Greetings!

If you will surf the CCCA web site, you will learn the answers to all your questions. I'll give a hint though. Since you won't find anything on the web site about a Club owned facility in Maryland, it is a pretty safe bet that there isn't one.

Enjoy your research project. You will find that this is a wonderful hobby.

1. I love the publication and activities w/people w/similar car interests.

2. Propably about 90 % of families that are members

3. No

4. Propably about 60-65, though I am 37 and one of the younger members (maybe about 25 members that I am aware of under age 40).

5. Events are usually open to public, though not publicised so difficult to find out about.

6. No, the club museum is in Gilmore Michigan.

Chuck,

I started looking through the threads and saw another post by someone looking for information regarding the Classic Car Club of America and I am sure we were not the first. I can only apologize on behalf of myself and my fellow students.

Anyway, thank you for the tip, and actually, reading through the CCCA Forum is turning out to be extremely informative.

Take care and have a great day!

Best regards,

Fabiana

No apology required!

It seems that CCCA is the topic of a college level business text book. I suspect that Matt Sonfield is the author. He is also is an active Club member who I think will tell you that he enjoys his involvement in the Club. Over the last three years, I have tried to bury the answers to these questions somewhere in the site.

If you haven't already done so, please read the article by Dick Gold which you'll find under "What's a Classic Worth?" The dollar figures are quite out of date, but I think you will get the entire point of the Club by reading this great story.

Chuck,

Is this the current address for the Club Headquarters, and do they still send out a package if I request information? CCCA, 1745 Des Plaines River Road, Suite 7, Des Plaines, IL 60018.

Thank you so much!

Best regards,

Fabiana

Yes, that is the right address, and they do have a package for you, if you ask.

Chuck,

I am curious about something. I read this posting and I wanted to hear your opinion. Is this the general feeling of the members in the club? That it is too expensive?

Thank you very much for your time.

Best regards,

Fabiana

"

Re: QUESTION

07/04/02 09:23 AM Edit Reply

As a relatively young member (43) I think that everything is generally fine. there will always be "more demand" for a 56 tbird than a 12 cylinder packard, and who really cares. We shouldnt be threatend by car collectors who collect muscle cars, they clearly have the money to buy just about anything they want, they just need educated.

It is our job to educate them by getting our cars out there where they can be seen, not just taking them on CCCA sponsored events. We could also use to "open up" our events a bit. I don't think we want mob scenes at our grand classics, but select spectators would not take away from them in my opinion.

The cost of actually participating in this club is pretty stiff as well. A family of 4 recently attended the grand experience, and had to pay 4 registration fees(it wasnt me, but that is why i didnt bring my whole brood). give me a break! How can you expect the next generation to be interested in these cars if you make them stay at home with a babysitter. I know of at least 3 dedicated long term members who attended that event but chose not to "register" and didnt attend the 40 dollar a plate dinners either.

What does the "registration fee" really get you anyway? Heck, I paid as much to register for that event as peter here paid for his 12 cylinder packard! HA

The cost of the cars isnt the problem (I just missed a Full Classic 41 cadillac sedan for 4500 bucks last month!, yes it was drivable) its the cost of our events. This is the most expensive car club i am a member of. While our membership numbers are at at all time high I dont see our participation numbers at an all time high. many of these members have joined as a result of this website. we need to do something proactive to get these people involved or we will lose them.

Also we need to be NICE and WELCOMING in our discussions in this forum. the world is watching here.

As my mom used to say if you dont have something nice to say, SHUT UP!

Shawn Miller

Indiana Region

"

My 2 cents worth....I am no longer active in the CCCA primarily because of the costs. I have encouraged several folks for whom I have restored classics to consider membership. One fellow in particular joined but did not renew simply because he did not feel welcome nor could he justify the expense. Couldn't there be a variety of events designed to appeal to those of us who own and love "lesser" Classics but aren't really interested in Champagne Luncheons and such? I'm sure the 840 Roadster we just completed would be welcome at a CCCA event but would we ? Don't widen the scope of CCCA. Do try to make the "inner circle" a bit less intimidating. For me at least that would go a long way toward reengaging my attention and keeping me (age 54) and my son (age 19) as active members. Simply put, we want to have fun at a CCCA event, not feel like a pair of brown shoes at a black tie dinner.

I don?t think the cost of membership slows down many people, especially when you take into consideration that every year you get four issues of The Classic Car (a color magazine), eight issues of The Bulletin, (which is a Black & White newsletter that runs about 30 pages) and an annual Membership Roster with everyone?s address, phone number and cars listed. A lot of people think the Roster is worth the whole price of membership. At $45.00 per year, it is a little more than some clubs, and a bit less than others.

I would be the first to admit that many of our events are expensive, but they don?t necessarily have to be. The cost is usually up to the sponsoring Region. My own Region, North Texas, has a variety of low, or no cost activities. We also get pretty good turn outs at them. That is probably a message, although our more expensive events are well attended too. I think the variety of activities is the real attraction.

I?m going on a NTR regional tour in a couple of weeks. It is two nights, arriving Friday and leaving sometime Sunday. My registration cost and all group meals totaled $55.00. The motel is about $60 per night. Your mileage may vary, but I think that is fairly modest by today?s standards. It is nice to have some events that are truly ?Classic? but that doesn?t have to be all you do.

Our National Annual Meeting and our CARavans are generally pretty pricey. Even so, they try to provide value for your money. If you return home saying, ?That was expensive, but damned well worth it,? then they have probably given you something you couldn?t do by yourself. That is the goal, but it doesn?t always happen. Courtesy of CCCA, I?ve seen some amazing places, visited private collections and done a bunch of other stuff that would not be accessible to us ?mere mortals.? Although these events are generally worth the price, I think keeping this in check is something we should work on. The price does keep some people away.

It is not just the price of events. The CARavans frequently take up too much time for people who work for a living. Long trips equal high costs, even if you are staying at modest priced accommodations. CARavans usually run about 10 days and stay at relatively up-scale hotels with ?hotel type? prices for meals. I?m not suggesting that we totally abandon what we are doing. It has worked for the last 50 years, but I?d love to see a CARavan start on a Sunday evening and end on the following Friday. This would give people who work for a living a weekend on each end to get to and from wherever they are going. The net result would be only one week away from work, which is much more do-able for those who punch a time clock. One week away from home obviously costs a lot less than nearly two weeks.

As for the Club being cliquish, I?ve experienced that with every car club I?ve ever belonged to, CCCA included. That includes the Model A Club, AACA, Horseless Carriage, VMCCA, Vintage Thunderbirds, RROC, Chevy Club and a lot of others. It is not that people intend to snub new comers. It is just that they see their ?old friends? at these activities and forget to include the ?new guy? in the conversation. They don?t mean to be rude, but it comes off that way to the new or prospective member. Breaking into the ?group? takes a lot of perseverance. Once you do, you find out why people like these clubs.

I guarantee you that it is worth the effort. I have met some of the most amazing people in the world in this hobby, and in CCCA in particular. The other clubs I?ve mentioned are also fine organizations. We are a hobby based on a mutual interest of cars. What we find out is the people who are involved in this hobby are usually far more interesting than their cars. It is really a hobby that is about people. My cars never asked to join a club. They like it just fine in their nice warm garage. I?m the one who enjoys the Club.

<img src="/ubbthreads/images/icons/laugh.gif" alt="" />

I think "Restorer 32" has an excellent point about his desire for CCCA events where he would feel "comfortable" with his "lesser" classics ( I have a STRONG suspicion he is referring to the kind of car we would have originally laughed out of a CCCA event...but...over the years...as more and more pressure was applied by the people who just wanted to make money selling these "lesser" cars, so they got them "accepted"...etc....etc.

For better or worse, the CCCA is now infested with them. The National Board, having done this, now has an obligation to meet their needs. The fact that the CCCA was originally founded BY the "champagne set"....FOR those with "champagne tastes", (as demonstrated by the cars we originally called CLASSICS) is now irrelevant.

Who is kidding who? All used cars are now classic...well..not ALL, but it is getting harder and harder to open any old car buff magazine, and find a car (or some product or service that someone is trying to "un-load") , that is NOT called a classic. So - let's accept this and deal with it.

If I were still in CCCA management, I would advocate CCCA meets that spanned a much broader band of tastes than we do now, so as to more fairly distrute our energies on the kinds of members we now have. For those who are so inclined, we could still have the "typical CCCA meet, to celebrat the elite cars (and the people who like them and feel comfortable being elitists ) that we have traditionally focused our attention on. But why NOT have alternate meets in a Kentucky Fried Chicken or MacDonald's parking lot.... ? Judging by the sentiment seen in so many forms of communication, including this chat room...that IS where we are headed...so let's "grab the bull by the horns"...and get it over with !

Pete Hartmann

Big Springs, AZ

I think most car club events are too expensive and the CCCA's are no exception. I would not expect much change, though, because snob appeal is part of the CCCA package, and having events at Kentucky Fried Chicken just won't do. It will simply exacerbate the dreadful "infestation" that PH reminds us about.

Funny, the recent Bulletins and articles describing the early days of the club sure didn't look like it started as a champagne and country club group. They sounded rather like college kids trying to get girls and drive around and preserve big, cheap gas guzzlers that no one else wanted. The rich kids were probably driving new Jags, Benzes and Bentleys about that time.

Bill

Albuquerque, NM

Pete Hartmann..the only man Dale Carnegie ever smacked...your routine is becoming trite and predictable. Only had to read the first line or two of your post to recognize the writer. Please find some new material.

For Restorer....and Buick Plus:

Sorry you guys have "almost" classics....the Packard 900's were damn good cars....for the money. And...now that people truly dedicated to making a fast buck off the word "classic" got them into the CCCA, you can come and bask in our glory too ! So you are "IN"....what are you worried about...I am AGREEING with you ! In fact...as I noted above..if I were still in CCCA management, I would advocate...based on the stuff the National Board has "let in" in recent years, that we have a DUTY now to start having more "MacDOnalds Parking Lot" meets....

Actually...there is a LOT of truth to the fact that SOME of our early events were done "on the cheap"...!

And you are durn right we liked to go after girls....

But what you people cannot understand, is that in those days..the idea that a "classic" car was historically significant, or had value (as Bob Gottlieb used to say...more than its weight as scrap metal) was something that came AFTER we got going as a Club...and auto buffs gradually caught on...(well..not all that gradually....anyone remember how badly the Lincoln Contintal owners wanted to get those fancy bodied Zephyrs into our Club, even at the earliest events..?

However, those of you who remember those elegant events at BUCK HILLS FALLS ...and the events the So. Calif Region put on...after we "rejoined" National in the late 1950's....know you guys 1) WERENT THERE and 2) ARE STILL JEALOUS ! 3) And were HARDLY "cheap"....!

Out in the So. Calif. Region, in the 1950's we had a "tradition" of elegant meets once a year...(which was all THIS kid could afford...!) Ahh...the fun and elegant snobbery of pulling up to the Hotel Del Coronado...

Anyone who remembers the movie SOME LIKE IT HOT has seen the Hotel "Del"....which some of us felt was the REAL "star" of that movie...still a luxury land-mark../watering place in San Diego....still about 2 hrs. drive south from Los Angeles ( where most of the So. Calif Region then lived).

Those were not "sets" in that movie..the place WAS...and STILL IS "that" elegant....! Talk about SNOB APPEAL....we picked the place for our "big" event...because it really WAS the setting for the true "classic" car.

MacDonalds hadn't yet got started...but these days.....bet we can find a nice appropriate place to show off that "900"..........

I know, our fellow chatter "Bob" has appointed himself an "expert". will tell us about what HE knows about our terrible highway system in those years....trouble is...I have this insane delusion...that I was THERE....with my Packard Twelve...and KNOW how fast we went between the towns...!

Oh...by the way...Bob...I was only in Mass. once or twice in the mid 1950's....but I do remember .....I did drive your main highways....some were already four lane divided, and your back-woods roads saw a bit of a '51 Packard convertible moving along at a pretty good clip...if I recall.....!

Now...Bob...let's see how much you REALLY know about your own area....tell us about William T. Morrisy...and Whallaston...and why Boston kept changing the names of the road which bore their names....and for the bonus prize...tell us what the name of the road around Quincy Bay USED to be before the "fight" over which name would be used...began.........(my grandfather lived there...went to visit him in the '51 a couple of times...last time was 1959! )

In fact...to show you guys that at least SOME of your otherwise nonsensical comments were correct.......the "first time" I really "discovered what girls were for...." was in the pool of the Hotel Del Coronado....with the daughter of another CCCA member...! Talk about a "classic" experience........!

I really do feel sorry for some of you guys. I can't help the unfairness of life. Fact is...some guys cars are bigger, heavier, faster, and more luxurious than others. Some guys have other things that are bigger, heavier...etc...than others. Don't blame ME....nothing I can do to help you guys.....But I do have a suggestion...for some therapy...how about this...I have an address for you guys to write to complain about it.

PACKARD MOTOR CAR COMPANY, INC.

1580 E. Grand Ave.

Detroit, 32, Mich.

Be sure to put your heart into your letter, expressing all your resentment for the fact that their "big" cars from their 'Senior' Division...were so damn arrogant...so damn elegant...and so damn superior...

I dont have the address for the Pierce Arrow, Dusenberg, or the plant where they made the "L" and "K" series Lincolns.....but...you get the idea....

Pete Hartmann

Big Springs, AZ

Mr. Hartmann, you've just illustrated the exact attitude that has soured me on the CCCA. I bought my 900s before they were Classics and had no influence on that decision. I suspect the shoe is actually on the other foot and it's the "oldtimers" like you who are worried about the value of your Classics diminishing as their exclusivity is diminished by the inclusion of more (and equally worthy) Classics into the fold. Please if you would...tell me why my '32 900 Convertible is a "lesser" Classic than the '31 840 Roadster parked beside it...Wern't they built to the same standards by the same workmen to plans drawn by the same engineers? I suppose if they had been more expensive and if fewer had been built you would be singing the praise of the "Custom" Light 8. Many 840s remained unsold at the end of the model year...imagine that..Classics that didn't sell ? Guess they wern't "Classic" enough....

Fabiana: In response to your research for your Strategic Management class. I applaud you on your choice of CCCA. The further you delve into the organization the more interesting I suspect you'll find it. As a non-car owning member I am constantly amazed by the passion and dedication of the members who collect and preserve such a significant and vastly underappreciated part of our cultural and artistic heritage. It is my believe that in the century ahead, based on the identification, classification and standards established by founding members and subsequent Club leadership, there will emerge an understanding and much broader appreciation of these cars for the great artistic achievement they represent. Therefore, a project such as yours could proove to be useful to the Club as it maps it's strategy for the future.

In answer to your questions:

1: I personally benefit by being exposed on a regular basis through Club publications to the history and ongoing preservation of classic cars, and the sheer joy of seeing phtographs of what to me represent the apex of automotive design.

2: The % of ownership I'm not certain of, but judging from the Membership Directory seems to be quite high, I'd guess 75% or more. THe club could provide statistics.

3: NO

4: I do not know the average age. I would guess it's probably in the late 50's early sixties.

5: Not to my knowledge. It seems most events are member oriented, but I would surmise that interested non-members attend Grand Classics.

6: No facilities in Maryland.

Finally, If I can assist in your research I live in Washington, DC and work with the Smithsonian in Maryland at the Institutions Environmental Research Center, located just south of Annapolis... Good luck with your research and feel free to e:mail me at delorbe@serc.si.edu

Fabiana,

Since you picked me to quote I felt I should respond that I am one of the younger members of the club and therefore my views are proably not representative of the membership as a whole. My views as stated in your quote are more reflective of what others have shared with me about their reasons for not attending certain events, coupled with my own situation of being a family man so for me to participate I need to multiply the costs by 5 every time I sign up for something.

The costs of membership itself are the best deal going! We have excellent publications that are well worth the cost of membership alone, as Chuck stated.

One need only read a few of the above posts to fully understand my comments about being positive on this, or any, on line forum.

Shawn Miller

If you can't see the difference between a Packard Super Eight such as the 840 you described in your post, and the Standard Eight / "Light Eight"...then....I agree..you really dont belong in the Classic Car Club Of America.

Pete Hartmann

Big Springs, AZ

I reiterate...it is thinking like yours turns away folks like me...I think I can see more Classics at Hershey than at most Grand Classics anyway....doesn't that tell you something?

For Restorer 32

I do not blame you for being "turned off" by the inherent ARROGANCE of the big engined super luxury cars of the mid 1920's thru the early 1940's. They most certainly WERE not for everyone...and ARE not for everyone.

I also do not blame you personally for being enarmored of the word "classic". As we have noted.....thanks to the success of the CLASSIC CAR CLUB OF AMERICA, this perviously little used work has become literally an OBSESSION for anyone with something to sell.

We Americans can be proud of what the American manufacturing industry produced in the "old days". Our industrial standards made the rest of the world look sick ! Yes.....the Europeans built a VERY limited number of truly grand cars....but...talk to a Rolls Royce Phantom series owner...or the owner of a Benz 500 series.....or a Hisso...they would be the first to admit their cars are "fussy"...and if you really wanted to get home on a cold, rainy, damp night...in the comfort of a properly heated reliable car...they'd pick an AMERICAN car any day !

There is nothing ...NOTHING to be ashamed of...of ANY ordinary American car built during the 'classic' era. I was actually BORN in a Packard "120" series (Packard's "ordinary" car that sold well...because it was a damn good car for the money!). Likewise....people SHOULD be proud of their Packard "900"s ( an earlier attempt by Packard to enter the "common man" market ). Who could deny that even Fords or Chevrolets were MARVELOUS buys for their money...and FAR more reliable than ANYTHING then made overseas.

But...all of this dosnt change the fact....that there were VERY rich and VERY pwerful people...who had MUCH higher standards...and demanded FAR more from their purchases...than the ordinary common folk who were content with the performance and quality levels of the perfectly good cars,...such as the Packard 900's and Packard "120".s..La Salles...etc.

We call the cars that were so vastly superior...in quality, performance...fittings...etc.....from the ordinary old car...CLASSICS.

OF COURSE the inherent arrogance of the proud long hood of a Cadillac V-16...a Dusenberg....Pierce Arrow...."Senior Series" Packard....is going to stir jealousy and resentment...envy...in those who, for any number of reasons...dont have one. This is NORMAL. NOTHING to be embarssed about.

But this is LIFE. Deal with it. Accept the fact that someone else...somwhere...has something BIGGER...LONGER..and BETTER than yours. So WHAT....no point in making a horse's hind-quarters of yourself trying to DENY normal human nature.

Frankly....with the word "classic" being tacked on as a sales gimmick for just about EVERYTHING...I really dont WANT people to call my car a "classic" any more....I think I will form the NON CLASSIC CAR CLUB OF AMERICA....requirement for membership.....must be on the "LIST OF APPROVED CLASSICS" of the Classic Car Club Of America....prior to the "liberalizing" of the 1960's....!

Pete Hartmann

Big Springs, AZ

Shawn?s point about the cost of bringing his family to a CCCA event is a good one. It is possible for a family five to share one room, although it may not be very comfortable for all concerned. Some of the hotels are expensive, but when they are, they are usually worth it. The Annual Meeting at the Hotel Del Coronado was a great example. The room was expensive, but mine was certainly worth the price. Some CARavans do stay in modest priced motels, so that is always a possibility. Unfortunately, these days "modest" seems to be about $80-100 per night. It really adds up.

The real problem is the cost of organized meals and general registration costs. Here is where the local organizers of these events can really help.

A six-year-old kid is not going to eat $50.00 worth of food at a banquet. The kid would probably rather have a hot dog or grilled cheese sandwich. Usually banquet style meals are expensive. It?s not CCCA that makes them that way; it?s the hotels and other suitable facilities. They simply charge a lot. It?s a pretty sobering experience planning one of these events.

Unfortunately, what usually gets left out of the negotiations is simply asking for children?s meals. Most facilities will provide a child?s plate or different menu at a substantially lower cost, but you have to ask when you are making your deal with the facility. They never volunteer to do this. Since most of the people who plan these events are ?empty nester?s? they simply don?t think to ask.

Likewise, most CARavan or Grand Classic registration fees include a budget for a hospitality room or get acquainted cocktail party. Over sevaral days, this can be a really big expense. These parties are traditions, which are a very enjoyable part of the Club. I'd never advocate dropping them, but realistically your kids are not going to consume vast quantities of alcoholic beverages and snacks. (snacks maybe...) Maybe they?ll drink a few Cokes and eat some cookies. I think it would be possible to have a lower registration fee for kids if this were taken into consideration.

Many of the public places you are likely to visit during one of our events will have a lower admission prices for children. As it usually works out, families end up paying full adult fees for their kids, because these admissions are a part of tour package. I can understand how it frosts people to walk into an attraction, to find the sign says ?Adults $10.00, Students $3.00, Children under 6, Free.? Since they paid the same ?activities fee? for every family member, they have no way of knowing what part of the fee went to which attraction, but they instantly get the message that this would have cost a lot less if they had just walked up and purchased tickets.

It is true, it takes a little extra bookkeeping and planning in order to provide lower fees for children, but I think it would be worthwhile. The real problem is we have to encourage the people who organize these great events to remember to do some of these simple things.

Sometimes it really is simple.

So then you're saying that things are exactly as they appear...while you (assuming you represent the CCCA) are perfectly willing to take my membership money I should certainly not have the audacity to assume that my chintzy 900 convertible in any way allows me to use the mantel of "Classic" when referring to it. Frankly, I fail to see much classic styling in those bulbous late 30's Twelves...classic performance perhaps, but styling ?

The only club Mr Hartman represents is possibly the toxic sperm backup club; just ignore his comments, they are not at all representative of the feelings of the vast majority of the CCCA. He has been asked nicely not to post here and supposedly agreed, but seems to be addicted to coming here and being a spoiler.

900 Packards are considered full classics.

Shawn Miller

Indiana Region

Shawn :

I agree...you really SHOULD ignore my views. You have a right to your own views, and you should be free to express them. What you are NOT free to do, at least not yet...is to tell other people they shouldn't have the same rights. That has no place in an American forum.

As far as whose views reflect what - let me again emphasize, this is a PUBLIC forum. Had you actually UNDERSTOOD what you were reading in my prior posts, you would have learned that at no time did I claim to represent the Classic Car Club Of America. My views are my own.

Bear n mind, however, the CCCA does, every few years, take a SURVEY of its membership, to see if its management is in concert with the general attitutdes of its members. My recollection of various CLUB SURVEYS down thru the years, indicates my view ARE in concert with the general membership, most of which remain conservative...i.e..determined to keep this Club what it was originally for.

Unfortunately...in past years the National Board, reflecting the over-influence of the various special interest groups who wanted to "tack on" the name "classic" to cars they had for sale, went ahead and "admitted" cars that would have been laughed out of our events years ago.

Yes...I agree about the last of the Senior Packards being "bulbous". If you look at a copy of 'CLASSIC CARS AND ANTIQUES' (fellow CCCA member Robert Gottlieb's excellent book (published in 1952) that really helped "put us on the map" as a club, and as an idea) you will see, stated far more elequently than I can, the "concept" of the true classic...i.e. "form follows function", and his use of my year Packard Twelve ( 1938) as an example of how the "classic" school of design was fading, and a less desirable "moderne"...and/or stream-lining, was literally RUINING the lines...and basic desirability, of the big Packards. See....Shawn...as a perpetually broke kid, I couldn't afford the more elegant, more "classic" earlier Packard Twelves....I agree with you...damn right I would have liked an earlier one...say around '34 or '35..... But...you see...Shawn...at the time I bought mine..a really nice one from the earlier period would have been worth a hundred dollars or MORE. I just didn't have that kind of money in those days. All I had was twenty five bucks, and you couldn't get much car for that, even in those days. THAT is why I had to "settle"...for what I agree....is just not as neat-looking as an earlier Packard Twelve ( I did have a "line on a beautiful "mint-mint-mint" 36 Packard Twelve town car - but the guy wanted seventy five bucks for it...nothing I could do...a Japanese gardner came along...had the seventy five bucks....and into that beautiful Laidlaw Broadcloth and Wilton carpeting, went his greasy power mower...oh well....).

So..Shawn..I agree...you really should ignore my comments. You are much more comfortable with the kind of cars that reflect your standards, and the kind of people who are attracted to those cars.

As you note, the Packard "900" series ( a Packard Company attempt to "reach down" to the "ordinary car" price range) and other similar perfectly good ordinary cars have been admitted to "classic" status. Hopefully, the CCCA National Board will recognize it has a responsibility to those who it brought in, and will plan more events as are consistant with the needs, tastes, and asiprations of our newer members. And dont be surprised to find me attending...! We have several local car clubs here in northern arizona that meet in MacDonalds parking lots - we all have a great deal of fun.....probably, because we are at PEACE with the fact that "some people have bigger ones than others"......and we can joke about it and not take it too seriously.....!

Pete Hartmann

Big Springs, AZ

Peter:

I hate responding to your posts, but I feel I must say something when you respond with misinformation and nonsense. From CCCA's own website, results from the most recent survey (1999) are:

43% desire "retain as is" (1925-1948 demarcations)

41% desire "expand to include others (other years or other marques within the current years"

And more specifically (again with many responding positively to several choices):

43% desire "identical built before 1925"

45% desire "earlier cars of high standards"

36% desire identical cars built after 1948"

40% desire "later cars of high standards"

If you call these results a resounding endorsement of your conservative positions regarding where the CCCA ought to go, you are a better statistician than I.

Perhaps you cling to your vacuous ideas because you are trying to enhance the value of your own "borderline" classic....Unfortunately, you aren't going to get there, you are only going to make the CCCA less relevant than it already is.

Bill

Albuquerque, NM

My final words on the subject...once again my "Spare Parts Theorem" has been validated...At any given time there are more horses asses in the world than there are horses, kinda like Tucker parts.

Buickplus,

The survey results are even more convoluted than they appear. It seems many of our members voted for multiple choices, so quite a few people voted to keep the years as they are and also voted to include some other cars as well. You could interpret this to mean that very few members have any argument that the 1925-1948 cars are indeed Classics as defined by the Club, but these same people also think there are other cars to be considered. Unfortunately, the survey results were ambiguous enough that the best you can do is make an educated guess. We got a real lesson in writing survey questions.

One thing is for sure: When the membership voted last year to include ?Virtually Identical? pre-1925 cars, the measure passed by about 80% in favor of adding these cars. I suspect that if the same question were put to the members about post ?48 cars, the result would not be the same, but a significant number of people would vote for it.

Hi BIll:

I would certianly agree with your description of my car ( a '38 Packard V-12 Formal Sedan ) as a "borderline classic"...that is...IF we were using the standards of the Club as it was originally formulated. Again, for a better understanding of why there IS a CLASSIC CAR CLUB OF AMERICA...i.e. what we meant in the early days of the Club, by the word "classic"...I strongly recommend Life Member and one of the original founders of what was then called the Western Region, Robert J Gottlieb's CLASSIC CARS AND ANTIQUES. This was first published in late 1952; I believe it has a Library Of Congress access code.

But, as you and other "posters" in here have pointed out, the definition of what is or should be acceptable as a "classic car"...to the CCCA,is MUCH wider than we could ever have conceived in those days.

Judging by the discussion in here of the results of the most recent CLUB SURVEY, it would appear more and more people want more and more cars accepted by the CCCA so as to be called "CLASSIC". I think this trend will increase in future years, with more and more "watering down".

This would be consistent with what the general public wants, does, and believes.

But I do not understand how you think that I could suffer any effect...eithe a gain or loss on my car's monetary value. My car is value-less, because I am not interested in parting with it. It had little monetary value when I bought it, in spite of its fine condition. for the simple reason that in those years, most people did not see any value in preserving cars of its "ilk". As you have seen me note...I bought it in 1955...and have been enjoying it ever since, with dis-interest in what the public thinks it is worth. Driving it...savoring its technical and qualitative excellence...seems not to change down thru the years...as the public's opinion of it, and its monetary value... rises and falls.

Today, as less and less people know or care what a REAL classic is, its monetary value appears to be declining, but this doesn't affect me, because again, to me its value is ZERO because I intend to use it until the day a jealous husband or two puts me out of my misery.

Actually, by "flooding" the CCCA with the "lesser" cars...the "almost cars"..etc...that might even SLOW the down-ward monetary value of my car, since, with our events containing more and more of these "lesser" cars...mine is going to look better by comparison.

So...Bill...again..I do not understand your logic.

Hi Peter

I found one part of your post most interesting. The part about value. "How much? How fast?" are probably the most asked questions at many car shows. For those of us who plan to enjoy them for as long as we can $ value is Zero. Enjoyment value like the universe, goes on and on. There are two kinds of people. Those who get enjoyment out of the things they are lucky enough to own,

and those who would rather display the cancelled check...

Best

Jim

The other day in a conversation at Hershey, someone said to me, ?Yeah, but you?re a car guy.? I took his observation as a compliment, but he was right. I just enjoy my cars for what they are. I really don?t get very worried about what they are worth. I just have them because of the enjoyment they give me. I think most people in CCCA (and other clubs as well) subscribe to this theory. It could be worse. I could be hooked on buying new cars whose values drop about as fast as a Steinway piano falling from an airplane.

Of course, there are people who do buy and sell cars for profit. There always has been, and I imagine there always will be. In many instances they provide a valuable service to the true hobbyist. The fact that someone might make a profit on a car really shouldn?t influence your enjoyment of the hobby. Just enjoy your cars for what they are. Cancelled checks aren't anywhere near as much fun.

Chuck and J446:

My comment to Mr. Hartman about his motivation to enhance the value of his car was said in jest to return some of his own venom. Somehow he is able tell us that those looking for changes in the CCCA are trying to increase the value of our cars, yet takes great offense when it is suggested he is doing the same.

Like most of you, I pay little attention to what my cars are worth. We don't really need to know, we aren't planning to sell any of them, indeed, each collector car we have is part of the family. And I have said repeatedly in this forum that I don't believe that CCCA recognition has much to do with the value of a collector car. Check out E-bay or Hemmings and see how often a seller mentions that this or that car is a recognized Classic. It is hardly ever stated.

Bill

Albuquerque, NM

Bill:

I disagree with you about your belief in the motivation for people wanting to tack on the word " classic " to some product, service, car, etc. If you will look thru the current issue of HEMMINGS, you will find page after page of listings in which the compulsion..or obsession...to tack on the word "classic"....appears on just about every imanageable item offered for sale.

Again, I think this is quite a tribute to those who formed the CLASSIC CAR CLUB OF AMERICA, and those of us who "sung the praises" of the concept of "classicism".

Pete Hartmann

Big Springs, AZ

I'm in agreement with the last few posts that said there is no sellers motivation for listing a car as a classic. The term "classic" as Peter has pointed out on so many occasions has ceased to have its former meaning. I will disagree with Peter, though, when he goes into his diatribe about all non-classic owners referring to their cars as classics in an attempt to get more money for them. If the people using the term classic to sell don't understand it, why would the people buying the car understand it any better? The reality is that classic has just become a term to describe an old car because old car doesn't sound nice. There's no sales motivation. If everything is labeled a classic, then the term ceases to have any meaning at all, and is ineffective in jacking up the price as Peter contends. For the vast majority of people selling and buying, classic has become just another term for an old car.

Yeah but, if, by using logic, common sense and decency, you remove or negate all of Hartman's reasons for spewing his bile, you will accomplish NOTHING! His acidic comments are not based on historical accuracy, engineering facts or a true appreciation of automotive history. His intent is to create anger, dissent and hard feelings. In this way he seeks to elevate his own inconsequential status. He is a burden to us all in the hobby.

Now watch as he cries to the administrator for removal of this posting.

I suspect if the fellow who posted that most unfriendly comment ( see above ) had been required to post his real name, he would have thought twice about making such a silly comment. Those who have read my previous "posts" will note that I believe very strongly in the great AMERICAN tradition that we all have an equal right to have our ides, however unpopular, heard.

My suggestion is that we use this marvelous new form of communication to see what we can learn. Focusing on the personalities (if any...!) of individual "posters" does not add to our knowledge.

Pete Hartmann

Big Springs, AZ

Hey Mr. Hartmann,

If everybody has to stick to using this marvelous new form of communication only to learn, how come you continually put down every car you think is inferior to yours? Ernie Sholtz.

My 2 cents worth.

The 1932 900 series Packard SHOULD be a CCCA Classic because:

1. The reason the car failed is because Packard DIDN'T know how to build a cheap car, and Packard couldn't turn a profit on them.

2. It is of the same/higher quality than other CCCA cars from the same year.

(Auburn really sticks in my mind here)

3. It is of the same high engineering standards of the other Packard's for 1932.

It's not THAT much different than the Standard 8 for that year.

As an aside, there's a guy who's been trying to sell a 1932 900 series coupe sedan (victoria coupe) for $89,000 recently. I think he's absolutly NUTS!!! Why would you buy that for $89000 when you could buy a nice driver 1932 Packard 12 club sedan or coupe for much less??? His arguement is that it's RARE. He claims 5 exist (i know of 2 more however) Just because something is rare doesn't make it worth a lot of money. Another example, in the same issue of the Bulletin, a guy has a 1929 Caddy d/c phaeton for around 70 or 80 Grand. That's reasonably priced. Isn't a 1929 Caddy phaeton a LOT more desirable than the 900 Packard??? It's a free county, and everyone has the right to ask what they want, but some people need to get their head examined.

In reply to the previous post that '32 Packard 900 should be a Classic, it already is. Here is the CCCA list of approved Packards:

All 12 cylinder models

1925 - 1934 All sixes and eights

1935 Models 1200 through 1205, 1207 and 1208

1936 Models 1400 through 1405, 1407 and 1408

1937 Models 1500 through 1502 and 1506 through 1508

1938 Models 1603 through 1605, 1607 and 1608

1939 Models 1703, 1705, 1707, and 1708

1940 Models 1803, 1804, 1805, 1806, 1807, and 1808

1941 Models 1903, 1904, 1905, 1906, 1907, and 1908

1942 Models 2023, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2055, 2006,

2007, and 2008

1946 - 1947 Models 2103, 2106 and 2126

All Darrin-bodied

This information is direct from the CCCA web site.

Also, cars that are not CCCA approved are advertised as CCCA approved. Here is an example of a non-classic car offered for sale from the Studebaker portion of this forum:

"I have a perfect 1929 studebaker commander 4 door sedan for Sale. 8 cylinder, 120 inch wheel base sedan. Red body, black fenders, perfect gray cloth interior. this is a ccca classic. come see this car and drive it home. $20,000.00 OBO. Pictures via e-mail jojackag@charter.net or call 805-481-7459 California"

I have seen ads in other publications for this same car stating that it is a Full CCCA Classic.

Only the 1928 to 1933 Studebaker PRESIDENT is a Full CCCA Classic, not the lower priced Commander. For those of you interested in buying the over priced non-classic car you can see the full posting here:

http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/showflat....365&fpart=1

Regarding the 900 Coupe Sedan: Leaving the asking price aside the 900 two door sedan is indeed a rare car. I am the roster keeper for the 900 and know of only 5 existing examples including the remains of 1 in my parts yard which literally washed out of a creek bank in Minnesota. It's probably restorable with Herculean effort, if anyone is interested it's available for about the same cost as a restorable Model A Ford. Who says Classics have to be expensive? If you saw the 900 Coupe Sedan at Hershey (the one currently advertised) you might agree that it is a strikingly attractive car. Unfortunately for the breed the low windshield and rakish lines of the 900 are very appealing to street rodders, several sedans and at least 1 convertible coupe having met this fate. Again, anyone out there wanting to spend God knows how many hours restoring a terribly rough but basically complete 900 Coupe Sedan (but having something of value and rarity upon completion) contact me, but don't say you wern't warned!