- Home
- About Us
- Join/Renew
- Member Benefits
- Member Pages
- Log In
- Help
- Museum Store
To be honest on price……it will be shocking. Unless you find a sympathetic person who is trying to help you out. I have bought every one I have EVER seen for sale……and over the last thirty years, the total is three.
Bob, thanks for clearing up my memory of the number sequence. One problem with your math, there are SEVERAL fake and repowered cars, yup………and I know which ones they are, not all of them are 1935’s, but in the world of open V-12 Pierce cars one MUST assume a car is made up until proven authentic. Sad but true………
On a positive note, it’s fantastic that such great cars are still coming out of the barn/warehouse/garage.
AND…..there are several eights that have had their top removed also…….be careful!
Peter that was much less than ten cents on the dollar for each…………you forgot to offer them to me! But that’s OK , as I already had my spares.
I want to clarify what my dear friend of 50-odd years Bob Jacobsen said:
“P-A’s body #’s are confusing. From my records, there were at least 74 total 1934 & 1935 V12 Convertible Coupes built. Contrary to what George and Ed stated earlier, the code 338-P-xxx was used for both 1934 and 1935 V12 convertible coupes, NOT for both 1935 8’s plus 1935 12’s. The 1935 V12 conv. coupes probably restarted at 100, so we both agree that there were 33 1935 conv coupes made, and yours is #23.
“(The 1934 and 1935 8-cyl both used code 238-P-xxx and numbered 1 thru 32 (’34) and 100 thru 133 (’35) for a total of 66.)”
Allow me to clarify:
The engineering code portion of the body number is 238 for 1934-35 8s and 338 for 1934-35 12s (all body styles). P is the body style code for conv coupes, and Y is the body style code for production Silver Arrows.
The sequential number (following the P or the Y) pertains to BOTH 8s and 12s, because the same bodies for P and Y cars were used on 8s and 12s. I’ve examined the Y code records as well as Bob has the PAS P code records (which include notes from company officials on non-surviving cars) and their are no duplicate sequential body numbers on known 8s vs 12s.
For their own reasons, Pierce-Arrow began the second year (1935) with body numbers beginning with -100 (for these fewer-than-100-in 1934 bodies), and as I mentioned, not with -101 as one might expect.
Therefore, along the lines that Ed is suggesting about counterfeit 12s, a 1934 12 conv coupe should have a body tag reading 338-P-nn (2 digits) and a 1935 12 conv coupe 338-P-nnn (3 digits). 1934-35 8s body tags would read 238-P-nn/n as above. That is by far not the only thing to check to see if a car might be counterfeit/modified from production.
George (my friend of 50-odd years – or is it my odd friend of 50 years?) et al.,
I agree with your statement “…a 1934 12 conv coupe should have a body tag reading 338-P-nn (2 digits) and a 1935 12 conv coupe 338-P-nnn (3 digits). 1934-35 8s body tags would read 238-P-nn/n as above.”
However, I would like to differ with your statement “The sequential number (following the P or the Y) pertains to BOTH 8s and 12s…their [sic] are no duplicate sequential body numbers on known 8s vs 12s.”
THERE IS EVIDENCE of duplicate #’s when you try to lump 8’s & 12’s together:
1. The Hale notes cite a 1934 twelve 338-P-10 (no other info) and our Roster has a 1934 eight 238-P-10 (Mr. Eastburn, S/N 2080284)
2. The Hale notes cite a 1934 eight 238-P-13 (no other info) and our Roster has a 1934 twelve 338-P-13 (ex Tom Lyons, S/N 3119001).
I therefore submit that the engineering code (238, 338) defines whether the car is an 8 or a 12, and that each code has its OWN sequence starting from 1 or 100.
There could be some other supporting evidence – in my spare time (?) I will search rosters.
Cheers,
Bob
The 1935 lenses are the same diameter as the 1933-34 lenses that are available as a reproduction. I had these produced and sell them for the P-A Museum as a fundraiser at $715.
The pattern is different and the lenses for 1935 are much more rounded in shape. I know there are some 1935’s around that have lenses with a still different pattern from a Buick of the same era, but I can’t tell you the year.
Keep the car and drive it!
Dave Stevens
We all know what free advice is worth, but if I was you, I’d explore if the
present owners of the ’35 open Pierce-Arrows would sell you their restored
car. I would enlist Ed Minnie’s fertile mind in that endeavor. If that didn’t
work out, I’d try to make your car functional to see if it meets your
expectations, and further its sale ability. At this point, a man with your
mountain of old car passion, extensive quality collection, and restoration
experience, doesn’t need my advice. After all, I’m still trying to acquire
my first Simplex!
Well Tony, thanks for that. If you do want a Simplex, I may know of
one that could be available. As to buying restored cars, I have often
found that they aren’t always that driveable. Can’t believe the money and
effort I have spent fixing cars that looked shiny but had weak cores.
Nevertheless, great advice. Give me a little time and this old Pierce
might look a little better….. unless I find someone crazier than me
to do it.
Peter. Bosch & Lomb was not a supplier of lenses for Pierce after 1928.
A 1935 headlight and parking light lens is labeled ‘Multi-Beam’. The same as the ’33-’34 lenses.
And just like the ’33-’34 lenses, the ’35 lenses are ‘Left & Right’ . Making them the MOST rare of all lenses.
With the possible exception of ’30’s cars made without fender headlights, but rather the ‘New York’ headlights. Those were often on custom body cars as well, Those ‘Multi-Beam’ lenses were made in very little quantity.
Greg Long
John, congratulations on acquiring such a rare and desirable car.
In the absence of any ‘correct’ 1935 lenses, what you can do is to install a pair of the very good reproduction 1933-34 lenses available from the Pierce Arrow Foundation store [Pierce Arrow Museum]
This will give your car a very close to correct appearance, and only very knowledgable Pierce Arrow aficionados will notice the mild convex shape vs the ’35’s pronounced highly-convex shape.
Having an adapter and a pair of sealed-beam headlights will be recognized as ‘not right’ by virtually anyone looking at the car. Like these on a ’32.
Greg Long
photo download failure, i’ll try again.
Greg
Here is a sealed beam headlight in a ’32 Pierce Arrow.
Greg
Here are the correct lenses in the same car.
Greg Long
I believe 33-34? Buick lenses will fit 33-35 Pierce-Arrow if you can find them. When Irv Blonder made replacement lenses many years ago he reproduced the non-handed Buick lenses so one mold could cover all 33-35 and be reasonably affordable. Unfortunately he had run out of them by the time I bought my P-A and needed a LH for my ’35. Reproducing lenses is obviously challenging, and when some insisted that they needed “authentic” acrylic lenses down to part numbers for 33-34, 35, L/R Irv bowed out from making more and Roy Judd took on the task of making 4 separate molds for each. Apparently 33-34 glass lens have been reproduced since then, and I salute whoever went to that very challenging task. I admit to some shock when $700 prices are touted for lenses, but pricing out replacement plastic lens for new cars puts in it perspective.
Its hard to to tell the difference in lens details on a car driving down the road, so if the choice is keeping a car hidden from view because it’s lens’ aren’t “correct” or enjoying the car, I say enjoy the car.
Jim
Here are the Multi-Beam numbers, L & R, if you want to start a standing search on eBay or elsewhere. The part numbers are cast into the glass.
1933-34 #915419 and #/915420
1935 #919017 and #919018
Dave Stevens’ repro optical-grade plastic lenses are excellent as a Q&D improvement while searching for correct lenses. Install them over the sealed beams, but paint out the exterior adapter rings as shown on Greg;s photo.
To do it right and permanently, you’ll also need a pair of reflectors which i **think** are the same for 1933, -34, and -35. Bob J will know…
Yes, the ’33, ’34, and ’35 all use the same reflectors, mounting rings and bezels.
The ’33 Buick lenses fit, but leave an â…›” gap between lens shouder and chrome bezel – noticeable onlly when being judged.”
I think the biggest issue is that the shape of the 35 lenses both headlight and parking light give such a diffrent look and perspective to the car that they actually add value to the car because of better styling……..I know lots of people will chime in and disagree…….but I have owned every year Pierce from 29 to 37, and I think the 1935 is the best overall styling……..my case in point, 1935 open cars will bring more than the 32 to 34 cars……..my judgment is it’s a ten to thirty percent difference depending on the year and body style……apples to apples. So now the 1935 owners will agree with me and all the others won’t. And, for the record, I like them all………..in th event of me passing in a untimely fashion, first person to my garage can have the set of 1935 headlight and parking light lenses in th box above my toolbox. They are clearly marked 1935 Pierce Arrow glass lenses, and NOT FOR SALE………..I’m always looking for thr next car………and having the wrong glass would drive me crazier than I already am.
Just for the fun of it, I bought a full set of the “Judd” plastic lenses some time ago, for use on my 1935 P-A. They do look nice and appear correct. The only problem is the discoloration that happens overtime on the plastic lenses. I will probably use them anyway and simply refer to the “lens patina” being aged to perfection.
Al
I too bought a set of Judd plastic lenses for my ’34. The discoloration
reminds me of the cataracts I just had removed. On a happier note, I was
searching for extra lenses for my ’35 and a fellow sold me a set that were
brand new made in India. I was told a wealthy owner was restoring his V12
and the lenses available weren’t up to his needs. He commissioned 10 sets
to be made for $10K or $20K (eons ago). They are super clear and detailed.