Whitewall overkill

[West Peterson]

Heh, heh, heh... I didn't think he'd find me in here.

Gotta go... bye! <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />

[26pack]

But West, your picture is "Overkilled" with whitewalls. And it has a Duck! <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

[Clipper47]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">By the way, I can't hang a beaver tail from the antenna. If you look closely, that got taken off too <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" /> </div></div>

West, Now in all my years I never saw anyone hang a beaver tail from a car antenna. Fox and raccoon tails maybe but never a beaver! <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

[R W Burgess]

Evidently he has the same problem with "furred" animals as "feathered" ones. <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

Wayne

[West Peterson]

I was only replying to Pete, who asked me if I was going to hang a beaver tail on the antenna. I guess I never even thought twice about how wierd that would look, not to mention that it would probably bend the antenna. All I was thinking was that I had already taken the antenna off, so there wasn't any where to hang nothin'.

Anyone have a set of 160-180 fenders without sidemounts. I just may do some of that stuff. I won't go as far as to block out the rear quarter window, or take the running boards off, but skirts, sidemounts and black sidewall tires is certainly doable, and well within the "It Could Have Been Ordered That Way."

Oh... I forgot to mention the duck. The duck is dead.

Ooops. I think I hear Steve comin' down the stairs again. Gotta run. Bye. <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />

[R W Burgess]

.....and he thought he was getting a good deal taking that job. Locked in a cage in the basement of headquarters 24/7. <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />

Even the terrorists get to read the Koran or some sort of material daily. <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

Wayne

[tbirdman]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">About that 33-34 Packard sedan. In order for dealers to clear out stock before the new model year, Packard Motor Car Company offered a conversion kit to update '33's to the appearance of '34's. Among other things, this included the distinctive turned-down-in-front fenders of the '34.

The famous Dietrich designed Car of the Dome is a 33 that underwent this conversion in the middle of the night during a show, the schedule of which fell across model year change time.

Thus, it was not uncommon to find converted 33's (complete with the poorly designed vent windows) on the road. I presume that in those more casual times, they were even registered as '34's. </div></div>

I have read a lot about this era of Packards (32-34), I have never heard or read anything about this 33 to 34 conversion. Where did you find this info? I know they did offer a 31 to 32 conversion.

[TG57Roadmaster]

Boys, <span style="font-style: italic">boys</span>,

http://mmm.lib.msu.edu/search/imagedisplay.cfm?i=EB01d728

Can we get back on tread, er, Thread here? Take a "gander" at this lovely '34 Packard 1108 Sedan entering the Packard Proving Ground. Forget the: "Circus Wagon" color; WW versus BW; Accessory gewgaw debate...Why was <span style="font-style: italic">so</span> much of Packard (and other cars of the realm) advertising geared to folks who lived in Cotswold Cottages?

I guess it's got to do with the perception that these <span style="font-style: italic">rich</span> folk had money to burn, whether it was "Old" money, or "New" money. As one who accessed the gold vault at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (to put in a new phone system) in 1986, I can assure you that, old or new, a pallette of C-notes looks, and spends, really sweetly!

TG

[mrpushbutton]

this thread has certainly exceeded the one-per-month rate that the CCCA forum usually gets!

[West Peterson]

Yeah. The CCCA and AACA must doing well on Google this week. <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

Tom

That 1108 Packard is "entering" the proving ground.

Ken

I don't doubt what Bill is saying about the 1933-34 twist. He's exactly right about the Car of the Dome car.

[TG57Roadmaster]

West,

Duly noted, and amended. I was just going by the "photo description." Anyhew, what is the fate of the Proving Grounds; are we going to see cookie-cutter "cluster mansions" on the site, or what? Haven't heard anything about it in a while.

There are some really sweet pix of the Grounds at that site, by the way.

TG

[Guest BillP]

Birdman,

By the way, I really like that Packard of yours, it's a beautiful car.

About the Car of the Dome,I've read that a few times. This time in order to check myself pre-post, I looked in Dennis Adler's <span style="font-style: italic">Packard</span>, which was the book nearest to hand.

To add to the ongoing, raging controversy, my '34 Packard has blackwalls, and yes, by gum, it looks proper. On the other hand, I just sold my yellow '37 LaSalle convertible that sat on wide whites. It is a much more flamboyant car and looks the part with those tires. Having said that, I decided that if I were to keep the car, I would put on blackwalls. I figured it would look even more, I don't know, maybe rakish, and certainly it would stand out in a sea of WW's.

[Packard enthus.]

Hi Bill:

C'mon..man..I didnt come in here to see no photo of some damned fool overgrown yellow "Chevie" with the "lock-washer" option-let's see that '34 Packard, too !

Seriously, Bill....great shot of that LaSalle ! Of course SOME people DID order white walls, and of course your particular car REALLY "comes into its own" with them !

P F H

( NOW LET'S SEE THAT '34 PACKARD ! )

[West Peterson]

Tom

I didn't notice the first time I looked at your last attachment, but there's a car speeding by on the track!!! All you see is a very fine blurrr. Cool!

Bill

I wanna see that Packard too!

[TG57Roadmaster]

West,

I hadn't noticed that blur either, might never have!

Here's another "slick" Proving Grounds shot.

TG

[Guest BillP]

quote: I wanna see that Packard too!

Just like the sedan leaving/entering the Proving Grounds only blackwalls & a leering bald guy at the wheel.

[mrpushbutton]

TG57Roadmaster--the proving grounds site is coming along, led by local Packard fan (and the man who owns one) John McArthur. The Packard motor car foundation was able to get the main parcel containing the lodge house, boulevard, test garage and timing tower donated by Ford land development, and they are buying additional acreage from Ford (right now they NEED the money)to include the "Chrysler building", the block building Chrysler constructed during WWII for tank testing and evaluation,as well as the airplane hanger. This additional acreage also allows the hosting of large show-events like the Carnival of Cars each June. The foundation is not out of the woods yet, and can use your financial support (501-©3 tax deductable) to insure that the memory of Packard, and of all US auto companies during the second world war will remain for generations to come.

There are McMansions (or "starter castles") where the track once was. The usual plastic covered drywall barns with a minimum of common brick, only on the part that faces the street. The street names bear no relation to the glory that once was Packard, the sub is named in the typical manner: the developer named them after his daughters and dogs. The proving grounds isn't out of the woods yet, and I'm sure a couple of developers would love to put a Best Buy or Costco there.

http://www.packardmotorfdn.org

[tbirdman]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Ken

I don't doubt what Bill is saying about the 1933-34 twist. He's exactly right about the Car of the Dome car. </div></div>

I don't doubt it either but I wanted to learn more about it. The 31 to 32 conversion is recited quite often but I have never run across the 33 to 34 conversion kit story. I did see a 33 whose front fenders skirts were removed to make it look more like a 32.

Anyway, have you shaved your door handles yet and added flamethrowers<img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

[Packard enthus.]

I personally am not aware of nor seen any literature confirming the Packard factory tried to "unload" 1933 models as 1934's. I have seen, over the years, (beginning in the late 1940's when I first became interested in old Packards...several Packards that had '34 fenders, but were obviously 1933 production.

How they got those fenders, I have no clue. Of course there are two obvious "give-a-ways" - on all series (320 cu. in Standard Eight, 384 cu. in Super Eight, and 440 cu in V-12, there was a change in front doors (different vent & window mechanisms that will NOT interchange between '33 and '34. Also, the dash in 1933 production did NOT have a provision for the control head - in that year, the so called "factory" radio control head was on the steering column).

I do NOT recall any difference in the V-12 engine itself between '33 and '34 production - it still had the "old style" front end engine support and timing case cover. My recollection is that '34 was the first year of the "new" type engine mount, in which the front of the engine is "hung" on a rubber support which attaches to the center of the timing case, but only on the Eight and Super Eight.

My RECOLLECTION (which may be incorrect) is the '34 Super Eights were the first ones with the finned con rod caps, and a revised oil filter and oil cooler.

Bottom line - the original "post" was correct - people monkey around with their cars, then and now, to make them look more attractive. We KNOW the first year or so of post war production came out of the factory without white-walls, because NO white-walls were manufactured until somewhere around early 1947.

Anyone who has access to photos from the pre-war era knows that while SOME dealers dressed up SOME of their displays with white walls...what actually went out the door to new car buyers was what the new car buyers wanted. And, as was discussed before, that was a VERY conservative era. I would like very much to see a REAL photo of a production big luxury car from that era that we now call a "CLASSIC" (with the exception of a few custom bodied cars for VERY "showy" people and / or car shows) that came like those beautiful FORTUNE MAGAZINE advertisements....!

[West Peterson]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Anyway, have you shaved your door handles yet and added flamethrowers<img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" /> </div></div>

Oh yeah!

[West Peterson]

You guys are sick! It's bad enough that rodders are actually doing that kind of stuff, and you're just leading them on to do more.

[TG57Roadmaster]

Unless someone has a direct line to the Wizard of Oz, none of us will ever see the true color of Depression Era cars; Kodacolor film wasn't <span style="font-style: italic">invented</span> till 1942, and true color movies didn't begin till well into the last half of the '30's. So, we'll just have to muddle through with contemporary descriptions of what was going on.

And rely on black and white...Hmmm, just like the tires. <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

TG

[tbirdman]

I did read in a Packard book as I was searching for info regarding a possible 33 to 34 kit, that Packard did offer instructions in their service letter how to change the 33 fenders for 34s.

[TG57Roadmaster]

This, from a trade publication in May, 1947.

TG

[TG57Roadmaster]

And <span style="font-style: italic">always</span>, read the fine print!

TG

[Packard enthus.]

My service letters do not have anything about installing '34 fenders on a '33 Packard. Again, I rather doubt this was done at the factory.

I would not be surprised if dealers would be able to order exchange fenders, since they are identical except for the additional covering of the foward front tire well - everything else regarding the fender mounting is virtually the same - this would not be rocket science - just a few bolts and off comes the fender.

But it would still be pretty obvious from outside the car - as the different front door window and vent treatment between '33 and '34 is pretty blatant.

And of course once you were inside the car, the dash would be obvious too. Hmm...let me see...if I recall correctly, bumpers on the both the Eights and Super Eights were a bit different too, between '33 and '34.

Yeah..the "small print" on the above Buick add shows us how right the first poster in this thread is. But again, let's be fair - very few people left in the old car hobby who know or remember that. And again, more and more people who CLAIM to be old car buffs just want to shove their old car off a trailer and get crowd attention at a car show. It would be dishonest of a car restorer to waste the customer's money making the typical "car show queen" mechanically solid, since actually driving and enjoying the old car for what it is, is not why these people have the old car in the first place. And to DELIBERATELY make the car less attractive by having black-walls....c'mon...be serious. Yeah..I know SOME of you CLAIM that some cars look better with just plain black-wall tires, and of course we know that the overwhelming majority of the pre World War Two cars, when they were first delivered as new cars, had black-walls.

But why waste your energy - this planet is going to continue to rotate, and new people with different needs, tastes, and ideas ARE coming into our hobby. I just cant get worked up about any particular car club's rules evolving to reflect the changing times. I used to. But that was then. Time to have fun and enjoy life.

[Shawn Miller]

WOW Finally after about 6 years of being your webmaster we have a discussion that has elicited great response, and a fun excange! I knew it would happen. I knew eventually all this web stuff would be more than just "gee we know we have to have a presence, even though our members don't give 2 hoots about the internet". Great to see this. I will return to my web duties renewed and reinvigorated that the time spent is actaully being seen by someone other than college students writing term papers. HA!

[Shawn Miller]

Oh and BTW, I like WW tires. Not on British cars, Nickel era cars, or conservatively painted cars, but otherwise I will usually opt for them on my Full Classics. they make a car look nice. Dandy if you will.

Face it we like to be noticed or we would all be driving Toyotas. Guess I am just a flashy kind of guy.

[West Peterson]

Did you put WW on that Duesenberg?

[Packard enthus.]

Maybe I should get white-walls for my fire engine, and re-submit THAT for "classic" status..!

What the heck..if the Board was silly enough to take that applicaton seriously...that it didn't recognize a JOKE to make fun of them.... by us "old hands"...to poke fun of them for "admitting" so many additional cars to "classic" status...they just might go for it..!

[Guest bkazmer]

Hey, the American -LaFrance with the Pierce-Arrow engine, custom coachwork, gold leaf trim............

[Packard enthus.]

At the risk of being called a "party pooper", let's get back to the original poster's question. It is a valid one. As many of us noted, there were no white-walls being produced in the immediate post-war era. As one of our posters pointed out, in his submission of an interesting advertisement, a Buick ad SHOWED a new Buick with white-walls, but the "small print" confirmed that they were not yet then avail !

My own personal view is that the initial question had a valid point, but one that does not require formal action by the National Board of the CCCA. It is certainly POSSIBLE that some dealer or supplier SOMEWHERE, still had some pre-war white-walls in storage, and thus it is certainly POSSIBLE that somewhere, somehow, some new car buyer in that immediate post-war era, got their car delivered with genuine white walls.

Yes, our judging rules are designed to encourage AUTHENTICITY, as distinguished from encouraging the kind of "show car dress up" that car clubs whose primary function is putting on exhibition car shows have in their rules. But I think at SOME point you have to be a bit flexible.

So - while technically I agree with the basic thought of the original "poster", again, if I were still active in Club managment, I'd recommmend "no action" should the issue of "taking off points for authenticity, for while walls", arise.

P.S...American La France only used the Pierce Arrow engines as an "economy measure" for its less expensive line. My "Type 400" (which does look like a giant sized classic car...!) was the "top-of-the-line, meaning it had the "in house" American La France V-12 - about twice the size, and probably four times the raw power of the Pierce-derivitive you are referring to. The Type 400 V-12 was nearly 800 cu. in, and was a much more "modern" OVER HEAD CAM engine than the Pierce.

[Ed Miller]

I have probably committed the greatest heresy. My 1933 Packard Twelve has wide white walls and my 1934 Packard Super Eight has double WWWs. Do I get ex-communicated twice?

[alsancle]

I think that white walls are like the paint colors in that they are in or out of style depending on the times. In the 1980s every other classic got painted a circus color because that was the trend. They all got double white walls. These days you see more cars repainted in more correct colors for the era and less white walls. However, I will say that to each his own, if it is your car and you are paying for the work - you can put anything on it you want.

[Packard enthus.]

you mention cars restored with "circus" paint jobs on classic era cars.

In fairness - let's remember there really were some pretty spectacular paint jobs in that VERY conservative pre-war era.

They were rare, but they did exist. Of course most of us know that in those days, just about all of the largest, most elegant and expensive "super luxury" cars we in the CCCA call "classics", were delivered a solid dark color, mostly black, with the exception of a few sport models, and even most of those were black or solid dark colors.

My favorite source, to show how wild some of the color combinations COULD have been, were the FORTUNE magazine ads of the late 20's thru early 1940's. In the ad featuring my own car ( a '38 Packard V-12 Formal Sedan ) the car is GREEN ! And it has white walls in that ad! Some of the earlier ads for Packard showed really slick THREE tone colors.

Yes, the combination of paint chemistry and the "tastes" of that era meant that the colors, when they dd exist, themselves were somewhat more muted then what is possible today.

So, my personal view, as I noted above, is that if I were still active in CCCA management (at one time I was a Regional Director, and thus had a "seat" on the National Board), I would recommend "no action" to any request change our rules to "dock" a car for either having white-walls in the immediate post-war period, or for wild color combinations, even tho EVERY..and I mean EVERY late 1930's Packard V-12 Formal Sedan I have EVER seen, came out of the factory solid black with black walls ( I take that back...there was ONE 1939 ('39 and '38 Packard V-12 Formal Sedans were for all practical purposes for this discussion were the same car) that really was a dark green.

[Shawn Miller]

West,

No the Duesie fits the description of a conservatively painted nickel era car. It has blackwalls.

Shawn

[Matt Harwood]

To me, this is what pre-war Classic cars without whitewalls look like:

However, I will say that some cars look exactly right with blackwall tires:

I've always felt that the whitewalls added the right amount of dress up to old cars. The exceptions are rare, such as the Packard above. And I've always thought that the rules included things that could have been on the car when new. I know that my '41 Buick could have whitewalls at extra cost, so I consider them authentic (though I understand the argument about the immediate post-war cars).

And you're right, they just don't belong on certain vehicles:

Now, about those '57 Chevies with all the options...

[Guest edalfa]

Are you the one with the brown shoes? <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

While admitedly my 40 Buick does not fit the "classic" category, I am mulling this same question. I keep going back and forth but may end up waiting a season until I decide. I guess it may be accurate to say that most people didn't have them when these cars were new but, to paraphrase Lina Lamont "I ain't most people". And that's what bugs me.

Ed

[TG57Roadmaster]

At least these boys have tanned gams, as the thought of all that exposed flesh otherwise is more than my eyes can bear. As for the '57 Chevys with all the toys, maybe this image will put the CCCA on its guard to zealously defend its trademark "Full Classic" status; I'm sure every one of these owners are proud of their "classics", too.

In all my studies thru the years I've never run across the axiom,

"Any color as long as it's <span style="font-style: italic">Red</span>!"

TG

[6219_Rules]

Hey Matt! Like most things, this is a case of taste (or lack of) for most people. I saw a 1960 VW with wide whites and it was <span style="font-weight: bold">cute</span> ! And I like that Phord Pickup with the white walls! Its well restored and painted, and looks really nice. Not as a manure hauller but a town truck.

I agree that the special cars like the Duesenberg and Packards look better in black walls, but I never liked Cadillacs in black walls except for the War years because that is how they were delivered. Cadillacs are supposed to have a little flash.

I will say, less is better. Every car seen suited up in wide whites deminishes the impact but like most popular additions it happens. I guess seeing everyone in spats would be a shock and bore too. LOL <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

And that picture was just not right. It probably extended my therapy another 5 years, thank you very much. <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

Uh oh,... TG, you just used the "C" word!!! Duck and cover!!! <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />