1935 Auburn Craigslist Calgary

[Modeleh]

Another seller who won’t put a price on something.  Looks like a nice replica.

 

https://calgary.craigslist.org/cto/d/calgary-1935-auburn-boattail-851/6992513012.html

[1912Staver]

I think I would delete the trunk rack but otherwise it looks to far better than most . Clearly out of my price range so I guess his ask is of little importance to me anyway. 

 

 

 

Greg in Canada , in fact not far away from Calgary at all but that isn't going to make up the $50,000- $75,000 or so I would be short.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[alsancle]

Too bad they didn't go all the way and get a blower.   Even so, most people would never know it wasn't real.

 

However,  I wouldn't buy a real one if the door handles where that badly aligned.   Amazing how many people don't pay attention to that.

[auburnseeker]

I would consider it,  but would want some serious money off for those door handles.  

My guess is he wants 80 to 100G 

anyone know for sure.  

The crappy definitely replica looking ones with a 350,  seem to sell in the 45-70G range.  Why I have no idea.  Not a whole lot different than a glass 32 Ford that only brings under 30G in really nice order. 

[mike brady]

Apparently the owner has never seen a real Auburn or Cord painted Cigarette Creme

[trimacar]

Nice looking car, and the ACD accepts such cars for any event.  Don't understand why you guys are beating up on it so much, it would be a fun car, with Prey provenance, and only values I've seen on this thread are guesses as to what seller wants.....when a real one sells for well into six figures, this one, which can be had for a fraction of that, is a cheap buy in to ACD activities.

[edinmass]

While most everyone agrees the 851 speedster is a fantastic design........why would anyone pot that ugly trunk rack on the car. It absolutely astounds me that people think they can improve a pre war car’s looks or style by bolting on any assorted junk......trunk rack, spot lights, Tripp Lights, side mount mirrors. The people who designed cars knew what they were doing. Placing a trunk rack on that speedster is like finger painting over some of the great masters. 

[edinmass]

8 hours ago, trimacar said:

Nice looking car, and the ACD accepts such cars for any event.  Don't understand why you guys are beating up on it so much, it would be a fun car, with Prey provenance, and only values I've seen on this thread are guesses as to what seller wants.....when a real one sells for well into six figures, this one, which can be had for a fraction of that, is a cheap buy in to ACD activities.

 

 

Well into six figures us an understatement ..........recently decent speedsters change hands in the 800k to 1.1 range. This 50’s Pray remake is better than a fiberglass Ford knock off........and done with lots of factory parts..........so I can almost tolerate it. Almost. As to why no price in the ad? Why bother? I’m sure he figures his later repop is worth 2/3 of a real one............it’s true value us unknown to me. 

[alsancle]

2 hours ago, edinmass said:

 

 

Well into six figures us an understatement ..........recently decent speedsters change hands in the 800k to 1.1 range. This 50’s Pray remake is better than a fiberglass Ford knock off........and done with lots of factory parts..........so I can almost tolerate it. Almost. As to why no price in the ad? Why bother? I’m sure he figures his later repop is worth 2/3 of a real one............it’s true value us unknown to me. 

 

If you look at the last 10 public speedster sales (and a couple of private ones I happen to know about),  you see prices from 500 to 1.1 million.  The sweet spot being 700-800 for a nice car.    The 500k difference from top to bottom can be attributed to condition, provenance, colors, original components, etc.

 

The subject car is a very well done replica and should bring 75k-100k, based on a couple similar to it that I know have sold in the last 10 years.  The Glenn Pray body is a plus.

 

The typical replica's are so bad that associating the name "Auburn" with them should reason to sue for libel.

[auburnseeker]

12 hours ago, mike brady said:

Apparently the owner has never seen a real Auburn or Cord painted Cigarette Creme

I was thinking that color didn't look right but I was looking more at what original Auburn trinkets were used to make it look more authentic.  Now that you mention it wow,  not even a couple shades off.  My 36 Cord was Cigarette cream and it looks a whole lot closer to Trimacar's Packard in his avitar than the tan putty color on the speedster. 

[John_Mereness]

This car is in a little different class than the average Glenn Prey Boatail replica build around such as  Ford/Lincoln drivetrains - especially if they have the documentation from new - they came in a variety of forms (some come with more "steel" in them than other came with. too), but basically you are looking at a fairly complete 1935/1936 Auburn drivetrain.  They have a cult following too and will just take some better advertising for it to sell for a surprisingly high amount. 

[trimacar]

2 hours ago, auburnseeker said:

I was thinking that color didn't look right but I was looking more at what original Auburn trinkets were used to make it look more authentic.  Now that you mention it wow,  not even a couple shades off.  My 36 Cord was Cigarette cream and it looks a whole lot closer to Trimacar's Packard in his avitar than the tan putty color on the speedster. 

I agree the color of this car isn't "cigarette cream".  That said, agreement among Cord enthusiasts on what shade cigarette cream really is varies quite a bit.  I think my Cord is too yellowish, though in photos it looks close(repainted badly in the 1960's), I think the ivory hue on my '38 Packard might be too light.  For sure, that faux Auburn isn't the correct hue to be called that....

[Gunsmoke]

Great looking car, and so much original Auburn gear. My Dad (passed away in 1999 at age 89, was a mechanic by trade) was a car fan, and owned a '36 Auburn (Coupe?) prior to joining the Canadian Navy in WWII, thought it was the best car he ever owned. He stored the car while enlisted, and a friend talked him into selling it in the early 40's (a decision he always regretted) while he was still serving his country. He told me he once was walking down a street in Halifax NS Canada (while on leave) circa 1940/41 and came across an Auburn Boattail (or convertible?) parked by the curb. It left an indelible mark on him. About 35 years ago I was driving to work and a mid-'30's silver Auburn Boattail sailed by me in the oncoming lane. I nearly lost control trying to check it out in my rear view mirrors to confirm I was not hallucinating. Never saw it again in all these years, but it's presence that one time was memorable, a large car, with such a small space devoted to the driver. May have been a replica, maybe even a Glenn Prey, but something to behold. I'd buy this one if price was within my reach.

 

For those who have not seen what one of these '36 Auburns looks like undressed, here are some photos I took about 10 years ago when an old friend asked me to give him a hand lifting the body off the chassis of his then under restoration '36 Phaeton. These were a ruggedly built car.

[JACK M]

I recognize the torque wrench, but whats the wooden thing?

[Restorer32]

Amazing how times change. Long gone acquaintance drove his Auburn BTS to an early Hershey meet and it was not allowed on the show field. Too new. We painted a '31 Chevy it's original Cigarette Cream in 1982 or so. As I remember the Ditzler Color Library had the original formula.

[Guest]

Nice looking car. I'm curious why the seller would use the phrase:

"This is not a replicar,...."

When, by definition, that is precisely what it is.

Perhaps he meant it is not a "kit car"?

Either way, it is a great piece of work.

 

[1912Staver]

I would not call it a replicar either. Its a re- body of an original Auburn . The replicar's are built on either a newly fabricated , non original frame or an adapted much later production chassis.

With few if any genuine Auburn parts used. This car is about 80% genuine Auburn, a substantial difference.

 

Greg in Canada

[auburnseeker]

I wonder actually if you would have fewer interested buyers as most of the guys buying the replicas want AC tilt steering and a crate 350.  Few purists would want to lay the money out for a non original car.  That rebodied 31? Speedster on ebay that only gets bid to the mid 30's, is actually an all aluminum car built just like the original over a wood frame. I would consider that long before I plunked down hard earned money on a plastic car especially if the plastic one was more. 

[Guest]

6 hours ago, 1912Staver said:

I would not call it a replicar either. Its a re- body of an original Auburn . The replicar's are built on either a newly fabricated , non original frame or an adapted much later production chassis.

With few if any genuine Auburn parts used. This car is about 80% genuine Auburn, a substantial difference.

 

Greg in Canada

I see endless descriptions and explanations on this this site meant to clarify the difference and/or correct use of the terms "Classic", "Vintage", "Collector", "Antique", etc. 

I do not view the term "replicar" as disparaging or derogatory at all. I think with these types of examples it is the perfect word for the product that is recreated.

 

By definition, from the Oxford English Dictionary:

Replicate: "make an exact copy of; reproduce"

 

That seems pretty clear.

This car may have many Auburn parts which help to reproduce the image and effect of an original BTS, and certainly help to stand it apart from the later fiberglass/carbon fiber kit cars, but it was not manufactured until two decades after the originals were built. So it is most certainly a replicated car.

A similar argument was put forward with the convertible Tucker that has made the rounds here. It also was built with many original Tucker parts. End result was another very interesting "might have been" car priced in the stratosphere. I can't get a grasp on the builders/sellers wanting to distance themselves from the term "replicar". As if by shunning this term the cars will have more validity.

I can understand not wanting to be considered a "kit car" which brings to mind many Volkswagen based hot rods, but one would think the term replicar would be embraced by those who are replicating the  originals.

I like them..... and the term.

 

Greg in America

 

[Gunsmoke]

I personally consider a car to be able to be referred to by its original name if the rolling chassis and a majority of it's inners are original, or if the body is original. As for "adjectives" to place, as mentioned they can be numerous, and most of us know generally what they mean. In the Glenn Frey case, I think "re-bodied" is perhaps the best adjective. For the Tucker, "non-factory prototype convertible" will work. Of course "resto-mod" covers a lot of sins, as does hot-rod, chopped, mild custom, clone, and on and on. Manufacturers (or body specialists) themselves back in the day, like Rolls Royce would re-body a car almost any way the owner wanted it, and many of those cars are more highly valued today than they would have been in their original body. Sort of like a "nip and tuck". Not many hard and fast rules when it comes to owners deciding to take some license with the original manufacturers product. Just nice when they disclose.

[alsancle]

If the subject car was made of steel and wood framing then I would go with the new coachwork or rebody terminology.   Considering it is a fiberglass,  I would say replica.

[Modeleh]

The TV auction shows seem to favour the word “tribute” over fake, recreation, kit car, replica, etc.  

I agree with the previous post that said if the car never left the factory that way then it can be described by any one of those previously mentioned terms.  And I agree that they are not necessarily disparaging terms.  In some ways it allows an owner to enjoy a car that otherwise may be too valuable to use in a less careful manner.

[Walt G]

New nomenclature now abounds for everything - a new way to try to promote something. Why not just call it what it is and the way the specific term has been for the past half plus century?

"Tribute" has replaced replica, "Refurbishment" has replaced restored, a new lexicon for something that is not different or at least changed in a small way - just another way to sell or enhance the item under discussion to make it sound more important. Everything and everyone has to be important now . New names people ! make all think it is better or more acceptable, more posh.

So if you get a major cosmetic surgery done - face lift - or ( unmentionable here) other body parts worked on have they been "refurbished". Is a nose job now a " nasal refurbishment" ?

 

Hey that original sales brochure you are trying to sell that has soiling and creases in it now has "patina of age". 😏

[60FlatTop]

The whole four years my daughter went to college up in the North Country tried to liberate this one from old Mr. Mace. Ford LTD chassis and a 400. If I had wrestled it away from him I wouldn't have call it a replica or a kit car. I would have called it "My Car".

 

I got a smile out of the car turned away for Hershey. It reminded me that exclusive is a variation of exclude. You see that a lot.

Bernie

[alsancle]

I think the problem stems from applying specific terminology like "Auburn 851 Speedster" to something that is really closer to a 1972 LTD Wagon than a 1936 Auburn.   Some like the car in question here are pretty well done and others are a crime against humanity, but none should be calling themselves "Auburn 851 Speedster".

 

[1912Staver]

The slope gets even slipperier when you look at things like some of the Lotus 7 , Lotus 11, Porsche 550 etc., modern build clones.  Some are remarkably close to the original car, although none of 

the modern 550's use the uber costly 4 cam engine. A good number of the Lotus clones use proper Coventry Climax engines , although generally converted fire pump engines rather than car version 

Climax's. Some of them are nut for bolt for rivet correct new construction. But very simple cars compared to something like a 1930's Auburn.

Greg in Canada

[Ed Luddy]

Hmmm, a lot of bashing for a nice,  honestly described antique car on the AACA forum.  

[Ed Luddy]