After Long Thread, a majority opinion?

[Dynaflash8]

QUOTE: From Davie Fields - I vote yes on the big Buicks. UNQUOTE. Thanks Dave. Appreciate your support. I'm still thinking.

[K8096]

Aye, laddie, it be much appriciated, it 'tis.

One of the stated missions of the original members was to perserve extradornary cars that were not old enough to classify as antiques. Unfortunately, the luxury cars, even those over 25 years old, today, suffer a simular fate. They have been scrapped for their engines, and their complicated air conditioning systems cause the owners and passengers to want for comfort. It is very unlikely that cars will every be manufactured again that will emulate the post Classic era luxury car, an era that ended in the mid to late 1970's. Something should be done to highlight and perserve this era of fine motoring.

Then why don't you restart the Milestone Car Club instead of constantly trying to water down the CCCA?

[Owen_Dyneto]

Then why don't you restart the Milestone Car Club instead of constantly trying to water down the CCCA?

As to the CCCA, I just hope the dilution stops where it is now, it's already over-watered. No further comment on that.

And sorry for taking this a bit off-topic, but what ever did happen to the Milestone Car Club? Dead as can be without a good reason other than the wrong people in charge? If I ever saw an opportunity for a national club that had defined a terrific niche of interest and would be successful, that was it. It certainly wasn't the lack of interest in the cars they intended to encompass.

[Dynaflash8]

QUOTE: Then why don't you restart the Milestone Car Club instead of constantly trying to water down the CCCA? UNQUOTE

The days of cold starting a club are, in my opinion, over. It's going to be all the current clubs can do, just to survive. Young people today are interested in electronics, computers and such; but not cars. We who number among current car enthusiasts are, on average, arriving at an advanced age. It's no secret what happens to each of us as we progress through advanced age. The cars young people see and drive are just no more than complicated, jelly-bean styled blobs on wheels to go from here to there, very dependably with little care, as well as with little ability to arouse enthusiasm. That's a good thing for John Q. Public, but not something that will instill lasting enthusiasm in automobiles. Modern automobiles have become throw-away chattel and nothing more, even the most expensive of them.

I did join CCCA, so I can speak as a member for now, and therefore do not feel like an interloper in giving my opinion. I've just finished reading a 1956 Trends Book again called "Classic Cars and Specials" by Robert Gottlieb. Gottlieb was one of the original guru's of the Classic car hobby. He refers to "Special Interest" cars and "Semi-Classic" cars in that book, repeatedly. It seems to me that a smart direction for expansion without dilution would be a separate Division of the Club where specifically identified autombiles, identified by an expert panel, would be designated as meeting those criteria (to be identified that panel or a separate panel of experts) that set them apart from the ordinary; and invited into a parallel but separate Division of the Club. As part of that, there could even be some redefining of current status; meaning those automobiles already involved in heated discussion. Or, they could be grandfathered. That seems to me like a very logical course that is both conservative and progressive. And again, the idea of there being cars that almost did, but didn't quite meet the definition of a "full Classic" was advanced by Mr. Gottlieb over fifty years ago; long before he could have realized there may come a day when there could be an "aging" of the old car hobby. A number of one car clubs have gone to having a separatge Division for "modified" cars of their brand, a road, in my opinion, gone too far. Of course that's my predjudice perhaps, that I don't need to go into here; other than to say that all of the clubs are recognizing the aging problem, and different ones are facing it in different ways.

Edited December 23, 2009 by Dynaflash8 (see edit history)

[jeff_a]

The Milestone Car Club Forum sure isn't getting much use. Maybe they should change their name to the Postwar Classics Car Club or the Postwar Thoroughbred Car Club and cater to the people who like Packard Caribbeans, 50's Lincolns, 60's Bentleys, etc. NOTE: When I wrote this, I hadn't noticed that this forum had been deleted.

Edited December 26, 2009 by jeff_a (see edit history)

[Guest BJM]

I had no idea the Milestone Car Club was defunct. Although I had not heard anything about it, I assumed it was operational.

The AACA replaced it. The CCCA - that people can understand. The Milestone Car Club, what does Milestone mean to the average Joe and where would that end?

[Guest x-100]

Hello to all! This is my first of comments to the forum. I have read with interest the comments about allowing 80 series Buicks into the CCCA. I agree with most comments made so far. The last photo uploaded by dynaflash 8 spurred my interest in another Brunn bodied Buick. The 1941 Buick Limited Brougham Towncar.

About 20 years ago I saw it for sale in Hemmings. It was listed for $175,00 and ran for 3 or 4 months. That last time it ran the price dropped to $115,000.

Does any one know the where abouts of this car, who owns it etc. etc.? Did it land in the late John O'Quinn's collection?

It was a great Brunn bodied car and only one was made. I'm certain CCCA would recognise it as a "Classic"

Dave

[Guest x-100]

Thought I shold list my car. I own a 1938 Buick Special 4Dr Touring Sedan.

[K8096]

I saw the cars on the latest CARavan in the Classic Car and I will say on that particular tour I'd have to eat my words. But many times you read the line up and it's about 30 - 40% 1941 & 1947 Cadillacs, and about 20% 1940's Packards.

[TG57Roadmaster]

Earl,

Pardon my intrusion on your thread, but I took the liberty to fill in the blanks on price and wheelbases,

using my Red Book National Used Car Market Report data, which is period and irrefutable.

1931 Series 86 3579 Coupe $1535 124”whb

Series 87 14731 sedan $1565

Series 87X 38 export $

1932 Series 86 1800 $1540 126”whb

Series 87 4089 $1570

Series 87X 3

1933 Series 86 758 $1540 130”whb

Series 86C 90 conv coupe $1575

Series 86S 401 sport coupe $1495

Series 87 1545 $1570

Series 88C 124 phaeton $1845

1934-1935 No Series 80

1936 through 1939 Series 80 cars carried name Roadmaster

1936 Series 80C 1064 4-door conv $1565 131”whb

Series 80 CX 165

Series 81 14985 sedan $1255

Series 81CX 343

1937 Series 80C 1040 humpback conv sedan $1856 131”whb

Series 80CX 115

Series 81 14637 $1518

Series 81X 344

Series 81F 452 formal divider window sedan $1641

Series 81FX 37

1938 & 1939 Series 80, 320.3 cid, 141 horsepower

1938 Series 80C 350 flatback conv sedan, 320 cid, 141 hp $1983 133”whb

Series 80CX 61

Series 81 4505 $1645

Series 81X 199

Series 81F 247 $1758

Series 81FX 49

Series 87 466 flatback sedan $1645

1939 Series 80C 3 flatback conv sedan $1983 133”whb

Series 81 5460 $1543

Series 81X 159

Series 81C 311 humpback conv sedan $1983

Series 81CX 53

Series 81F 303 $1758

Series 81FX 37

Series 87 20 $1543

1940 Series 80 cars carried the name Limited, 141 hp, 320.3 cid

1940 Series 80C 7 $1952 133”whb

Series 81 3810 $1553

Series 81X 88

Series 81C 230 $1952

Series 81CX 20

Series 81F 248 $1727

Series 81FX 22

Series 87 14 $1553

Series 87F 7 flatback formal sedan $1727

1940 Series 70 cars carried the name Roadmaster, 141 hp, 320.3 cid Series 76S Sport Cpe $1277 126”whb

Series 71 Tour Sed Trk $1359

Series 76C Conv Cpe $1431

Series 71C Conv Sport Phae Trk $1768

1941 Series 70 Roadmaster cars engine dual carbs, 165 hp, 320.3 cid

Series 71 10431 sedan $1364 126”whb

Series 71X 122 export sedan

Series 71C 312 conv sedan $1775

Series 71CX 14

Series 76C 1845 conv coupe $1457

Series 76CX 24

Series 76S 2784 sport coupe $1282

Series 76SX 50

Larger. This is Red Book data pertaining to 1937 Packards, but it provides a glimpse of the info that these sweet little books provide. Notice the comparable prices of the 120's to those of the Buicks.

What I can't find are the "X" export car prices, but Dave Corbin should be able to supply those to you. For what it's worth, if the Cadillac Series 60's are Classics, then, so too should be these Buicks, but then all the Junior Packard kids would want a seat at the table. Good luck on your nomination process, and, should you wish to, you can thank me personally for this small contribution at Philly in February.

Regards,

Tom Gibson

Edited December 28, 2009 by TG57Roadmaster (see edit history)

[Dynaflash8]

Thanks TG57Roadmaster. You've added a lot for sure. I will look forward to meeting you in Philly in February. I still don't know if I have the stomach to involve myself in what I'm afraid would be a difficult and unrewarding effort. I went through all of that 35 years ago in AACA. But, I'm still thinking and wondering about it.

[Dynaflash8]

X-100 - There was one 1940 Buick Roadmaster by Brunn, called the Townmaster, and it is still existing, and in the Chicago area. Mr. Brunn told me there were a half dozen or more of the 1941 Limited Brunn cars, and provided me with pictures of three different ones, as well as a 1941 Roadmaster Brunn convertible show car. To date, only the one 1941 Burnn has ever surfaced as a survivor, and it came out of Pittsburgh. It was shown one time, at Hershey, in rather poor condition, about 20 years ago. I have no idea where it might be today, and yes it or one like it was advertised at those prices in Hemmings some years ago.

Edited December 28, 2009 by Dynaflash8 (see edit history)

[K8096]

I thought Richard Kughn up in Michigan owned a dark green 1941 Buick towncar. 100 point car. I saw it at a Grand Classic about 15 years ago at the Dearborn Inn in the pouring rain.

[edinmass]

All of the posted info shows why the Buick is not a classic. Small displacement of 320 CID, and a relatively short wheelbase, as well as a very low sticker price. Very fine automobiles and a very good bargain for the money. But still not a classic.

[Guest x-100]

Thank you Dynaflash 8 & k8096 for the info. Any one else with info? I have never seen the car or the 1940 Townmaster. I saw awhile ago the Townmaster up for sale on the internet. Around $115,000 I think?!!!

Two great custom bodied cars. Too bad Cadillac executives were weak in the knees over Buick competition. Buick would have had great success with those cars if GM had let themcomtinue with Brunn.

[Dynaflash8]

Very short wheelbase? Wheelbase of 127 inches on the Roadmaster as I recall. Now that's a lot longer or as long as a lot of Cadillacs, Packards, Auburns and others edinmass. But, your comment is sort of what I've expected to see. As for price, I'd have to have comparables to agree or disagree. We're not talking about a Special, Super, or even a Century here. In 1941 the Century and Roadmaster outmusceled every other car in America for standard horsepower. Have a Happy New Year.

[Dynaflash8]

K8096 the Brunn-Limited that was brought to Hershey many years ago just for show, was sort of maroon, as I recall, and it looked amost like it was painted with a brush. I assume it was purchased and restored; probably as the car you know about.

[edinmass]

Dynaflash8, I have owned more than a dozen CCCA Classic cars. Not one of them had such a short wheelbase as 127", or only 320 cid. As I look in my garage 147" is the norm, with average displacement over 450 cid. My favorite car tips the scale at 6250 lbs. List price when new was 7500.00 . While I like and admire the Buicks of all the 30's and think they were one of the best cars for value on what the customer spent per dollar, I invite you to park it next to a 1931 P 1 Springfield Rolls, a 1933 Pierce 1247, or any of the other American super cars and while the Buick is a very fine machine, it can't hold it's own against them. P. S. A 32 Buick series 90 roadster has been on my want list for more than 20 years, I just have not found the right on yet. I have actually started collecting hard to find spare 32 90 series items and literature in anticipation of getting my hands on one.

[Dynaflash8]

QUOTE: with average displacement over 450 cid. UNQUOTE Will it generate 165 h.p? I don't think so. And this is done in 1941 with the 320 c.i.d. Prior to that it was 141 h.p. Pretty good engineering. And further, the point is too that you don't have one each of every recognized classic in your garage; just those which meet your personal criteria. Things change over time and different people have different interests. Although I can't tell you the cid for every recognized classic, I am certain that many have no more than 320 cid or a wheelbase longer than 127 inches, which in fact was only 126 inches in 1941; however the Series 90 was 139 inches with the same engine. So, then, how long was the wheelbase on a 1941 Cadillac, 1941 Packard 160? I don't know, but I think not much longer and the Cadillac mustered 150 hp. There are so many different things that can go into consideration, that no blanket approval or condemnation is appropriate.

[TG57Roadmaster]

Earl,

Here's some comparative data for '41...

Packard Super Eight 160; whb 127," 138," 148"

356cid, 160hp, 9 main bearings.

4-door sedan (127"whb) price, $1,795; 3,995 lbs.

Cadillac Series 62 V-8; whb 126," including 60-Special

346cid, 150hp, 3 main bearings.

4-door sedan price, $1,495; 4,030 lbs.

Buick Series 70 Eight; whb 126"

320.2cid, 165hp, 9 main bearings.

4-door sedan price, $1,364; 4,010 lbs.

Chrysler New Yorker Eight; whb 127.5"

323.5cid, 137hp, 6 main bearings.

4-door sedan price, $1,389; 3,775 lbs.

Lincoln Zephyr V-12; whb 125"

292cid, 120hp, 4 main bearings.

4-door sedan price, $1,541; 3,710 lbs.

Packard Eight 120; whb 127"

282.04cid, 120hp, 5 main bearings.

4-door sedan price, $1,291; 3,535 lbs.

Packard Eight Clipper; whb 127"

282.04cid, 125hp, 5 main bearings.

4-door sedan price, $1,420; 3,725 lbs.

TG

[Dynaflash8]

Thanks TG57Roadmaster. You must have some good data stuff there in your library. For my money you have to give some credit to Buick for superlative advanced technology with the engine......165 hp with 320 cubes. The Packard Super 8 was a wonderful engine, but they were having to go to 356 cubes to get 160 hp, and Cadillac was pulling more weight (by a smidge admittedly) with 15 hp less.

[Marty Roth]

Earl, you have my support on this issue.

I vote to include the 80 Series Buicks, or at least the big-series Convertible Sedan / Phaeton.

Two of our other cars are recognized, and the 1937 Model 80C is a good example of why recognition should be granted.

I consider my 1937 Buick 80C Phaeton, which is more accurately a Convertible Sedan, to equal or to surpass many other already-accepted examples. The Series 80C '37 Roadmaster 131" wheelbase was unique among Buicks, in that only the 80C had all four doors hinged at their front edge, eliminating the "suicide-door" danger. Specifically, this particular car is a 10,548 mile original car which was owned by the City of New York, and used as Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia's Parade Car for the many dignitaries and Generals of the WWII-Era. Its 320 ci. valve-in-head eight cylinder is dramatically more powerful than the 320 ci. eight cylinder engine of our 1930 Packard 7-Passenger Phaeton. That being said, it doesn't diminish my enjoyment of the Packard, nor does the "only" 126 inch wheelbase of the 1941 Cadillac Cabriolet Convertible Coupe diminish its virtue in comparison to the Packard's 134-1/2 inch wheelbase.

We drive them all, and enjoy them all. That, I believe is the true measure, but recognition is overdue.

[K8096]

The big Buicks are already Classics, it's called the 90 series.

[Dynaflash8]

QUOTE: The big Buicks are already Classics, it's called the 90 series. UNQUOTE Since I'm the guy who wrote the case to make that happen, I feel like I am in the best position to speak to this comment. I didn't try for the 70 & 80 Series in 1974 because I didn't want to push the bubble. I also did not apply for the 1940 Series 80 car, but it is now considered a Classic, by somebody elses request. It is the exact same car as the 1939 Series 80. So, the difference could only be labeled as nonsense. The biggest difference is that the Series 90 was longer, more finely appointed and a closed car. The only open cars were in the Series 80 after 1933. The Series 80 was discontinued in favor of the Series 70 in 1940, and in fact there were Brunn bodies contracted by Buick in 1940 and 1941 on the Roadmaster chassis as a trial, just the same as on the Series 90 chassis and I have pictures to prove it. However, Buick President Harlow Curtice decided to offer the Brunn through catalog and dealership only on the Series 90 chassis in 1941. Then, in fact, GM stopped him from doing that. If you go up to the Buick Club thread you'll see a long thread on the Buick Brunn-bodied cars of 1940 and 1941. If anyone cares to find a copy of the May-June 1971 issue of ANTIQUE AUTOMOBILE they will discover all there is to know about the Buicks built from 1931-1942, 19 pages worth. During the time that article was being written I personally corresponded with Hermann Brunn, William Hufstader, Charles Chayne and Edward Ragsdale. All were living at the time. If I felt there was an open mind to be found, I could easily establish the Classic properties of the Buick Series 80. However, I've come to the conclusion that this is not the time, based on what I've seen and heard. Why beat a dead dog?

[RDMSTER]

I would think that '38/'39 Buick 80 series ,especially the very low production Phaetons (350 +/- units produced each of these years) would be "pre approved" for CCCA certification as their only signifocant differences from the certified '40 80 series Buick are in the design of their dashboard and grill. This aside I won't show up yet at a CCCA event with my '39 81-c in an effort to spare others any embarrassment until what must be an oversight is corrected. As far as the engine size/wheelbase/low production/price measurements go the '38/'39 80 series Phaetons meet or exceed the qualifications of many CCCA Classics from A.C.,Auburn,and Bentley to Wills St. Claire. Interesting,these late '30's Buicks were favored by royalty in Scandinavia and the United Kingdom,so much so that Rolls Royce purchased a 1939 80 series car for engineering inspection (see Rolls Royce & Their Competitors '06-'65),and they were particularly impressed with it's 320 inch straight eight. As an aside, for those who find wheelbase of great importance,the '37 80 series cars had a shorter wheelbase than the 133" wheelbase found on the '38-'39 cars.

[TG57Roadmaster]

Looking strictly at '38, '39 & '40, something's not right, as the Packard Super Eights

on their 127"whb are much shorter than all the Buick 80-Series. For '38 & '39,

the Buicks outpower the Packard, and outweigh them in '39 & '40, ...

(Sedans used for comparison).

1938 Packard 1603: 127"whb; 320cid, 130hp, 9-main brg; 4,530 lbs; $2,790

1938 80 Rdmstr: 133"whb; 320cid, 141hp, 5-main brg; 4,245 lbs; $1,635

1939 Packard 1703: 127"whb; 320cid, 130hp, 9-main brg; 3,930 lbs; $1,732

1939 80 Rdmstr: 133"whb; 320cid, 141hp, 5-main brg; 4,247 lbs; $1,543

1940 Packard 1803: 127"whb; 356cid, 160hp, 9-main brg; 3,825 lbs; $1,632

1940 80 Limited: 133"whb; 320cid, 141hp, 5-main brg; 4,400 lbs; $1,553

Cost between the two was ever-narrowing; production numbers shift, too;

1940 saw many more Packard Super Eights made over the Buick 80,

so the "rarity in numbers" theory gets the boot.

1938 Packard: 1603, 1604, 1605, Super Eight, 2,478 prod.

1938 Buick 80, 6,100 prod.

1939 Packard: 1703, 1705, Super Eight, 3,962 prod.

1939 Buick80, 6,479 prod.

1940 Packard: 1803, 1804, 1805 (160) 5,662 prod; 1806, 1807, 1808 (180) 1,900 prod.

(No breakdowns of 127"whb models were available).

1940 Buick 80, 4,446 prod.

If it boils down to an engine thing, Packard's nine main bearings have

an advantage over the Buick's 5 mains, at least for '38-'40.

TG

<O:p</O:p

[Guest bkazmer]

This has brought out, at least to me, that there are engineering considerations and coachwork considerations, and to some extent they fight each other. F=ma still, so the best performance comes from the Century and the 127" wb 160's, not Roadmasters or lwb Packards! Yet from a coachwork standpoint of course the big cars were more luxurious and generally rarer (I suspect the fastest 160 is the business coupe and those are pretty rare).

It seems the current "rules" slightly favor the coachwork aspect over engineering. I don't think we are going to reach a right answer, just a number of generally well-informed opinions.

Isn't the pre-war Nash production convertible(1940?) eligible now? That certainly seems a coachwork driven case.

[Owen_Dyneto]

It was a great Brunn bodied car and only one was made. I'm certain CCCA would recognise it as a "Classic"

Yes, I'm sure they would if they haven't already recognized it. Just a matter of making an application. Consider that junior Packard 120s when fitted with custom coachwork have been accepted. Even a couple of similarly bodied Fords and many other non-Classic chassis with unique coachwork.

[Dynaflash8]

TG57ROADMASTER You have some wonderful stuff. Now I wonder, are there any policy-makers reading this thread?

[Dave Gelinas (XP-300)]

For those of you have been following this thread, you may want to check out the thread I started on Dec. 31. Also mentioned in this thread by dynaflash8. His quote, "If you go up to the Buick Club thread you'll see a long thread on the Buick Brunn-bodied cars of 1940 and 1941."

Some good information has started to develop in this thread on Brunn bodied Buicks.

"Have you seen "The Brunn ?"

Dave

BCA 26773

1938 Buick Special 4 door sidemounted touring sedan

Edited January 5, 2010 by xp-300 (see edit history)

[Dave Gelinas (XP-300)]

I'm certain that the photo below of the 1936 Buick is recognized by CCCA as a full classic, since it is a custom coach built car. It is a nice car but in my view still does not compare to the "Brunns". This town car was done by Brewster on a 1936 Buick Roadmaster. It is currently for sale with Hyman Ltd. in the $87,000 range.

"Have you seen "The Brunn?"

Dave

BCA 26773

1938 Buick Special 4 door sidemounted touring sedan

Edited January 5, 2010 by xp-300 (see edit history)

[Dave Gelinas (XP-300)]

Below are three more photos of the 1936 Buick Roadmaster Brewester Bodied Town Car. I found on the web. They were posted by conceptcarz.com

A very good web site on Classic and collecter cars.

"Have you seen "The Brunn ?"

Dave

BCA 26773

1938 Buick Special 4 door sidemounted touring sedan

Edited January 5, 2010 by xp-300 (see edit history)

[Dynaflash8]

Dave, the car you pictured above is a 1936 Buick; although if Brewster worked on it for two years, it could have been first registered in 1938. In Maryland, that would have given it a 1938 title at the time. A friend of mine in California owns an unrestored 1938 Buick Brewster-bodied car, which he purchased years ago at an auction in Southern California. Many years ago there was a 1940 Buick Brewster-bodied car shown yearly at Hershey; however that car did not look like a Buick, in that it had the heart-shaped grill similar to the Ford's that had a Brewster body. This would have been the first Buick to win in AACA''s Class 19 I believe. If I'm right, that man's name will be listed in the AACA Winner's Book. The first regular Limited to win in Class 19 (Classic class) was a 1942 Buick Limited that belonged to woman golf-star Gayle Mann's brother. My 1941 Buick Limited was the second one to win; that being in 1976.

[Dave Gelinas (XP-300)]

Hello Dynaflash8

I have seen that 1940 Town Car. It is owned by Robert Bahre of Paris, Maine. He is the former owner of The New Hampshire International Speedway.

The 1940 Brewster Buick Town Car was built for Mrs. Richard Whitney,

wife of the former president of the New York Stock Exchange. The rear compartment contains

2 crystal bud vases, vanity compartments, 2 fold-up jump seats and a polar bear rug.

I'm certain that this Buick is a reconized CCCA classic.

I have uploaded 4 photos of the car. I'm sorry to say it is not one of my favorite Buicks. I still prefer "The Brunns".

"Have you seen "The Brunn?"

Dave

BCA 26773

1938 Buick Special 4 door sidemounted touring sedan

Edited January 5, 2010 by xp-300 (see edit history)

[TG57Roadmaster]

One would think that if Buick had lumped the 80 & 90 Series cars together

earlier under the Limited moniker, that there would be no issue

for the 80 Series' recognition by the CCCA.

Larger, from the November, 1938 BUICK Magazine.

Larger, sorry for the bluish cast of this 1940 brochure image...

I have no dog in this fight, just an admiration of the largest Buicks, but, as mentioned before,

the later Series 80 cars are same in everything but name only.

TG

[Dynaflash8]

You always have good stuff TG57Roadmaster

[West Peterson]

Many years ago there was a 1940 Buick Brewster-bodied car shown yearly at Hershey; however that car did not look like a Buick, in that it had the heart-shaped grill similar to the Ford's that had a Brewster body. This would have been the first Buick to win in AACA''s Class 19 I believe. If I'm right, that man's name will be listed in the AACA Winner's Book.

Owned by Noel Thompson at the time. Dave is right, it is now owned by Bob Bahre.

[Dynaflash8]

Correct. Noel Thompson. I remembered the name the minute you typed it.

[Dynaflash8]

Well folks, I was sent an application. For better or worse I filled it out, wrote a long letter, provided some pictures and backup information, and a copy of the May-June 1971 issue of ANTIQUE AUTOMOBILE in which I authored a 19-page researched history concerning the 1931-1942 Buicks. This article was written with the help of personal correspondence with retired Buick leaders, Charles Chayne, William Hufstader, Edward Ragsdale, and custom body builder Hermann Brunn. That's about all I can do. This thread has been fairly split, but I got the feeling that the result was leaning toward agreement that the rest of the big Buicks of the period should join the Limiteds. Nothing ventured, nothing gained. As of now I will close this thread, insofar as my continuing comment. I want to thank everyone who has offered and provided help, and offered their thoughts, both positive and negative. Now let's get this cold weather behind us and go have some old car fun.

Edited January 12, 2010 by Dynaflash8 (see edit history)

[Buicksplus]

Good luck, Buick friend. I would not give it much of a chance since the committee rejected an application a few years ago for 31-39 80 Series Buicks. But times and committees do change, congrats for your initiative. Without it, surely nothing would change. I hope your proposal sails through, I think it would be good for the CCCA.