any of you STILL be interested in this issue, I suggest a review of prior "posts". You can find all arguments about this issue set forth. I think we are ALL repeating ourselves.

I suspect you guys are getting as tired as hearing my point of view, as I am reading my own arguments. My arguments are not relevant to today's car culture. My arguments are of no interest to the overwhelming majority of car buffs. Just walk thru your nearest major dept. store nd see where today's products are NOT made...! We have ceased to be a technically oriented manufacturing society, where "precision of speech" was essential.

There must be some technical issue regarding old cars that we can discuss...that would be more useful, interesting, and relevant to TODAY's car buffs.

Pete Hartmann
Big Springs, AZ

Stellite:

As I understand it, unless the 1924 McFarlan you mention produced an esentially identical car in 1925 or later, it would not be eligible for the CCCA. The CCCA defined the "classic era" as from 1925 to 1948. Naturally, there are very many fabulous cars produced outside this era, such as the McFarlan, but they are not eligible unless they are identical to later models produced during the "classic era".

Bill
Albuquerque, NM

I believe the TV6 was produced on order up to about 1928, maybe later,not sure.
It was one of the most powerful and expensive cars produced at that time.
Interestingly enough Jack Dempsey's 1926 McFarlan phaeton is up for sale and what a car that is!

Stellite:

I noticed that the McFarlan TV6 and 8 are on the Classics list. I would think the Don Lee car you mentioned would quite likely be eligible based on the "essentially identical" rule. But the owner or someone with an interest would have to apply to the classification committee and demonstrate that case. They have been busy of late with the addition of quite a few cars falling under this classification, see Jon Lee's posting earlier in this thread.

Bill
Albuquerque, NM

Yes, the CCCA just changed their by laws to allow pre 1925 cars that are "virtually identical" to those built in 1925 to apply for inclusion.
I imagine the example you cite would be accepted. Let's just hope they never accept any more post war cars.