Lets open up this 'can of worms' -
What, in and of itself, 'crosses the line', breaks the barrier, etc., when it comes to determining if a vehicle is considered restored, 'modified' or 'rodded'?
While there is little issue with the most obviously altered, modified or 'rodded, there are those vehicles that most individuals would be hard pressed to distinguish/determine that anything had been altered or modified.
So, where is the 'line' drawn?
- For safety's sake, an individual puts in a relay for his headlights, horn, etc., so the old wiring will not catch fire;
- A electric fuel pump is put in, to make it a more reliable mode of transportation;
- A conversion to 12v, to allow the use of more modern lights, accessories;
- Replacing the rearend with a more highway friendly ratio;
And the list could go on and on, until at some point (unknown), the vehicle becomes 'modified'... The question is - at what point is that determination made, the 'line' crossed?
Can of worms!
For me personally, Tires are about the only change one could make and still really count as "stock".
A lot depends on the cars condition at time of restoration consideration. I'd still rather see one being driven with some mods than parked in a field!
And of course the big question is, how often are you going to drive it? Changes for modern gas and lack of really good brake linings have to be considered. Some safety items like seat belts and fire extinguisher would be acceptable.
I used to would never consider changing the engine out as it is the heart of the brand, but I have seen a couple of LS engined Hudson's that I would love to drive.
Three points: One, many of us have a modified Hudson and bone stock Hudsons as well. Two: People have been modifying their Hudsons forever...this is not a new phenomemon. Three: It's my car. I like it. Bug off. 😛
Over here in the UK and Europe it may become an interesting point of contention.
From next month cars made before 1960 will no longer need to have what is called an MOT ; an inspection if you like. An interesting subject of debate for many people ; some in favour but I'd say on the whole most not.
Problem is of course that you can now put any old thing on the road (insured of course) and not worry about the consequences. Personally I would prefer having some form of inspection just to check those basics which count e.g. the stopping of it.
There are also rumblings now of another law from the EU that cars over 30 years old that have been modified may fail the MOT.
Basically:
[i]
It wants to exempt all cars more than 30-years-old from testing providing the vehicle 'has been maintained in its original condition, including its appearance'.
This is based on the vehicle having not 'sustained any change in technical characteristics of its main components such as engine, brakes, steering or suspension'.
Classic cars which don’t fit this criteria would then have to be subject to new regulations.
Under its plans, all vehicles would have to remain identical to the specification they were in when they left the factory - which would mean classic cars could not even be updated with safer equipment.
The proposed new rules would mean any modifications - from different windscreen wipers to newer brake lights - would mean the car would automatically fail its MOT test.
[/i]
Go figure!
Every Hudson in our fleet has been modified to some extent (e.g. electronic fuel pump, 12 v system, etc.), yet still have the appearance of the original car. Even our 49 Commodore CV appears to be stock although it now has a six cylinder Twin-H rather than the H-8 that was in it when manufactured.
The lid on the "can of worms" seems to come off when an HET vehicle is fitted with such features as a V-8 engine, disk brakes, fuel injection, seats from a different manufacturer and to a lesser extent, air conditioning among a host of other modifications. While I have chosen to keep our Hudson's in as close to original condition as possible, I am fascinated by the innovative skills of our members who have "remanufactured" their cars, many of which were rescued from the crusher.
Unfortunately, some who own modified and/or rodded HET cars feel unwelcome in our club which is of concern.
The decision is a tough one for me. I have three collector cars. All are drivers--with some minor exceptions. One of the three is simply a resto-rod. There is no doubt that it is not origional (Hudson/Essex did not make a car of this style. One is hard to compare to any standards because it was Coach built. Each of the cars have their strong points and each have some weaknesses. But, as stated above all have had some type of update to make it more managable. What they all have in common is they can draw a crowd wherever they go, they are a lot of fun to drive and they are mine (as Sam would say.)
This is my favorite modified Hudson. It is Hudson powered with a body by the Barris brothers and the engine done by Gus Souza. This is clearly in the modified group. Was able to meet Mr. Souza and his son and grandson. Enjoyed getting to know him and his family.
The club has room for all it's members, some that do not have Hudsons at all. We need to go out of our way to make all our members feel welcome or our club will die.
[quote="Todd Lentz" post=117]This is my favorite modified Hudson. It is Hudson powered with a body by the Barris brothers and the engine done by Gus Souza. This is clearly in the modified group. Was able to meet Mr. Souza and his son and grandson. Enjoyed getting to know him and his family.
The club has room for all it's members, some that do not have Hudsons at all. We need to go out of our way to make all our members feel welcome or our club will die.
I saw that car at the nationals and really liked it. Very different and still Hudson powered.
yes, I say welcome all----
Leave a reply
