[Author nameAuthor names are only available to PAS members.]

[Author nameAuthor names are only available to PAS members.]

You’re welcome David, these are fun. One thing I have learned from all this study and contemplation of automotive history is that by the Thirties luxury makers needed to learn to borrow with pride. For decades Cadillac did it masterfully but eventually showed what happens when taken too far. I believe it was Pierce-Arrow and Studebaker who did it first, and did it successfully.

[Author nameAuthor names are only available to PAS members.]

Good pics from WheelsAge showing trans tunnel on Cord-based RWD Graham-Paige, click on image to scroll. Pretty wide tunnel up front, not much room for foot on gas pedal. Pics of rear seat show what the tunnel width would roughly be up front if gearbox were part of rear transaxle. Much less intrusive but a real technical challenge. Would Pierce have been up to it? Of course they would…

https://en.wheelsage.org/graham-paige/model_113/graham_model_113_custom_hollywood_supercharged_sedan/pictures/qx3e7u/

[Author nameAuthor names are only available to PAS members.]

That’s a very special and rare car! Remember seeing a maroon one cruise down Michigan Ave through Dearborn probably 15 years ago. Well-balanced body style in same general category as 836A though more sporty and modern looking. Makes one wonder if the new P-A owners reached out to Hupp before deciding to do the in-house entry car for ’34.

Let’s take a look at that R3Q without skirts. Gave me chance to tweak other things and wake up the trunk rack.

[Author nameAuthor names are only available to PAS members.]

Thanks Anthony. Came across a few Hupp Skylark videos recently, learned that they had actually incorporated one of the above suggestions: front and rear door vent windows. They also managed to fit their Six in a 10 inch shorter axle-dash length, which suggests that Pierce’s V12 would have had a good chance of fitting in Cord’s longer space.

The Skylark demonstrates that at the very least a Pierce could have been created with conventional RWD using Pierce’s own transmission and solid rear axle. The trans tunnel would have cut into front passenger foot space as shown in the Hupp videos. Whether this would have been a non-starter for a critical mass of would-be Pierce customers would have been a question that needed quickly answered. There was one unsolved aesthetic issue with the Skylark’s use of Cord’s dies atop a conventional RWD layout: the rear port of body sat an inch or so higher to clear the solid rear axle; see image in third link. Not sure what exactly was crashing into what but if it was top of axle hitting bottom of rear seat, this need not have been an issue with the taller 132 wb Cord body . Was at the St. John’s Concours in Plymouth, MI today and got a chance to eye-ball a Cord up close. The distance between grill slats looked to be about an inch and a half. If it is true that the 132 car’s extra grill slat adds that amount to overall vehicle height, the rear seat could have been raised that much without loss of headroom, thus clearing the axle without having to raise the rear of the car.

Another issue that apparently foiled Hupp and Graham was that Cord’s dies were not meant for volume manufacturer. For Pierce this would not have been a problem… Elmwood Ave would probably have have been happy as a clam to sell a few thousand cars a year, probably could have broken even at a thousand.

http://www.oldcaradvertising.com/Hupmobile%20Ads/1940/1940%20Hupmobile%20Skylark%20Postcard-01.html

[Author nameAuthor names are only available to PAS members.]

And Anthony, here’s your non-skirted version.

[Author nameAuthor names are only available to PAS members.]

Here’s a VERY rough rear three quarter look at that big backlight. Have also added a trunk rack, which would have been a simple way to increase trunk capacity for those occasional needs and a style element the rest of the time.

[Author nameAuthor names are only available to PAS members.]

Glad you like it, Craig. And Anthony, I was hoping there was a PAS member who also owned a Cord! That car was not only a styling but also an engineering tour de force. For you to have talked to The Master himself, well that just takes the cake.

Your comments do make me wonder if the Cord unibody would have been able to carry what likely would have been another 500 lbs of Pierce weight. Cord’s front suspension probably would have been fine, the weight of Cord’s V8, front transaxle and supercharger probably in same ballpark as Pierce’s V12 alone. But the Pierce’s rear transaxle and independent rear suspension would have been much heavier than Cord’s simple setup and resulted in dumbbell weight distribution, which would have affected body flex. Given the success Pierce’s engineers had in strengthening the 836’s Studebaker-based frame they probably could have identified and solved any issues that cropped up. But as you said, the car would not have been as nimble as the Cord. On the other hand, compared to contemporary Cadillacs, Packards, Lincolns and Rolls-Royces it would have been a revelation.

There was one additional issue that Pierce would have needed to address: Cord’s small backlight, and again technology could have saved the day, this time in the form of Imperial’s one-piece curved windshield that launched in 1934. Pierce would have needed to lean on the glass industry to pull ahead a large curved backlight that would appear en mass a few years later. Distortion need not have been a concern, folks just wanted better visibility. Doing so with a stylish one-piece solution is what was expected of a luxury maker. In fact the entire car, with its advanced features and design, and 61 inches tall vs 64 for Cadillac’s Sixty Special, probably would have been the biggest about-face that a car maker had ever made. And yet, perfectly believable and welcomed as a Pierce-Arrow.

Not sure I posted this image in past threads, shows better view of front styling had it been adapted from the bigger Pierces. I think it would have looked striking and very luxurious. Pierce could have fielded its versions of Cord’s 125 wb 2-door models.

[Author nameAuthor names are only available to PAS members.]

No doubt, and with a little effort Pierce-Arrow could have even improved on the Cord design. For example, by adding side vent windows, which would have improved ventilation and enabled a new V-windscreen with better visibility and appearance because it would have narrowed Cord’s wide center divider, the windshield no longer needing to flip forward for ventilation. Another easy change would have been to reverse the location of the front door hinge and handle to bring the car to modern standards. A more significant change that smartly responded to customer demand for added luggage space would have been to tool new rear quarters and decklid fully integrated with the body. Besides looking better than the awkward bustle back then in vogue, it would have negated the need for rear seats that slid forward. I don’t show it but an optional rear mounted spare would have freed up even more luggage space and given the car a nice “Continental”” look.

Lots of opportunity had Cord and Pierce-Arrow worked together. Certainly there was no need for Pierce to tool an entirely new car to save itself.”

[Author nameAuthor names are only available to PAS members.]

Here’s a comparison of schematics. Was a fun exercise and easy to do in Paint.

[Author nameAuthor names are only available to PAS members.]

Sorry I missed this earlier, David. Thanks for sharing.

The images that Oivind uploaded in the other thread show a high level of craftsmanship and attention to detail including a continuous surface element down the fender all the way to the running board. This level of appearance suggests studio work, probably Nash’s circa 1935 or 36. Good suggestions were made in the other thread as to why. I would rule out an affordable Pierce study since the changes did not include a unique Pierce-like grill. Of course, were a Pierce Eight to have been stuffed underhood then the issue would have been settled!

Most likely the ’36 Zephyr motivated Nash to investigate a way to set itself apart from the competition. Why multiple builds? Perhaps one for testing, the other for market studies? Or both for studies, one on the East Coast, the other West?

[Author nameAuthor names are only available to PAS members.]

Beautiful car indeed, one of the all time American greats and now very rare.

Did some scaling with other photos, almost positive it is a 144 wb chassis, the 147 sedans having 3 inch longer rear doors per Pierce practice to the end.

Gotta believe the company would have built a 144 or 147 wb Club Sedan, including in Town Car form, had the order materialized. Packard did something similar in 1937, creating a one-off lwb club sedan by using its 5 inch longer front doors. They also installed a division window to make it a Berline. For both marques the roof extension is where the specialty work was needed, though even that was probably no big deal.

[Author nameAuthor names are only available to PAS members.]

And finally, knit those stylish rear quarters and deck into the standard 2-door sedan body to create a 126 wb convertible with Cord 810-like rear quarter windows. The attached image depicts a steel roof 2-door sedan but Pierce would not have been able to afford to tool such a roof, not for a low volume segment. But a near zero investment canvass top for a low volume series that lit up the brochure and showroom? Absolutely!

[Author nameAuthor names are only available to PAS members.]

Mating that door set with 126 wb sedan’s shorter roof, Pierce could have fashioned rear quarters and deck to make what would effectively have been an update to the 836A body style, only now with enough rear bustle to make the car rather elegant. This is the model that would have generated needed conquest sales in 1937, no other fine car producer offering it. In 1938, Sixty Special would have joined but at least Pierce would have arrived first.

[Author nameAuthor names are only available to PAS members.]

Building out the model range on that 133 chassis, could have extended the rear doors like the first image I had attached to make a nice 4-window touring sedan.

[Author nameAuthor names are only available to PAS members.]

What was really needed was a series of cars of mid-130’s wheelbase like the earlier Studebaker-based 836/1236. Nash coupe’s front door appear to be around 7 inches longer than sedan’s. Were its surface contour to align with the sedan’s rear doors, would have made a nice 833/1233 6-window sedan priced around $2750 in 1937.

[Author nameAuthor names are only available to PAS members.]

Sorry to hijack the tread, just had to run out a few more images…

First is lwb 8-pass car, 145 wheelbase. An $800 Nash turned into a $3,000 Pierce? Why not.

[Author nameAuthor names are only available to PAS members.]

I had the same thought too. If she didn’t create it, who did?

[Author nameAuthor names are only available to PAS members.]

Longer front door and shorter rear door means 144 wb. Closed rear quarters in metal rather than leather covered, very interesting, wish this car still existed. Always wondered what a Club Sedan’s similar but narrower and more steeply raked rear quarters would have looked like on 147 wb chassis, especially as Town Car with convertible’s windscreen.

[Author nameAuthor names are only available to PAS members.]

The 836/1236’s front design is one of the all time automotive greats! Pierce-Arrow’s advertising agency certainly new what the “money shot” was. Only wish LeBaron, Rollston or the like had created a beautiful one-off body to match it.

[Author]

Posts