Jump to content

"Mag Wheels" In the AACA Official Revue : Disgusting !!!


Recommended Posts

This is an outrage and also a shame that the official AACA Publication ( November/December 2018) had printed pictures of a car equiped with aftermarket chromed mag wheels.

Sometimes some amateur car owners put some pseudo " Factory Style" rally wheels ( today those could also be ordered in larger diameters than stock) on their car even if they are not period correct;

that, I can live with that saying to myself that those car owners are sometimes simply misinformed or try to make their car look more equiped than what they were originally !

I also saw some "Aftermarket Mag Wheel Equiped Car" being refused at the Car Coral entrance or even in the flea market itself for this simple reason alone...!!

In this present case; this poor ol' 57' Vette also look so " Old Hat" by the new standard as of the "Resto-Mod" standards that it could also being laugh at by those younger restorer...!!

Also, I've been informed by an unofficial pseudo AACA Facebook Group that the AACA name could be employed by anyone to publish HOT-RODded car pictures  or annything else you could feel like on Facebook...?!

Is this the begining of the end for a very noble hobby Automobile Club...?!

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

We had a fellow send a letter to our region several years ago upset that there was a car on tour with aftermarket mags. If the mags  are period vintage I myself have no problem with them or any other vintage speed accessory. On the National Vintage tours I see Ford Model A's with Ford V8 wire wheels and T's with wire wheels so where do you draw the line. We should except a car from the 60s with different period accessories that were available then  like we have for the early  cars. 

On another note is there any difference in a Columbia rear end on a 30s car verses a Winters quick change on 30s?

Edited by Joe in Canada (see edit history)
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would assume that you are talking about the article and rear cover picture of the 1957 Corvette. Yes, the car has been modified and the only modification that you can see are the mag wheels. Now if you read the article, the owner participates in the DPC, Drivers Participant Class, and drive his car he does. The article states that the car has been driven to Texas, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Alabama and Canada. I for one don't have a problem with putting radial tires on a car to make it drivable. So he has a set of stock wheels, hubcaps and tires and uses the mag wheels to travel. I give the owner a lot of credit for using his car. "Unofficial"' "pseudo" Facebook Group, I can't even figure that one out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

gervaisgt,

I don't understand quite all of your rant about the AACA facebook page but if something inappropriate is on the page, simply hit the report button on the facebook post and the admin staff will review the post. Posts are more likely to get removed from it if you report them. With the way facebook works, the admins don't see every post, but will see it if you report a post.

 

The story about that car clearly explains that the car is a Driver Participation Class car.  DPC guidelines clearly show that alloy wheels of the same era are permissible. 

"The following are exceptions that will not disqualify the vehicle: seat belts, seat coverings, turn signals, stop lights, sealed beam/ halogen headlights, radial tires, alloy wheels of the same era and/or same vehicle manufacturer, radio upgrades, electrical upgrades, brake upgrades (bolt on), steering upgrades (bolt on), air conditioning, overdrive system and altered exhausts."

 

DPC has been around for 18 years. It is certainly not the end of a "noble" club.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I bit my tongue when I read the article about the home made Stude convertible. There is always a double standard when it comes to things like this. on one hand, the modified cars are kicked out of the Hershey car corral because they are not 'like they came from the factory.'  Then in THE national magazine highlights things like Packard speedsters or Studebaker convertibles that were NEVER built at the 'factory.'  I, too, don't mind things like mag wheels on a Corvette or V8 wheels on Model A when touring. Hell, the roads today are dangerous places. The more road worthy we can make these cars, the better. But, come on... home made Stude convertibles in the National Magazine???

 

Frank

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Must admit I am always amused by this kind or post that makes assumptions that the club is some glory land in the sky when the current purpose is "Since 1935, AACA has had one goal: The preservation and enjoyment of automotive history of all types". To me the key is "enjoyment". One example is the name of the club magazine, the "Speedster". Back in the day a "speedster" was a stripped down chassis with minimal bodywork designed for one thing: speed. This was rarely a manufacurer's option.

 

Really, what is the difference between what Beurig, LeBaron, Fleetwood, Franay, or Saoutchik and the current crop of "resto-mods". When you look at what they did, there is little difference in the work of Bill Frick, Caroll Shelby, Briggs Cunningham, John Fitch, or Don Yenko and the current herd. The only real difference is age.

 

My Judge is a case in point (I rarely own a stock car for long). Today it would be a resto-mod since I built it to be an autocross car but would take a fanatic to tell the difference between stock and Grand Prix, W30 Olds, and WS6 Firebird parts and all are "period correct" - well most of them, the original G70x14s on 14x6 rimes were "unsafe even in the driveway" so have Pontiac 15x8 Snowflakes with big BFG radials, 235/60R15 on the front and 255/70R15 on the rear. All of the tires I buy are rated 9.0 or better in wet traction on Tire Rack (we get a lot of rain).

 

Further all of my cars have non-stock (mostly higher power) halogen headlights (experimented with HID and LEDs put prefer halogens. Today). Since the last century I had stockish par 25 sealed beam halogens but just went to H4 bulb type for more visibility particularly against oncoming traffic that does not know how to turn their fog lamps off.

 

All of my cars have full gauge sets. All have Bluetooth and handsfree capability. All have advanced wiper technology. Fortunately all came with seat belts. Only the tow car has stock sized wheels and tires.

 

One difference is that I research and know what "stock" is and in most cases the originals are in baggies in my garage. Also I am fascinated history and the people and places where things happened. Years ago there was a PBS show called "connections" that I loved.

 

Bottom line I have no desire to return to a life before AC/FI/Disk brakes (though my first car, a '59, had four wheel disk brakes). Do remember having the brakes on a '61 Caddy 'vert fade completely in one stop from 70ish and no desire to repeat.

 

So I get a bit confused in that pre-war coach builders are venerated while modern ones are despised. Do agree that points judging is a a good way to increase the value of a restoration but after creating a judging a "platinum" class for a large national club, I got tired of picking apart nice cars (when did Delco-Packard stop embossing spark plug wires and go to silk-screen) and quit. Now all of my cars are "drivers" and all have alloy wheels.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Joe in Canada said:

We had a fellow send a letter to our region several years ago upset that there was a car on tour with aftermarket mags. If the mags  are period vintage I myself have no problem with them or any other vintage speed accessory. On the National Vintage tours I see Ford Model A's with Ford V8 wire wheels and T's with wire wheels so where do you draw the line. We should except a car from the 60s with different period accessories that were available then  like we have for the early  cars. 

On another note is there any difference in a Columbia rear end on a 30s car verses a Winters quick change on 30s?

Myself I wouldnt mind much about a 30' ford "A" with 32' V-8 wheels; they are all in the family period time correct, as for the "T" with Wires I dont see what you saw but does it also had disc brake and electronic 12 volts ignitions? Well you got my point here...!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, padgett said:

Must admit I am always amused by this kind or post that makes assumptions that the club is some glory land in the sky when the current purpose is "Since 1935, AACA has had one goal: The preservation and enjoyment of automotive history of all types". To me the key is "enjoyment". One example is the name of the club magazine, the "Speedster". Back in the day a "speedster" was a stripped down chassis with minimal bodywork designed for one thing: speed. This was rarely a manufacurer's option.

 

Really, what is the difference between what Beurig, LeBaron, Fleetwood, Franay, or Saoutchik and the current crop of "resto-mods". When you look at what they did, there is little difference in the work of Bill Frick, Caroll Shelby, Briggs Cunningham, John Fitch, or Don Yenko and the current herd. The only real difference is age.

 

My Judge is a case in point (I rarely own a stock car for long). Today it would be a resto-mod since I built it to be an autocross car but would take a fanatic to tell the difference between stock and Grand Prix, W30 Olds, and WS6 Firebird parts and all are "period correct" - well most of them, the original G70x14s on 14x6 rimes were "unsafe even in the driveway" so have Pontiac 15x8 Snowflakes with big BFG radials, 235/60R15 on the front and 255/70R15 on the rear. All of the tires I buy are rated 9.0 or better in wet traction on Tire Rack (we get a lot of rain).

 

Further all of my cars have non-stock (mostly higher power) halogen headlights (experimented with HID and LEDs put prefer halogens. Today). Since the last century I had stockish par 25 sealed beam halogens but just went to H4 bulb type for more visibility particularly against oncoming traffic that does not know how to turn their fog lamps off.

 

All of my cars have full gauge sets. All have Bluetooth and handsfree capability. All have advanced wiper technology. Fortunately all came with seat belts. Only the tow car has stock sized wheels and tires.

 

One difference is that I research and know what "stock" is and in most cases the originals are in baggies in my garage. Also I am fascinated history and the people and places where things happened. Years ago there was a PBS show called "connections" that I loved.

 

Bottom line I have no desire to return to a life before AC/FI/Disk brakes (though my first car, a '59, had four wheel disk brakes). Do remember having the brakes on a '61 Caddy 'vert fade completely in one stop from 70ish and no desire to repeat.

 

So I get a bit confused in that pre-war coach builders are venerated while modern ones are despised. Do agree that points judging is a a good way to increase the value of a restoration but after creating a judging a "platinum" class for a large national club, I got tired of picking apart nice cars (when did Delco-Packard stop embossing spark plug wires and go to silk-screen) and quit. Now all of my cars are "drivers" and all have alloy wheels.

AMACA: Antique Modified Automobile Club of America...!! Is your model "T" also is Bluetooth equiped...?!

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, padgett said:

Must admit I am always amused by this kind or post that makes assumptions that the club is some glory land in the sky when the current purpose is "Since 1935, AACA has had one goal: The preservation and enjoyment of automotive history of all types". To me the key is "enjoyment".

 

Well said! To me, the key is "automotive history of all types". The automotive aftermarket is certainly a part of our automotive history.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Padgett,. 

 

I am assuming you are not an AACA member. The club's magazine is not Speedster. Speedster is a monthly email newsletter sent out by the club. The club magazine is Antique Automobile, which is what the original poster is upset about.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

I found the Stude article article both interesting and curious.

It's Interesting from an engineering and build standpoint but curious as to why it's a good fit for the AACA magazine. It's essentially a one off vehicle made from a highly customized production car. In essence a "hot rod".

It's curious from the standpoint of the AACA show field obsessing over the plating on spark plugs and valve stem caps and yet devoting several pages in the mag to something that never was. I may be mistaken but I think it was on the show field at Hershey. Hope the valve caps were "correct".

I'm agnostic about this particular car vis-à-vis AACA policy but I am curious as to what the policy is or if there is one.

Just sayin..............Bob

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, oldford said:

I bit my tongue when I read the article about the home made Stude convertible. There is always a double standard when it comes to things like this. on one hand, the modified cars are kicked out of the Hershey car corral because they are not 'like they came from the factory.'  Then in THE national magazine highlights things like Packard speedsters or Studebaker convertibles that were NEVER built at the 'factory.'  I, too, don't mind things like mag wheels on a Corvette or V8 wheels on Model A when touring. Hell, the roads today are dangerous places. The more road worthy we can make these cars, the better. But, come on... home made Stude convertibles in the National Magazine???

 

Frank

With so many great PRE WWII vehicles, why worry about the used cars made after the war? Bob 

Edited by 1937hd45 (see edit history)
Link to post
Share on other sites

Like it or not, modifications have always and will always be done as owners personalize the cars they love to be what THEY want rather than what others think they should have. In the 60s and 70s just about every muscle car sold was either turned into a weekend race car with aftermarket parts or at minimum customized with a set of mags and wider tires. Companies like Wheel Vintiques make a fortune selling repro oem style wheels because so many of the originals were thrown away! Like many other groups AACA has seen the mod trend and has the DPC class to allow it, I'm sure there are still plenty of bone stock classes to satisfy everyone. I personally like the day two look and do not mind seeing some of it covered.

DSCF1083.JPG

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in full agreement with the "period correct" look. I strive for it with most of my 60's era cars.

Did a rotisserie restoration on my 1968 Firebird 400 4 speed a few years ago. It was nut and bolt correct and numbers match from bumper to bumper. When finished I installed a big pair of 50 series BFG's on 10 inch rims on the rear. The car looked great, period correct and got a ton of compliments for "looking just like they did back then".

Now I just bought a 1965 Corvette 327 4 speed coupe,  two weeks ago. Doing the same level of restoration and when finished I will run a set of period correct Cragar SS wheels with the big fatties in the rear. I love that look. And, after seeing so many perfectly restored muscle cars with skinny 6 inch tires and dog dish hub caps, they have just lost interest for me. I currently run a period correct bumper sticker on my '73 Corvette.😄

Greg

20180718_170025.jpg

Edited by GregLaR (see edit history)
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Although I am a purist in the true sense of the AACA, I totally understand the reason for the article.  I suggest we all read it in its entirety before making harsh judgment.  The Studebaker in question was designed to mimic the "concept car"designed by "Studebaker stylist Bob Bourke".  The owners, Vic and Connie Oliver attempted and were successful at building their car based upon the drawings of Mr. Bourke.  Page 50 gives specific reasons for each of the changes to the car, per the concept.

As Mr. Oliver points out, the car was accepted by the AACA in Class 39, Special Interest Vehicles, which is a non-judged class, fully approved by the Class Acceptance Committee.  Per the article, it is a "display-only class" consisting of celebrity, movie/television props, historical significance or "an innovative design that never matured".  They received only the third ever granted Special Interest award for this category - on the show-field, not even at the awards banquet.

There are several categories of AACA vehicles including Driver Participation, HPOF, etc. which have been previously added in an effort to accommodate different tastes among our members.  This little beauty fits nicely into another category and might even be considered a work of art.

If one were to find an early Ford or General Motors "concept car" tucked away in a barn, should the AACA ignore it, based upon the purist standards?  I think not.  I commend them for publishing, informing and educating us on this part of automotive history.

IMG_4406.JPG

IMG_4407.JPG

Edited by AJFord54 (see edit history)
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

AJFord54, Thank you for taking the time to enlighten us. That Studebaker is of no interest to me, BUT I can fully understand the reason the class exists. If the 1929  Auburn  Cabin Speedster clone showed up the crowd would be six deep. Bob 

iv8mgxr8ypv11.jpg

Edited by 1937hd45 (see edit history)
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, TexRiv_63 said:

Like it or not, modifications have always and will always be done as owners personalize the cars they love to be what THEY want rather than what others think they should have. In the 60s and 70s just about every muscle car sold was either turned into a weekend race car with aftermarket parts or at minimum customized with a set of mags and wider tires. Companies like Wheel Vintiques make a fortune selling repro oem style wheels because so many of the originals were thrown away! Like many other groups AACA has seen the mod trend and has the DPC class to allow it, I'm sure there are still plenty of bone stock classes to satisfy everyone. I personally like the day two look and do not mind seeing some of it covered.

DSCF1083.JPG

If you have to put a mag wheel on a car like that Olds, please make it a Olds Mag!

Image result for 1963 oldsmobile starfire images

2 hours ago, AJFord54 said:

Although I am a purist in the true sense of the AACA, I totally understand the reason for the article.  I suggest we all read it in its entirety before making harsh judgment.  The Studebaker in question was designed to mimic the "concept car"designed by "Studebaker stylist Bob Bourke".  The owners, Vic and Connie Oliver attempted and were successful at building their car based upon the drawings of Mr. Bourke.  Page 50 gives specific reasons for each of the changes to the car, per the concept.

As Mr. Oliver points out, the car was accepted by the AACA in Class 39, Special Interest Vehicles, which is a non-judged class, fully approved by the Class Acceptance Committee.  Per the article, it is a "display-only class" consisting of celebrity, movie/television props, historical significance or "an innovative design that never matured".  They received only the third ever granted Special Interest award for this category - on the show-field, not even at the awards banquet.

There are several categories of AACA vehicles including Driver Participation, HPOF, etc. which have been previously added in an effort to accommodate different tastes among our members.  This little beauty fits nicely into another category and might even be considered a work of art.

If one were to find an early Ford or General Motors "concept car" tucked away in a barn, should the AACA ignore it, based upon the purist standards?  I think not.  I commend them for publishing, informing and educating us on this part of automotive history.

IMG_4406.JPG

IMG_4407.JPG

So many people want to mimic their car to a original concept car or to a production car.

 And what about a clone?  1964 & 1965 Pontiac LeMans has the same body style # as a GTO until the car became it's own series in 1966. Is it OK?. It must be ok to make your LeMans  a GTO because the GTO in those two years is a LeMans with a GTO option. Remember the rules; as long as it's on the option list for your car it's OK. How is a Packard 12 treated when the body was taken off in the late 30's and the car was rebodied as a roadster?  Certainly didn't come that way. As long as it's a perfectly done custom by Steve Mole in 2018 it should be just as good as a car done by Bohman & Schwartz in the 40's right?

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, padgett said:

Must admit I am always amused by this kind or post that makes assumptions that the club is some glory land in the sky when the current purpose is "Since 1935, AACA has had one goal: The preservation and enjoyment of automotive history of all types".

 

So I get a bit confused in that pre-war coach builders are venerated while modern ones are despised.

Amused? don't you mean confused? 

To me the word preserve is the word that comes to mind. Preserving history I thought is what it was all about. How can you preserve the history on a particular car if you add all the options it could have had??? When you find out that this speedster that you have was rebodied by Murphy in the 30's and was not the car as built what do you do? Is there any difference in skill with guys today doing the same thing?  Restoring a car means restoring back to the way it originally came.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Greg, I hate to be the stickler, but that Nixon bumper sticker would only be right if that '73 Vette was produced before November 1972. If produced after October and delivered after November  7, 1972, then that accessory would not be period correct. Ha!😁

  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

re GTO clones from LeMans/Tempest: there were several ways to tell if a 64-65 was real or not even before PHS. Were ways to spot 66 parts on a 67 and verse the vice but had to be a fanatic. Had one owner get really mad who spent a lot of time and effort creating a 67 GTO with hood tach, gauges, and clock but I took max points off because he had the clock and gauges in the wrong pods. I happened to have the original build information. Those experiences had a lot to do with why I stopped judging.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, padgett said:

re GTO clones from LeMans/Tempest: there were several ways to tell if a 64-65 was real or not even before PHS. Were ways to spot 66 parts on a 67 and verse the vice but had to be a fanatic. Had one owner get really mad who spent a lot of time and effort creating a 67 GTO with hood tach, gauges, and clock but I took max points off because he had the clock and gauges in the wrong pods. I happened to have the original build information. Those experiences had a lot to do with why I stopped judging.

As I said before 1964-65 GTO's are a option on a LeMans and they have a LeMans  Body Style number. According to AACA rules which say anything goes as long as it could be ordered. Example: a guy buys a 1961 Pontiac Catalina with the standard engine ( 389) and automatic , 10.25 comp ratio 2bbl carb, 267 h.p. with a 2.67 open rear end. Under AACA judging rules he can make that Catalina any way you could have ordered that Catalina in 1961. So he can make that car a 389 engine with Tri-Power (3-2bbl) , 348 h.p, 4 speed stick,  Safety Track 4:10 gears in the diff. So any 1964/65  LeMans could be ordered with the GTO option. No problem making your LeMans into a GTO. according to the rules applied to the 61 Catalina. The factory internally called the GTO optioned car a " LeMans GTO ". After 1965 model GTO becomes it's own model and you can't clone that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pfeil,

            While I like the mags on my muscle era cars I agree with you on the vintage cars. I'm about 75% through the resto on my '38 Plymouth coupe and I love it for it's plain simplicity. This was a very low option car (two tail lamps and passenger side sun visor) and that's the way I'm keeping it. Right down to the black wall tires. I always think it looks cheesey when one of these lower end, inexpensive cars are all dressed up with fog lamps, visors, fender skirts, trim rings, etc.

I suppose that makes me a little hypocritical. I can't really justify why I think its OK for one type of car but not another.

Greg

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, GregLaR said:

Pfeil,

            While I like the mags on my muscle era cars I agree with you on the vintage cars. I'm about 75% through the resto on my '38 Plymouth coupe and I love it for it's plain simplicity. This was a very low option car (two tail lamps and passenger side sun visor) and that's the way I'm keeping it. Right down to the black wall tires. I always think it looks cheesey when one of these lower end, inexpensive cars are all dressed up with fog lamps, visors, fender skirts, trim rings, etc.

I suppose that makes me a little hypocritical. I can't really justify why I think its OK for one type of car but not another.

Greg

How will feel when your muscle cars become vintage cars?

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

"Outrage" and "shame" are pretty strong words over an aftermarket accessory.  Okay, I get that you don't personally like it, but I would suggest that it is our differences in tastes that make for such eclectic and interesting meets.  I may be wrong, but I seem to remember a time in the past when AACA accepted up to three period-correct factory accessories.  Of course, at the time, that meant you could have a manifold heater, a motometer, and an air cleaner on your Model A.  Heck, back in the "period'', I was a teenager putting 'period correct' accessories on my car.  I think it's fun to see some of them again.  What is a bigger "outrage", a 1950s car with mag wheels, or an over-restored classic era roadster with a mirror-finish basecoat/clear coat "concours" finish on every chassis and undercarriage part?  IMHO, what will keep our hobby and our club strong Is some appreciation of what the other guy is doing, regardless of whether or not it is what you might do with the same car.

  • Like 10
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Akstraw said:

"Outrage" and "shame" are pretty strong words over an aftermarket accessory.  Okay, I get that you don't personally like it, but I would suggest that it is our differences in tastes that make for such eclectic and interesting meets.    What is a bigger "outrage", a 1950s car with mag wheels, or an over-restored classic era roadster with a mirror-finish basecoat/clear coat "concours" finish on every chassis and undercarriage part?  IMHO, what will keep our hobby and our club strong Is some appreciation of what the other guy is doing, regardless of whether or not it is what you might do with the same car.

Excellent!  Especially your last sentence.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

" No problem making your LeMans into a GTO. " oh I agree, as long as it is done correctly. If I can open the trunk and tell it was not a GTO then...There a few things on a 64-65 GTO that were different from a LeMans. Of course with PHS the question is moot.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/1/2018 at 8:29 PM, Joe in Canada said:

excerpt: . . . . We should except a car from the 60s with different period accessories that were available then  like we have for the early  cars.  . . .

 

I'm confused. Accept (in?) or except (out?)?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, AJFord54 said:

I totally understand the reason for the article.  I suggest we all read it in its entirety before making harsh judgment. 

 

The Studebaker in question was designed to mimic the "concept car" designed by "Studebaker stylist Bob Bourke".  The owners, Vic and Connie Oliver attempted and were successful at building their car based upon the drawings of Mr. Bourke.  Page 50 gives specific reasons for each of the changes to the car, per the concept. The car was accepted by the AACA in Class 39, Special Interest Vehicles, which is a non-judged class, fully approved by the Class Acceptance Committee.  Per the article, it is a "display-only class" consisting of celebrity, movie/television props, historical significance or "an innovative design that never matured".  They received only the third ever granted Special Interest award for this category - on the show-field, not even at the awards banquet. There are several categories of AACA vehicles including Driver Participation, HPOF, etc. which have been previously added in an effort to accommodate different tastes among our members.  This little beauty fits nicely into another category and might even be considered a work of art.

 

I commend them for publishing, informing and educating us on this part of automotive history.

 

This sums it up. Thank you A.J.

 

AACA is for the preservation and appreciation for automotive history. The Corvette owner, Steve Eason, is promoting the hobby in many ways: preserving, showing and, most importantly, showing the world that vintage cars can been enjoyed on and off the show field. The Drivers Participation Class is for those who prefer to drive their cars as opposed to competing for Junior, Senior, Grand National and National awards (actually, there is a national award for DPC, too!!). DPC allows for a few alterations in order to make the car more enjoyable and safe to drive. It is an AACA official class, and none of the alterations that Mr. Eason has done to his Corvette have caused the DPC class judges to object.

 

My comment to Mr. gervaisgt: For more than 14 years, I have strived to feature all aspects of AACA. I receive many letters from members who think that all I feature are high-point award-winning automobiles. Nothing could be further from the truth. As most of us know, pictures lie. In fact, if you read through the Letters section of this very same issue (November/December 2018), there is a letter from a man who "claims" members of an AACA Region in his area have shunned his cars because they are the wrong make and wrong condition. Steve Moskowitz penned a perfect response of shock, adding that "There is a danger in equating All of AACA as having a singular view on the hobby ... Our magazine tries to add mixes of DPC, and HPOF cars along with exposing members to rare cars that [few] of us can ever hope to own. We are proud of those members who restore and maintain their cars for the enjoyment of the rest of us."

 

Snobbery is a cancer of the old car hobby, weather perceived or real. Why should we not feature as many aspects of AACA as we can?"

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

West, I did not intend my post above to imply snobbery regarding the Stude or the Packard Speedster of last year. Rather, it deals with the double standard applied at the Hershey show.  How can the club justify refusing to allow even mildly modified cars in the car corral or even the flea market, and then allow home made cars in the show. I don't care what class you put the car in on the show field, it still remains that the cars identified were never produced, and thus did not come from the factory as they were shown. If an early LaMans gets changed to a GTO (as could be ordered from the factory) then OK... But at least the factory produced such a GTO. I'd like someone to explain to us plebes why the Stude above is not just a home made, modified Studebaker. If the standards are applied to one group of modified cars, why not to all....

 

Frank

Link to post
Share on other sites

I cannot answer for those who monitor the car corral. Apparently it is not consistent.

As for allowing the Packard Speedster onto the show field last year, all I can say is that AACA and the Hershey Region have their hands full organizing more than 1,200 registered vehicles. They do the best they can. If someone registers his 1929 Packard in Class 19, it is difficult for the person handling the paperwork to know just exactly what the owner is going to display. As for trying to decide if a car belongs or not, that is not up to the volunteers who are doing their best to park cars in a quick and orderly fashion. Since I am not a judge, I do not know the process of reporting "hot rod" cars. That car was meant to emulate the actual 1928-29 Packard Speedster concept car (the real car was actually on display in the flea market during the week), and was being displayed next to a 1930 Packard Speedster owned by the same gentleman. While, in my opinion, the car did not qualify as a "hot rod," it did fall short of copying the real thing. Perhaps the judges felt it was close enough to what the factory built that they didn't raise a stink. Sometimes it's best to just "let it be".

As for the Studebaker, it was shown in Class 39. For good reasons, the acceptance committee felt it qualified under sub-heading "d."

Class 39: A display only, non-judged class. All vehicles in this class must be approved by the Class Acceptance Committee. The owner of such vehicle must provide documentation and authenticity documents to the Class Acceptance Committee. Consideration will be for the following examples: a. Celebrity vehicles b. Vehicles in movies or on television c. Vehicles of historical significance d. Vehicles of innovative design that never matured. This class is not for modified vehicles, hot-rods, street rods, choppers, etc.

All in all, AACA is quite consistent in keeping actual "hot rods" and "customs" off of its show field, other than for what is accepted in Class 39. Some cars are definitely in a grey area, and it is those that seem to come to the surface to raise a stink. Perhaps we should keep our focus on the 99 percent.

  • Like 1
Link to post
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
×
×
  • Create New...