Best handling 1950-54 American Cars ?

Right off the top of my head, I think the leading contenders would've been...

The Cunningham (not sure if he was still building cars in '54, though)


The Corvette


The Allard


...and of course....

The Kurtis-Kraft Car!


Not really basing this on anything more than some Kentucky Windage and a lot of Alabama Elevation.



6narow

 

...and a pic of the engine that powered that car.

6narow

 

You don't lower a Carrera car. Even on their website, it says you want 6-8 inches of clearance. Mexico has speed bumps that are so nasty, there's a coffee-mug and T-shirt industry devoted to them. Every car that runs it has a skid plate under the engine.

Within the last year or two, Chevrolet built a big honkin' Caddy and ran it down there.

My plan is to build a car that makes it through the race, and maybe tops out at 120mph on the long straights coming out of the mountains and on the freeway thru Mexico city. This year, the average speed of all the cars on the Mexico City freeway section was 161mph. So for every Original Pan Am car that topped out at 120mph, there was someone smoking along at nearly 200mph. I have zero desire to go that fast.

I like Buicks. I like Nailheads. I plan on making the best handling Buick I can, but I'm not going to try and make it handle like a Corvette. I want to run the race in a body style I like, and finish it, so some day I can say "Yeah, I did that." I don't need to sit on the pole, or the podium. Besides, I've heard from a lot of other people that it's way more fun going fast in a slow car, than slow in a fast car. I'm going to build a slow car.

Build the Caddy. Just do it the best you can. (If that means accidentally dropping all the bumper brackets in a bucket of acid over night, and going goofy with the hole saw, then so be it!)

-Brad

 

George, come on, now what's wrong with smoking a few banana peels every now and then?

 

Agreed, hudsons. hands down. late forties, early fifties, I believe, werent they killing everyone on the ovals?

My paws hudson corners pretty damn good, and she's still pretty much stock..

cheers and beers
Hodge

 

nothing,but i'm sticking with cigars nowadays...

 

I had only 1 Hudson Conv. a Fun Car Built like a Tank Not much Power
But my 50 Merc was a Great Car Drove it all over the Country with over 250,000 miles
on it Never had a Problem
Still Have it.

 

The Allard was English

 

I'll agree, the Hudson and the stude were both low-slung compared to the others and with some stiffer springs aught to handle as good as could be expected.

The Buick shouldn't be bad to improve on, it has coils all around, have some stiff ones made up for it and wear one of those sports guard things in your teeth. They have a big heavy frame under them, I'm not sure if the hardtops and sedans have the X-member but I would be more surprised if they didn't.

I do have to say though that one of the best handling - and somewhat surprisingly so - cars that I've had was a '60 Pontiac. That car would take corners fast with no lean as fast as I dared to go - faster than speeds that would have my parent's Buick leaning like a drunk, on the edge of control. The Pontiac was basically stock. It just had that wide track and long wheelbase, and a set of radial tires on it. About the only thing we ever had that compared close to it was an '87 T-bird, it was almost as good out of the box.

 

I'm in for the step-down Hudson too. Center steering, front and rear anti-sway bars, low CG, etc., etc.

 

How about the first American car with four wheel disk brakes and Class winner at the 24 hours of Daytona?......................Crosley

 

I heard Mark Dees did that at Monterey, yelled something like "men of Ferrari tremble at the sound of the mighty Offy" and drove off losing a rear wheel, did a whole lap and still seemed oblivious.

 

I KNEW SOMEONE WOULD SAY THAT!

...ok, so it was, but it had a Caddy mill! That has to count for something, right?

Well, if not the Allard (which was a hot car back then), then I'd replace it with a...

Muntz Jet?



Built between '51 and '54, IIRC. America's first performance luxury car.

So...better?




6narow

 

good call

 

Don't forget 331 hemi powered Chrysler Imperial with power steering. These cars just float down the road. I've got an old race car version for sale cheap and I have extra parts too. http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=291270

 

There just isn't any argument here. Its a Hudson.

Nascar proves it, other past Pan Americana races prove it (there are some Hudson entries in that race even now).

I can prove it if you wanna ride with me sometime. Or, if any of you guys wanna try me in your own vehicle of the period - come on. I can snatch a curve with less tire squeal in my Hudsons than my wife's '05 Chrysler 300.

Actually my Wasp (6" shorter wheelbase) corners better than the longer Hornet type.

To Scott, if you are going to race one of these on the road - don't use any of the 3 speed manuals originally used by Hudson. Listen to Yorgatron and use a manual valve-bodied Hydramatic. I'm not sure of the Pan American rules and how original you have to be, but the little 3 speeds can't handle a mildly hopped up Hudson - at all!

I think I've seen Scott's name before? Did you at one time disappear with a WLA Harley I was working on and leave behind a Cafe Racer Ironhead?

Hud

 

Hudson?

 

that looks a lot like Ivan Zaremba's car,looks a lot like Laguna Seca Raceway too.

he's building another Hudson for Bonneville,which should be a record-holder.

 

Hud-- While i'd gladly take an WLA Harley over an Ironhead anyday, I wouldn't own an Ironhead as a cafe racer. I'm more of a Norton guy myself. I don't think we've met yet.

Thanks all for the good info.

-scott noteboom

 

I do understand. I kinda fell out with the guy I was building bikes with over that trade. Ironhead Cafe Racer? Bah!

Best of luck on your racing endeavor. If you do go with a Hudson, there are several Hudson speed fanatics out there who'll help.

Hud

 

Best handling big car- Hudson

Best handling car- Crosley. They were the darling of early sports car racers. The Hudsons and buicks might've been good, but it comes down to physics, mass. & contact patch so the little Crosley wins.

Expand the selection into the 59/60 timeframe and corvair is a serious contender.

 

I'm sure most here are already well aware of this, but since there's so much mention of the Hudson, I wanted to note that Jack Clifford started off racing a suped up '54 Hudson
Clifford Performance Parts still offers Hudson performance parts to this day.



6narow

 

a little addition to the hudson voters, if the rules will allow a 308 based engine in any of the short 119" wheelbase cars (pacemaker, wasp, superwasp 232/262ci) run it- the engine is set back a few inches relative to the LWB models and after my conversations with an old time hudson owner, he agrees it takes away the hornet/super's tendency to push the front a little wide. hudson also ran dana 44 rear axles. if you are prepared to do a little fabricating to some crossmembers and the clutch linkage it is possible to fit the 55/56 hornet trans into a stepdown- it has a larger input by a 1/4". the hydra would be easier though.

 

blu collar stu,

So you're saying that running a 308 in one of the smaller Hudson's of that era is almost a sort of "Front Mid-Engine" type of arrangement?



6narow

 

its just set back, (4" if i'm not mistaken) the firewall has about a 2 inch recess in the shorties, rather than a flat firewall in the 124" cars. not like you are fighting the block for room in the front seat..... also the 232-262-308 engines are all physically the same size, just the 308 castings have bigger bores and a reinforcement rib along the crank centreline.

 

blue collar stu,

Thanks for replying to my question.
Funny how a small change like that can affect a car.
Sorry for all the questions, but I'm not too savvy on Hudson's.
Do all three of the engines you mentioned share a 4.5" stroke crank ?
It kinda sounds that way, from what you wrote, but I might've missed something.



6narow

 

all displacements have their own stroke measurements, the 308 is the only one to get the 4.5" stroke(3.81" bore), but it will fit in the smaller displacement blocks. 262 is 4.375" stroke 3.562" bore, wont take a 308 piston without damaging cylinders. 232 has the 262 bore and 3.875 stroke

oh and mark i agree there- i took my ex's japanese luxury car out (that handled very well) on a windy road that has claimed the odd inattentive driver or two and i had white knuckles at 65 on a certain bend, ran through there in my hudson (years ago when it ran the ford engine) and noticed id gone through at 60 without a care, with one front shock torn out at that.

 

Stu,

Thanks for clearing that up.
Much appreciated.



6narow

 

Works for me!


I'd love to see a Crosley in full race trim getting angry on the Carrera!

 

The Muntz Jet was reviewed and compared to the Jaguar by Tom McCahill. The Jet has an extremely low center of gravity, too.