Engineering vs Esthetics in a first purchase of a CCCA Classic

[padgett]

I agree with Matt.

[alsancle]

1 hour ago, Matt Harwood said:

 

As someone who doesn't personally care even a little about rebodies and matching numbers, I'd be all over that red one. The Imperials are great-looking cars that drive superbly.

 

I was pointing out the rebodied nature of the blue and red car in response to why was there such a price difference with the Convertible coupe.    We have this discussion all the time.   Things that look the same are not necessarily the same to all people.    You guys don't care,  but if I was gonna pay 120k for something,  it might be important to me where I was allowed to show it,  and how much I felt up to explaining the "story".

[alsancle]

In the same ballpark you could have a real car.

 

[edinmass]

Comment:

 

I have traveled to Europe over the years, just for the purpose of visiting museums. Went to France for the Louvre, Went to Italy to see Rome, the coliseum and the Vatican......Went to London to see the Tower and the Crown Jewels. Could have saved tens of thousands of dollars and a bunch of time off if I just looked at the stuff on line. Walking through the Sistine Chapel , climbing the stairs of the  Eiffel Tower, seeing Napoleons tomb........are experiences..........just the same way driving a “real” car is compared to a rebodied car. I rather have a 7 Passenger Limo, than a new coachwork roadster. Most.....people feel the same way, certainly not all. Getting behind the wheel of a genuine Duesenberg, a one off special purchase by a gentleman who at the time was in the league of Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos is a totally different sensation and experience than driving a car with 1970’s coachwork. I understand it’s not for everyone. Hell......I can’t afford it. I took this job so I could experience the sensation that almost no other people on the planet have had. I turned my life upside down to do it. And, yes.....it was worth it!👍

Edited October 3, 2020 by edinmass (see edit history)

[1937hd45]

9 hours ago, Matt Harwood said:

 

As someone who doesn't personally care even a little about rebodies and matching numbers, I'd be all over that red one. The Imperials are great-looking cars that drive superbly.

I think a bare block that holds water goes for around 20 large. Bob 

[padgett]

What is the cost of casting a new block ? Crank or cam would be harder.

[John_Mereness]

DO NOT BUY REBODIED CARS THAT WERE DONE IN THE 1970's to 2000's unless it is an exact recreation of the exact original body that was on the chassis when the car was new (ie a roadster chassis that lost its roadster body due to say a tree falling on it) - far better ways to spend your money.  Also falls under category of "Ghosts of Christmas past and ....

Edited October 4, 2020 by John_Mereness (see edit history)

[John_Mereness]

On 10/2/2020 at 5:16 PM, alsancle said:

Joe Morgan is selling this one.

 

https://www.hemmings.com/classifieds/cars-for-sale/chrysler/cg-series/2402074.html

 

A fine car and worthy of the price !!!

[alsancle]

2 minutes ago, John_Mereness said:

DO NOT BUY REBODIED CARS THAT WERE DONE IN THE 1970's to 2000's unless it is an exact recreation of the exact original body that was on the chassis when the car was new (ie a roadster chassis that lost its roadster body die to say a tree falling on it) - far better ways to spend your money.  Also falls under category of "Ghosts of Christmas past and ....

 

As I pointed out before,  this discussion always elicits a variety of opinions.   The nicest way I can put it is the way you said it "far better ways to spend your money".     There are worse ways I can explain it too.

[FLYER15015]

I am so glad all you folks are concentrating John, who started this thread, onto the Chrysler / imperial brand !

 

Re the red one, all you experts know that the '31's did not come with 'trumpet" horns.

You either have to use '32 headlight brackets, that have the 2 mounting holes, or make your own brackets like i did.

 

Rebody ? So if I use brand new welding rod to repair an original old body is that a "sin"?

 

I know there is a whole crowd out there that when the paperwork outweighs the car, it's fit to show.

But like they say in Kansas, "I ain't one of them "

 

Mike in Colorado

[FLYER15015]

14 hours ago, 1937hd45 said:

I think a bare block that holds water goes for around 20 large. Bob 

That's true, but for about 4k you could transplant a completely rebuilt '49 Chrysler flathead 8 and 90% of the population out there would not know the difference.

 

Mike in Colorado

[SC38dls]

Mike I think you are wrong, it’s probably closer to 95-96%! 
I know I wouldn’t. 

Edited October 4, 2020 by SC38DLS (see edit history)

[edinmass]

1 hour ago, FLYER15015 said:

That's true, but for about 4k you could transplant a completely rebuilt '49 Chrysler flathead 8 and 90% of the population out there would not know the difference.

 

Mike in Colorado

Mike.....you’re low.......99.98 percent.

[FLYER15015]

34 minutes ago, edinmass said:

Mike.....you’re low.......99.98 percent.

Ah, but you would...................and that concerns me.

 

Mike

 

PS; Now that we're really off track and have hijacked John's thread, I have to again refer him to the Chrysler / Imperial marque.

       Hey John, GET A MOPAR and Take Ed's advice, "drive it like u stole it" ! It really is the only one u can.

[58L-Y8]

"Soooooo, with that issue of "engineering vs esthetics", what are the thoughts from some of you regarding a suggestion for a closed car, in that earlier era I prefer, to do touring (occasionally sustained speeds of 55 MPH), reasonable braking, mechanical stability) for under 50K?"

 

1932 Chrysler Imperial CH Series.

[edinmass]

When it comes to 1932 Chrysler Imperial CH series cars,  I don’t think there’s an engineering VS aesthetics issue. The Imperial CH has both of them covered. They are great cars, and I would own on in a second.

[58L-Y8]

5 minutes ago, edinmass said:

When it comes to 1932 Chrysler Imperial CH series cars,  I don’t think there’s an engineering VS aesthetics issue. The Imperial CH has both of them covered. They are great cars, and I would own on in a second.

Ed:

Do they drive as great as the spec's suggest?   Whether correct or not, I tend to think of them as the Chrysler Imperial version of the Packard 734 Speedster series.

[edinmass]

They are great cars........better than a lot of other high end stuff. 

[John Bloom]

20 minutes ago, edinmass said:

They are great cars........better than a lot of other high end stuff. 

I will confess I haven’t looked into them much in my research. The pictures and comments in this thread have my attention. I like the long wheelbase and the esthetics. What is the most active club that will have owners and examples of these models and years?

[FLYER15015]

To be honest John, the Chrysler / Imperial bunch is playing checkers, while the Buick crowd is playing chess.

Were I to look at '30's buicks, I would save up for a series 90.

Awhile back Mr. Sandy Jones widow, (AKA Outlaw Car Man here) had one of his 2, count em 2 series 90 1932 Buick limo's for sale.

I think it was the black one, and it came from one of the DuPonts some time ago.

I rode in it many years ago, just after I found my '40 LTD. He would not trade me, and I've lusted for a '30's BIG sedan ever since.

The '31 imperial was found almost by accident, and I've been very pleased with it.

 

You been on www.carsonline.com yet ???"?

 

Mike in Colorado

[alsancle]

2 hours ago, John Bloom said:

I will confess I haven’t looked into them much in my research. The pictures and comments in this thread have my attention. I like the long wheelbase and the esthetics. What is the most active club that will have owners and examples of these models and years?

 

The CH is the shorter Imperial wheelbase at 135.  The cars I was posting were CG which is 145.     A few years ago Joe Morgan was selling a really nice CG club sedan at Hershey and he couldn't get a sniff at 90k  Not sure what it ended up selling for.   But the CH is cheaper to buy than the CG.

 

Check this website out:  http://www.imperialclub.com/Yr/1932/index.htm

 

[FLYER15015]

AL,

"couldn't get a sniff at 90K"

That's because just looking at the picture above, he's 70K too high.

 

Mike in Colorado

[alsancle]

6 hours ago, FLYER15015 said:

AL,

"couldn't get a sniff at 90K"

That's because just looking at the picture above, he's 70K too high.

 

Mike in Colorado

 

The car above is the 135" CH.   The car that Joe Morgan was selling was a 145" CG.   It looked a lot like this:

 

 

[John_Mereness]

This Chrysler sold for $47,850 with very older restoration, not the best colors, and needing quite a bit of care and upgrading.  I would say a realistic price for a well done, but no longer really show quality car.   If you had a car capable of AACA or CCCA awards you would be hard pressed to not have a 90K number involved. 

 

https://rmsothebys.com/en/auctions/af20/auburn-fall/lots/r0408-1931-chrysler-imperial-close-coupled-sedan/972740

 

[Matt Harwood]

1 hour ago, John_Mereness said:

This Chrysler sold for $47,850 with very older restoration, not the best colors, and needing quite a bit of care and upgrading.  I would say a realistic price for a well done, but no longer really show quality car.   If you had a car capable of AACA or CCCA awards you would be hard pressed to not have a 90K number involved. 

 

https://rmsothebys.com/en/auctions/af20/auburn-fall/lots/r0408-1931-chrysler-imperial-close-coupled-sedan/972740

 

 

Looking at RM's photos of that car, it appears that the previous owner needed to stop for potty breaks more often than he did...

[60FlatTop]

4 hours ago, alsancle said:

was a 145" CG. 

My Great Uncle Sam, yep I had one, went to Chrysler production engineering after some years as a machinist at Simplex. He told me that 145" wheelbase evolved from the construction of concrete highways in 12' sections. They were aiming for one thump for two tar strips.

The last company car he had with Chrysler was an Imperial and he told me how all it took was a little whiskey and a good straight 8 to put the lower front wheels right up there where the spares went into the fenders. That was right before he was uninvited from Chrysler and moved back here to western New York for his early retirement. He was telling a lot of good car stories round 1960.

[FLYER15015]

Matt,

I agree. Whom ever chose the colors on that '31 should be shot.

Does not do the car justice.

Sidemount covers ? Not correct, and to cover those big whitewall sidemounts is a sin.

 

Mike in Colorado

[John_Mereness]

48 minutes ago, FLYER15015 said:

Matt,

I agree. Whom ever chose the colors on that '31 should be shot.

Does not do the car justice.

Sidemount covers ? Not correct, and to cover those big whitewall sidemounts is a sin.

 

Mike in Colorado

Yes, the sidemount covers are correct for a 1931, rare as hens teeth too.  

Sidenote: I will rarely consider buying a car without sidemount covers as whitewalls in the sidemounts look like crap. 

[John_Mereness]

17 hours ago, alsancle said:

 

I would probably be more excited about a car like this verses a restored one - just me though.

[John_Mereness]

6 hours ago, alsancle said:

 

And it would take me about 10 minutes to arrange for the black sidemount cover face plates on this car to get changed to grey to match the body.  As to why grey: Makes the car look longer (as would a grey trunk).  As to why sidemount covers:  People wanted a more modern car. 

[John_Mereness]

1 hour ago, FLYER15015 said:

 

Mike, I know I probably offended you on my comment, though I come from a different school on 30's cars and it all has to do with winning at Concours events (which I co-run the Cincinnat/Ault Park which is the second oldest Concous in the United states with Pebble Beach being the longest running).  When I buy something without sidemount covers I am quick to try to find a set and if I cannot then that probably is the end of the car in my ownership. Of all the 30's car that dad and I have owned the only one of his or mine without sidemount covers was my 1932 RR PI and the only reason it did not have a set was because it used 20 inch wheels and not many things had 20" wheels post 1929 (ie 20" Lyon brand covers are particularly hard to find).  Personally, I like your Chrysler, though if I were to buy it today then tomorrow I would be on the global quest for covers. In 1930, you start seeing the covers on high end stuff and by 1931 they are more commonplace and so on (people wanted modern).  The 1930/1931's styles can be a bit boxy too depending on the marque. By the time 1932 hits you nearly have the covers being quite commonplace on high end cars and very good looking too.   By the way, I do like whitewalls - especially double whitewalls (as a sidenote:  most people know I like and are baffled when I see something and say "get blackwalls on that" - it just depends on the car and ...). 

[zepher]

2 hours ago, Matt Harwood said:

If you had a car capable of AACA or CCCA awards you would be hard pressed to not have a 90K number involved. 

 

This is another area where Pierce Arrows shine.

You get a world class full Classic with outstanding engineering and styling for much, much less than any comparable full Classic.

Heck, many far lesser cars sell for more than most great Pierce Arrows.

On top of that, the support through the Pierce Arrow Society is second to none.

[John_Mereness]

14 hours ago, FLYER15015 said:

 

 

 

In the compliments department - I doubt more than a couple handfulls of 30's sedan interiors come in any better original condition - pretty stunning. 

[John Bloom]

8 minutes ago, zepher said:

 

This is another area where Pierce Arrows shine.

You get a world class full Classic with outstanding engineering and styling for much, much less than any comparable full Classic.

Heck, many far lesser cars sell for more than most great Pierce Arrows.

On top of that, the support through the Pierce Arrow Society is second to none.

This causes me to ask a question I have been trying to figure out as I search different makes.

 

if the “average classic (for comparison purposes)” could be stereotyped as a 134 in WB, straight 8, standard body (let’s not involve coach builders in my question), what is the perceived/estimated prevailing sale prices of the typical example from each Make for : Cadillac, Packard, Pierce Arrow, Chrysler, Lincoln, Franklin, Marmon, Stutz, Cord, Auburn, Nash, Buick, Auburn Studebaker?  (US makes only). What I mean by that is if an Auburn was considered the Middle of the road/average/50th percentile........and we pegged it at 1.0 in cost, what is a comparable Lincoln?  1.2?  Packard? 1.4?  Franklin? .7?

 

keep in mind I’m trying to get a feel for cost of “like models “ (i.e that 134 in WB straight 8 example I gave).  Forget about Duesenbergs .....    and I do know that Franklins are 6’s, and many examples I gave have V8 vice straight 8.

I hope what I’m trying to ask is clear. I’m not sure if I’m getting my question out clearly like I have in my mind........

 

john

 

[FLYER15015]

John,

Last picture, did you note the "Stewart Warner" radio below the wheel ?

Most folks think it's a tach or a vacuum gauge...........till I turn it on with it's own key.

 

Mike in Colorado

[TexRiv_63]

22 hours ago, FLYER15015 said:

 

Were I to look at '30's buicks, I would save up for a series 90.

Awhile back Mr. Sandy Jones widow, (AKA Outlaw Car Man here) had one of his 2, count em 2 series 90 1932 Buick limo's for sale.

I think it was the black one, and it came from one of the DuPonts some time ago.

I rode in it many years ago, just after I found my '40 LTD. He would not trade me, and I've lusted for a '30's BIG sedan ever since.

 

 

Mike in Colorado

Mike, totally agree. I tried to buy the green one from Sandy but could not afford it, here is the black one - supposedly all original! Not sure if it ever sold.

[1935Packard]

21 minutes ago, John Bloom said:

This causes me to ask a question I have been trying to figure out as I search different makes.

 

if the “average classic (for comparison purposes)” could be stereotyped as a 134 in WB, straight 8, standard body (let’s not involve coach builders in my question), what is the perceived/estimated prevailing sale prices of the typical example from each Make for : Cadillac, Packard, Pierce Arrow, Chrysler, Lincoln, Franklin, Marmon, Stutz, Cord, Auburn, Nash, Buick, Auburn Studebaker?  (US makes only). What I mean by that is if an Auburn was considered the Middle of the road/average/50th percentile........and we pegged it at 1.0 in cost, what is a comparable Lincoln?  1.2?  Packard? 1.4?  Franklin? .7?

 

keep in mind I’m trying to get a feel for cost of “like models “ (i.e that 134 in WB straight 8 example I gave).  

 

 

 

Good questions.  Others know a lot more about this than I do, but here's a placeholder uninformed answer until actual experts weigh in (especially someone like Matt Harwood, who does this for a living). 

 

I think there are two ways of answering the question. 

 

First, there are general trends in the values of certain brands. You could take cars that were competing in a particular price range, and compare how they generally play out today.  For example, maybe  a Packard is typically worth X%  more in the current market than the Lincoln equivalent that year.   That's really ballpark stuff, giving the rough premium or discount for the brand relative to other cars that were (when new) considered market competitors. 

 

The second way is to focus on specific models and conditions.  For example, with Packards, the value of a 1930 Packard is different from a '34, which is different from a '36, or a '38, or a '41.  Some years are more desirable than others within the marque. Some of the trends within the marque will resemble trends for other marques, in that there were a lot of commonalities among them as they progressed through the years: styling and technology for most cars was in one place in 1930 and a very different place in 1936. But some of those trends will vary by marque, with years for certain brands being deemed particularly desirable or less so for collectors of that marque.  Some of that may be the marque's styling, or the details of its technology, such as when did they switch to better suspensions, or when were brakes improved, or when did they improve their engines. 

 

All of which is to say that you can get a super-rough ballpark comparison relatively simply, but for a more fine-grained comparison, I think depends on more details like the year and other things.  When I was looking to buy my '34 Packard, for example, I felt it took me about 6 months to get a feel for the market on the exact car I wanted, down to the years, model, and body style. There are something like 20 of them out there, and I would check out ones for sale, and talk to people who had relatively recently purchased ones, to get a feel for where the market likely was.  But that was specific to that year, model, and body style.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 5, 2020 by 1935Packard (see edit history)

[zepher]

I have no idea why all but the very, very special Pierce Arrows sell for much less than comparable or lesser Classics or non-Classics.

Drive a well sorted Pierce and you will fall in love with their road manners, feel and composure on the road. Also, their factory body construction was better than or equal to even the best of the custom coach builders at the time.

I know looks are subjective but Pierce Arrows do hit the mark with overall looks and majesty.

Sit in a Pierce Arrow and look at the interior fit and finish, the quality of the materials, and then sit in another comparably priced car.

The difference is staggering.

I own a mid-line 20's car, Rickenbacker, and a Pierce.

Parked side by side there is no mistaking the Pierce is special.

Drive each one and the differences are even more obvious.

Keep in mind, my Rickenbacker has had the engine and drive train redone over the years while my Pierce is 100% original and it still stands head and shoulders above my Rickenbacker.

And the Rickenbacker was no slouch for its time - A Car Worthy of its Name.

Edited October 5, 2020 by zepher (see edit history)

[alsancle]

19 minutes ago, zepher said:

I have no idea why all but the very, very special Pierce Arrows sell for much less than comparable or lesser Classics or non-Classics.

 

Don't shoot the messenger because I love Pierce Arrow but they are relatively unattractive apples to apples.

[zepher]

3 hours ago, alsancle said:

 

Don't shoot the messenger because I love Pierce Arrow but they are relatively unattractive apples to apples.

 

I don't know, I've always loved the Pierce Arrow styling.

Maybe I am a reincarnated business mogul from the 20's but I love the understated grace and lines of a Pierce.

 

And I'm not sure AJ deserves another ride in my Pierce. 😝

Edited October 6, 2020 by zepher (see edit history)