- Home
- About Us
- Join/Renew
- Member Benefits
- Member Pages
- Log In
- Help
- Museum Store
Can you tell from this picture which one he has?
An update on the vent window rubber. I went to great pains to make sure all my dimensions were right, they made the die, they produced the rubber, I’ve paid the piper, now just waiting for it to be delivered.
It should be in my grubby little hands end of next week. I’ll test fit, and if all looks well will contact those who showed interest in this rubber.
As an update, it’s an H rubber shape, dimensions to fit around the metal framework of a 1934-35 840/845 or 1240/1245 rear vent window. Part of the legs of the “H”” will have to be trimmed off for clearance on opening the window. A 15 foot piece will be $100.
Update to follow when I receive it. thanks David C.
“
If it’s a lacquer paint job, it probably has no lead in it.
Some enamels of the time had lead content, particularly the brighter colors of paint.
There’s no law regarding an individual taking paint off a car at his private facility. If there is lead in the paint, however, you’d want to do it without raising a lot of dust (i.e. wire wheel) and dispose of waste material immediately.
Lead in paint was outlawed, so to speak, sometime in the 60’s or 70’s, I think…
That is a good story, Don…those auctions aren’t really a good selling place for Full Classic cars these days, so can understand why you got a bargain!
The Pierce Arrow Society is a great bunch of guys with a ton of knowledge, so don’t hesitate to ask questions.
What you have is arguably one of the prettiest years for most cars manufactured, and particularly for Pierce. A club sedan is very stylish and will make a great tour or show car.
Do you have any specific questions about the car?
Well, at least Dave added at the end of the story that the ban on fender headlights was “folklore”, which I’m starting to think is the real truth.
He also said his Pierce had an “ash frame”, but didn’t make it clear that it was the body that was framed in ash and covered with a metal skin…
And the interior..
Charles, that’s a beautiful car, very tastefully done. Here are a couple of pictures since you’re having a problem posting them.
Long ago, probably in the 1980’s, there was an AACA tour in the area of my hometown of Alexandria, Louisiana.
I was on the tour with my Pierce, as was the late Ron Barnett. I was talking to Ron, and somehow the subject of old fire trucks came up. I mentioned to him that there was a very old fire truck about two miles from where we stood, so old, in fact, that the ladder trailer had originally been pulled by horses. It was converted to a power unit with the addition of a huge chain driven truck. There was nothing on that fire truck that one person could pick up by himself.
So, Ron asked if we could go see it. Sure, let’s hop in the Pierce.
Ron sat in the passenger seat, looked out across the hood, and said “You know, I never have liked the look of those fender headlights, but they don’t look bad from inside the car…..”
On HAC Jr., here’s an obit…
I’ve been researching for the article, and Ed I believe you’re correct. Most writings refer to “Austie”, and only one I’ve found so far states “Austy”. The attached photo of one of his dusters seems to confirm that fact.
That “Austy” reference is in a British publication, so we’ll forgive them their mistake, and stick with Austie.
I know the old timers are familiar with him, but Henry Austin Clark Jr. led an interesting life. Born into the aristocracy of Long Island, his family at one point controlled much of the sugar produced in Cuba (up until the 1960’s). Austie was in the Navy during WWII, and is quoted as saying that when he left the Navy that was “the last paycheck I ever received.”
He attended Harvard, buying his first Classic car while there, and eventually his collection would reach over 200 cars. Many, many early cars passed through his hands, including my 1931 Pierce phaeton in the 1950’s. As someone mentioned to me, he had access to all the best garages and carriage houses!
Please, make no mistake, this thread being started IN NO WAY is criticizing bracket headlights.
It’s still a Pierce Arrow, and I’d never criticize one of those (oh, maybe comment on color or the red velvet interior, but not serious criticism).
My intent was to try to prove the headlight story true, but in absence of proof, then the obverse is proved by default.
I think there are a lot of antique car “truisms” that aren’t really true, and my intent with this discussion is to determine if the New York headlight story is true or false.
It’s easy for a story to be told so many times that it becomes “true”. It’s my understanding that most of those Cord or Auburn “This car has been driven 100 mph by Ab Jenkins” were plaques made in the 1960’s. Captain Kirk on Star Trek never, in any episode, said the exact words “Beam me up, Scotty”. Henry Ford said any color as long as it’s black, which is interesting since his first Model T’s were red and, I think, green. It’s not “money is the root of all evil”, it’s really “the LOVE of money is the root of all evil”. The Stanley brothers would NOT give you a free car for holding down the throttle all the way on a car for one minute. The list goes on.
I’ve searched the teens New York headlight laws, as Curtiss mentions, and have yet to find any mention of fender headlights…..
I already have a few pieces of memorabilia loaned to the museum, and there are numerous pieces of interesting literature that have been copied, placed on foamboard, and should be on display now in museum. These are not ads or common items, but rather business cards, business that advertised using Pierce vehicle, and the sort.
I’m writing an article about the 1954 rally and Austy (or Austie, depending who you ask) Clark’s part in it, will appear in the Arrow at some point….
I agree that lenses were a big issue back then. New York was trying to eliminate glare to oncoming motorists, as it apparently was blamed for many wrecks, people blinded by the light. They also mandated that at 75 feet, the beam of light could be no more than 42 inches off the ground. I’d like to see how they figured that out.
I’m not disputing that there were headlight related laws. I’d just like to see proof that Pierce Arrow was targeted by any law that said the fender headlights were illegal.
The law, if it exists, would have to be Pierce related, since as we all know that’s a trademark and patent and no other company had such lights.
So, I’m being the devil’s advocate, and saying that no such law existed, and bracket headlights were a customer option and never required by law.
Now, if someone can prove me wrong, I’ll accept that, but it has to be in the form of period laws.
Here’s a period write up of the event.
http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/archive/article/october-1954/31/anglo-american
I’ve read numerous accounts of the rally from different sources. Most of the accounts are written by someone of the British persuasion.
It’s interesting to see how, even then, news was slanted or biased. Nothing much bad said about the British cars, but the American cars skidded and jerked their way along the course!
Hard to think anything would beat the 66 in a hill climb.
The banner that was on the 66 at this rally was recently online for sale, and I bought it. It’s very high quality work, and interestingly made in Springfield Mass.
It’s identical to the banner shown in the video at 1:17 into the show, on the Lozier, but of course the one I have says 1916 Pierce.
Thanks Craig, I keep forgetting too. Anyone know where that particular car is now? thanks David C.
Wasn’t this the car that sold at the estate auction for under 20K? If so, that was probably cheap, but 59.9K isn’t….
An update on this project. The drawing is at the rubber manufacturers, I’ve given the go ahead to make the die and proceed with the manufacture of the rubber.
Things move slowly, that’s for sure. From this point he’s saying 4 to 6 week delivery.
Thanks for the interest, and when it’s done will let everyone know, particularly you who have shown specific interest.
Thanks! David C.
I’m not a tax lawyer but I’ll give you my thoughts.
If you do everything above board, then yes, you’d have to prove how much you have in it, basis cost (purchase price, parts, labor paid to someone else for restoration). This would be deducted from sale price, if sale price is higher, and that is your capital gain. Your labor, or value thereof, is not able to be added to the basis. Also, you need to define what rate the capital gain tax would be, is it a collectible rate or other, see discussion attached.
Buying another car with funds doesn’t count, you still owe tax on gains.
If you do it “below” board, that is, all in cash, sell you car, and stash it away or buy another, all in cash, then it’s your decision whether to hide that from the government. The problem is, with large sums, they’re easily tracked, so trouble might occur, tax evasion is serious business. Think Al Capone.
In the old days it was no big deal, not significant money. Now, with cars in the 5 and 6 figures, and up, it’s very traceable.
Here’s a link to a AACA forum discussion of the topic.
This comment is in no way approving nor disapproving of how one handles one’s business, just thoughts.
http://forums.aaca.org/topic/248242-capital-gains-taxes-on-old-cars/
