Re: [Chrysler300] Mecum Auction Resultro

["John Lazenby french_fryguy@xxxxxxxxx [Chrysler300]" <Chrysler300-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

The only note I have on #1028 is "Jan 2000 Charlotte Pickler's Dad bought new, they would like to find".  Based on my files the engine block # typically runs higher than the body #.  There is no consistency on how much they vary.  I spotted immediately was the DeltaWing housing is not a C300 or 300B unit.  Note there are no ribs (indents) running front to back which only these cars had.  Also, the necks to the cars are taller than they should be.  I suspect this is from a Caddy or some other example.  Hose clamps are incorrect as well as the fuel lines.  The thermostat housing is a replacement aftermarket.

  Exterior rear view mirror is not correct time period AND these cars did not have a mirror from the factory.  Wire wheels are aftermarket with incorrect center marking on caps.  Front turn signal lenses are wrong color and look odd (non factory style).  Exhaust tips are incorrect.  Front bumper is not level with panel on sides.  Note how it drops down as it goes towards the rear.  Front 300 badge is missing checkerboard which was available through Gary Goers and did you know the white in those from the factory was reflective?  Missing tail light reflector on left rear.  

Just spotted that the dash legs on the pad are the long type which didn't start until much later in the production year.  My theory on this is that the engineers figured out you couldn't remove the dash pad from inside the car and narrowed the pad and covered that space with the longer feet.  FYI:  to remove the pad without bending and destroying it you must remove the wiper arm chrome plates, windshield trim and then the windshield.  By 1956 those wiper arm chrome plates were moved forward on the cowl.

Going from memory what Noel states is what I remember and would have to see a current set of photos to add to his observations.  I've never figured out why everyone wants to paint these red and typically not the correct "Tango Red".  Personally I've always liked Platinum cars.

Regarding my "Platinum" comment I'll share the following.  Probably 25 years ago Wayne Graefen and I went to a Mopar Swap Meet at Pierce College in the San Fernando Valley.  We had walked back to my "real Tango Red #1881 example.  I had the keys out of my pocket to open the trunk and was approached by a guy who said "is this your car?"  My first thought was to be a wise guy and say "no, I'm in the process of stealing it" but thought better and said "yes".

I'll never forget his next comment which went as follows; "then why did you ruin it and paint it red?  Everyone knows they only came in white".  In the trunk I had numerous documents to disprove his statement but was so incensed I simply looked at him, closed and locked the trunk and walked away.  And yet another chair side authority roams the land............

John Lazenby

---

From: "Noel Hastalis cpaviper@xxxxxxxxxxx [Chrysler300]" <Chrysler300-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: jholst@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: Chrysler 300 Club <Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2018 7:25 PM
Subject: Re: [Chrysler300] Mecum Auction Result

 

Observations on this ‘55 - 

$42,000 hammer price is not an apparent bargain for this car. Mark Obermann and I were at Mecum on Thursday and checked out this ‘55. It’s an early production - #1028 - with engine stamped #1026, so it does appear to have the original 331 motor. Radiator #1541641 is correct. Its battery was a 12-volt, so upgraded from the original 6-volt system. Generator is #GJC7003A. Contrary to Mecum’s marketing materials, this 300 was born Platinum, and not Tango Red. Also, the interior seating surfaces looked to be stamped vinyl, and not the advertised leather. And the seating upholstery pattern clearly does not mimic the factory installed pattern. Carpeting on lower sections of door panels is tan on this car, matching the door panel color, and not the factory issue black. The trunk underside insulation was heavily covered with red overspray. The spare tire wire wheel appears to be painted silver, rather than chromed. 

Body looked pretty good, with no visible rust.. We didn’t crawl under the car, nor did we perform the magnet test, to see if there were heavily bondoed areas. 

As Mark and I were finishing up, a fellow walked over who said he was the owner. He said it’s a great car, and asked how we liked it. We nodded our approval and walked away. 

I’m sure John Lazenby can offer additional commentary on variances from factory stock that he sees. 

Noel Hastalis 

Burr Ridge, IL 

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 27, 2018, at 7:09 PM, John Holst jholst@xxxxxxxxx [Chrysler300] <Chrysler300-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

 

Today a 1955 C300 sold for 46,200 or 41,580 to seller. the listing can
be seen at:

https://www.mecum.com/lots/CH1018-333899/1955-chrysler-300/

The VIN was not shown and it was the famous "Auction Red". John...

__._,_.___

---

Posted by: John Lazenby <french_fryguy@xxxxxxxxx>

---

To send a message to this group, send an email to:
Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to bob@xxxxxxxxxxxxx or
go to https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/all/manage/edit

For list server instructions, go to http://www.chrysler300club.com/yahoolist/inst.htm

For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang

Visit Your Group

• New Members 1

• Privacy • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use

__,_._,___