.
Talk:Hudson: Difference between revisions
78.47.87.22 (talk | contribs) (wAQiUm <a href="http://amcvsnknudez.com/">amcvsnknudez</a>, [url=http://jbexluhuvvcw.com/]jbexluhuvvcw[/url], [link=http://ftripbtpvzij.com/]ftripbtpvzij[/link], http://ztvdynykjgtl.com/) |
Red marquis (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
[[Image:04aa.jpg]] | [[Image:04aa.jpg]] | ||
Latest revision as of 03:12, 29 October 2009
It is said that the 1955 Hudson was actually a re"hashed" 1954 Nash.
But I have been told that only one panel on the whole 1955 Hudson was lifted from the older Nash, either the deck lid or top. Certainly, some things are definitely different: The roof line at the rear as it joins the body curves back toward the rear on all Hudsons, but is resolutely forward swept on all Nashes from 1952 through 1957, plus the Nashes have a 3 piece rear window unlike the 1955 Hudson's one piece backlight.
Obviously the front fenders of the Hudson in 1955
are totaly different from the Nashes (through 1956) with their large wheel cut outs, though the top of the fenders do resemble the 1954 Nashes.
Certainly a lot of the trim like the door handles and name plates and emblems are uniquely Hudson from the old days. The 1955 instrument panel is lifted from the 1954 Hudson and "frenched"
into the Nash-like dash. The 1955 Hudson's front track is wider than the 1955 Nash's (remember, Nash hid its front wheels until 1957). But Nash did get that kind of "bow string" top to the front fenders starting in 1955,
losing the cylindrical pod look, which certainly updated the sillouette and made the Nash, at least, more contemporary.
I clearly remember my father coming in one evening after looking at the new 1955 Hudsons, saying that it was too bad that Nash gave Hudson its last year's body, and my mother asking why, to which he replied, "I guess it is cheaper that way". The 1955 Hudson kept the big six and Twin H carburation, though, along with its triple safe brakes and got the Packard V8, air conditioning and reclining seats in the deal. I have always wondered why AMC had to settle for the "de-tuned" version of that V8. Though it surely must have been a good performer since the heavier Packard Clipper was equipped with the same engine, it does seem that Hudson and Nash would have been more appealing with more horses and a four barrel carburator! It is just too bad that AMC couldn't have afforded to update the whole line about then and incorporate more of the "step down's" features in a new up to date package. After all, Hudson was the only one of the continuous fender cars of the late 40's post-war era, including Kaiser, Frazer, Nash, and Packard, whose body lasted past 1951 (except Studebaker which was all new in 1953)! That same old "step down" lasted for three more years! Every one of the others plus all the big three got new bodies, incorporating at least some "step down" influence by 1952 and yet Hudsons continued to sell. What great cars they were!
Back to the 1955! The 1955 Hudson has larger rear wheel cut outs, too. The use of the "Continental Kit" became one of AMC's styling gimicks in 1955, as well. Though Nashes had had them before, they were only after market items for Hudsons.
Now, the poshest Hornets and the lowliest Wasps
could all sport these huge rear extensions.
The original Continental tire
was recessed into the rear deck, between the fenders, not tacked on to the back. Later, Packard did likewise with the Carribean in 1953.
Most of the 1950's continental tire additions were of the ostentatious J C Whitney variety. Though I am sure that they may have been offered by some other makers, AMC really pushed them. And while discussing AMC's excesses of the 1950's the "panoramic" or "wrap around" windshields deserve mention. I have read that Hudson and Nash had the largest (area) windshields made in 1955. This look helped the two marques appear more up to date (remember Hudson was just one year past a two piece windshield and Nash's 54 windshield was very nearly flat, so this was a big step). The Hudson, with its hood and top of its front fenders lifted from the 1954 Nash,
did get a better looking frontispiece with an extension above the massive egg crate grill, making the hood look "recessed" a bit and not too much like the older Nash. I have seen a picture of Frank Spring's sketch of the possible 1955 "step down"
and it has that same egg crate grill. It is probabaly the grill that "got" me. It looks good enough to fit on a Cadillac and it helps make the 1955 Hudson Hornet maybe the most attractive of the vehicles with 1952 to 1957 Nash body. From an up-date standpoint, the Hudson lost the hood above the fenders look that was definitely dated in 1955.
But how much of a Nash clone was the 1955 Hudson, really. When you look at Chrysler's minivans of the 90's, up to this year, Chevrolet and GMC as well as other GM and Ford clones, it wasn't really a clone at all. Sharing very little trim, only one of five engines, different roof lines and front ends, different upolstery and instrumentation there are 'way to many differences for the 1955 Hudson and Nash to be called clones by today's standards. But the 1955 Hudson lacked the one thing that would have set it apart from the rank and file in 1955 and that was the low center of gravity which lent it the amazing handling characteristics that set the step down apart from the competition. Now, the question is, which is the best looking of the 1955 Hudsons. First, I think the Hornet gets points over the Wasp because of the extra length ahead of the cowl, between the leading edge of the front door and the wheel well. This gives the car a longer and better proportioned look. Then, which is more attractive, the sedan or the Hollywood hardtop? I cannot decide about that.
1955 Hudson Wasp
