ATVrider

I think you are right ! - caught me confusing what I thought I can remember - clearly later "option" final drive ratios. But the essential point of my discussion remains - there can be no question that each era of auto technology brings marvelous improvements in comfort, performance, durability, and driveability - again, who can deny that the 1941 Cadillac 60 Special is a magnificent automobile, vastly superior to the ordinary car of ITS era, and certianly much more pleasant to drive, and a much more competent performer, than its 1931 counterpart in the Cadillac line. That hypothetical 1931 Cadillac V-16 Empress Imperial Town car I brought up as an example, had an incredibly low final drive ratio, probably around 4.6 or worse. It could not have been as comfortable at ANY speed, especially on a hot day, as an "factory air" equipped 1941. And it's engine certainly wouldnt have survived very long even ATTEMPTING to reach the speeds that a 1941 could cruise effortlessly at for as long as its driver could stay awake ! But again, the argument of many of our members WHO OWNED 1941 Cadillac 60 Specials AT THE TIME, was this magnificent automobile was "too modern" in its shape and design, to be a reprsentative of the classic era. Be assured I was not suggesting that we dis-enfranchise ANY car already holding "classic" status - for better or worse, we, as CCCA members have to accept what our elected representatives have done in our name. What I was suggesting, is that the argument that a car someone likes, (or wants to sell), is "better" in some way, then a car already granted CCCA status, is not the best argument for its consideration. As I noted, the Horseless Carriage Club Of America has done very nicely by keeping to its long-established traditions. By contrast, some of us feel the AACA has not been well-served by just getting raw membership numbers. As you know, they declare any old car that has managed to survive for twenty five years is somehow an 'antique' ! And as a side note - again - please dont confuse CCCA members with our cars ! Our cars represent a unique period in our history, not all of which is commendable! Those long hoods, absurdly large engines may, to some, seem to represent the arrogance of the market to which they were directed. But social commentary is not what we are about here. We in the CCCA are CAR BUFF guys, many of whom are of relatively modest means, and just about ALL of us like ALL old cars (along with just about anything else that can go "whir" !). So - to repeat my question...what about "classic" or "antique" status for my nice Honda ATV...?

I just got a big box with my new windshield for my Honda ATV. It tells me that new windshield is "classic". I rode my ATV recently to a "fast food" joint where I enjoyed my "classic coke" with my "classic chicken". Pursuant to the present "25 year" rule of the AACA, it will be only a few more years before my Toyota Corolla will be an ANTIQUE. Yes, the general public has become aware of the word "classic". Many of us wish they would think a bit about what the word REALLY means. Obviously, as the world changes, as our culture changes, our language and manner of speaking changes. The answer to Wes's question can be found by thinking WHY there is a Classic Car Club Of America in the first place ! Are we a bunch of snobs ? Of COURSE not ! Yes, the CARS we favor in this particular club are typically bigger, faster, more elegant, and more powerful than the ordinary old car of their era. But those of us older members can only smile in astonishment when you call us 'snobs'. We are not our CARS ! Let me remind you younger folk, that in our early years, we were LAUGHED at for bothering with these big elegant but out-of-date relics of an earlier era. To get a "flavor" of how we were looked down on for rescuing the cars we decided to call "classics", take a look/listen at old television and radio shows from the 1950's. Remember the old I LOVE LUCY series ? There are at least three of those shows that center on how stupid LUCY was, for bothering with a big old car that any of us would love to get our hands on now. Yes, it is correct to say that the word "classic" has evolved. The dictionary our early members relied on had the traditional "classic" definition of this now popular word " UNIQUE, OF FIRST RANK..REPRESENTING THE HIGHEST STANDARD OF EXCELLENCE". The parallel meaning for those educated in the arts, was " FORM FOLLOWS FUNCTION". I recommend the book "CLASSIC CARS AND ANTIQUES" by Life Member Robert J. Gottlieb, first published in 1952, to give people a better idea of what we were all about, when the classic car movement first got going. In that book, Bob correctly points out that (in those days) it was absurd to spend a hundred dollars trying to restore a classic car, when a "mint" one can be purchased for $75 ! Yes, our definition of the word "classic" has evolved. Some of us dont see the point of widening our membership. Take a look at our own club publication (THE CLASSIC CAR Fall 1968 Vol XVII, Page 26. A LOT of our members LIKE being a small "niche" club. The issue before the Club at that time, was whether to "admit" the 1941 Cadillac Fleetwood Series 60 Special. C'mon, folks. Who would deny the '41 Cad. 60S is an elegant, luxurious car. You could have ordered one new with FACTORY AIR CONDITIONING, the reliable Hydramatic automatic transmission. With its optional 3.08 rear axle ratio, pressurized cooling system, and "modern" type "insert" connecting rod bearings, wouldn't we rather take THAT for a 100 mph trip across the desert, than a much more elegant 1931 Cadillac Empress Imperial V-16 town car ? The point is, you will find strong arguments that the '41 Cad. was simply too modern to be included - arguments by CCCA members who OWNED '41 Cad. 60S cars! Well, that particular issue is "water over the dam". The "camel got its nose" under the tent, so we now have, along with the '41 Cad. Fleetwood, whole bunches of streamlined cars that no-one can doubt are much more pleasant to drive than the cars we originally felt conformed to our definition of what constitutes a classic car. Down thru the years, our Club has had "National Policy Surveys". Each time, the membership rejected the idea of expansion, clearly reflecting our rules that "license to dillute is license to destroy". Now that we have flooded our membership with people who do not see these issues as clearly as some of the older folk, we keep expanding our list of cars. When does it end ? Should we think about why the Horseless Carriage Club Of America continues to thrive, even tho it stands firm that it will not expand its definition of acceptable cars ? Or should we go the way of the AACA, where my Toyota Corolla WILL be an "antique" acceptable to them, in just a few more years ! Of COURSE old Buicks are excellent cars, and of COURSE we have in recent years let in cars that are not as "good" as the car YOU might want to have US call a "classic". Thanks to what our National Board has "admitted" to "classic status", it is hard to argue against old Buicks, or just about ANYTHING you like (or want to sell for a higher price) as a "classic". Say - what about my Honda ATV. It runs good. When should I apply for "classic" status ?

I like Packards so I do peek at you guys from time to time. Looks like I missed something really wild. Can understand why whatever this guy did in here is gone and was erased as it must have been a real gross out. Just curious; if this dude keeps coming back and posting bad sex or race hate crap, why dont one or more of you quick make a print-out before it gets erased and take it to some police agency. I'm no computer geek but have heard that some federal or state agency will prosecute these guys and keep them out forever. Or maybe you could have your web guy save a copy for that reason. How long did the bad junk stay on here anyway? I am no old prude/guy, but there are limits.

Be careful ! It is SOOO easy to "fall in love" with an old derelict. Sad fact is, you can ALWAYS buy a good running and nice looking car MUCH cheaper than trying to resurrect a derelict, even if you did ALL the labor yourself. here's a suggestion. Go to as many old car events as you can. Sooner or later, you are bound to link up with a guy who has a car like the derelict you may be "falling in love" with. Get a chance to look over the car like the derelict, maybe even get a ride in or even drive it. Just about EVERY guy I ever knew who is a legit old car buff will go out of his way to "take you under his wing" and help you make up your mind what your objectives are. If you do that, you just may find, that the attraction of the old derelict, is what is running around in your "mind's eye" as to how much fun you could have with it when it is done. Now that you are back to reality, save your money and go out and buy one like it that is in service as a running, enjoyable vehicle! I gaurantee you, that with just about ANY old car, no matter how nice it is when you got it, you will STILL find there is plenty to do with it that will keep you busy !

Still not sure what the correct answer is re: Packard eight cyl engines after the 1930's. I'm pretty sure the 1941-1947 "120" - "Clipper Delux" - and the "356" "Clipper Super/Custom" were entirely different motor castings, with the "356" being much larger and more powerful than the "120". Now here's where I remain puzzled. Sometime in the late 1940's, Packard dropped BOTH engines, and came out with the "288 / 327" series motor blocks. Is it correct that the "288-327" series are the same basic casting, but entirely new and different blocks from the above earlier eights ? Another question. What engine was in the 1950 "Custom" series (first year of Ultramatic, but last year for the "bath-tub" body). Was 1949, or was it 1950 that is last year of the 356 in the most expensive Packards? I had a 1951 "400/Patrician", which I know was a "327" Another question - the "359" was NOT the same block casting as the earlier "356" (or at least I think so). Is the '54 "359" just a bored and stroked "288 - 327" ?