All: Somehow I blew the Tiny URL for this car. It should have been: http://tinyurl.com/nko6tb8
Dear Johns:
I find the threads focusing on OH-riginal vs. any change of any element from when a car got off the end of the assembly line to be interesting from both the mechanical and human viewpoints. As any change of any hard component on a vehicle has the potential of rewriting history, there is value in documented original content. Consumable fluids such as fuel, engine oil, differential lube, coolant, windshield washer fluid and air in the tires are mostly beyond the discussion but the knowledge of the original specs of these fluids is valuable. Knowing what kind of lubricant and fluids were available for a curved-dash Olds is an important part of that car’s history and can provide guidance to the current owner-operator. Some folks are just going to find OH-riginality more important and valuable than others.
When cars are being judged, the smallest details can assist the judges in coming up with a rational ranking that will be respected if all know the rules and agree on the documentation of OH-riginality in advance. I feel this knowledge is one of the most valuable assets judges (and appraisers) can have.
John Lazenby has given me and others a lot of great information on 1955 and 1956 Chrysler 300’s over the years and I must admit I enjoy checking out a $125,000 1955 Chrysler 300 for overall visual impact as well as details. I spotted a few non-factory items when I first viewed the car and reported to all that I felt it was gorgeous. After John L. agreed and added he had noted a few off-spec items I went back to see what I could spot in the pictures.
Once again, I am willing to publish information that will document my ignorance of the truth regarding ’55 C-300’s, even though I spotted my first new one in 1955 at age 16. I offer this list up as constructive criticism and as an invitation to help document “Truth�.
1. Original tail-pipe tips were rather oval and deflected the exhaust downward. This car has round tips. Easy fix. The Studebaker club repo’s them.
2. Hood and trunk emblems have 3+ rows of black & white squares and appear to be the vinyl stick-ons. The originals had slightly larger squares that filled the open area with only three rows. Coloration was directly on the chromed pot metal.
3. Original headlamps were “bullseye� type as had been used for Chrysler for many years. They put off a nice glow and used ones are still available and can be upgraded with new bulbs and reflectors. The car will be safer for night driving with the newer halogen sealed beams.
4. The proper shade of Platinum can only be documented by the club’s standards but the paint looks a little lighter than Platinum, less greenish tint and probably has several layers of clear-coat on top to give it that glistening look under the spotlights. It may even have some aluminum powder in the paint like an Escalade.
5. I think the parking brake handle may be from a ’56 but it is possible this very late ’55 car had the new design.
6. The headliner and visor cover material did not look original in the pictures. Good luck on finding exact replacement material.
7. Neither did the black padded dash color and grain—but either could be the photography.
8. I don’t believe seat belts were a factory option in 1955 but I am glad to see them and also glad that our judges do not apply penalties to seat belts that are period-correct. This is a common sense rule that properly places the value of seat belts to enhance human safety above all else. This, then, begs the questions on all other safety gear developments in the last 60 years. ABS to air bags to self-driving packages. Bob Rodger would roll over in his grave.
9. There is no spare tire hold-down system. The trunk area is especially gorgeous.
10. The horn button is a beautiful and rare self-winding clock. While this is a nice addition, it is not factory and also is redundant to the antique electro-mechanical clock in the RHS of the dash.
11. The glove compartment door appears to have a bad gash in it. That’s not factory.
12. Under the hood, it looks like an electric choke on the front carb. The original is a nicely-plumbed system that routes air heated in the RHS exhaust manifold to thermally-activated chokes. That tubing was wrapped in asbestos so what does one do there?
13. The words “Chrysler FirePower� on the rocker-arm cover have been highlighted in black. I’ve never seen that. Nice touch for under-hood eye appeal but not factory. The seller is clear about an under-hood fire and this may explain some of the anomalies there.
14. Original black coils can be found.
15. My C-300 had acorn nuts on the ends of the threaded rods rising from the center of the carbs. Looked dressier than just a bare hex nut. I think wing nuts on the oil-bath pots are correct—but the vintage wing nuts are different from current Ace Hardware stock. Similar Cadillac Eldorado air cleaners have fancy round chrome fasteners atop the “Delta-Wing� air cleaners.
16. The oil filler/crankcase vent cap is painted silver and should be low-gloss black.
17. Glossy radiator tanks are pretty but slightly over-restored.
18. The car appears to have an extra vacuum tank up by the booster—like a ’56. Anything to improve the braking on a ’55 driver.
19. Many types of hose clamps had been invented and used by 1955 but the worm-drive stainless steel clamp was not used by Chrysler in 1955 and may not have even been invented yet. The spring-type clamps were used to entertain hapless owners and shade-tree mechanics who did not have the proper tool for loosening and positioning them.
20. I can’t track all the heater hose connections and support clamps but I do believe the heater system is plumbed bass-ackwards and is missing a few support clamps on the fender liner and/or the rocker-arm cover.
21. The line from the fuel pump to the front carb is black and may even be synthetic instead of the original steel line.
22. The car appears to be raked and up maybe 2� at the back from new or re-arched rear springs.
23. Tires are undefined but are most likely not 8.00 x 15’s, let alone Goodyear Blue Streaks (with tubes when mounted on wire-spoke wheels).
24. Ending on a plus, the car does not have an outside rear-view mirror (strange decision on Chrysler’s part) or backup lights (neither were available from the factory).
Additions, corrections and commentary are always welcomed by this mechanical engineer/Virgo. Picky-picky-picky but I still love the car and wish the seller (Bob Lederer) all the best in a successful marketing of the car. No fatal mistakes that would make the car difficult to return near-er to OH-riginal were spotted with the possible exception of the headliner material. A rising tide lifts all boats—even our dream boats.
The unsung heroes of the clubs are our Model-Year Consultants and they generally love to help guide a member to the best possible restoration. That best restoration will be markedly different for a museum piece and a daily driver. Mr. Lederer might well have profited by having memberships in our clubs.
C-300-less,
Rich Barber
Brentwood, CA
From: Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of 'John Grady' jkg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [Chrysler300]
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2015 12:02 PM
To: 'John Lazenby' <french_fryguy@xxxxxxxxx>; 'Rich Barber' <c300@xxxxxxx>; 'Chrysler 300 Club Int. Server' <chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [Chrysler300] Platinum 1955 C-300
Interesting observation, John. We in our club have a hard job in a way..people who correctly say “it is not original battery acid� vs a better battery. Or brakes say. I get this on some of my cars; one answer is “well I do have the wrong rear view mirror, this one is bigger, now I can see out-- therefore I guess I force the car value to drop 50k?� I have seen “numbers matching� wrecks that someone inherits who never touched a bolt on a car , has personally 20 minutes in the car total, be very vehement about originality, vs someone who rebuilt it down to the nuts on the brake lines with his own hands, ----and then someone does not like the color or bend of the brake lines .
Maybe it is sort a passive aggressive thing with humans—trying to lower the perceived value of what one really wants, or would not mind having? Or maybe it really is trying to keep it exactly 1955.
I would personally much rather have the second car, the one with new incorrect brake lines. . But recent craziness about barn finds has fed the other way. The only reason I swing into this, is I remember the absolute best 300F convert I ever saw, would support pictures like this beautiful c300, and I have seen a lot of those 300F converts (owned 9 at one point) , it was a light beige colored one 20-25+ years ago, spotless , white top I think . The guy had stiff white paper on the floor all the time, to protect floor pad from scratches, although he drove it to meets. Car was 110 points, on that scale. It was perfect. He was a really good guy. I tried to buy the car several times, just missed it, I understand a Chrysler dealer bought it. But he was vilified at early meets by some, over the beige color . The paint on it was far better than that on any cars of those complaining. The car was flat out far better. The best one there. The guy got really really emotionally upset, stopped coming to meets. Would not enter judging. That is not good.
I am not taking any positions, beyond kind of categorically stating, that, to me, having original chalk marks at just the right angle is maybe not as important in the real world, as having a beautiful looking, good useable safe car….maybe even in the color you like.. But, maybe different if you are into $ appreciation only, or something wrapped in Saran wrap “look but do not touch�—let alone drive. . My .02. Not a strong feeling, at all, and most definitely not trying to be controversial….I appreciate how hard it is to have a period correct car. …. just an observation , after a few years on the clock, about inner peace. . The point after all is it is a car..you drive it, hopefully.
We all can do whatever we like, obviously. And appreciate the other guy has his own values. And for any direction a seller has chosen with his car, someone likes it. That beige F was worth more to me than any original car due to its condition.
Sometimes I really wish for 1970, when an F was a 500$ used car, a few dents, you drove it around., peel out, sew a patch on the roof hole, add some oil even if spilled, a few drips off the torqueflight.. . . Now fear of calamity keeps it kind of in a glass dome. Such is life….
From: Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [mailto:Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John Lazenby french_fryguy@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:french_fryguy@xxxxxxxxx> [Chrysler300]
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2015 1:40 PM
To: Rich Barber; Chrysler 300 Club Int. Server
Subject: Re: [Chrysler300] Platinum 1955 C-300
After reading the statement on e-bay and viewing the photos I can note several things that are not correct on this example. The photos are nice.
John Lazenby
On Thursday, November 5, 2015 10:25 AM, "'Rich Barber' c300@xxxxxxx <mailto:c300@xxxxxxx> [Chrysler300]" <Chrysler300-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:Chrysler300-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote:
Some beautiful photography of a beautiful Platinum 1955 C-300 on e-Bay at: http://www.ebay.com/itm/131644797974?forcerRptr=true <http://www.ebay.com/itm/131644797974?forcerRptr=true&item=131644797974&viewitem> &item=131644797974&viewitem= or http://tinyurl.com/3u4kswc
Rich Barber
Brentwood CA
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network
Archive Sitemap