Could or would this car be considered a classic

From the Classic Car Club mission statement at the top of this forum....

"What exactly is a CCCA Classic?" The club defines CCCA Classic cars as "...fine or unusual motor cars which were built between and including the years 1925 to 1948.

By the way, there are "no" Oldsmobiles listed in their group!

Wayne

The term "classic" as defined by the CCCA should have absolutely no bearing on a car's value. I own two Franklins, one is a "classic," and one is not. The "classic" is worth about a quarter of what the non-classic is worth, and they are both probably worth less than many Fords of the same era.

So, to answer your question, your car is not a "classic," and never will be in the eyes of the CCCA. If you would like, I will take this non-classic off your hands for you.

Joe, I looked at your website, these cars are buried treasure! They may not be considered "Classic" but they are definitely "Historic"! Obviously a lot of work to finish them but if you are up to it the end results will be great. If you are not already a member of the OCA join up, they may be able to help with info and parts.

...............and all journalists and media people today, Petey.

Merriam-Webster defines classic as: serving as a standard of excellence : of recognized value; historically memorable.

No mention of the CCCA in there.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 6686L</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Mr. Sdbravenetey - you are RIGHT. What you point out in reading a modern Websters, is how much our language and culture has changed. Reminds me of what a liberal California Governor said when voters complained about the declining highways, educational quality, etc....'LOWER YOUR EXPECTATIONS'.

When we formed the Classic Car Club Of America, we were an entirely different country, where exaggeration was considered dishonest, and PRECISION OF SPEECH was considered worth-while. Obviously, the third-world country we are becoming, has no need of precision in speech and thought.

In the 1950's, the Websters published for that generation had a far more precise definition of "classic". We picked this word for our Club, straight out of Websters, because we felt it reflected the particular era, and price class of the cars we felt were historically interesting. The exact definition ? Well..it had TWO parts. First, it said " UNIQUE, OF FIRST RANK, REPRESENTING THE HIGHEST STANDARD OF EXCELLENCE". Thus an ordinary middle class 8 cyl. Packard or similar upper-middle-class car from the 30's was not of interest to us.

We liked the BEST. Meaning, of course, the largest, most elegant, most powerful multi-cylinder super luxury cars.

Of course we were car buffs and liked ANY old used car. But for our particular Club, we knew PRECISELY what we were interested in.

The word "classic", when used PRECISELY, also meant a particular "school of design". Meaning..FORM FOLLOWS FUNCTION (from the greek word "classicus".). So a CLASSIC super luxury car would be one where the hood, the headlights, the grill, the fenders, each stood out representing its own function. The "stream-line" era beginning around 1940, was the very antethesis of "classic", which is why the idea of having a '41 or later Cadillac or Packard in our Club would have not occured to us.

It never occured to us in those early years that our cars would have value, so concern for selling them was not of interest - we got em and drove em and worked on em cause we LOVED em.

As the 50's became the '60's, somehow, much to our surprise, people started seeing the REAL value WE saw in these "engineering exaggerations, magnificantly over-done", and the race was on by the used car dealers to get any old car they wanted to sell, called a "classic".

But, you fellows are right - times have changed. In a country where the youth of today have no need or use for precision of speech, since our technical jobs are going to China, all they need to know, is how to ask "DO YOU WANT FRIES WITH THAT? ". So why NOT abandon "precision of speech" and call EVERYTHING "classic" ? </div></div>

Well said! When I was a kid I used to ask my dad why the CCCA didn't let in some of the upscale cars of the 50s. In my older age now I fully understand why not. The reason is exactly as you describe it.

Full Classics are unique enough in their own way be be one of the seven commonly recognized genres of collecting. I just received my first issue of Hemmings Classic Car (well, "classic", right..)with two separate editorials suggesting CCCA is not inclusive enough. Not sure, with the mountains of organizations & clubs out there, why the push for this. I think the inclusion of "virtually identical" pre-1925 makes sense, and understand what change there has been has been very slow, and this is probably about it. I think that is fine - diluting this genre further makes no sense.

BTW - I am not a member, I just admire the CCCA for an outstanding job of identification of those special cars from a special era - true Classics.

Getting back to this gent's post, he can choose from AACA, HCCA, and probably several Olds or brass clubs, which will add value in terms of networking for parts, knowledge, etc. He has a desirable car in it's own right.

Your car is better than a classic, it is an antique!

The Antique Automobile Club of America was founded for the preservation and enjoyment of Antique Automobiles, defined as cars from the pioneering era before 1915.

These cars are typically open cars with brass headlights and accessories. They represent the era when cars were uncommon, expensive more or less hand made luxury items.

After 1915 cars became common everyday transportation and a lot of the character of the early models disappeared. This was the time when Ford was in the ascendent and every car maker aped the Tin Lizzie to a certain extent. Brass disappeared, bright colors went out of fashion and cars became more practical but dowdier.

So be happy you have one of the relics of the early days of motoring, a genuine antique, and enjoy it to the full.

Rusty,

The AACA is about cars 25 years and older, not pre-1916.

Peter

BJM - If you buy your Lincoln but do not join CCCA I think you are just missing out on an opportunity to get more enjoyment out of the experience of owning a Classic.

I just think CCCA just gets a bad rap. This is no different than any other specialty club or group - they are not just marque specific. Consider the "traditional hot rod" clubs. If you show up in a Corvette, the guys with the 32 Ford highboys may appreciate your car, but honestly that is really not what their particular group is about. Nobody questions this rationale. At the same time, if I bought a traditional hot rod I would get involved with one of these clubs for the same reason I joined the A clubs - knowledge, fellowship and people who really hone in on your car. Just my 2 cents...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Steve_Mack_CT</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

I just think CCCA just gets a bad rap. This is no different than any other specialty club or group - they are not just marque specific. Consider the "traditional hot rod" clubs. If you show up in a Corvette, the guys with the 32 Ford highboys may appreciate your car, but honestly that is really not what their particular group is about. Nobody questions this rationale. At the same time, if I bought a traditional hot rod I would get involved with one of these clubs for the same reason I joined the A clubs - knowledge, fellowship and people who really hone in on your car. Just my 2 cents... </div></div>

Well put. There is a certain amount of reverse snobbery at work that you see all the time which feeds in to what you are saying.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BJM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Likewise, all the CCCA needs to do is have a list of what they accept in their club, and if you are then so inclined - join and enjoy the comaraderie. </div></div>

Why not Google for CCCA list of cars or CCCA approved and see for yourself what cars are accepted. You could do that in less time than what it took to compose your post.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BJM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

If I restored it and was able to show and drive, I would still feel inferior . .</div></div>

I know of several proud Continental owners who are quite at home in CCCA and aren't smitten with class envy and self esteem issues.

I for one am pleased that CCCA has found a way to protect the term 'Full Classic' against the pretenders.

The assault on CCCA by the Vermont activists editorializing in the HMN periodical classic car is offensive and unwarranted. I refuse to subscribe to it because the crowd from Bennington shows disrespect to a major faithful segment of the hobby (CCCA).

My deceased Duesenberg owner friend Al Bennett was fond of saying, "This hobby was started by mechanics and was ruined when $$$ took over."

The first post in this forum pinned by PeterG has the Classic Car Site attached at the address below........

http://www.classiccarclub.org/

Wayne

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BJM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

I just checked out the list. I have some definite disagreements. No 1937 Chrysler Imperial Airflow C17? I can understand not including the Desoto Airflows and the grocery getter 34 to 36 Chrysler 8 Airflows but the 1937 Imperial C17 Airflow was a work of art, was built in limited and final year production, was powered by an aluminum head 8 cylinder and had power brakes, as well revolutionary styling that led the aero styling race. Yet is excluded.

On the other hand I was surprised to see ALL Cadillacs from 1936 to 1947 included. Did I read that right? I owned a 1040 60S and another 1941 model, not a 62S, but it was a new model that year. That seems like a broad brush to include these cars. </div></div>

One problem that I do have with (our) CCCA is ~loose quote here~ <span style="font-style: italic"> a vehicle has to be approved on its own merits and not because of another.</span>

This sounds great but in actual practice it means democracy, majority rule, the Cadillac lovers can get all their cars admitted but the Chrysler Town & Country supporters cannot because the approval committee is stacked against them. <span style="font-style: italic">(Sorry I cannot think of any politically correct wording here)</span>

Another example is the Auburn 8 vs. Chrysler 8. Ever compare a 1932 Chrysler CP 8 or 1933 Imperial CQ with a 1932-33 Auburn 8? Nope, not allowed in CCCA, can't compare and approve . . each car must stand on its own merits. (Sorry, I don't think the Auburn 8 qualifies either.)

Another example, only in recent years was the 135" wb 1932 CH Imperial accepted. Same engine, essentially same powertrain as CL, production body.

I was the editor of our regional CCCA magazine for a while and the folks that came out of the woodwork to criticize me because I ran some Imperial Lore was unbelievable. They wanted ACD, Packard or Cadillac.

Ok, the CCCA has some problems but so does your car pool, your lodge, your church, your spouse . . everyone but you and I and I worry about you sometimes.

We have had some wonderful times and made lifelong friends in the CCCA and I will probably remain a member for life regardless of its quirks.

From an outsider's viewpoint I agree CCCA is probably not perfect in it's selection criteria, and Dep5's insight is interesting to me. Still, there are many affordable cars that do qualify. In terms of bringing these cars out for the public to enjoy, I would like to see more also but like many other pre-war cars they may be more selective about what shows they go to or the owners may just not be as active anymore in some cases. Getting more of these cars out to our local AACA chapter show next year is one of my goals.

As far as I know, CCCA is about driving as much as many other clubs. I have been able to get up close and personal with some of these cars after visiting with owners. Once they see your interest is genuine, and not based on "what is it worth?" etc. it seems as informal as anywhere else.

That said Dep5's comments on HMN are also interesting. I am more than a little dissapointed in the HMN stance on CCCA, and the new "classic cars" magazine is a bit of a dissapointment for me so far. Turns out to be the same editorial staff who only write about rat rods, entry Brit sportscars and GM cars of the 70s in the main publication (not bashing but I am just not interested in these.) Thought I would try the "classic car" magazine thinking there would be some good coverage on American pre-war. Very little pre-war coverage let alone Classics. Too bad - but will probably use that slot to join CCCA. (truthfully I am over the "limit" in terms of magazines, national and local club membership - but I figure there are worse ways to blow money, right??!!)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BJM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

My point there is that if I own a car that can be shown, my 1st goal is to be able to enjoy driving it, next is to be able to show it, followed by interacting with the public with it. In a restored "Full Classic"'s lifetime, how many times do you suppose it get's shown, driven, enjoyed by a broader circle then just an immediate few folks.

That is what I meant most by stating I would participate in other club settings. I'm a poor guy monetarily, and the 46 Connie I mentioned I can afford - it's a project. If I restored it and was able to show and drive, I would still feel inferior to the hoi poli that owned Full Classics in the $100,000 to $1,000,000 range. I'm pretty sure, I couldn't even 'fake' it if I showed up.

</div></div>

Well I drive my full classic 2-3 times a week in nice weather.

Also you can get full classics in the 30K range. In fact a lot of full classic are less than these 60s muscle cars.

Why would you attempt to enter a show where your car was the accepted margue? Plenty of non classic car show out there. I would enter my Packard in an all Ford show.

I know a guy who owns mostly full classics, but has a weekly coffee meeting with friend who owns both classic and non classic such as chevys, fords etc.

Your argument against the CCCA is IMHO vey weak.

where the last Packard vs Cadillac cut offs are is always a subject for interesting debate. The 1941 Cadillac 61 and the 1948 Packard Custom 8 are interesting cases to consider.

"CCCA Recognized" or "CCCA Recognized Classic" still seems to have favor with many sellers - I think the guys who sell a lot of cars know this phrase is pretty clear. I just received another issue of HMN classic car today(???) with an editorial on acceptance standards in it that may be of interest to those who are reading this thread.

Steve B - that is a great pair of Franklins!! If the sedan was anywhere near the condition it is in your picture, I would say very well bought! Nice lines, too, sort of makes me think of a bigger '31 A slant window!

Steve - if I'm remembering the articles correctly - there were two where they were lobbying for acceptance of certain post-war cars. They completely mis-understand the purpose of the club. I'm not much of a club guy, although I do belong to about 1/2 a dozen clubs including the CCCA. Personally, if I don't like what's going on with a particular club, no need to renew my membership. For some reason the CCCA comes under external attack - i.e. people who are not members but seem to be "offended" that their particular car is not on the CCCA roster.

A.J.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: alsancle</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> if I'm remembering the articles correctly - there were two where they were lobbying for acceptance of certain post-war cars. . . For some reason the CCCA comes under external attack - i.e. people who are not members but seem to be "offended" that their particular car is not on the CCCA roster.</div></div>

I think HMN 'classic car' magazine contributor Jim Donnelly's column was offensive. CCCA bashing seems to be fashionable these days, much like the relentless bashing of Republicans by the Democrat dominated news media.

Go to your neighborhood church and try to introduce/impose your views on the congregation and see how far you get.

These people that want their Model T, 55 Chevy or 69 Corvair accepted in the CCCA bring to mind a picture of a horny gnat floating down the Mississippi river on his back shouting "raise the drawbridge".

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Steve_Mack_CT</div><div class="ubbcode-body">that is a great pair of Franklins!! Nice lines, too, sort of makes me think of a bigger '31 A slant window! </div></div>

I'm not sure if that's a compliment or not.

Steve that was absolutely a compliment. As I said, well bought - you have a great car (indeed a recognized Classic) for essentially Model A money. I would love to add a bigger car from the same era to my garage - problem is we are trying to "agree" on the next one! (actually not a bad problem, I am lucky Mrs. Mack has an active interest - the Olds is really hers!)

Re HCC editorials - I just re-checked my dates. Actually I received my September issue just yesterday but got October last week. The two articles Dep5 refers to, as I did earlier are in the October issue. Schultz writes a general but non-offensive editorial on inclusion criteria in September. Without looking at the dates I assumed I got the next issue, and I thought the Schultz editorial was a kind of attempt at balance. Sorry for confusion but being a new subscriber I guess that is just the order in which they came.

Just to correct a couple of misconceptions:

First, CCCA doesn't take "All Cadillacs." as reported. The correct list is:

Cadillac All 12's and 16's

All V-63 from 1923

1925 -1935 - All

1936 -1948 - All 63, 65, 67, 70, 72, 75, 80, 85, 90 Series

1938 -1947 - 60 Special

1940 -1947 - All 62 Series

CCCA recognized "Full Classics" are listed on the CCCA Web site, as well as in our "Member's Roster & Directory." The list is even printed on our Membership Application, just so you'll know exactly what you are getting in to.

CCCA is a specialty club. That’s no different from many organizations. Even AACA excludes cars that are less than 25 years old. Everyone has some kind of standard.

In fact, CCCA is the car club that popularized the term "Classic Car." The founders of the Club had a very definite idea of what they had in mind when they called their cars “Classics.” Did you know that CCCA was formed because AACA thought these cars were too new? In hindsight, it's quite amusing. The story can be found on the CCCA web site for those willing to take the time to look.

Over the years, the general public adopted the term "classic" and applied it to almost anything. There is a place near me called "Classic Donuts." The CCCA Board, being aware that their name was being used by just about anyone to describe just about anything, decided to look for a way to secure the rights to a name that described the cars that are unique to the Club. They chose "Full Classic."

To be honest, I was less than excited with the term. At the time, I was a Regional Director, and wrote the Board, urging them to adopt something more user friendly, like "CCCA Classic." That was not to be, and Full Classic became a registered trademark. Such is life.

Currently, the Club uses "Full Classic," "CCCA Classic," and "Classic" (with a capital "C") interchangeably. There is no arrogance intended. It is simply a referral to the list of cars we accept.

If you aren't happy with the list, you can ask the CCCA Classification Committee to adopt a new car or model. You must be a member of the Club to do that, and you must actually own one of the cars in question. That sounds fair, and it is. Will it be accepted? Maybe. That depends on how the car fits in the Club. Keep in mind that in well over 50 years of defining what cars are acceptable, the pool of prospects for inclusion has proportionally diminished. The obvious choices have already been made. Still, hardly a meeting goes by when another car isn't added to the roster.

My views are probably more liberal than many on the Classifications Committee, but since I've been a voting member, I can only remember one car that was refused that I thought should have been included. Prior to that time, there were several that didn’t make it, but that was then, and this is now. In the last ten years or so, 98% of the time, I'd have to say that the right decision was made and 100% of the time, the car in question got a fair hearing. People do tend to have different opinions from time to time. Not everything is a “shoe in.” On the Classifications Committee, it is a democratic process. The majority rules.

As for CCCA events being "closed" affairs, some are, and some aren't. If it is closed, it is because it is being held on private property, and the Region hosting the event is paying a fee to the property owner for each attendee. We do tend to hold our meets, which we call Grand Classics, at some very amazing locations. Some times they are places that us mere mortals might not otherwise see. That’s one of the real “perks” of the Club. The down side is it can make it difficult to invite all of our non-member friends.

Most of the time, our events are in publicly accessible locations and we are more than happy to see other car hobbyists drop by to see what it is all about. In fact, we'd like you to do so. Where else do you think we find new members? The affliction is contagious.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BJM</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I kind of wish they would quit using that term "Full Classic" as it implies aristocracy. But whatever they want to do, it's their club. </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BJM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

While not technically ALL of the Cadillacs from 38 to 47 are included, I really don't think the post war Series 62 qualifies. has any car ever been taken off the list? A 46-47 Cadillac Series 62 four door sedan was grocery getter at best, and the 46-47 Series 60 Specials are a personal favorite but again, they built a lot of them, they aren't distinctive in terms of powertrain, trim, etc - they just have really big back seats. </div></div>

Actually, this is a very good point. Mob rule won.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BJM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Just wrong IMO, to copyright a slogan which appears to imply privilege and snobbishness. I like the term CCCA Recognized Classic, and they can copyright that. But "Full Classic" is ridiculous

</div></div>

So is your constant whining about a club that you don't belong to. Who cares what you think. Get over it. CCCA prefers the cars of kings.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Peter Gariepy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Rusty,

The AACA is about cars 25 years and older, not pre-1916.

Peter </div></div>

Where did I get the idea an antique car was defined as one from before 1915? And a classic was from the period 1925 to 1940?

I'm sure these were someone's official definitions once but that was a long time ago and I don't remember where I got them from. But I always had the idea they were "official".

Does anyone else know where these definitions may have come from? I'm sincerely puzzled here.

Well, HCCA takes cars up to 1915, which is credited as being the end of the Brass Era. CCCA originally was 1925 to 1941, with the advent of WW II as the cut off. Later they added 1948 as the cut off date because some post war cars were virtually identical to pre-war cars. A few years ago CCCA added pre 1925 cars that are "virtually identical" to CCCA Classics that were produced in 1925. It seemed like a fair thing to do. I really can't tell the difference between a 1925 Rolls-Royce and a 1924 model, and neither can most mere mortals.

Technically, any car that is 25 years or older qualifies as an "antique" in most states. AACA and VMCCA abide by that standard. Our friends in the UK think of early cars as "Veteran," but they will call almost anything a "classic." It seems that we really are divided by a common language.

Here is a link to common collector car terms:

http://www.chalkhillmedia.org/Museum/historic_automotive_terms.htm

Use it at your own risk.

For those that haven't seen it there's a good thread on this subject on the AACA side.

See: In your eyes.......

At one time I thought the CCCA was too focused on particular cars of a certain era, but I have changed my view. I attended the joint CCCA-LCOC-LZOC meet in 2006, and all I can say is I hope that the CCCA *doesn't* expand its mission.

Are cars like the 1956-7 Mark II, the '57-58 Eldorado Brougham and the Mercedes Gullwing every bit as exclusive and well-built as the Full Classics? Sure, but the CCCA is a celebration of cars from a particular era, when automobiles were still relatively new and luxury simply couldn't be mass-produced.

And as much as I like my '37 Zephyr coupe, it still has the characteristics of a mass-produced car. Cars like the Zehpyr, the 120 Packard, and the junior Cadillacs may have taken sales away from the Full Classics, but that doesn't mean they should be in the club with them.