CCCA Future

[Restorer32]

There are exceptions of course. We were involved with a '49 Bentley James Young Sedanca Coupe that certainly was a throwback to the Classic pre war era. Full wooden body framing, all aluminum hand formed body. Total of 6 built, all slightly different depending on the desires of the purchasers. The original purchaser of this car made his fortune selling provisions to the military in WW II so I suppose one could say his mindset and taste was still that of his pre war contemporaries.

[Dynaflash8]

What were the fears? Dissolution due to dropping membership? Whats the minimum number of members before talks of dissolution occur? I'll bet the CCCA isn't even close.

On another note, why can't cars be removed from the roster? Such as all the Cadillac production cars like the 62 series and the postwar 60 S?

Matt and others, as an owner of a 1936 Buick 81 Roadmaster sedan, I became familiar with the 36 Century. It should be a full classic as much as some Cadillacs, Packards and the post war cars. There was a lot of thought that went into it's 1936 incarnation. Different front clip, 320 8 cyl, different "highway" rear axle ratio, smaller wheels.

If memory serves, I believe the '36 Century was supposedly also driven by Ab Jenkins and named the Century because he proved it could run 100 miles per hour. A '39 Century won the first stock car race at Langhorne Speedway also, but was denied victory when it ran out of gas, officials said, on the last lap, but later recalculations proved that laps were miscounted and driver Mark Light did finish the race first.

Edited February 16, 2012 by Dynaflash8 (see edit history)

[Dynaflash8]

Regarding inclusion of the late 30's/early 40's Phaetons, for me, defined as 4 door convertibles - it is my understanding that there was nothing "production" about them. In that, they had to be hand assembled and prepared outside a normal Buick production line. Just like a "Woodie".

Let's see, it's unique in that low numbers of them were made and they were a burden to the normal objective of Buick (or Cadillac or Packard) to mass produce autos, therefore, someone made a decision that went against the grain to have a run of them produced. Full Classic.

The CCCA definition is that all cars in a year or series have to be included if any are; thus the 1935 Auburn 8 cylinder sedan is included, as well as the 1935 Auburn Speedster. And yes, there is some indication on the rear doors of my 1939 Buick Special 4-door convertible that some factory re-engineering was done on the doors, and that maybe, and I say maybe, the doors were made from sedan doors. This car was manufactured in November, 1938, so it is very early in the year and that could account from some of what I have observed during restoration. And also BJM, you're right they are actually 4-door convertibles, but Buick literature took license and referred to them as Phaetons, so many collectors like myself do also.

Edited February 16, 2012 by Dynaflash8 (see edit history)

[Dynaflash8]

I tend to think of Classics this way...What car would the richest family in town who lived in the mansion on top of the hill likely have had in their garage? Not as their "every day" car but the car they kept for special occasions or to drive to the club or to the theatre or when they just wanted to show that they were "somebody". If you look at it that way the list of Full Classics shrinks a bit, at least in my mind.

Maybe it depends on the size of the town, but in a lot of towns, there was a big, black Buick sedan in that garage. Marty Roth's '37 81-C was used by none other than Mayor LaGuardia. But, I agree with you. I sort of think of a Classic in the same way.

[Restorer32]

Not my car, wish it were.

[alsancle]

To my knowledge all prewar Bentleys are RHD.

[Guest studepeople]

I read in the "Bulletin" Frank Wemple's letter to Al Kroemer. I think Frank nailed it. Which means that to dilute the "Club" with more and newer cars will not be the answer. As for me if the CCCA does go on and decide to do this even though a great many of us are opposed to this,I for one will elect to put my dollars somewhere else. It was the very reason I first joined the club over 25 years ago .The cars of " THE CLASSIC ERA". They were and are something "Special".

[Guest Water Jacket]

You're not alone, StudePresident. But as Peter Hartmann and others have pointed out, repeatedly, and, sadly, to deaf ears, 'tis all about $. Back in the 1970s, owners of muscle cars, hot rods, retrorods, niftyfifties, chrome baroque, and old cars in general, noted the oft large prices some CCCA Classics were getting at various ballyhooed auctions. And the cat's been out of the bag ever since.

As with aging boomers allowing in the Chrysler woodies of the '40s. There's naught "classic" about them. They've a certain amount of handwork in their wood-clad bodies, but otherwise, they're upper-mid-range '40s Chryslers. Not a bad thing at all.

But they're not "classic" cars, whether or not enough dollar-addled aging boomer egotists permit their inclusion. Have you noted that Chrysler is today launching a redo of the woodie? Makes you wonder if Chrysler Corp. has some moles in the CCCA. Marketing.

There are many good old cars out there. I had a Packard One-Twenty for many years. Wonderful car, one of the best prewar road cars from either side of the Atlantic.

But it wasn't a CCCA Classic, nor should it be, other than the wholly custom-bodied permutations.

The '40s Chrysler woodies are not custom-bodied. They're wood-clad production jobs with a certain amount of handwork. But then, even production-line Fords, Chevies, Plymouths of the '40s had much handwork by today's standards.

As pointed out on this Forum many, many times, there are many, many clubs for all manner of old cars.

But so long as Classic = $, and peoples' egos demand recognition via their possessions, things'll never be the same. Add to that the proliferation of people lacking the thorough education to appreciate the gamut, perspective of history.

I love Louis Armstrong, Sid Bechet. Great music which will survive the centuries, perhaps millenia.

But it's not classical music.

It's simple as that.

Thank you, sir, for trying, uphill and against the wind, to remind people what the CCCA is about; the care, maintenance, preservation, appreciation of 1920s through 1942 fine automobiles, and some of their immediate postwar continuations.

Not revisionist history or trying to get more money for whatever you happen to own and like that may or may not be sorta kinda.

Edited April 24, 2012 by Water Jacket (see edit history)

[Owen_Dyneto]

As a 40+ year member of CCCA, I too wrote to Al Kroemer and the CCCA board though I dwelled more on my displeasure over the T&C ruling, and the method by which it was reached. I did receive a long and thoughtfully composed reply from Kroemer which I appreciated; the short replies from some other board members were far less complimentary. I debated with myself long and hard about whether to renew my membership which I untimately did with great reluctance. I doubt CCCA gained more members from the T&C ruling than they lost over it. Not that I don't appreciate their problem with dwindling membership and think Frank Wemple has hit the problem square on the head.

[trimacar]

Yes, it's an interesting discussion. I can tell you that I came this-close to not renewing my CCCA membership due to the Chrysler fiasco (IMHO). I can absolutely guarantee that, should the club start letting in 50's cars, then I'm gone. This from a member who dearly loves the big Classics, and has been a member since the 1970's.

Not that one member lost will hurt the club. Financially, as stated, maybe the club would come out ahead, lose a few members, gain a few more. But, such a change would not be true to the purpose of the club.

What the CCCA should do is put some effort toward expanding membership by having more affordable tours and meets. I realize that the cars are special, but that doesn't mean that every event has to have $400 a night hotels. I haven't attended a CCCA meet in quite a while, because I don't want to spend thousands for a few days of driving.

There are hundreds, if not thousands, of Classic cars in the hands of hobbyists, that aren't in the CCCA roster, because the owners don't want to spend the money for the events, so why join the club........work on getting those people into the club, not diluting the club with pseudo-classics.............

[Dynaflash8]

What is, and is not considered a Classic is very erratic as well as purely subjective. What makes a 1935 Auburn sedan a Classic? Like many others, it is because somebody early on had enough sway to make it so. The big Buicks were twice the car of some of the recognized Classics before WWII, but they met with certain predudice back in the early 1950s when this club began. It's sort of like the Hatfields and McCoys......a time came when nobody knew why they were fighting. I'm no middle age boomer; I'm an old guy with over 50 years in this hobby. And, while you guys vasilated over whether to rejoin after the T&C inclusion, I didn't vasilate at all this year when I didn't renew. And unlike one of you who received an answer from Mr. Kroemer, I never received a reply to mine; and my letter to the Bulletin Editor was never printed or answered. So just keep on keeping on.

Edited April 27, 2012 by Dynaflash8 (see edit history)

[Matt Harwood]

The idea of adding more cars to the list also begs the question of whether THOSE owners will join. Based upon what evidence? It's not like adding cars to the roster magically makes people want to join a club, and the people who own cars like the Continental Mark II are probably already members of several clubs that serve them well (the LCOC is awesome). I'd also wager that a good number of the guys who own the cars that they are proposing already have Full Classics and are either already members or wouldn't be members anyway.

Adding cars to the roster in order to expand membership is faulty reasoning.

I'm also a little peeved by the addition of newer cars. I go on AACA tours, and I'm flat-out tired of touring in my slow as dirt 1929 Cadillac trying to keep up with the guy in a 1982 Ford Fairmont or a 1978 Lincoln Town Car or even a 1959 Chrysler. On CCCA caravans, most of the cars have similar capabilities, but will my '29 keep up with a Mark II? Hell no. Pretty soon all the old cars at the driving events are supplanted by the more comfortable, air conditioned "new" cars and even fewer of the grand old cars are seeing the light of day. Why do you think the late Cadillacs with automatic transmissions are the most popular CCCA tour cars? A lot of people naturally gravitate towards easy to drive, comfortable, no-compromises touring (it's also why they build hot rods, but I digress).

When we reach that point, I stop participating. I joined the CCCA and am an ardent defender of the founding principles, mostly because it practically guarantees all the cars on tour will be of roughly the same vintage and performance (no, my car is no match for a 1941 Cadillac, but you know what I'm getting at). I don't get excited about local AACA tours because I'm always the last guy to arrive at stops, usually when everyone else in their "modern" iron is rolling out. That's just no fun.

And park any '30s Classic next to a Mark II and see where the crowd goes. With the exception of, say, Barry Wolk's stunning Mark II convertible, they aren't really in the same league, no matter how you want to define it.

And really, why are we doing this if not for fun?

Edited April 25, 2012 by Matt Harwood (see edit history)

[Guest BJM]

CCCA is still fighting about the T&C inclusion? I thought they were included about 4-5 years ago and although it was not well received, it was water under the bridge.

Not a CCCA member, but am an AACA member. (As well as 4 total clubs)

ALL clubs are experiencing declining memberships I think. Age has caught up with the members that did the most.

Why does the CCCA need to grow? It was viable with lower numbers at one point in it's life. The publication might need cut back a little, as with other national groups the strength should be in chapter and region involvement anyway.

LCOC addresses the Mark II crowd I think. Matt is absolutely correct - just including the admittedly neat 1946-1959 or so limited production cars does NOT mean those owners would rush out and join the CCCA.

WooHoo I want to join this club now that they have included me! Sounds like high school all over again.

[Matt Harwood]

Why should the club be about growth to satisfy a financial requirement? Does everything always have to be about profits? While I don't know the specifics of how the club is run at the national level, I am a member of the Ohio Region CCCA board of directors, a purely volunteer position, and we make it work on a shoestring budget regardless of the number of members. I believe that the club exists to serve its members, not grow and become a profitable enterprise. Yes, I understand that money is necessary to continue operations, and that all the wonderful things the club does require cash. To be honest, I'd be happy to pay more in dues to support the organization in its current state. Heck, if the members love their high-end caravans so much, would they really object to higher dues that STILL cost less than one night in a posh hotel on tour? Perhaps we're looking in the wrong places to generate revenue to maintain the same standards of quality.

Surely there's a right-sized CCCA that serves its members well despite a smaller membership, and still remain financially viable.

As we've seen so often in our own favorite industry, as soon as you start chasing volume, quality inevitably suffers and reputations are tarnished.

[Guest BJM]

Matt

I couldn't agree more, you hit the nail on the head. The CCCA and all old car clubs have a mission. (and a mission statement).

I don't know but I think it's implied that part of the mission would be celebrating the Classic Era cars, preserving them and enjoying them in a club environment.

Nothing about required minimum size of the club.

[Matt Harwood]

So we do away with the age requirement to define a Classic, what then?

A new 2012 Rolls-Royce Phantom is an exclusive, hand-built, bespoke luxury car. Does it count?

A car like, say, the Pagani Zonda, which used Mercedes-Benz engines, was completely hand-built to customer specifications in very limited numbers, each one unique. Is it a Classic? I'd argue that it is the 21st century interpretation of, say, a Bentley 8-liter or Mercedes SSK.

What about the Maybach? Bugatti Veyron? Fisker?

I hate "slippery slope" arguments, but once you get rid of the model year criteria, it's going to open up a whole bunch of other cars that fit the "technical" definition of Classic, which is a custom, expensive, limited-production, hand-built car for the very wealthy that embodies the best engineering and craftsmanship of the era. Of course, we'll have a bunch of asterisks and notations why certain cars are in and others are out, but that seems like a lot of work and explaining to do instead of simply using the simple criteria we've always used.

It's also quite possible that the newer cars on Caravans aren't a reflection of "where the club wants to go" but merely an exercise in convenience. If those later cars weren't on the list would those people stop going on Caravans? Again, it is faulty logic to assume that correlation equals causation (i.e. that the members want newer cars on the list versus touring with newer cars out of convenience now that they are on the list). There are an awful lot of people who didn't care about owning Town and Countrys until they were Full Classics...

I'm not a stickler for the vision of the "founding fathers" because that just turns into an exercise in splitting hairs, but I am a stickler for the intent of the club and the cars on the list. The '50s weren't the '30s. The CCCA is as much a celebration of an era as of the machinery. Moving away from that, well, maybe the list will just become "cars that our committee thinks are cool and/or we put there because someone really, really begged us to do it."

I'd also like to point out that even if I didn't own a Full Classic, I'd be making the same arguments. I'm 42 years old, the youngest guy on every tour by a large margin. I've aspired to own a CCCA Full Classic in the traditional sense since I was 12 years old and went on my first Caravan, where we rode with friends because we didn't own a Full Classic. I didn't aspire to own a 1947 Cadillac 4-door sedan, I wanted a '30s car with at least eight cylinders, sidemounts, a trunk, wide whitewalls, and an upright grille with lots of chrome. I wanted a CCCA Full Classic because the CCCA was the top of the line as far as clubs were concerned. It was exclusive, yes, but only because of the cars themselves, not the people. I aspired to it because they put on the best events with the best cars. There are enough clubs and events for non-Classics, do we really need to dilute the club in pursuit of the almighty dollar?

If the CCCA starts putting on "Nifty Fiftes" shows, I'm gonna puke.

Edited April 25, 2012 by Matt Harwood
typo (see edit history)

[Matt Harwood]

I had one other thought. There were more than a few guys who knew that the Town and Country was going to be added to the list of Full Classics. Values practically doubled overnight when it was announced, and remained there.

It would be interesting to see how many guys currently on the CCCA board and selection committee own, say, a Continental Mark II or an early Eldorado...

[Restorer32]

I think you hit the nail on the head. Money talks.

[mrpushbutton]

I, like Matt am an avid fan of the 20s and 30s big classics, Packard being my poison. What I worry about with the CCCA is the fact that everyone is roughly the same age, and that mean average keeps going up every year. I belong to another group with a similar devotion, the American Theatre Organ Society, and we are losing membership yearly to attrition, we just keep going to funerals. Our guys rescued these sleeping musical giants from movie theatres in the 50s and 60s, often paying $300-$600 then for the whole thing and it was a going hobby. They installed these beasts in their basements and have enjoyed them for years. Now that they are dying off there are a glut of instruments on the market, all at once. Any young guy (we have a few) is able to pick these things up at the right price. The surviving family wants to get this huge "thing" out of the house so that they can sell it to settle the estate.

I see a few similarities with the CCCA and other marque clubs, the generational disconnect--I know of three, maybe four families where the sons like and want their father's CCCA cars and will take them after dad has gone to the great garage in the sky, the rest will cook a deal at the funeral home and bottom-line the car(s) quickly.

I don't have an easy answer for this, and I shudder to think what would happen if the value of the cars drops after supply exceeds demand. The street rod crowd scares me there; they are moving toward Classics and have just as much money to spend in some cases.

[Steve_Mack_CT]

Well, values could drop a bit but hopefully our collective concerns are for the good of the organization, mission and members, so the only real issue there is with speculators for the most part. Not that I wish anyone loses money on any car but the difference between an investment and a hobby has been discussed many times over. the drop may make these cars accessible to folks with an interest which may be good in the future.

I agree with the observation that there is a generational disconnect accross many marque clubs - in fact, one thinks of an MG as a sporty, younger person's type of car, fair enough? Well, have been on varioud MG T series sites lately and all the recent event pics are grey, just like AACA, CCCA, PAC, and probably NSRA type events. Most 60s car owners are at least my age (48) or much older. the price or percieved price of entry into a CCCA vehicle and the cost of events is an additional hurdle, so I can feel for the concerns of club leadership. Not an easy question for sure.

Will Classics largely end up with street rodders? Maybe they get a few more (shame to see any Classic rodded) but they are in the same boat in terms of aging with a limited younger following. Most of the younger guys in that group are more interested in more "mainstream" hot rods anyway. But that hobby is not attracting youth in great numbers either. So I guess, while some may go in that direction, I am not seeing it as an up and coming trend.

Just got my Bulletin and handbook yesterday and have not had time to read Frank's letter yet. A minor nit - they mis-spelled my wife's name in the directory! Another nit is that I sent an inquiry about activating my member ID so I could access "member's only" part of the site that went unanswered. We'll see how the year goes...

Not too much else to add that has not already been said but I guess I will only note that nothing is perfect. If CCCA adds cars I do not agree with or leaves deserving cars off the list I would chalk that up to an imperfect organization. I do not see branching off as viable, especially given the recent faillures of "Prewar Car" magazine and "The Golden Era Car Club" which I believe did not make a year. So you take the good and ignore the bad like anything else and see how it all looks on balance - since my perspective is a newcomer and not a lifer I am open but not "married" to the club so we'll see how the year goes...

Did T&C values really double?? On one hand, I can see where CCCA acceptance is still very relavent to cars of the Classic era but on the other, here is a model that like certain sports records, will carry a mental asterisk on the list for many members. Is this a permanent price bump?

Edited April 27, 2012 by Steve_Mack_CT
added thoughts (see edit history)

[mrpushbutton]

I would like to obtain a 32-34 packard sedan one day, when my kids are grown, and the way things are going that may be less expensive then than it is today. I'll be there to take up one of the cars, at least. I just don't think the museums will be able to house all of the cars that might come their way--all at once.

The street rod crowd has climbed every mountian there is to climb with Ford bodies and they are looking around for new, different projects. Go to any Autorama event, it's already started. Someone rodded the last remaining '34 Airstream Imperial.

[Steve_Mack_CT]

Agree some will go in that direction, John, and less valuable Classics are probably most vulnerable but I do not see what CCCA or anyone else, for that matter can do about that. I just don't see street rodding as a really popular hobby with younger people either, that's all. Another topic I guess but some more involved or in tune with the street rod scene may have better insight though.

[alsancle]

Prices dropping would be a good as I could hoard more cars .

Btw, Steve I have good news for you. I think at 48 you may be the 3rd youngest member of the club. Jason being the youngest with me a year younger than you. :).

The bad news is my dad at 87 is around the 100th youngest.

Edited April 27, 2012 by alsancle (see edit history)

[Dynaflash8]

The idea of adding more cars to the list also begs the question of whether THOSE owners will join. Based upon what evidence? It's not like adding cars to the roster magically makes people want to join a club, and the people who own cars like the Continental Mark II are probably already members of several clubs that serve them well (the LCOC is awesome). I'd also wager that a good number of the guys who own the cars that they are proposing already have Full Classics and are either already members or wouldn't be members anyway.

Adding cars to the roster in order to expand membership is faulty reasoning.

I'm also a little peeved by the addition of newer cars. I go on AACA tours, and I'm flat-out tired of touring in my slow as dirt 1929 Cadillac trying to keep up with the guy in a 1982 Ford Fairmont or a 1978 Lincoln Town Car or even a 1959 Chrysler. On CCCA caravans, most of the cars have similar capabilities, but will my '29 keep up with a Mark II? Hell no. Pretty soon all the old cars at the driving events are supplanted by the more comfortable, air conditioned "new" cars and even fewer of the grand old cars are seeing the light of day. Why do you think the late Cadillacs with automatic transmissions are the most popular CCCA tour cars? A lot of people naturally gravitate towards easy to drive, comfortable, no-compromises touring (it's also why they build hot rods, but I digress).

When we reach that point, I stop participating. I joined the CCCA and am an ardent defender of the founding principles, mostly because it practically guarantees all the cars on tour will be of roughly the same vintage and performance (no, my car is no match for a 1941 Cadillac, but you know what I'm getting at). I don't get excited about local AACA tours because I'm always the last guy to arrive at stops, usually when everyone else in their "modern" iron is rolling out. That's just no fun.

And park any '30s Classic next to a Mark II and see where the crowd goes. With the exception of, say, Barry Wolk's stunning Mark II convertible, they aren't really in the same league, no matter how you want to define it.

And really, why are we doing this if not for fun?

Matt: Before you knock AACA too much for their tours, I have to remind you that while I was on the Board, I got the AACA Sentimental Tour approved. It happens every other year --- this year at Staunton, VA --- and it covers 1928 trough 1958. Agree that a 1932 Buick has a hard time keeping up with a 1958 Buick, but most of the cars on the tour are older cars, and that's why I invented this tour. I would have stopped at 1954 which was the end of the straight 8 era, but I couldn't get it through that way.

[Steve_Mack_CT]

A.J., locally, Laferriere & Ed (Edinmass) are I think younger as well, I know Tom is 43 or 44 now, and recently joined CCCA as well. So there are a few of us who may be good custodians for those "cast off Classics" - but I bet some remain in their families, I guess time will tell.

I was in a Model A club for years, absolutely the youngest member and I am close to it in our AACA region as well. The only club I have ever belonged to where the people were younger on the whole was a Triumph owner's club. As noted, those clubs are greying as well. These kids don't know what they are missing.... I think a lot of it comes down to reaching a point in life where you can afford this stuff. I think that starts in the 40s - 50s for a lot of people.

BTW A.J. your dad looks and acts a he** of a lot younger than 87!!! Good for him!

[Guest BJM]

Unlike the Organs, CCCA Full Classics probably won't see a huge decline in value anytime soon. Like a Painting by a well known artist, some of their ownership is almost guaranteed by the rich folks in the audience.

I am 48. Personally, I think this subject is just going to have to be revisited in 20 years and see what the landscape looks like then. Rehashing the subject 2-3 times a year in this forum is interesting but does not change the present situation.

I see a lot of much less valuable cars transferred by will to the next generation who promptly sells them on ebay or Craigs List so they can use the cash for their own needs and interests. Wives do that too.

The passion has to underlie the purchase.

[mrpushbutton]

BJM--I sincerly hope they don't, but they are a commodity, and any commodity is subject to the laws of supply and demand. 30 years ago the organs and piecey-parts were extremely high. Low supply, high demand. I am just saying that a lot of cars could hit the market all at once.

[1937hd45]

I've owned a few Full Classic projects and worked on many over the years but never joined CCCA. Very sad if you change and accept Late Model vehicles. What's next the The Model T Ford Club of America allowing Chevrolets on the show field? Bob

[alsancle]

Bob, the CCCA publications are more than worth the 65 bucks/year. I think you would enjoy them.

I need to find out about these organs. If I ever build a barn I was thinking it would be cool to have a loft with large juke box or player piano. I could go for the organ though.

Steve, he may look young but my dad has been unable to keep with his pickup hockey 3 times/week and has cut back to only Mondays and Wednesdays.

[JV Puleo]

Did this ever happen with Brass cars? I remember back in the 70s my friends and I looked forward to the big slump in prices when all those early collectors, the ones who had the big brass cars, dropped out. At this point there is virtually no one left alive who even remembers seeing a brass car in regular use but that doesn't seem to have effected prices at all. In fact, there are precious few who can remember the early classics on the road as anything other than what my late father would have called a "jalopy." I don't see the big classics suddenly becoming the stuff of hot rods... even things like the big Pierce Arrow limo that was advertised here several months ago for something like $10,000. A huge restoration project but, were I not otherwise engaged, I'd have taken a serious look at it...

[edinmass]

Hi all, I joined the CCCA in 1986 when I was 19, the math makes me 46 now. There are a few others my age or younger in the club, and active, just not here on this forum. When the T&C came on board, I decided to leave the club and ask for my life membership back. (I am I believe the youngest ever life member of the club at age 29.) Several very long time members persuaded me to keep my membership, but my participation in club activities has been severely curtailed. My taste in cars was "guided" by many well known "founders and pillars" of the club. The first piece of advice I was given was....... "never buy a car with roll up windows and more than four seats, and be sure it also has overhead valves." It was good advice, and while I strayed a little, it has served me well. As what holds for the CCCA's future or the entire hobby, I suspect a slow decline in membership and a larger decline in car prices. The super cars will always do fine, but the plain old boxy sedans will fall in price. Maybe it will bring in some new younger members. One thing for sure, no one will crush or scrap the cars, so they will end up somewhere. Since 1984 I have been waiting to buy a DV-32 Stutz touring car for "reasonable" money, as I didn't have the 75,000 then. Now I don't have the 900,000 today 25 years later. I imagine in the future 25 years I won't have the 3-5 million it will take. I will probably just have to settle of a closed DV, but such is life. I also must give a slight thank you to the T&C crowd, as I now have a 50+ hp HCCA car I purchased at Hershey the same day the T&C was jammed down my throat at the board meeting in the chocolate field. My guess is there will be many more HCCA cars in the garage in the future, with the detriment to the addition of even more Full Classics. Most importantly, I am still having lots of fun. I just hooked up my trailer to my truck while I was in the middle of writing this tome, and another Pierce will be in the garage tomorrow! The mental illness continues...... Ed

Edited April 27, 2012 by edinmass (see edit history)

[edinmass]

Frank's letter from post number was right on the money. I am sure his uncle John Wemple who passed his passion for Packard's on to Frank would agree. Two very dedicated gentlemen who have both given MUCH to the club and hobby.

I posted this several times, and it still speaks to the entire issue of the CCCA and the cars in the club.

THE PENALTY OF LEADERSHIP

In every field of human endeavor, he that is first must perpetually live in the white light of publicity. Whether the leadership be vested in a man or in a manufactured product, emulation and envy are ever at work. In art, in literature, in music, in industry, the reward and the punishment are always the same. The reward is widespread recognition; the punishment, fierce denial and detraction. When a man's work becomes a standard for the whole world, it also becomes a target for the shafts of the envious few. If his work be mediocre, he will be left severely alone - if he achieves a masterpiece, it will set a million tongues a-wagging. Jealousy does not protrude its forked tongue at the artist who produces a commonplace painting. Whatsoever you write, or paint, or play, or sing, or build, no one will strive to surpass or to slander you unless your work be stamped with the seal of genius. Long, long after a great work or a good work has been done, those who are disappointed or envious, continue to cry out that it cannot be done. Spiteful little voices in the domain of art were raised against our own Whistler as a mountback, long after the big would had acclaimed him its greatest artistic genius. Multitudes flocked to Bayreuth to worship at the musical shrine of Wagner, while the little group of those whom he had dethroned and displaced argued angrily that he was no musician at all. The little world continued to protest that Fulton could never build a steamboat, while the big world flocked to the river banks to see his boat steam by. The leader is assailed because he is a leader, and the effort to equal him is merely added proof of that leadership. Failing to equal or to excel, the follower seeks to depreciate and to destroy - but only confirms once more the superiority of that which he strives to supplant. There is nothing new in this. It is as old as the world and as old as human passions - envy, fear, greed, ambition, and the desire to surpass. And it all avails nothing. If the leader truly leads, he remains - the leader. Master-poet, master-painter, master-workman, each in his turn is assailed, and each holds his laurels through the ages. That which is good or great makes itself known, no matter how loud the clamor of denial. That which deserves to live - lives.

What applied in 1915 to the lesser cars still applies to the want to be Classics of today. T/C and all the others. Ed

Edited April 27, 2012 by edinmass (see edit history)

[K8096]

Matt and Ed are dead on correct. My dad has been a CCCA member since 1957, and I joined in 1990 at the Hershey tent when I was 16. My original plan was to be a life member at 26, and obviously come out way ahead financially. But I got married, bought a house, and went to Europe that year; so I didn't want to spend the money. Now I'm 38 and still haven't done it, and I'm thinking I need to do it in the next few years or not bother. The idea of letting more modern cars in makes me hesitant to pull the trigger on life membership. Cars with OHV V8 engines, power steering, power brakes, and A/C are not what the CCCA is supposed to be about. I like and appreciate top of the line cars from the 1950's, but I don't want to see them at CCCA events.

Through all this turmoil the past couple years the one thing that has remained excellent is the publications. I think the new editor is doing a great job, with coverage of non CCCA events which are "Classic heavy" like Pebble Beach, the previous editor did not do. That 6 or 7 part series that's been running in the Bulletin about the young man who had several Duesenbergs and Packards in the late 1930's and 1940's is worth the cost of membership almost by itself. I love stuff like that. I happen to be fortunate enough to have several "old timers" in my area who were in the CCCA back in the 1950's and 1960's during the glory days of the club. Three of them were on the 1955 CARavan to the Packard Proving Grounds. So I guess my point of reference with the CCCA has always been the way it was back then. I don't want the club to change.

Go to Youtube. Type in "1957 Classic Car Caravan" Watch the 10 minute video of this. This is my reference point of what the CCCA should be.

[Guest Water Jacket]

Thank you, K8096, for referring us to the 1957 Classic Car Club Caravan on YouTube, a lovely paean to lighthearted young adults enjoying genuine Classic cars.

Bittersweet, as all the cars survive, but only some of the people. The Rimsky-Korsakov Scheherazade accompaniment is inspired, couldn't have been more appropriate. How wonderful it must've been to enjoy such cars, many of them well-preserved without their charm erased by needless, trophy-chasing overrestoration;

when the man on the street was more apt to ask a question about the cars themselves than "What's sumpin' like that worth?"

Perhaps, so long as people enjoy such music as accompanies that video, there'll yet be those who appreciate and look after the cars.

Thank you.

Edited April 28, 2012 by Water Jacket (see edit history)

[R W Burgess]

I merged these two threads together. I fear it will be a never ending discussion!

Wayne

[Guest donald ellis]

the issue turns on the definition of "Classic" a word overused in application to the car hobby. To broaden the definition from the arbitrary rules of the CCCA based on judgements about individual cars, some general rules might be in order. Why, for instance, should my 1922 Packard single six be excluded? Back in 1962 I was a member of the CCCA. I was present and active at the foundation of the Oil Belt Region. At that time I had a Packard 1101 Sport coupe and a 1932 Cadillac close coupled sedan. These were considered "Classic" under the prevailing rules...But then my 328 BMW also qualified but upon what basis? It has to have been arbitrary for I can see no other criterion for determining the 328's inclusion. Just out of curiosity, is there a list of qualified cars and dates at which they qualified?

[Restorer32]

Same with my '34 Auburn 4 door conv. The 8 cylinder is recognized by the CCCA while the 6 isn't even though the bodies are identical. Is their theory that the 8 would have appealed to the ''swells" while the 6 would have appealed to the unwashed masses? I have no problem with the exclusivity of the CCCA, that's what makes it special but it would be nice to see a more subjective definition of Full Classic. Every time I read this thread that old tune runs thru my mind..."we belong to a mutuallllll ad mir ation society".

[trimacar]

The issue isn't the definition of "Classic" with a Capital C, as it applies to the CCCA definition.

The issue is that misguided membership and directors of said club cry doom and gloom, instead of sticking to what the club is supposed to represent.

The other problem is that everyone thinks the car "they" own should be a Classic, because it's "special" for some reason, or close to the same as a recognized Classic, or built in the same time period, or very popular, none of which define Classic.

The subject has grown tiresome, let's just leave it alone and move forward.

Edited May 4, 2012 by trimacar (see edit history)

[Restorer32]

Moving forward is what got the club in this mess.

[Guest Water Jacket]

Thank you. Absolutely. There continues to be an interest in fine cars of a certain age,

just as people continue to appreciate classical music, Shakespeare, Twain, Victor Hugo, Louis Armstrong, Cezanne, any human creativity.

We just have to learn to graciously shrug off the ongoing parade of post-Classical cars attempting to gain CCCA acceptance ever since the word Classic when applied to automobiles started equating money, thanks to the much ballyhooed auction results of a few cars beginning in the early 1970s.

The Classic Car Club of America is a wonderful organization of enthused folk celebrating the best from both sides of the Atlantic, open to one and all, whether they own a CCCA Classic or not, as it has been since 1952 and will always be.

*

Edited May 4, 2012 by West Peterson (see edit history)