When I was 20 or so years old, my best friend’s dad was playing Robert Johnson on the CD player at his house, and I immediately bought myself a copy of Mr. Johnson’s “complete recordings.” One of his famous hits was “Terraplane Blues,” which is certainly a metaphor for infidelity, something for which I have neither the stomach nor the inclination to try. During these morose days of quarantining, therefore, I prefer to take Johnson’s muse more literally by scrolling through my backlog of car show pictures to 2013. At the Ypsilanti Orphan Car Show in Michigan, I took pictures of Terraplanes and more, starting with this 1934 model.
This is not meant to be a marque history lesson, just a simple jaunt in a picturesque park some years ago. Because I have used the Terraplane name as a starting point, however, it is appropriate that I should mention that the nameplate was a sub-nameplate of a sub-nameplate, namely, a sub-model of an Essex, which was a sub-model of a Hudson. Confusing? Well, early on, the Terraplane was called the Essex-Terraplane, and the Terraplane itself only lasted from 1932 to 1938, so you’re excused if you’re confused. The car above is a 1937 model.
This is a rear image of the same car. Although its owner apparently enjoys keeping his/her speed down, the Terraplane was well-known as a budget performance car for its era. Gangsters such as John Dillinger approved of its performance by appropriating one when they got the chance.
The last of the Terraplanes arrived in 1938, although Hudson began to phase them out as the model year elapsed, calling them “Hudson-Terraplanes” before replacing them with the similar Hudson 112.
The 1938 Terraplane interior is what one might expect from an era where telling one make from another was quite difficult, especially from the rear of the car.
See what I mean?
Essex itself was represented at the 2013 show by this 1930 model, a model that illuminates how quickly streamlining came into vogue over the course of a few short years.
As we all know, Hudson itself only outlasted its sub-brands by about 20 years, as the august nameplate (belonging to a Detroit department store owner, by the way) breathed its last on the flanks of a Nash body. American Motors decided to drop both the Nash and Hudson nameplates after 1957, a few years after the two companies had merged. For the next several years, American Motors focused solely on the Rambler line of cars, which would (temporarily, it turns out) bring them great success.
Speaking of which, American Motors cars are never in short supply at the Orphan Car Show. I photographed this Marlin from the same perspective that Rambler’s advertising depicted, probably for the same reason that the most common adjective I have seen when referring to the Marlin is “ungainly.” Regardless, I thought about buying one once, although the same could be said about almost every car ever produced in America.
Perhaps a little easier on the eyes is this 1974 Javelin AMX. With swelling fenders à la Corvette, the second-generation Javelin looked more muscular; indeed, Dick Teague always had a few tricks up his sleeve when he wielded a pen. The two-seater AMX only lasted from 1968 to 1970 before becoming a racier version of the regular Javelin. I’ve always liked the AMX grille, and the overall effect makes one think of Mark Donohue entering Turn 1 at Lime Rock, or something equally romantic.
A distant precursor to the AMX was this jaunty looking Nash Ambassador Suburban, a 1948 model. According to Consumer Guide, Nash produced only 130 Suburbans that year; this must be one of the only ones extant today.
Another beloved orphan in the car world is Studebaker, and almost as uncommon as a wood-sided Nash is this 1963 Lark Daytona Wagonaire: a fun, quirky example of why so many people still like these cars.
The Wagonaire was a little half-baked, as the sliding roof had a reputation as a leaker, but if you wanted a truck without having a truck, this was a fascinating alternative. A turquoise Matchbox version has its place in my long burgeoning toy collection.
The Lark Daytona also offered a sliding sunroof on its hardtop models; Studebaker called it “Skytop.” Hardtop 1962 and ’63 Larks are my favorite of the breed, their almost European styling updated from the original by Brooks Stevens. The Studebaker/Mercedes-Benz dealer connection may have had some influence on Stevens’s pen, or maybe it was just coincidence.
Here is the ’62 Skytop as shown at the 2011 Orphan Car Show.
Here’s a short clip of a Skytop commercial.
The Avanti was, of course, Studebaker’s true glamour queen, a last ditch effort to save the car side of the conglomerate. It didn’t work, but the Avanti, especially with round headlights, was a beautiful car.
This one is owned by a man in one of my neighboring towns; my wife sees it on the road reasonably often.
Almost as exotic as the Avanti was this 1958 Golden Hawk, with a supercharged 289 under its heavily updated hood. Like Dick Teague over at AMC, Studebaker was usually able to get a lot of mileage out of a basic body design. It had to. Its sales and profits precluded new platforms on a regular basis; in fact, the basic 1953 body was the basis of not only the later Hawks, but the Larks as well.
Orphans, however, are not the strict purview of the independents, as this 1941 DeSoto proves.
This one looks like the Custom three-window coupe, as the lower line Deluxe model didn’t wear the generous taillight trim of our example. The proportions on these are…interesting, but I like them.
They only seat three across, but the trunk must be enormous. The Custom Coupe cost a mere $982 when new, the only Custom model to come in under the thousand dollar price point. All DeSotos were six-cylinder propelled in 1941, to the tune of 105 horsepower. Fluid-Drive was still several years off.
The 1942 DeSoto was rendered vaguely more exotic by its concealed headlights, a one-year-only feature, but there were few changes aside from styling updates.
Even Plymouth is now an orphan, making this fancy 1941 Special Deluxe welcome in Ypsilanti. Plymouth produced over 10,000 convertibles in 1941, each starting under $1000. I think I would choose this car over a DeSoto coupe in 1941, even if it did give up 27 cubic inches and 23 horsepower to its intra-corporate competitor.
Even the parking lot was a car show, with this ’51 Plymouth occupying a spot near one of its descendants. This one looks like a short-wheelbase Concord two-door sedan.
This plain but handsome little fastback offers us a good place to stop. The Ypsilanti Orphan Car Show usually takes place around September 15th, so there’s still a chance that it could happen this year. My selection of pictures simply represents my interests on the day I took them, but you’ll find your fill of Kaisers, Mercurys, Corvairs (they’re accepted–they were built nearby), and foreign makes that are no longer offered on our shores.
Until then, go fire up some blues from the delta and dream about your favorite forgotten car.
Can’t decide. Nash woodie, ’37 Hudson, or that wild Studebaker wagon? Or maybe just the’ 42 DeSoto. Right colour, rare model year and that eyeless face with its toothy grin…
Terrific post.
I’ve come to appreciate more and more the ’41 models from Chrysler – that aqua Plymouth is gorgeous – love the shape of the grille.
Excellent camera work! You caught some Deco details on the ’41 DeSoto that I’d never seen before, and you caught the wraparound taillights on the Concord, which are rarely pictured.
Minor point: The Terraplane was only lively in the first two years, when it was a small light car with a big engine. By ’37 it had followed the usual path for compacts, becoming just a trim level of the big Hudson.
I have not had much exposure to prewar Hudsons or Terraplanes. They had some unique front end treatments in the late 30s. And isn’t Terraplane one of the great names?
I don’t know a lot about the cars in my father’s family when he was a kid, but I know that my grandmother rocked a blue 41 DeSoto convertible through the war years. I imagine she could have done a lot worse. Also, 1941 was the first year for Fluid Drive and the vacuum-assisted transmission in both Chrysler and DeSoto.
The Lark Skytop you feature is a 62 – there is not a lot of difference between 62-63 on the 2 door cars, except that the 63 got parallel wipers and a huge dash upgrade. I have preferred the 59-61 and the 64, but am coming around on those 62-63 hardtops.
Oops! You’re totally right, JP…I’ve amended the text. When I was originally writing it, I didn’t include the front end shot; and when I included it, I didn’t look that carefully at it. Thanks!
I look at the windshield itself for a quick check…on a ’62 it wraps around more severely than it does on the ’63.
I was going to point that out too – the grey hardtop and ivory sedan are both ’62s – but there’s quite a difference from the ’63s even on the 2-doors. The fishbowl windshield and rear window on the ’62 were both replaced with much flatter glass, and the post coupe had thinner, crisper-looking window frames. I think 1963 was when the Lark finally got suspended pedals too.
What is that fold-down bar thing on the Wagonaire? I’d always thought it was a step to make it easier to climb into the (optional) rear-facing third row seat, but here it looks too low to serve that purpose, and looks more like a support for the tailgate. But the tailgate is already supported by the side hinges.
It is a fold-down step. The picture makes it look like it is resting on the grass, but that is an optical illusion.
Yes, there are quite a few updates on the 63 but on the hardtops they are not often noticed by those not into Studes. The 62 has long been my least favorite, particularly on the sedans. But at least they were the first Studebakers since 1958 to offer metallic paint colors.
I’m fine with most of the ’62, especially the new rear section and front clip, but that bent molding on the rear door, pickup up by the sculpturing in the new rear fenders, just looks weird. Other aspects of the sedan like the thick window frames and fully exposed B pillars look dated. The Daytona hardtop avoids all of those issues though, helped by wider, straighter side trim (I’m amused at all the ways Studebaker tried to disguise that droopy crease baked into the door sheetmetal since 1953).
Correction: the ’61 Larks were the first with suspended pedals.
Terrific info on the difference between 1962 and 1963 Larks (windshield and wipers). It’s the sort of esoteric minutiae that CC enthusiasts love.
Some years ago I was at BWI airport in Baltimore and there was a display featuring a restored 1937 Terraplane that once belonged to John Dillinger. Recall it seemed a bit more compact than other cars of the era and had a V-8 engine. With the V-8 and lighter weight, performance must have been excellent for the time.
Looking at the grille on that ‘55 Hudson, didn’t that Hudson logo in the middle light up? Recall this was a Hudson feature going back to the ‘40’s.
I’m fairly sure the Terraplane was a straight 8.
The early models could be ordered with an inline eight, but it looks like everything from 1934 and beyond had a six.
Correct you are! It was indeed a straight 8 and it had to be a 1933 model, as the 8 was discontinued after that year.
I never knew the Hudson’s department store was named for the same guy as the Hudson car. Coincidentally, both Hudsons had similar fates. Hudson merged with Nash, and while both of those names are long gone, the company itself survived and is now part of Fiat Chrysler. Likewise, Hudson’s (the store) joined up with the Dayton’s department store chain in 1969 to become Dayton-Hudson Corporation. Both of those are also gone, but the company itself survived, having changed its name in 2000 to reflect its more popular store brand. You may have heard of them; it’s called Target.
I think you’re reading too much into the “Terraplane Blues” lyrics – it’s just about an old car that’s not running very well 🙂
I think it was the other way around – the way I heard it was that J. L. Hudson of the department store invested some money in the new car company and the boss (Roy Chapin Sr, I believe) named the car in his honor.
That is correct. This is a good biography of Mr. Chapin, if anyone’s interested.
Thanks Aaron — I’ll definitely check that out.
Thanks for the wonderful photos and notes. And I too remember the first time I heard Robert Johnson’s Terraplane Blues … back when you could still buy a new AMC or Plymouth. But it’s hard for me to associate Plymouth, as well as Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Saturn etc with brands like Hudson or DeSoto or even Studebaker, but I guess they’re all orphans now. Who’s next to join them?
I was thinking back, and between the Plymouths, Mercury, Oldsmobile and Imperial, orphans make up about 25% of the cars I have owned during my life. I think the Imperial was the only one that was actually an orphan when I was driving it, and even then (early 90s) they were making a new Chrysler Imperial.
Who’s next to join them?
Buick or Chrysler is my bet
Up until recently, I never had much interest in most pre-1960 cars but Im really gaining interest in some of the 1930s cars, especially Hudsons, Chryslers and Oldsmobiles; I really like that ’38.
I’d say both, at least in America. My wife and I were just talking about how superfluous Buick has become; other than the Envision, there’s really nothing in its lineup that isn’t repeated somewhere else. And Chrysler could easily be rolled into Dodge, if that’s even around much longer. These are certainly some ignominious potential endings to some truly venerable nameplates.
Chrysler, with it’s “everything under one roof” sales channel has a lot of flexibility here. It can ashcan Chrysler and not really affect the dealers, or it can offer a single model if one makes sense.
If Buick goes away, the Buick-GMC dealers lose all of their cars and many of their crossovers, volume that will not be huge but will make a difference to the people trying to pay the overhead. I still see this as a problem for GM because there is nothing in those stores that could not be sold from a Chevrolet dealer. Maybe then they could have an occasional Buick model or a GMC trim variation on a Chevy truck.
Buick-GMC dealers are losing all their cars even if Buick sticks around, as their last car, the Regal, will be gone after this model year.
If I’m not mistaken, Matchbox cars had a Lark Daytona Wagonaire. It used to be one of my favorite toys.
The full-size car might have been a flop, but the Matchbox version with its opening roof might be the Wagonaire’s real claim to fame. Of 1:43 scale cars owned as children, that one always seems to be remembered as a favorite.
Is there anyone here who DIDN’T have that Wagonaire? I don’t have it anymore; around the time I stopped actually playing with my toy cars, but before it ever occurred to anyone to collect them, I discovered lighter fluid, matches and firecrackers. Many of my 1/43 scale cars avoided that fate, but only a few of my Matchboxes and none of plastic 1/25 scale model kit cars.
“I discovered lighter fluid, matches and firecrackers”
I discovered Testor’s paint and little brushes and unlocked my inner Earl Scheib. With results little different from yours.
Same here. I started off silver-painting all the chrome trim the factory forgot.
That was one of my favourites too. Didn’t that one come with a plastic figure of a hunter with rifle and dog?
I have the same Matchbox. I think I got it from a friend who thought it was boring; I loved wagons even at age 9 or 10 even if it’s not a “Superfast”.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen one that’s not this color.
Is this the color you are going for? Pics that are too large will not post.
Trying picture again
Like la673 for the longest time I didn’t know the Hudson name was derived from the J.L.Hudson store; as a kid I thought it was in honor of explorer Henry Hudson just as DeSoto was, in fact, named for explorer Hernando. You mention the Corvair being built nearby. That was in the Willow Run complex where Ford made B-24 bombers during WWII and where Kaisers were built shortly after. Read somewhere that the assy. line at Willow Run made a strange right angle turn to keep the factory from extending into an adjoining township controlled by a political enemy of ol’ Henry. CPJ – I’m fairly sure that the first V-8 Hudson of any sort was the ’55 “Hash” that used the same Packard engine engine as that year’s Nash Ambassador.
Make mine a three-window coupe ’42 DeSoto. Generous sleeping accommodations in the trunk.
My WOF inspection guy just had his best Marlin repainted in that silver it looks great not sure what hes doing with the other one it will likely just become a parts car, a hot rodder in a nearby burg pulled a 37 Terraplane coupe out of a shed locally a while back its a maroon colour untouched original car back on the road after a long sleep, they were a quite popular car here it seems there are a couple of other originals on the road locally and its such a cool name, Terraplane,
Living in Illinois, make mine the one with air conditioning!
A neighbor had a large, heavy ceramic planter shaped like a mid-’30’s sedan glazed with bright garish colors they’d brought home from a trip to Mexico. Since they know my interest in older cars, they ask what make of car it looked like…..I told them it was a Terra-cotta Terraplane!
Nice collage of automobiles. In the mid 1950’s a lady who we knew had a 1939 Chrysler version of that De Soto three-window sedan. It is a business coupe for the traveling salesman with adequate room for his samples – ahem – if you did not mind crawling into a trunk to retrieve the ones behind the seat. Hers was a New Yorker and was powered by the Spitfire Eight Cylinder. My Mom purchase the Dodge Wayfarer version of the Plymouth in 1950. We enjoyed using the car. Thanks for the information on the Hudson automobiles. I liked the fifties models with all the trim and garish styling, still do. By the way, as soon as Mom took delivery of the Dodge in mid-June, she took us to RAYCO to have seat covers installed. “RAYCO seat covers, better than all others. Ride with pride with RAYCO.” That was the advertising jingle.
All beautiful orphans and I would own any one of them. I’m not picky i just love cars. Speaking of orphans it just hit me that I own three orphans all from Mercury.
I was there! Actually, I don’t remember if I went in 2013 or not, but i have pictures of many of the same cars.
This is my favorite car show, bar none.
I attend every few years. It’s a great show, but the same cars usually show up year-to-year, and that weekend is a really busy one for car events, so I try to change it up a little every year. Plus, it’s an hour and a half drive each way for me, so if the weather is iffy, I’ll probably pass.
My Butte-born and raised dad told me that the Montana Highway Patrol bought some early to mid-thirties Terraplanes instead of Fords, for their speed. They quickly became known as Terr-aparts and were soon replaced. Didn’t nudge him away from owning and admiring a Hudson after the war, however.
42 DeSoto in menacing black with menacing hidden headlights for me.
Interesting story about the seldom-photographed Robert Johnson…
https://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2017/11/10/is-this-really-the-bluesman-robert-johnson/
The ’42 DeSoto here, too.
It looks either like a fat black cat sleeping with a Cheshire grin, or the finest 1942 Deco household radio. Or heater, or kettle. Quite arresting, whether a toast pops out of it or a behatted man pops in.
I have long thought the wagon of the Lark was by far the best looker, Wagonaire or no. The square but elegant windows balance the square front properly. Incidentally, I too had the model version, but I could’ve sworn it was in ambulance livery.
Wonderful virtual car show! Lots of cars that you don’t usually see at your typical show. I owned one orphan, a Mercury Sable.
“I thought about buying one once, although the same could be said about almost every car ever produced in America”. Spoken like a true Curbivore.
The AMX is probably my pick. So of its time and actually quiet a simple and fluid shape. The Marlin looks good from that angle, but otherwise a complete disaster that says “we want to complete but can’t afford to”.
The Avanti has never worked for me, but maybe that’s just me.
Looks like a great show, and a great selection