LaSalle 1927-1940

I can’t comment……….because I don’t have anything good to say about post 1933 cars that were let in, 

As a LaSalle owner, I always thought it odd that we were excluded while post 1933 Cadillacs which were just as mass produced were let in. That said, I don't have any plans to join the CCCA any time soon. They are far above my station in life.

I believe that it had more to do with the fact that they shifted to a straight

eight, much more like the Olds.

Johnny

jcrowJul 8, 2022

I believe that it had more to do with the fact that they shifted to a straight eight, much more like the Olds.

Johnny

Late LaSalle's had a V8. Similar but not exactly the same as Caddy.

Mid late 30's-40 Fisher GM B body shell the same as Buick

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LaSalle_(automobile)

58L-Y8Jul 7, 2022

Now that all 1927-1940 LaSalles have Classic status, we should have a topic for them.  

Please be gentlemanly and civil in your comments on the merits of this decision and the cars themselves.

Steve, I did not see this in the bulletin. Where did you find out this information?

alsancleJul 8, 2022

Steve, I did not see this in the bulletin. Where did you find out this information?

AJ: It showed up in the list of Approved Classics on the website.  

edinmassJul 7, 2022

I can’t comment……….because I don’t have anything good to say about post 1933 cars that were let in, 

Ed:

That's very gentlemanly of you...

The 1934 LaSalles had been before the CCCA Classification Committee several times and were not accepted. The reason given seemed to be the straight eight engine , which was said to be an Oldsmobile. They were originally an Olds design, but they were actually built by Cadillac and had somewhat different specs. I had a 36 LaSalle for many years and the straight eight certainly gave very decent power. They seemed to be a very well designed engine. My '36 had a Fisher Body but shared many Cadillac parts. The '34s had a Fleetwood body. They were IMO spectacular looking cars. I  personally have happy that the CC finally accepted the Lasalle marque. They are a nimble well built automobile with excellent performance. They will make great Caravan cars.

I owned a 1938 LaSalle convertible coupe for a few years, from around 2010 to 2017.   I can see both sides of this one.   On one hand, it seemed a little odd at the time that my '38 was not a CCCA car when the larger Cadillacs were; they had a lot in common with their bigger brethren.   And some of the years of LaSalle are just really beautiful to look at, especially the '34s. On the other hand, put a '38 side by side with a senior Packard, and there's no comparison.  The need to draw lines is never going to make everyone happy, and I can see both sides on this one.  

So all LaSalle vehicles are now full classics? Even the less priced models from the late 1930s?  I thought only some of the models were in this category, much like with Buick and the Model 80s and 90s from 1933. 

BucketofBoltsJul 13, 2022

So all LaSalle vehicles are now full classics? Even the less priced models from the late 1930s?  I thought only some of the models were in this category, much like with Buick and the Model 80s and 90s from 1933. 

Yes, all of them.  New CCCA list here: "LaSalle – 1927-1940 All"

https://dealer-marketing-assets.s3.amazonaws.com/CCCA/CCCA%2BJanuary%2B1+V2.pdf

Perhaps that may entice some people to want to join a club that has seen a drop in membership numbers. All should remember that if you want to be on the national board of that club you have to be healthy , or you most likely will be asked to resign , that comes from personal experience.

BucketofBoltsJul 13, 2022

So all LaSalle vehicles are now full classics? Even the less priced models from the late 1930s?  I thought only some of the models were in this category, much like with Buick and the Model 80s and 90s from 1933. 

Yes! Even the owner of a factory delivered priced $995 1937 LaSalle sport coupe has a Full Classic...just like those custom-bodied Duesenberg J owners!

58L-Y8Jul 13, 2022

Yes! Even the owner of a factory delivered priced $995 1937 LaSalle sport coupe has a Full Classic...just like those custom-bodied Duesenberg J owners!

My issue is if the $995 LaSalle is in, what about the many other vehicles in that price range?  Pick your favorite thousand dollar depression era car and make your case.  Very tough area to draw a line.

Yes, but look at all the new people it's bringing into the club...

/sarcasm

bryankazmerAug 28, 2022

My issue is if the $995 LaSalle is in, what about the many other vehicles in that price range?  Pick your favorite thousand dollar depression era car and make your case.  Very tough area to draw a line.

Bryan:

Years ago, when I was a CCCA member, the Classification Committee was soliciting feedback on the inclusion of makes and models previously considered and rejected.  I suggested that rather than relax the standards and grant Full-Classic Status, the committee create a list of "Worthy Contemporaries" for those bypassed cars which had many of the qualities but not quite all.  The idea would be to allow owners of those cars to participate in activities and meets for period context but without Full-Classic Status or Class judging and the other benefits of that exclusive status.

Response was the same a dropping a stone into a bottomless well...

Steve

First, I like LaSalles, Roadmasters, Packard 120's, Hudson Eights, Cadillac 61's, Chrysler Town and Countries.  I can see both the arguments for inclusion and exclusion. I was solicited for feedback recently too.

It seems to me that the current, redrawn "line" is rather arbitrary and rather GM-biased.  If the straight 8 LaSalle and the Cadillac 61 is now the level of car that's in, there are many others that are comparable.  Likewise, postwar Cadillac vs Packard cut-offs seems a bit odd.

Class judging can accommodate both more and less exclusive cars by judging them in different classes - marque clubs do this all the time.  And CCCA meets are quite nice (to me) by having none of the "rods and used Corvettes" clutter.

I also agree with Matt H that this is not the key to increasing membership.

The issues is at one time it was an EXCLUSIVE club, in today’s woke world we must make everyone happy……just let in the Ford T’s next. Since I have one it will make me feel better……NOT. Sad state of the entire country……excellence is no longer something to be admired, and setting your goals high is damaging to one’s psyche………..hell, I started with a 35 dollar bone yard special in 1979. Worked hard, clawed my way up to Cadillacs, then Pierce Arrows, went on to take my self education in the car world to get to where I wanted to end up………todays kids should just have it handed to them……..they deserve it, along with college debt forgiveness. Someone want to pay my bills? I seem to remember working full time while in college, as well as hustling cars and motorcycles to pay the bills. And my everyday car in the mid 80’s was a 200 dollar Pontiac LeMans with a spray can paint job. I survived……..my first new car came in 1997 when I was in my 30’s. My home made flat bed trailer that I paid 800 dollars for with a hand powered lobster winch lasted me over 20 years……..then my next flat bed I paid 1800 for was 18 years old…….I still have it. We rebuilt it three times, and sand blasted and powder coated it the last time. It was cheaper to overhaul it than just pay the new sales tax on a 14k new open trailer. I expect the trailer will last me the rest of my life with just one more overhaul. 

I'm going to report you Ed. You must have offended at least one person with that post.  It's going to take some time,  but I'm sure we can find them.  Just check their parent's basement.  But just one more hand out, and they'll make it.   That will be the one.  

I think Ed deserves a participation ribbon for getting as far as he has in the auto world. Hard work is just as valid as having things handed to you in todays world. 

dave s 
 

I have no issue if the CCCA wants to stay with a more exclusive list.  It's just the current version "sits between two chairs."

Walked away from an Internet squabble last weekend when gently trying to advise sellers (young guy helping out an older, non PC savvy long term owner) that his 1937 Packard 120 was not a Full Classic and I just wanted them to know for his own edification.  A couple days later guy comes back with "Well, I talked to xx, and Page xx, column xx of January 2022 member handbook says all 37 Packards are Full Classics"  

Full disclosure, I am a past member so not active - but I suspect one of two issues.  One, all 15th series Packards are but in 37 Jr. Cars are designated 115 or 120.  This changed later.  Or two, the reason I posted here (sorry to go slightly OT but seems worth a mention as a follow up to the two chairs comment) is really confusing messaging from CCCA...

A link to the CCCA new list is posted above. IT appears that every Classic brand like Packard, Cadillac, Marmon, Pierce, Loco, etc. has been dropped down to 1915. Some lower models previously excluded are now Full Classic. Everything Packard 6, 8, 12 from 1915 - 32 is Classic. 32-47 is selective. 110/120 cars are still not included. no 140 either. 160 & 180 are Classic. 1200 series on up are classic.

Packard 120 might be considered a Classic under AACA rules. AACA has classes for Classics and the rules say something to the effect that the "AACA accepts all cars accepted by CCCA plus (additional list). Most of the AACA additions include the CCCA carve outs. I don't know if 120 is on AACA list but the Cadillac 61 series has been included.

The AACA may need to re-examine their classifications. These new teens/20 era Classics conflict with established AACA classes of this era.