Jump to content

bogus among us?


Guest
 Share

Recommended Posts

Thats a good point Chuck brings up about somebody trying to slip in a bogus car at the last minute for judging to get a Senior badge. I think the way to combat this is that if someone comes at the last minute, make them go in exhibition, period. As we all know, there are a few cars with Senior badges that are bogus, perhaps 1 - 2% of the total population. The topic of "recycling" senior cars to allow them to be judged again has been brought up recently in the Bulletin. It would be interesting to see what would happen if one of these bogus cars that was previously awarded a Senior badge was entered into judgign again and proof was then presented that the car was bogus & was then disqualified. I heard about that V 16 Caddy a few years ago (I assume it was a roadster or phaeton) where the owner tried to register it & some CCCA board members KNEW it was bogus & refused to allow it in. I guess the owner threatened to sue, but then calmed down & nothing happened.<BR>Also, I heard that a few years ago, the Imperial Palace bought a Marmon 16 convertible sedan that was originally a club sedan. After they bought it they found out about the change & threatened to sue, so the seller agreed to take it back. A big organization has the money & leverage to do things like that, but the average guy doesn't. I like reading through old issues of Collectable Automobile. In the 70's they had a lto of great articles on Classics, and they also had a section called "Old Cars in Court." There were several cases described where the seller mislead & the buyer sued.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As others have pointed out, the general interest in the TRUE classics is declining, due to a number of factors (aging, change in cultural icons, etc.) As a result, the values of big classics seem to be leveling off and even declining.<P>Also, just about everyone knows just about everyone else, and everyone else's car.<P>Given the above, it is no longer as attractive financially to take a serviceable closed big classic, and "convert" it to a so called "more attractive" open version ( I personally never understood this, as I have always felt the closed big luxury cars were more elegant)....( damn..if I were super rich..what fun to ask a restoration shop to convert an OPEN classic into a CLOSED one..!<P>So, I think this is going to be a self-correcting phenomena. Given the legal and financial risks, I suspect the future will see fewer or NONE of the competent restoration shops wanting to be bothered with the "hassel" of "conversions". <P>The few "conversions" I did have an opportunity to inspect were damn nice jobs. In fact, they were so accurate I saw NO "faults" in them at all from a "historically accurate" standpoint. I DID see some internal changes in door structure/bracing, which made them BETTER than the "originals".<P>Bottom line - my "hunch" is that this will be increasingly UNimportant as the years unfold. I think the fellow who pointed out how the HCCA (Horseless Carriage Club Of America) continues to be VERY active. MUCH smaller than in years past, but the activities continue, and the big brass cars continue to sell, although not as well as before. And at these much smaller and more intimate meets, they all have a lot of fun.<P>Pete Hartmann

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to complicate our world, it seems in the early days of the Club, appropriate re-bodies were perfectly OK. One day, the ?powers that be? changed the rules and declared them to be ?Replica/Counterfeit Cars.? (Boy, there is a warm and fuzzy name if I ever heard one!) When they changed the rules they also grandfathered all cars that had been previously exhibited at Grand Classics, or at the Annual Meeting at Buck Hill Falls. Even if a car started life as a sedan and now looks more like a boat tail speedster, by this rules it would continue to be accepted.<P>Well, that?s just ducky. There are also conditions today where the Club deems body swaps acceptable. Unfortunately, it seems to be a very inconsistent policy. Obviously there are quite a few cars with Senior badges on them that don?t appear as they originally did. This will become a bigger and bigger problem to figure out, assuming we continue along that route.<P>As Peter points out, some of these cars are REALLY nice. They look absolutely authentic, although they may have some advanced construction techniques that are hidden but actually make them better than the original. A lot of them are almost impossible to detect by just looking at them. To further cloud the issue, one of CCCA?s prime reasons for existence is ??the interchange of technical, historical and other information?? Although I?m certainly not advocating making a car into something that it wasn?t, it?s pretty hard to ignore the fact that if somebody did make drastic changes to that car, those changes have now become a part of the car?s history. In fact, if a 21-year-old car was rebodied in 1960, it has existed in its rebodied state twice as long as it did in its original configuration. So which history is more significant? It is easy to say, ?The way it was delivered to the original owner.? That would be my preference, but that?s no longer an accurate reflection of what happened to the car over its life.<P>Hmmm?<BR> shocked.gif" border="0

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what i understand cars were regularly rebodied during the classic era as the needs or tastes of their owners changed. <P>We have a class for modified classics and to qualify I think that the new body has to has to be correct in every manner and even be of a design that had been executed during the classic era, sooo...<P>whats the big deal? it happens. cars get rebodied. There are probably a good many chassis floating around that have lost thier bodies for whatever reason. i have heard there is even class for bare chassis at pebble this year. <P>Who would expect an owner to build a new sedan body for such a chassis when it would be much more expensive, than say a roadster body, when the finished product is only worth half as much, at best.<P>Interestingly, I am faced with such a dilemma, and will probably be the only fool who goes ahead and builds the sedan body! LOL. <P>As long as the owner is being honest, who really cares?<P>Shawn Miller<BR>Indiana Region

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the real problem is the Modified Classics are not judged. If you admit that your car is something other than it originally was, the Club sends you off to Classic Car Purgatory, where you sit with no incentive to participate. We probably need to fix that, so it is not shameful to own one of these cars. At the moment, that is not the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I met an old timer at a swap meet a few years ago who said that in 1950 he made a 1932 Packard super 8 conv. cpe. into a Twelve. I guarantee whoever has this car today has no idea this was done. It's probably gone thru 2 restorations since 1950 & any original errors in the switch would have been corrected. Thats why I like original cars. There has been a lot of super 8 Packards made into Twelves, and many V-8 & V-12 Cadillacs made in V-16's. I know I guy who had a 1938 Caddy model 75 conv. cpe. in the 70's in original condition. He didn't really want to sell it, but a guy came along & hit him over the head with money for it, and promised to leave is as a model 75. As soon as he got it home, they made it into a v-16.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like them original too, but I hope we don't get into the "numbers matching" sort of obsession that our Corvette and '57 Chevy friends like to practice.<P>I really don't care if the original engine was swapped out for another engine of the same year and type. Even switching an 8 to a 12 or 16 doesn't bother me much if 12's or 16's were built with that chassis originally. Face it, this cannot be too common a practice today, you can't exactly run out and find a 12 or 16 engine at pep boys or your local junkyard.<P>If an owner wants to establish some sort of traceable "provenence" for their cars, fine, they may realize increased value by doing so. That is up to them. But I think the CCCA should just judge cars as they appear, and stay out of the detective business. <P>Frankly, most of the restored cars we see today are "modified Classics", I don't think these cars look much like they did when they were built. I heard that the Smithsonian will not accept any restored cars for display, only unrestored originals, because a restored car is just that -- a modified car.<P>Bill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Check your parts-books...guys...."faking" a Packard Twelve is NOT going to fool a guy who knows his Packards....<P>Take 1938 for example. Packard Twelves and Packard Super Eights traditionally share the same sheet metal. But underneath, they are ENTIRELY DIFFERENT CARS. With all due respect to B. Kime's books, there are NO chassis parts that will interchange. Not a ONE. EVERYTHING is bigger, more massive, and heavier on a Twelve. From the size of the forgings on the suspension parts, to the king pins, brakes, rear axle...EVERYTHING...<P>It dosnt take rocket science to figure out that a much heavier, faster car, needs much heavier parts to handle the "loads" (for those of you who were reading PLAYBOY when you should have stayed awake in your high school PHYSICS courses, as you add speed ARITHMETICALLY, you increase load forces GEOMETRICALLY...)<P>If you want to spot a "fake" Packard Twelve, just bend down and look at the brake drums !<P>True..over at Cadillac, it would have been a LOT easier to "fake" a V-16 out of a Series 75...in '38..all you would have had to do...is change the grill, add some decorative emblems, and you are "in".....!<P>Someone refresh my memory..in the earlier 30's...werent the V-16 Caddies ALSO on a heavier chassis with larger brakes, then the "lesser" ones..?<P>Pete Hartmann<BR>Big Springs, AZ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most like original cars...Good luck finding an original rag top Classic in drivable condition. If you collect hen's teeth you'll enjoy collecting orignal rag top Classics. My 1933 Packard Twelve I can document to before 1953 as a real Twelve and my 1932 Cadillac V8 is identical to the V12 except for engine, length of drive shaft, brake booster and emblems. It's an easy conversion. That's one of the reasons I prefer having the V8. Noone converts from a V12 to a V8. Also, I can document the car back to its birth and delivery by "Packard Motor Car Company" to a Cadillac dealer in New Mexico!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the 1932 - 1936 Packard super 8 chassis is almost identical to the Twelve. The Standard 8 was the smaller chassis. It was not until 1937 that Packard decidied to go with 2 luxury lines and not three. The smaller Standard 8 was promoted to Super 8 status, and the wonderful 384 CI Super 8 was history. Peter is right, it is impossible to put a twelve in a 1937 - 39 packard Super 8 chassis, but I believe it will fit right in on the 1932 - 1936 Super 8's. I don't think this is what happens though. I believe on most occasions, one would have a Super 8 convertible, and the go out and find a rough Twelve sedan & build the car up on the original Twelve chassis. I'm sure it's been tried the other way, but the above example would be much easier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For unregis VIP<P>I think you are making the same mistake Beverly Kimes and her contributors made, in that you are confusing chassis LENGTH with chassis STRUCTURE.<P>From the firewall back, DIMENSIONALLY, Packard's chassis HAD to be the same for any given body style - you could get any of Packard's "production" bodies with any engine offered in a given year. <P>For example, my '38 Packard Twelve Formal Sedan body would drop right on a '38 Packard Super Eight Formal Sedan Chassis. <P>A.O. Smith was the leading chassis/frame supplier to the American auto industry, and the traditionally supplier of frames to Packard from its earliest days. I am not clear as to how much engineering support A.O. Smith supplied to its customers, but I suspect it was considerable. <P>The "specs" for chassis STRUCTURE are dictated by SAE engineering standards, and this accounts for the fact that as you get to heavier, more powerful cars, you find chassis structure amd running gear getting stronger. <P>As your "post" implies, the "real" SUPER Eights (the 384 cu in version that was last used in '36) was very close in weight to the much more powerful and larger displacement Twelve. It would NOT surprise me if the chassis STRUCTURE of a '32 - 36 Super Eight was SIMILAR to the Twelve. I vaguely recall the material was thicker, but I dont have my factory specs. in front of me, so I am not positive about this. Perhaps one of our other "chatters" can refresh us on this. Brakes and tires on the '32 thru '36 Twelve were, if I recall correctly, heavier than the Super Eight.<P>When we get into the "fake" Super Eights (the "Standard Eight" was re-badged as a Super Eight for 1937) (this was clearly a FRAUD on Packard's customers, as while it was a good car for the price..it was no Super Eight in performance......!) we are dealing with a MUCH lighter and MUCH less powerful and MUCH slower car. There, both the STRUCTURE of the chassis, and the running gear, is MUCH lighter than the Twelve...but again..DIMENSIONALLY they were IDENTICAL. Until a Packard body came down from the "body drop" and was mated with its chassis, it had no identity as a Packard Twelve or an eight.<P><BR>Over at Cadillac, my recollection is that the "real" Cadillac V-16...( the up-draft carb. over head valve one built from '30 thru '37) had a much heavier chassis, and bigger more massive front end, than the smaller Caddy. <P>But again, as I noted previously, NO problem in "converting" a '38 thru '40 75 series Cadillac to a V-16...just drop in the engine, change the grill....add the side trim...and presto..a "bogus" V-16...(and that flat-head V-16 was no slouch...it was one TURBINE SMOOTH motor....!<P>Now...back to the body that interests ME....(Britney Spears....!)<P>Pete Hartmann

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The club's action in regard to Modified Classics may have been partly in response to a situation that occurred a few years back. An owner of a one of a kind Duesenberg removed the unique body and placed it on a spare chassis. He then had an exact duplicate of the the body placed on the original chassis. He then sold the original chassis with replica body as original while he still had the car with original body on the different original chassis.<BR> shocked.gif" border="0

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can confirm some of what Peter has said. I have a 1934 Packard Twelve Convertible Sedan. I have compared it to other 1932 through 1934 Packard Convertible Sedans, Eights, Super Eights and Twelves. The bodies are identical except for hood length and accouterments (such as: headlamps,divider windows, etc.). They were designed by Ray Dietrich prior to him leaving Dietrich Inc. in 1931 and built either by Dietrich, Inc. or Murray. The same applies to the Convertible Victories of this period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...