Suggestion between Hudson or Pierce Arrow

[Guest mirko1974]

Hello,
I'm new in this forum, I'm an italian collector of classics and now I'm interested in an american prewar car.

I found these two cars:
1933 Hudson 8 Terraplane coupe cabriolet, that needs mechanical and electrical works, new tyres, upholstery (now leatherette)
1931 Pierce Arrow model 43 coupe, that needs interior cosmetic works and some chrome details

Which of the two are most interesting for your experience?

Thanks in advance for all your suggestions

Mirko

Edited June 17, 2015 by mirko1974 (see edit history)

[roysboystoys]

The Terraplane seems to be the best value, Would help to see photos.

Very fun car to drive. Held Pikes peak hill climb records for a long time.

A rare car

[R Walling]

 In my humble opinion, comparing a Hudson to a Pierce Arrow is like comparing a thoroughbred to a plow horse.

 

 Both have exccelent qualities but would you want to ride a plow horse?

[60FlatTop]

They are quite different cars. That is one thing about the hobby, when one finds a car they just have to have it may be a dark horse you never thought of, even a plow horse.

 

I have driven a 1933 Hudson-Terraplane convertible coupe. t was a pleasure to drive, very responsive and agile. It is a little tight for a 200+ pound driver, but the fun of driving the car made up for it. Overall it was quite sporty. My final thought after a few drives to test the cooling system was that there would be a lot less modified 1930's cars if they all ran like that little Terraplane Eight.

I drove a 1931 Pierce-Arrow Model 42 convertible coupe, as well. It was surprisingly "sporty" to drive. I liked the feel of the larger car and the large rounded hood out in front of me. It had great acceleration. I have not driven the Pierce-Arrow since it has had and overdrive added, but I did get a ride in it. The overdrive made a good improvement from the passenger's seat and would be a good addition.

 

Both cars were in excellent condition. The sun is shining in my window and it is a beautiful day. It would be hard to decide which to take for a ride. I would lean toward the Pierce today.

 

In your situation buying both would be the obvious solution. If you are under 50 years old you will never regret the purchase, although you may regret leaning one behind. The only regrets in life, that I have, are cars I either didn't buy or sold. The rest has been routine.

 

If you can only have one the Pierce appears closer to driving and enjoying. The larger car would be my first choice. If you need some help PM me, I have a couple of good project managers that can take care of things here.

 

Buying both fits the Mirko name best, too.

Bernie

Edited June 14, 2015 by 60FlatTop (see edit history)

[Guest mirko1974]

The 1933 Hudson

[Guest mirko1974]

The 1931 Pierce Arrow

[Guest AlCapone]

They both look great! Do some research and possibly look at the Hudson and Pierce sites, Wekcome , Wayne

[Dandy Dave]

Decisions, Decisions.... Would be the Pierce for me. But that is just me. I've driven a few, and also did repairs on several though the years. Dandy Dave!  

Edited June 15, 2015 by Dandy Dave (see edit history)

[alsancle]

Keep in mind that the Model 43 is the down market Pierce for that year so this is not exactly like comparing a race horse to a plow horse.   All things equal you always go with the convertible but the Pierce is still an up market chassis from the Hudson so things are not exactly equal.  

 

I guess assuming identical mechanicals I think I would probably go with the Hudson given the lesser price.  That car with correct tires and better colors would be very sporty.

[60FlatTop]

That looks like a home made water jacket distribution plate on the Hudson. It may be just a fabricated cover without the correct internal passages. If the original rusted away that new one could have cause overheating problems. The head sure looks like it has been off since painting and the coolant temperature sensor is not connected. You mentioned the Hudson needs mechanical and electrical work. I bet it overheats. I would be real suspicious of previous work that will need to be redone.

Bernie

[Rusty_OToole]

Pierce Arrow was America's top luxury car, everything of highest quality regardless of expense. They were the favorite of the very rich, old money class and the official White House limousine. They were put out of business by the depression. They built their last car in 1938.

 

Hudson was a medium price car, known for speed and performance. Terraplane was their lowest priced model, along with Ford V8 it was the lowest priced eight cylinder car on the market.

 

Comparing a Pierce Arrow to a Terraplane would be like comparing a Rolls Royce to a Renault. Both were good cars in their day, for their intended purpose and market. Both hard to get parts for compared to more popular makes like Chevrolet or Ford.

 

Either would be a challenge even in the US. In Europe, I hope you are dedicated to your old cars and have plenty of money. If not, better leave them alone.

[Guest bkazmer]

Agree on the Terraplane cosmetics.  Repainting the fenders, replacing the tires (and I see the usual European aversion to covering sidemounts) would really improve appearance

[Restorer32]

Not sure I would call Pierce "America's top luxury car".  One of the top luxury cars for sure.

[alsancle]

Not sure I would call Pierce "America's top luxury car".  One of the top luxury cars for sure.

 

The Model 41 for 1931 was certainly one of the top 4 or 5 American Chassis from  1931.  This is a Model 43 which was Pierce's attempt at a lower priced car.

[Guest mirko1974]

Many thanks to all for your opinions and suggestions,

I saw the Terraplane last week in a french showroom during a visit for another nice 1929 Hudson roadster and I found the Terraplane really interesting, but with works on brakes and on electrics to be redone after respray, it' from argentina with right hand drive and odometer in km instead of miles.

I can t know if the motor is ok because not in use.... so thanks for the info on the probably overheating to be check

Know I found in Germany the Pierce that I think that it is a more prestigous car but I wait for info on mechanical and interior that there is no pictures... maybe I will have to go to visit the dealer, what I have to check?

[roysboystoys]

_{Those wheels look like they are from a later vehicle. Not necessarily bad . The hubcaps don't appear to be correct.}

_{If the Pierce was a convertible , it would be an easier choice ?}

_{I still think the Terraplane might be a better value.}

_{The water jackets are available.}

[alsancle]

I think the tires make the wheels look wrong.   I missed the right hand drive on the Hudson... that makes this a tougher choice.  I'm not a fan of RHD unless the chassis would only come that way (Issota,Hisso, Alfa, etc).

[Guest mirko1974]

_{Those wheels look like they are from a later vehicle. Not necessarily bad . The hubcaps don't appear to be correct.}

_{If the Pierce was a convertible , it would be an easier choice ?}

_{I still think the Terraplane might be a better value.}

_{The water jackets are available.}

Do you speak about the Hudson?

l think that are the wrong tyres, modern, that make look wrong...

The Pierce is unfortunatly a coupe... but maybe to seem with an open top... it was available option?

does it have also back window goes down?

Edited June 15, 2015 by mirko1974 (see edit history)

[Rusty_OToole]

Pierce Arrow was America's top luxury car in  the sense that Rolls Royce is England's. Or for that matter, Cadillac is America's today. You could argue about the merits of other cars but in their day Pierce Arrow was the one to beat.

[60FlatTop]

If you took the time to post the cars on the forum asking for advice you probably aren't really as excited as you could be about them. I think every time that Hudson moves power is provided by four Frenchmen. The Peirce-Arrow, being a coupe and in an undignified "wrong" color doesn't have the majestic look  one of those cars should have. I bet you'd get a lot of "Nice Studebaker" comments.

 

The car to find is the one that gives you heart palpitations until it is in your garage. Objective questions and answers will be cast aside in the rush to take possession. Five of the six cars I have were total impulse buys, consummated within hours. I am still excited to own them and usually walk backwards when I leave them parked just to enjoy looking. I'm pretty sure my next one will be the same type of illogical impulse buy. There are other places in life to be pragmatic, not cars.

 

Especially in Italy, owning the car should be like being in Rome with Audrey Hepburn!

Bernie

[Restorer32]

Pierce Arrow was America's top luxury car in  the sense that Rolls Royce is England's. Or for that matter, Cadillac is America's today. You could argue about the merits of other cars but in their day Pierce Arrow was the one to beat.

 

Pierce Arrow was America's top luxury car in  the sense that Rolls Royce is England's. Or for that matter, Cadillac is America's today. You could argue about the merits of other cars but in their day Pierce Arrow was the one to beat.

 

You might get some argument from the Packard 12, Cadillac 16 or Duesenberg folks.

[Steve_Mack_CT]

Not so lonely at the top of the US luxury car market in that era. Not sure the market then or now points to a clear leader. Another consideration is if you want a Full Classic or CCCA eligible car or just a nice interesting 6 or 8 cylinder example of the era.

I am with Bernie though, you may want to file these away for now and see what else turns up. Mechanics on hudson seem a little questionable. Good luck with your search.

Edited June 15, 2015 by Steve_Mack_CT (see edit history)

[alsancle]

This would be a good tangent.   American chassis in 1931:

 

1. Duesenberg Model J

2. Marmon V16

3. Caddilac V16

4. Pierce Model 41 & 42, Packard 845,

 

After that you have a whole bunch of cars in a bunch.  Including top of the line Peerless, V12 Caddy, Reo Royale, Pierce 43, L29 Cord,

Edited June 15, 2015 by alsancle (see edit history)

[Guest mirko1974]

Steve and Bernie, you are right.

these cars don't give me hentusiastic feelings...

unfortunatly the 20s 30s car I really like is out of my actual economic potential, so I have to find a compromise

I want a reliable car for long distances to use in Italy and EU rallyes, roadster...

Auburn would be my first choice....

The Pierce I think is nice, with cosmetic works but quite right price, what do you think?

it can be a first step for this era car...

Edited June 15, 2015 by mirko1974 (see edit history)

[Rusty_OToole]

And you might get some argument today that Cadillac is America's number one luxury car but if you asked 100 random people to name the top American made car, I bet Cadillac would get the most votes.

 

There is no doubt that through the teens and twenties Pierce was America's #1 prestige car. When Caddy brought out their V16 and Duesenberg their OHC straight eight, it wasn't Maxwell they were gunning for.

 

Pierce was building cars for presidents,  tycoons and millionaires when Cadillacs and Lincolns were for characters from the wrong side of the tracks who hit it big in the rackets, and Duesenberg was a race car builder hoping to break into the luxury car market.

Edited June 15, 2015 by Rusty_OToole (see edit history)

[Steve_Mack_CT]

A very nice car. Colors could be better but they look period if not original. If you can live with the color I might keep it on the list.

To go down from alsance's 1931 American list, big Chrysler, lincoln or Peerless come to mind, or a lesser Packard which may not be as tough to find and could be easier to sell later on than a lesser known car or less popular car.

[Guest bkazmer]

"the top American made car, I bet Cadillac would get the most votes."

 

counting the ones made in Canada and Mexico?

your comment is probably right but not necessarily reflecting well-informed "voters"

 

[StillOutThere]

When new, the '33 Essex-Terraplane 8 cyl. cars had the highest horsepower to weight ratio of any car built in the WORLD.   That means they were the fastest accelerating car in the world in 1933.   I have owned the same car in LHD version fully restored and I can tell you it is an exciting car to own and experience driving.   I'd like to experience a Pierce Arrow some day.   Photo attached of the '33 ET8 convertible coupe (cabrio) I had.

[StillOutThere]

Perhaps this time my photo will attach?

[trimacar]

Discussion of the "best" Classic car, I'm talking real Classics, is a tough one.  Pierce Arrow built a quality car, excellent and advanced engineering, and never backed down from that philosophy.  Thus, the company withered in the economic times of the mid to late 1930's.  Was there a comparable Classic, well of course, Packard, Cadillac, and many others were building some fine cars at the time, 12's and 16's in low numbers.  They bowed to public demand, however, and thus the LaSalle and junior series Packards were made.  Pierce Arrow never built an entry level car, nor even a mid range car.  Yes, they made the 836 in the mid 30's, but it was a very minor attempt to market a more affordable car.

 

Not to say Cadillac/LaSalle nor Packard/110/115/120 was wrong, these too were very nice cars, and bordering on greatness.  But, not really GREAT.

 

They all have their place, but back to the original topic.  Hudson built a very good car, very dependable, sometimes stylish.  Pierce built great cars, excellent engineering, lacking in style for some of the 1920's, but overall very sedate and accepted.

 

Sheesh, wonder where my vote falls?!

[60FlatTop]

A Bentley would be a idea tour car as you describe, but they do push to the high end of a budget.

 

Now, right in the middle of the two you are looking at is little sweetheart:  http://www.carandclassic.co.uk/car/C536340

 

I started building a replica of one of these Railtons on a 1933 Terraplane 8 chassis maybe 20 years ago. Simple, reliable, and if repairs are ever needed, very reasonable to fix. I can only think of one ride more exciting: 

 

That did it! I'm heading for the garage to get a car out!

Bernie

[Marty Roth]

The car to find is the one that gives you heart palpitations until it is in your garage. Objective questions and answers will be cast aside in the rush to take possession. Five of the six cars I have were total impulse buys, consummated within hours. I am still excited to own them and usually walk backwards when I leave them parked just to enjoy looking. I'm pretty sure my next one will be the same type of illogical impulse buy. There are other places in life to be pragmatic, not cars.

 

Especially in Italy, owning the car should be like being in Rome with Audrey Hepburn!

Bernie

 

Bernie said it very well. Some collectors buy as an investment, or only with the intent of profit. Some buy as a memory of their youth. Some buy with the heart, rather than the head. An impulse purchase may result in more repairs, but if you truly are infatuated with a car, it will pay you back many times over, and you will not regret the times you share. Wait for the one which lights your fire !  I did !

[alsancle]

I think if you could find a Auburn cabriolet with the 2 speed rear end that would be a great car.  I have seen ones in similar condition to the hudson for around 50k us.

 

I thought a bit more about the list for 1931 and realized a couple of horrible oversights.

 

1. Dueseneberg  (you can't even compare based on price, acceleration, top end, etc)

2. Marmon V16 (except this woudl stick with or pass the Duesey up to 100mph)

3. Caddy V16

4. Stutz DV32

5. Pierce 41,42, Packard 845

6. Chrysler CG

7. Pierce 43, Cord L29, Caddy V12, Auburn V12, Reo Royale, Big Peerless, etc.

Edited June 16, 2015 by alsancle (see edit history)

[Guest oldhudsons]

Mirko - you say you are a collector of "classic" cars & if so the Terraplane is NOT a classic car by the definition of the CCCA whereas all Pierces are.

The ultimate American classic car is the Duesenberg; Packard V-12s, Cad V-12 & V-16, some Pierces fall in line right behind the Duesenberg which could "run rings around" them in performance & depending on coachwork cost much more.

Having owned a number of '33 Terra. 8s this one: has a bugle for a front horn, has the wrong hubcaps, doesn't have lights on the fenders which was std. equip., there should be no lights on the cowl, the heat gauge from the dash to the block has been cut, and a flat piece of metal attached to the left side of the block instead of the proper water jacket.

Know "zilch" about Pierces exc. to notice hubcap(s) missing.

[Guest mirko1974]

To reply to the question if I'm a collector of classic cars, maybe I misunderstand the definition of the term in the States...

Here in Italy, classic cars are all classics if they are more then 30 years old... my actual, oldest and only car at the moment is a 1951 Simca 8 Sport (picture), I had a short experience with a nice BSA Scout from 36,

so I am a newby for the real US classic cars, and this will be my first step in this world...

 

I read very carefully all the posts and the following are my thoughts:

- I look for a reliable car from end of 20s beginning of 30s

- I look a "sporty" looking car due that I am "only" 40 years old

- I prefer 6 or 8 cylinder cars

- my actual budget is maximum 50.000 €uro

 

So due to these starting points:

- The Hudson is sporty and nice, maybe really fast for its period, but with more works than I expected, so not so a fairy price. And last it is not recognized as a CCCA Full Classic

- The Pierce is less sporty and not open one (I usually have cabriolet) but it is really charming (also the colours are ok for me, the picture is not so good but it is a dove grey over black) EU registered car so I think that mechanically is quite good, maybe in need of refresh, with works on iteriors (poor fabric interiors) and with some external details to find (ex: hubcaps). The price of €uro 43.000 give me the possibility to implement the car remaining in the value of the car (I found that the quotation for a Pierce 43 is 40.000/100.000 $) 

 

I understand that this deal is not guided by the pure passion, but I like this car...

 

What do you think?

[alsancle]

Ultimately the only thing that counts is that you like the car.   If you expand your search a bit to the mid-30s there are some interesting convertible coupes that would be within your budget.

[Steve_Mack_CT]

I like your search criteria mirko. Not sure how critical CCCA recognition is in your corner of the world but it could make it easier down the road to sell. European hobbyists seem to value using the car so I would push for an extended road test, maybe an hour or so if seller allows to see if you like how it drives. Your description of the colors actually sounds nice for that body style. Keep us posted.

Edited June 16, 2015 by Steve_Mack_CT (see edit history)

[benjamin j]

If you took the time to post the cars on the forum asking for advice you probably aren't really as excited as you could be about them. I think every time that Hudson moves power is provided by four Frenchmen. The Peirce-Arrow, being a coupe and in an undignified "wrong" color doesn't have the majestic look  one of those cars should have. I bet you'd get a lot of "Nice Studebaker" comments.

 

The car to find is the one that gives you heart palpitations until it is in your garage. Objective questions and answers will be cast aside in the rush to take possession. Five of the six cars I have were total impulse buys, consummated within hours. I am still excited to own them and usually walk backwards when I leave them parked just to enjoy looking. I'm pretty sure my next one will be the same type of illogical impulse buy. There are other places in life to be pragmatic, not cars.

 

Especially in Italy, owning the car should be like being in Rome with Audrey Hepburn!

Bernie

^best addvice by far^

[Rusty_OToole]

Pierce may be a better highway car than they are given credit for.

 

In 1932, Ab Jenkins set a 24 hour speed record of 112 MPH at the Bonneville Salt Flats with a V12 Pierce. The next year he repeated the feat, and in 1934 upped the record to 127 MPH.

 

This means 3 continuous 24 hour speed records in 3 years without a mechanical failure.

 

To put this in perspective, in those days Rolls Royce warned their customers not to drive their cars wide open for more than 5 minutes if they wished to avoid mechanical disaster. The Grosser Mercedes straight eight had a supercharger that allowed it to top 100, barely, but the manufacturer limited the use of the supercharger to 2 minutes at a time for the same reason.

 

I don't know how hard Pierce cars are to get parts for, or how hard they are to repair. But they were a well made car capable of continuous speed in their day.

 

The Hudson Terraplane was a fast car in its day but the splash lubrication system did not like continuous high speed. They were a good, low priced car but not as well made as the much more expensive Pierce Arrow.

 

As for a Duesenberg "running rings" around a Pierce Arrow, this is a slight exaggeration. In 1935 Ab Jenkins returned to the salt flats with a supercharged Duesenberg and upped the record to 135, considerably faster than the unsupercharged Pierce but, this must have been all the Duesy had.  Because his next record attempt was with the Duesy chassis fitted with a Curtis Conqueror aircraft engine.

 

So, the Duesy supercharged was faster than the Pierce unsupercharged. I point this out not to disparage the Duesenberg which was a great performance car, but to highlight  the Pierce's performance, which showed great merit. Especially since the Pierce was usually considered a dowager's town car or millionaire's limousine, not a performance car.

 

The Duesenberg may have been the faster car but that does not mean the Pierce was a dead head on the road because it definitely wasn't.

Edited June 16, 2015 by Rusty_OToole (see edit history)

[60FlatTop]

Ever hear the one about the Hoosier who got Buffaloed into trading his Duesy for a Pierce? I think it happened on Oneida Street.

Bernie

 

If you got that cars could be an obsession.

Edited June 16, 2015 by 60FlatTop (see edit history)