ClassicCar

AvantiPower

Did Hudson offer two-tone fenders on the '36 Hudson-Terraplane cars? I've seen some online but have no idea if these were factory-correct.

oldhudsons

yes, that was the std. color, black fenders with a different body color.

During certain years, not sure about '36, you could pay extra & get the car painted all in one color.

Hudson308

oldhudsons wrote:

yes, that was the std. color, black fenders with a different body color.

During certain years, not sure about '36, you could pay extra & get the car painted all in one color.

Interesting that the solid color was extra charge! (Except for black, I suppose?) That would certainly make mass producing the fenders easier.

66patrick66

My '37 Terraplane, all one color. Looks to be the same shade of Peacock Green as your '36 is!

What year and model is that scoot parked next to that '36???

Huddy42

If my failing memory serves me correctly, all '36 were one colour in Australia, 1934-5 were two tone and from there on all one colour.

OlHudson8r

Huddy42 wrote:

If my failing memory serves me correctly, all '36 were one colour in Australia, 1934-5 were two tone and from there on all one colour.

Les, I do not remember seeing any 1936 Terraplanes in two-tone in Illinois either back when there were still some on the streets. My 1936 Hudson Six that I purchased in 1949 was of a solid color also. That doesn't mean that Hudson might not have two-toned the '36 cars, just that they were not commonly seen.

Dee

Browniepetersen

My 36 Hudson that was built by Coachcraft, London England was two toned (medium and light grey) with the top and fenders one color and the inset another. However, it is not the same color today... It is two toned, same pattern, but more to my liking.... --but colors that were used by Coachcraft back then.... (two edits already today--bad typing or brain dead? Must be the new snow?)

Park_W

According to the '36 parts book and color chart, no 2-tones were offered in '36. So it appears '34 or '35 would have been the last of the black fender era.

53jetman

If the cars had black fenders, it would have been probably because that was what the customer wanted - having had an earlier model two toned in that way. My dad did a lot of two toning of the lesser series cars during his many years of selling Hudsons & Terraplanes. Simply because in a rural area, people did not go for the full dressed versions that were available due to the added initial cost.

Jerry

53jetman

walts garage-53 · walts garage-53 February 2010 Posts: 1,470Platinum Member

Huddy42 wrote:

If my failing memory serves me correctly, all '36 were one colour in Australia, 1934-5 were two tone and from there on all one colour.

You are correct, 36-37-38 and 39's were all one color. 2 tones started again in 1940 right up to 1954. All models sold in the usa were one color. !940 had a model called BLUE BIRD, light gray body and dark blue fenders. I worked at Moody's and Wilcox's motors in Waterbury, Ct at the time and we sold them to the Secret Service in New Haven, CT. They were the 175 cid engine and could never figure out why they bought them. Walt.

AvantiPower

Park W wrote:

According to the '36 parts book and color chart, no 2-tones were offered in '36. So it appears '34 or '35 would have been the last of the black fender era.

Thanks, I had a hunch that most (if not all) of the two-tone's I had seen online were not factory-correct and this settles it.

Unless someone has the build plate or documentation to prove they have a factory '36 two-tone, it is much more likely their car was re-painted at some point.

AvantiPower

66patrick66 wrote:

My '37 Terraplane, all one color. Looks to be the same shade of Peacock Green as your '36 is!

What year and model is that scoot parked next to that '36???

I don't actually see "Peacock Green" in any of the 1936 factory paint charts. I see other greens like "Vineyard Green", "Montana Green" and "Sage Green", which range from dark to light.

Park_W

Peacock Green wasn't introduced 'til '37. In my view there weren't many really good colors in '36. Among the few good ones, my favorite is of course "Glacier Blue," a beautiful "blueish teal." If you've ever flown over Alaska and looked down on the glacier lakes, it's exactly that color.

Browniepetersen

This is a little like Henry Ford's comment about you could get your car any color you wanted as long as it was Black. Dealers were always happy to make any changes you wanted and grab a few extra bucks in the process. I know my 36 was "custom built" and not "factory run." I do not even know if Grey was an acceptable color for 36; but, here is the photo (with Sir Andrew Caldecott's wife) taken when the car was delivered in Hong Kong in 1936(Black and white photo naturally) but the color was two tone grey with the darker color a bit to the blue side of grey. The color it is now more to the Montana Green with a bit of metalic thrown in for fun. Not realy, the green is a custom mix as well. I have added period wheel rings and put in place the last of the bright work. It is off to the shop for interior next week.

By the way Park, Great Looking Car...

Park_W

Brownie, your baby is lookin' fine !! Looking forward to seeing it in person.

Scott

Park is right, the 36 colors were pretty drab, with a few exceptions. They look like something you would paint your duck blind. In the Hudson master body group parts book, they list a 'special option' paint color, Mandalay Ivory, which I think is a beautiful color.

66patrick66

I was told that the 1937 Peacock Green is the same as 1936 Peacock Blue. :confused:Now, since I have no color chart in front of me to check this, that is what I was told when I got the car in 2004.

I still would like to know what year, make, and displacement of that motorcycle parked next to that '36!!!

OlHudson8r

66patrick66 wrote:

I was told that the 1937 Peacock Green is the same as 1936 Peacock Blue. :confused:Now, since I have no color chart in front of me to check this, that is what I was told when I got the car in 2004.

I still would like to know what year, make, and displacement of that motorcycle parked next to that '36!!!

My brother Bill, pretty knowledgeable in bikes, says he is fairly certain the bike is a 1971 Honda 450 DOHC. He says he had a 1971 350 SOHC and also a 160, but the pictured Honda is neither one of those. He and his two sons have had a number of Hondas, Yamahas, etc. from that era. Outside of a 1971 Honda CB 750 I had for a short time in 1972, all my bikes were Indians, British, or German from the 1940's-1950's. Dee

RL Chilton

Brownie-

That is awesome you have an original picture of your car!! I love the comparison stuff, which brings some curious observations and questions:

1) Your re-build appears to sit much higher, especially in the rear end. Was this on purpose?

2) Is there brightwork on the edge of the louvers? They don't show up in the original photo.

3) The original running lights look bigger than in the modern photo. Was that intentional?

Love the history stuff.

Browniepetersen

Russell,

Your observation about the car sitting higher is a observant one. I put a rear end that will allow me to curze with the local folks (80/85 mph) and that included a "new old stock" set of springs. Part of what you see is because the driveway is on a hill, but the back end is actually one and a half inches higher than when I got the car.

The bright work on the louvers is glare from the sun. First sun we have seen this spring. That and the fact that the camera is an old digital. That is why there is a star burst on the grill.

The larger fender lights are the same that came with the car--restored. I expect that they look larger because the headlights are chrome and the fender is black. I think it is an optical thing? I have tried to stay as close to the original as I could--well, other than paint, chrome headlights and horns, whitewalls and chrome beauty rings (not shown in the photo) the rest is correct to the car. Oh yea, since this is to be a driver, I added a set of 1935 tail lights to the bumpers that have directional lights and an extra set of brake lights. Am I at the "HoT Rod" stage yet?

RL Chilton

Thanks, Brownie, and no, I don't think you're at the Hot Rod stage yet, but keep tryin'!

Really is beautiful and you've done one outstanding job. Can't wait to see it in person.

RL Chilton

Brownie-

I was comparing the photos again. I knew about the headlight buckets from previous posts.

I agree, it must be an optical illusion about the running lights. Maybe they were originally set back farther? They look pretty close to the front of the fender in the original photo. Also, are you going to add the bumperettes? I think that would be a nice touch.

Browniepetersen

The bumperetts that came with the car look more like cattle catchers. Not sure where along the line they showed up. I cannot use the bumperetts on the back of the car because the trunk is in two sections and folds down. The trunk sits only inches from the bumper. (reference the bad photo taken before the bright work was added) I am going to purchase a badge bar for the front because they are "all the rage" across the pond. Depending on how it mounts I might add a set to the front. right now they would be in the way of the driving lights. If I do use them I will need to move the driving lights to the outside of the bracket and more in front of the fenders. Glen Johnson also thinks I need to put the bumperetts on the front and make a custom set for the back. I had a woody wagon (Chevrolet) that had the same issue. I tried it both ways and finally took the bumperetts off because it gave a cleaner look. I'll listen to feedback at the national in Spokane this summer and then make a decision. By the way, I have made new brackets for the "directional signal/brake lights mounted to the back bumper. They still mount to the bumper but they face back and sit about in the middle of the back fenders. The money drain has to stop somewhere because I need to start on the 39 Martz Roadster.

AvantiPower

Park W wrote:

According to the '36 parts book and color chart, no 2-tones were offered in '36. So it appears '34 or '35 would have been the last of the black fender era.

Back to the original topic (doesn't it suck when threads get hijacked?)...

Gregg Maroney, who runs the hudsonterraplane.com website, has provided one of the forum members with conclusive proof that Hudson DID OFFER two-tone paint in 1936. The fenders on all Terraplane and Hudson Six models were finishd in black enamel unless the owner forked over the cash for matching paint.

From Page #122 of the book "How, What, Why: About The 1936 Hudsons And Terraplanes", which was intended for Hudson salesmen.

You can find the entire sales book at the following link:

http://www.hudsonterraplane.com/tech/HHW1936/HowWhatWhy.htm

So I finally got the correct information although it took some time and a few unfortunate diversions.

RL Chilton

"So I finally got the correct information although it took some time and a few unfortunate diversions.

"

Wow! That's quite rude. We WERE talking about '36's in this thread, weren't we?

Thanks for the info, though. Very interesting.

AvantiPower

RL Chilton wrote:

Wow! That's quite rude. We WERE talking about '36's in this thread, weren't we?

Thanks for the info, though. Very interesting.

Yes and I suppose you could make the case that you were discussing Hudsonâ€™s too but the subject of the thread was whether Hudson offered a two-tone finish in 1936.

Off-topic subjects like what kind of motorcycle is in a photo or questions about ride-height are for another thread - or even another forum. Scattered-brained members that prefer to hijack threads are wasting space and making it that much harder for more disiplinced members to get answers.

Sadly, your latest post is yet another example of wasted space....but you'll learn.

Browniepetersen

Wow Freshman Member, you have a bit of the case of up-tight's or wound a bit tight. I am not sure where you obtained your list of rules for what our posts are for or for that matter what we are required to discuss as a part of each thread. I did not just fall off my first horse but who knows. My input into these threads cover a wide range of reasons. The most important being good natured discussions about subjects that are identified. If only imperical data were exchanged our Forum would die and die fast. How about taking a little drink of roll with the flow and spend a little more time enjoying the data, knowledge and decorum that is posted here. Perhaps when you do, and we meet at a car show it will be as good long time friends and not as just another text book?

AvantiPower

Browniepetersen wrote:

Wow Freshman Member, you have a bit of the case of up-tight's or wound a bit tight. I am not sure where you obtained your list of rules for what our posts are for or for that matter what we are required to discuss as a part of each thread. I did not just fall off my first horse but who knows. My input into these threads cover a wide range of reasons. The most important being good natured discussions about subjects that are identified. If only imperical data were exchanged our Forum would die and die fast. How about taking a little drink of roll with the flow and spend a little more time enjoying the data, knowledge and decorum that is posted here. Perhaps when you do, and we meet at a car show it will be as good long time friends and not as just another text book?

Oh, are you one of those losers that take pride in the amount of time you've spent posting usless comments on forums? If so, go ahead and give yourself the most pretentious title and biggest avatar. Knock yourself out buddy.

I prefer to remain a freshman member who stays on topic.

royer

Mike, the website you took the photo from gives permission to use their photo only if you link back to their site, which I will do for you now. http://www.hudson-cars.com/1936-hudson.html

I wouldn't take a salesman's manual as gospel when it comes to what colors and options were actually offered in reality. Many times there are changes that happen after materials are printed and before regular production begins.

Good luck to you and your friend at Bruce Arnold Models with the production and sale of his Hudson models. Isn't it nice how many Hudson folks posted help for your friend so that he can manufacture his high end models?

AvantiPower

royer wrote:

I wouldn't take a salesman's manual as gospel when it comes to what colors and options were actually offered in reality. Many times there are changes that happen after materials are printed and before regular production begins.

So you are saying the the info found in Hudson's "How, What, Why" book is wrong? What evidence do you have to counter the black enamel fender spec on Terraplane and Hudson Six models? Can you post a scanned image?

http://www.hudsonterraplane.com/tech...HowWhatWhy.htm

Jon B

AvantiPower, speaking as one of the moderators here, I really don't see the need for such language on this forum. Sure, we get distracted from the topic theme, from time to time, but it's really nothing to get so worked up about. It's fine to pull things back when they've gotten off-topic, but please do so in a civilized manner. We'd just as soon not see references to "scattered-brained members that prefer to hijack threads", or "losers". That kind of language is more appropriate to chatrooms and forums populated by churlish teenagers than by mature adults. You've raised some interesting points about early two-tone color combo's, stimulated discussion, and we welcome your positive contributions. However, coarse language only rubs people the wrong way and begets further coarse language, ruining the relaxed, friendly atmosphere we've built up here.... "but you'll learn."

AvantiPower wrote:

Oh, are you one of those losers that take pride in the amount of time you've spent posting usless comments on forums? If so, go ahead and give yourself the most pretentious title and biggest avatar. Knock yourself out buddy.

I prefer to remain a freshman member who stays on topic.

53jetman

I don't have any official information to back up what I'm about to list, but I can remember of a few cases where pre-production "Salesman's Books" & information were received prior to actually receiving the cars for that new model year, and differences in paint colors and even interior trim were noted. It's just that the pre-introduction information packets were prepared and distributed before the actual model change-over went into production.

Jerry

53jetman

AvantiPower

Jon B wrote:

Sure, we get distracted from the topic theme, from time to time...

As a moderator, I must say you have utterly failed to quall the numerous off-topic posts that have plagued this forum. Search through any thread that begins with a valid question or informative subject and you will find yourself wasting time reading useless off-topic posts and general chit-chat that belongs in a General Discussion or Lounge section. If you're an off-topic kind of person than you probably won't notice but when you're in search of useful information, it can get tiresome.

The vBulletin software allows you to move off-topic posts out of the threads and into other sections of the forum. If you would've taken a few moments to perform this necessary action on my thread, it would've trimmed it down to pertinent responses and the "scatter-brained" members would've got the message loud and clear. No harm, no foul - just a moderator doing his/her job.

AvantiPower

53jetman wrote:

I don't have any official information to back up what I'm about to list, but I can remember of a few cases where pre-production "Salesman's Books" & information were received prior to actually receiving the cars for that new model year, and differences in paint colors and even interior trim were noted. It's just that the pre-introduction information packets were prepared and distributed before the actual model change-over went into production.

Thanks for the tip but I think I'll stick with the book. It seems perfectly logical that Hudson would have continued the practice of charging extra for body color fenders. And why would they have discontinued this system in 1936 only to re-institute it later?

Again, unless someone has some evidence that refutes this period documentation, I think most owners and restorers would be wise to go by the little black book.

Hudson308

WOW.... you try to help a guy out and have a little chit chat on the side and get THIS? :eek:

RL Chilton

Hi all,

Russell's wife, Vicki, here. Just wanted to express my appreciation for the forum just the way it is. Maybe Mr.AvantiPower is accurate in his description of some of the more encyclopedic, information-based forums out there on the web, but that's just not very Hudson-esque. The thing about this forum and the whole Hudson community is that it's never been solely about the cars. It's always been so much more, especially the camaraderie between those of us in the Hudson family (and all it takes to be born into the family is just to appreciate the cars and your fellow HudNuts!). And, along the way, through the fabric of those relationships, a whole world of information and tools and parts is opened up, because sharing what we have is just what friends do for each other.

But, maybe I should just hush and move this note to some general discussion thread! :rolleyes:

AvantiPower

RL Chilton wrote:

But, maybe I should just hush and move this note to some general discussion thread! :rolleyes:

Atta girl. Now you're gettin' it!

AvantiPower

Hudson308 wrote:

WOW.... you try to help a guy out and have a little chit chat on the side and get THIS? :eek:

And exactly how did you "help a guy out"?

Moderator: Feel free to add this pointless post to the growing heap of drivel.

Jon B

I think this thread has run its useful course....

ClassicCar

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

In this Discussion

We'd love to hear from you! info@classiccar.com