Jump to content

1934 Pierce Arrow 836A club sedan $54,000 Mesa AZ (Not Mine)


Recommended Posts

 

The last production 1934 Pierce? OK, I dont know if that is worth much. 

 

Body style is nice, but the all leather interior is a turn off for me. (cloth = prewar luxury) The colors tell us when it was restored. At least they left off the orange. 

Typically few photos, no engine shots. Ed can probably give us the full story. 

 

https://www.facebook.com/marketplace/item/787445170158517/?ref=search&referral_code=null&referral_story_type=post&tracking=browse_serp%3A8eae6f05-7eda-48fe-87d3-a152413495b6

 

 

Year: 1934 Make: Pierce-Arrow

Model: 836A

VIN: 1080938

Engine: Straight 8, 366 CI Horsepower: 135 HP

Transmission: 3 Speed Floor Shift

Wheelbase: 136"

Weight: 4,940 lbs MSRP (in 1935): $2,795 = $64,545.80 according to CPI inflation calculator

 

Listed Price: $54,000 Facebook did not have a Manufacturer option for Pierce Arrow, Rolls Royce was an arbitrary choice. - A beautiful Full CCCA Classic - The final 1934 Pierce-Arrow 836-A to roll off the production line - One of only 330 built with the vented hood -

 

All Original Example - Kelsey-Hayes Wire Wheels - Dual Side Mounted Spares This example is an incredibly rare and sought-after 1934 Pierce-Arrow 836-A Sedan, the very last 836-A to be built in 1934 as confirmed by the Pierce-Arrow Society.

 

This beautiful car has many desirable features, including Kelsey-Hayes wires wheels with dual side-mounted spares, Arvin heater, and is but one of only 330 to be built with the much-desired vented hood. This classic automobile has been very well preserved, and runs and drives beautifully. It could be enjoyed immediately with great satisfaction as it is, or could easily be taken to the next level with cosmetic updating to make it a true show car.

It is among the rarest of pre-war automobiles you are likely to find anywhere, and the fact that it is the very last model 836-A Sedan to be produced for the 1934 model year is a distinction that cannot be claimed by any other Pierce-Arrow on earth.

 

As was the case in the early days of registrations, this year-end 1934 model is actually titled as a 1935, but the serial number clearly states it is a 1934. Previous and current ownership has kept this vehicle indoors and in good running condition. Previously housed in Wyoming this 836A now resides in Arizona and is stored in a climate-controlled facility designed for classic auto storage.

438250852_1241652053865413_345652184637855378_n.jpg

445262749_1474518833438501_8016870159183605004_n.jpg

441928483_1654484711964674_7392684992792780780_n.jpg

441887994_452844400776509_56351158296955646_n.jpg

446057577_401355776196988_5066486448638557829_n.jpg

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have seen this car before……….836A cars are not particularly persued by established Pierce collectors…..short chassis, and a bunch of strange minor downgrades. Mechanicaly similar but still different. The short wheelbase makes it very cramped. It was another attempt at building a less expensive model. 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The base for the hood ornament can't decide if it wants to be chrome or painted.  Either way not a good sign for the quality of the restoration.  Can't believe the interior was done close to correctly either.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that's a good-looking car. The interior isn't correct but it isn't a travesty like so many others. A set of dark red wheels with a matching pinstripe and it would look fantastic. And it's still a Pierce-Arrow club sedan, down-market version or not. I'm not going to crap on the car, I like it.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Matt Harwood said:

Matt……look close at the rear door, it’s so tiny a 12 year old can’t fit through it. The car is extremely difficult to get in and out of.

Edited by edinmass (see edit history)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't disagree, Ed, although that rear entrance doesn't look any smaller than, say, a '41 Cadillac 60S. For the majority of the time that I don't use my back seat, I think I could live with it. I will defer to your expertise here, but I still like the looks of that car and think it could be amazing with a few changes.

 

I just ran across these photos on Facebook as a regular post with the same claims of it being the last 1934 Pierce-Arrow built. It has to be the same car, although the interior is cloth. Could those simply be seat covers (even though it covers the seat structure as well as the cushions)? Looks like a Daniel Schmitt plate on it in these photos, I wonder how old they are...?

 

449474532_433014956319190_5126068642508663203_n.jpg.e5ae252a2873680244f69232a7c95411.jpg 449515786_433015022985850_7508451827681568986_n.jpg.f49896c64750d17623619b56044b8966.jpg

 

449464360_433015056319180_5477389829080703737_n.jpg.6b6916ad020ba968a8ba28af06f24df0.jpg 449386705_433015006319185_3800095385140438809_n.jpg.7ede78d1c6f9983868c2131b861dc21d.jpg

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find it a stretch to claim that this car was the last 836A built--all the Pierce-Arrow records were destroyed, tossed in the furnace, when the company was liquidated in May 1938.  It is legitimate to say that this is the highest serial number 836A registered with or known to the Pierce-Arrow Society (PAS) since 1957.  Our records also reflect the engine number 240924 (highest known-to-PAS 836A engine number) and body number 135-S-559 (highest known-to-PAS 836A **sedan** body number).

 

If I were wearing my snark hat today, I'd say this claim is akin to claiming the last Yugo ever built.  The 836A was a failed attempt to build a medium-price Pierce in the depression.  The 836A used the earlier 366 cid solid-lifter engine, a very good one, and a 3" shorter wheelbase when the larger 840A had the 385 cid hydraulic lifter engine.  I find the body styling...uh...unfortunate, but that's my own taste.  Unfortunately, the 836A tore into 840A sales rather than into those of competitive companies.  Packard may have learned a lesson from this folly for its 1935 120 series by using a smaller, completely different engine but continuing the styling cues from its senior models.

Edited by Grimy
fixed typo (see edit history)
  • Like 5
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

At 54k for a 836A would be a world record price. It’s a nice fun car…….and gets you into a Pierce, but the real number for that car could be half the asking or less. It’s what I don’t see in the photos that that scares me.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, m-mman said:

MSRP (in 1935): $2,795 = $64,545.80 according to CPI inflation calculator

The thing about these calculations for present value of old prices is that they don't take into account of the way the world has changed.  Today, anyone with a decent job can get a 7 year loan and buy a Chevy Tahoe for $64K. In '34 this car was not within reach of many. 

Edited by Leif in Calif (see edit history)
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Grimy said:

I find it a stretch to claim that this car was the late 836A built--all the Pierce-Arrow records were destroyed, tossed in the furnace, when the company was liquidated in May 1938.  It is legitimate to say that this is the highest serial number 836A registered with or known to the Pierce-Arrow Society (PAS) since 1957.  Our records also reflect the engine number 240924 (highest known-to-PAS 836A engine number) and body number 135-S-559 (highest known-to-PAS 836A **sedan** body number).

 

If I were wearing my snark hat today, I'd say this claim is akin to claiming the last Yugo ever built.  The 836A was a failed attempt to build a medium-price Pierce in the depression.  The 836A used the earlier 366 cid solid-lifter engine, a very good one, and a 3" shorter wheelbase when the larger 840A had the 385 cid hydraulic lifter engine.  I find the body styling...uh...unfortunate, but that's my own taste.  Unfortunately, the 836A tore into 840A sales rather than into those of competitive companies.  Packard may have learned a lesson from this folly for its 1935 120 series by using a smaller, completely different engine but continuing the styling cues from its senior models.

 

You made me laugh George.  I don't hate the styling, but was never a fan of detuning just to have a lesser model.  Seem like weird way to make a lesser car that is actually not cheaper to build.

 

I wish they had left the interior alone.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When it comes to club sedan proportions, the closer the body mass ends near the rear axle plane the more attractive it is.  A detail that contributes is the position of the rear door edge: it never should be beyond the rear axle plane.  The 836A violates both these tenets to a degree, looks 'over-cabbed' in the rear section.  While nearly equal door window openings can visually work on some cars such as the Cord 810/812 sedans, Ray Dietrich discovered the 3-2-1 window opening proportional configuration was more visually pleasing.  The '33 836 club sedan has it, the '34 836A does not.  The '33 836 is styled in the architectural 'High-Classic' idiom which includes a relatively thin roof shell, the '34 834A moves toward the rounded Streamlined Modern theme which includes a thicker roof shell which appear taller.   Although the two images are not exact profiles, they reasonable illustrate the differences.  Credit to RM Sotheby and the 836A seller for the images.  

 

Steve

'33 P-A 836.jpg

'34 P-A 836A.jpg

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

8 hours ago, alsancle said:

 

You made me laugh George.  I don't hate the styling, but was never a fan of detuning just to have a lesser model.  Seem like weird way to make a lesser car that is actually not cheaper to build.

 

I wish they had left the interior alone.

Well Packard did the same in 1932 with the Light Eight. That didn’t work out too well and it only lasted one year. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Grimy said:

I find it a stretch to claim that this car was the last 836A built--all the Pierce-Arrow records were destroyed, tossed in the furnace, when the company was liquidated in May 1938.  It is legitimate to say that this is the highest serial number 836A registered with or known to the Pierce-Arrow Society (PAS) since 1957.  Our records also reflect the engine number 240924 (highest known-to-PAS 836A engine number) and body number 135-S-559 (highest known-to-PAS 836A **sedan** body number).

 

If I were wearing my snark hat today, I'd say this claim is akin to claiming the last Yugo ever built.  The 836A was a failed attempt to build a medium-price Pierce in the depression.  The 836A used the earlier 366 cid solid-lifter engine, a very good one, and a 3" shorter wheelbase when the larger 840A had the 385 cid hydraulic lifter engine.  I find the body styling...uh...unfortunate, but that's my own taste.  Unfortunately, the 836A tore into 840A sales rather than into those of competitive companies.  Packard may have learned a lesson from this folly for its 1935 120 series by using a smaller, completely different engine but continuing the styling cues from its senior models.

That’s what I was thinking. Glad you jumped on it before I had to answer! 
🤣😂👍🏻

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like a pretty nice car to me. I agree that the closeup of the hood ornament is not very flattering to the paint. The above comments reaffirms that if and when I decide to buy a car like this I need to take Ed and AJ along for the ride.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Den41Buick said:

Well Packard did the same in 1932 with the Light Eight. That didn’t work out too well and it only lasted one year. 

Apparently, the old boys in Buffalo when developing the 836A weren't paying attention to the Packard's recent experience with the Light Eight 900. Or they failed to wonder why the 900 prices were increased within months of its introduction then quietly folded into the Eight line for 1933.  The Light Eight 900 succeeded but not in the way management intended, it sold 40.7% of total 1932 sales, cannibalizing the sales of the higher-priced Packard models.  It did deliver an important message: to compete on price, the total car and production methods had to be designed, engineered, tooled and productionized to meet a specific price target. resulting in the 120.

  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 58L-Y8 said:

Apparently, the old boys in Buffalo when developing the 836A weren't paying attention

Remember that the boys in Buffalo had just extracted Pierce from the Studebaker bankruptcy.
Studebaker was doing all the Pierce foundry work in South Bend.

 

Kind of a surprise that there was any Pierce after 1933. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Matt Harwood said:

If this were a victoria coupe with the same profile but only two long doors, would the negative opinions change?

It would help the door and window detail proportions, but the overall form remains if all else is shared with the four-door sedan.   Are any of the 1934 836A Club Broughams still extant? Does anyone have a profile photograph of one?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Matt Harwood said:

If this were a victoria coupe with the same profile but only two long doors, would the negative opinions change?

 

It would have bucket seats, and be ten times more desirable than a 836A........

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, edinmass said:

 

It would have bucket seats, and be ten times more desirable than a 836A........

The same "bucket" seats as in 840A, 1240A club broughams and production Silver Arrows (I speak from experience), and earlier club broughams:  high center, no lateral support, and in the immortal words of the late Bill C. of TX, "driving while seated on a beach ball."

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes George....but us tall and large guys find them much more comfortable, and easier to get in and out of.........those vertically challenged can easily fit in the 836A. 😎

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, edinmass said:

Yes George....but us tall and large guys find them much more comfortable, and easier to get in and out of.........those vertically challenged can easily fit in the 836A. 😎

I prefer to be vertically challenged than rectally challenged like you, Ed!

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Grimy said:

I prefer to be vertically challenged than rectally challenged like you, Ed!

I beg to differ........I'm challenged in countless categories.............but when it comes to my postierior I have been told I am a perfect XXXXXXX!

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, edinmass said:

I beg to differ........I'm challenged in countless categories.............but when it comes to my postierior I have been told I am a perfect XXXXXXX!

That's what I'm talking about and I'll support that appellation!

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
×
×
  • Create New...