Idiotic News Review

[Deleted User]

Take a read of this idiots writeup on Hudsons. First he says they were big and ugly then the offhanded comment about how many they sold. Then the icing on the cake no one is going to celebrate the 100th.



What junk. If you live in this papers state send this fool a letter.



http://www.theday.com/re.aspx?re=3495779b-42e4-4c09-b426-5c1311dbc629

[Deleted User]

Sounds like he had problems with everything he owned! I bet he didn't even own a full set of wrenches. (figuratively & literally)

[Deleted User]

It's apparent he doesn't like cars, he likes Japanese people moving appliances.

[Deleted User]

Here's his e-mail.... have fun!



Dahles@hotmail.com

hudsontech

Not going to be much of a celebration for Hudson.



Hmmmmmmm - let's see; national coming up looks to be 300-400 cars, bigger than most Nationals I remember; banquet of 700 people sold out with over 100 begging for tickets; 3 hotels, at least, booked.



Well, if the guy's comparing it to a NHRA, Ferd or Chevy national meet, I guess we is pretty small potatoes. But that's the fun of it - small, compact and everybody's family.



Hey, he's from Connecticut - 99% of them people have nutmeg in their brains; the remaining 1% are Hudson family and they got brain power.



Hudsonly,

Alex Burr

Memphis, TN

coverton

This jerk must have worked where there was no sports editor ? As i expect i am about his age our local paper wrote of "stock car" events so i was a hudson fan and still am. Ol man Hendrichs locked the showroom door every time I walked by going to my ol mans office- A sixteen year old pest in 1954

C Overton-lived in Salisbury,NC in those days

Unknown

Although the author is entitled to his opinion regarding the Hudson he owned, he shouldn't let his experiences or emotions taint his story. He must have missed class on the day when they were teaching this. Since he graduated college in 1955, he must be approximately 80 years of age. So, I'll chaulk his rant up to old age and the onset of curmudgeonitis. LOL

hudsontech

Dave53-7C wrote:

. Since he graduated college in 1955, he must be approximately 80 years of age. So, I'll chaulk his rant up to old age and the onset of curmudgeonitis. LOL

Hey, hey - watch it now. I'm class of 55 and I ain't 80 yet. Ok, close, as I'll be 72 in September.



And us ole folk got every right to rant and rave - just some of us know what we're ranting and raving about. He don't. LOL



Hudsonly,

Alex Burr

Memphis, TN

Kennebunk (Maine) Class of 55

Aaron D. IL

The cars being ugly is purely a subjective opinion. How many were sold...little under 4 million.....did better than a lot of makes did. .... not being celebrated? He hasn't done much research there. And if they're not worth noting why did Pixar bother to mention the make in a kids movie ?? Some people have noted it who aren't in the HET club.

[Deleted User]

Here is his response to my e-mail...



Dear Mr. Pederson-Thanks for sharing all that Hudson information. I must admit I never thought of my old Hudson in terms of speed, endurance and NASCAR and the stepdown to me wasn't a thing of beauty but I can understand why others might differ.



Dick Ahles

---

From: Nptelcel@aol.com

Date: Sun, 21 Jun 2009 16:36:13 -0400

Subject: RE: Hudson's Ugly?

To: Dahles@hotmail.com





Hello ,



Not too many people would agree with you that the Hudson stepdowns were ugly. They were a huge hit for Hudson. Also, I'm surprised you didn't mention that Hudson still holds more speed and endurance records than any other manufacter. Hudson won NASCAR 52,53 and 54 as well as all the AAA races. Regards, Niels Pedersen

[Deleted User]

This is going to get a lot of attention. I wrote the following letter to this character:



Dear Mr. Dahles,



I was passed your article on your first Hudson and was sorry to hear you didn’t have much fun with it. Although I would like to point out to you several problems you have failed to consider. First, if you buy a used car today based solely on price, you will likely get ripped off as bad as you did with your 51 Hudson. Poorly maintained and worn out cars exist today as much as they did back in the 50’s, and they are sold by the same rip-off used car dealers to the same naive and unsuspecting customers as they were back then. I own many Hudson cars today, some restored and some not. I can tell you based on my experience with many makes of cars that any car in the early 50’s with 75,000 miles is just plain worn out. Period. If you were a mechanically astute person (which I suspect you are not), you would have looked for a car based on its mechanical condition rather than price. Then you would have been happy. It’s too bad you didn’t save up enough money to buy a Hudson in better shape, because I think you would have had a different experience all together. I buy nothing but used cars today, and always seek a well maintained car that was not traded in because it was bought back under the lemon law, or traded off because it was nothing but trouble. You see, I am a mechanically astute person and can spot a tired raggedy car a mile away; I know plenty of people who can’t and believe me they pay the price for being naive!



I am also disappointed in your lack of research on who or what organization exists today that may be celebrating Hudson’s long and stately history. I belong to the Hudson Essex Terraplane club and we just happen to be having our national meet in Dearborn Michigan this year to celebrate the 100th anniversary of Hudson. There will likely be 300 to 400 cars with 800 to 1000 people. You are welcome to join us and have a different experience (you can look us up on the web).



Incidentally, I know for a fact that neither Ford, Chevrolet, of Chrysler sold tens of millions cars each, each year. In fact, they didn’t sell as many cars as that per year combined. This is also factually incorrect and used to bolster your point of view of a bad experience with Hudson. Not very good reporting if you ask me.



Hudsonly,



Allan Minard

Unknown

I got my first Hudson [37 Terraplane] at 16 and now am ashamed to admit it but I was the best endurance test driver Hudson ever had, [dig up the local cop and ask him] NEVER did it fail me on anything , nor did any of the others I owned after that, and all had features yrs ahead of the big 3 .---BUD

RL Chilton

You won't get far with a conversion, I think. Sounds to me as he is not a car guy and has had some unfortunate luck throughout his life with automobiles. Cars are the bane of all of us, I think. Some of us look at that as a good thing, others differ, and it's all good.



Really the only thing that bothers me about his article is that I always have a problem when writers state their opinions in such broad terms and then regale it as fact. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, especially our elders. But it is just that, his opinion- nothing more, nothing less.

Aaron D. IL

RL Chilton wrote:

You won't get far with a conversion, I think. Sounds to me as he is not a car guy and has had some unfortunate luck throughout his life with automobiles. Cars are the bane of all of us, I think. Some of us look at that as a good thing, others differ, and it's all good.



Really the only thing that bothers me about his article is that I always have a problem when writers state their opinions in such broad terms and then regale it as fact. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, especially our elders. But it is just that, his opinion- nothing more, nothing less.

Agree with you totally Russell and there's nothing wrong with someone stating their opinion. However it is a sad trend as of late in many media where writers of articles do state opinion as fact rather than taking an unbiased view of the subject matter and presenting both sides of it. It's bad journalism outside of an editorial column.



Now here at classiccar.com forums it's obvious we're not going to get up here and say "I hate classic cars." But it's also true we're not writing articles for the public's general consumption. In that situation it's little more than propaganda for a single point of view. It would be much better for the writer in question to preface his article saying "this has been my experience and is my opinion." A generalization is definitely not a fact.

[Deleted User]

I think you guys are being overly sensitive, something I am guilty of when you pre 55 guys trash my hash, or simpy imply that it is inferior to your "pure" Hudsons. It appears to me in an age when newspapers are failing weekly he is just a guy trying to write a humorous article to keep his editor happy. True he didn't research his facts very well and he is overly impressed with cars built for the simple masses but in this day and age when too many people aren't car guys the japanese build the cars that fit the bill. Generic and easy to own. For all his negativity though he ends his article saying that there was something about the Hudson that he holds on to.



Harry

[Deleted User]

Harry Hill wrote:

I think you guys are being overly sensitive, something I am guilty of when you pre 55 guys trash my hash, or simpy imply that it is inferior to your "pure" Hudsons. It appears to me in an age when newspapers are failing weekly he is just a guy trying to write a humorous article to keep his editor happy. True he didn't research his facts very well and he is overly impressed with cars built for the simple masses but in this day and age when too many people aren't car guys the japanese build the cars that fit the bill. Generic and easy to own. For all his negativity though he ends his article saying that there was something about the Hudson that he holds on to.



Harry

I agree Harry. This guy certainly isn't a car guy and he is entiled to his writings. I'm sure he understands that his work is subject to objections and scrutiny.

P.S. Now I feel bad about not liking Hashes.... ok, I'm over it now LOL.

Unknown

When I bought my '39 CCl8 sedan the seller told me it was "ugly but rare". But when I park my unrestored car next to the pretty ones on Cruise Night it draws a crowd.



People who buy a cheap used American car and compare its reliability to a new $28,000 Camry baffle me. Of course, I simply fix things most people complain about.

RL Chilton

Harry Hill wrote:

I think you guys are being overly sensitive, something I am guilty of when you pre 55 guys trash my hash, or simpy imply that it is inferior to your "pure" Hudsons. It appears to me in an age when newspapers are failing weekly he is just a guy trying to write a humorous article to keep his editor happy. True he didn't research his facts very well and he is overly impressed with cars built for the simple masses but in this day and age when too many people aren't car guys the japanese build the cars that fit the bill. Generic and easy to own. For all his negativity though he ends his article saying that there was something about the Hudson that he holds on to.



Harry

Can't lay off this one, Harry. If I am one of the "overly sensitive", well, my first thought is TOO BAD!!. I personally am very passionate about automobiles, as most of you are, too. The thing that REALLY gets me about this fellow is that he's never experienced the "magic" of owning/driving/experiencing a fine automobile . . . ever . . . with any car, and that's so sad, I almost can't stand it, because I spend my life spreading the passion about automobiles at every opportunity. It's not just Hudsons, the magic is there for everyone, but some experience it with whatever kind of transportation that blows their skirt up (for me, it happens to be Hudsons).



I'm certainly not one to trash-your-Hash, either. Fine automobiles abound out there, of all makes, sizes and styles and I have a deep appreciation for the automobile in general (Hashes included). If there is a make or model that is not to my particular taste, it doesn't mean I don't appreciate YOUR passion for same.



Mostly, I just feel sad for this guy, 'cause he's never really lived by not experiencing the "magic", and then goes and tells the public about his misfortunes and, wrongfully, thinking it's the same for everyone.

[Deleted User]

Russell, some people will never experience the magic of anything mechanical, mechanical things are just tools to them. Objects to get their lives accomplished with the least amount of trouble. It's good for us that they exist, they will always need those of us who can make things work when they break.

By the way, I'm not passionate about the Hash, I just don't like the snobbish attitude some people show against them. Not all Hudsons are stepdowns, only about six years of them, and the Hudsons of 55 and later kept the nameplate alive for three years longer. Personally my favorites are the 37 PU and the 48/49 Commodores Broughams, but until I find one I will drive the 55 Hornet and enjoy it.



Harry

[Deleted User]

My biggest problem was with this crap no one has enthusiasm to celebrate its centennial year. Where did he get that info. Well when I went down to McDonalds on the weekend I talked to the 14 year old at the drive through window and he said he wasn't going to the national I therefore surmised that Hudsons are not popular in my town. Yeah I know I could have taken five minutes and did a search on the web but my fries were getting cold so I wrote this crap.

Unknown

hudsontech wrote:

Hey, hey - watch it now. I'm class of 55 and I ain't 80 yet. Ok, close, as I'll be 72 in September.



And us ole folk got every right to rant and rave - just some of us know what we're ranting and raving about. He don't. LOL



Hudsonly,

Alex Burr

Memphis, TN

Kennebunk (Maine) Class of 55

Alex,



When we're talking about someone being 70 or 80, being off by a decade or so is no big deal, right? LOL



With age should come privileges. So, you go ahead and rant and rave all you want.

SamJ

Anybody who "looks down on" AMC-built Hudsons has never seen Paul Schuster's '57 Hardtop in all-black. It's a helluva car. And I like all the rest of them, too...:D

Aaron D. IL

I think the whole "hash" thing being negative is fading. I see nothing wrong with them at all.

Clutchguy

"P.S. Now I feel bad about not liking Hashes.... ok, I'm over it now LOL"



NOW that's Funny!!!:D

Clutchguy

I think because of Paul Schuster's '57,I will actually look at a "Hash" car. A Tri-tone '57 Hdtp. at the National in Dearborn in '96 was my wife's choice of the meet. I tried to explain to her that it really wasn't a Hudson-BUT she said it says Hudson on it! She proved me wrong and my thinking has been different ever since. Paul and so many others are advocates of these cars and have helped change my view of these. They don't drive like a Stepdown, but really what did/does ?.:cool: I'm sure there will be a few to look at in just a few short weeks.

Browniepetersen

I took a bit of a different approach. I sent the guy a note and invited him to drive up to the National, meet a few folks, maybe take a ride in one or two cars and then write a follow-on article to the one he wrote. My guess is that his follow-on article would get more readership than the circulation of his small town newspaper?



Also, on another subject. I have always been fond of the cars we call Hash's. I have never owned one but have it on my list. I hear of this disparaging, but have never witnessed it myself. Does it really go on? If we "Trash a Hash" what do our members do with the metropolitions? Just wondered?

Hudsonrules

:rolleyes:Reading the article makes it obvious why this "reporter" writes for a small town rag. Lack of knowlwdge of the subject, just his opinion. People who see cars just as a means to go from point "A" to point "B" will pay little attention to it if any. The "Rice Burner" generation will not understand it.

Perhaps this guy is the same "moron" who has the five hundred thousand dollar Essex on ebay, because he does not know what to do with it. { I asked the seller a question regarding his Essex, and he never answered}

On the subject of the Hash, I never have owned on, but would consicer one if it came my way. The first one that I remember seeing belonged to a customer on my morning paper route in Seattle. It was a salmon and cream color teo door hardtop. Nice car, however another customer on my route had a yellow and cream '54 Hornet Sedan that I really liked. The syep downs are good driving and handling cars, but they are not the only Hudson's that were built. I try to like them all.

Back to this so called reporter. I am sure he would find fault with the mucle cars of the sixties as well. To fast, Like gas, to loud, etc. Those kind of people are just not with it. {The Reporter}

That is all I have to say for now. Arnie in Nevada

RL Chilton

Browniepetersen wrote:

I took a bit of a different approach. I sent the guy a note and invited him to drive up to the National, meet a few folks, maybe take a ride in one or two cars and then write a follow-on article to the one he wrote. My guess is that his follow-on article would get more readership than the circulation of his small town newspaper?



Also, on another subject. I have always been fond of the cars we call Hash's. I have never owned one but have it on my list. I hear of this disparaging, but have never witnessed it myself. Does it really go on? If we "Trash a Hash" what do our members do with the metropolitions? Just wondered?

I personally keep a metropolitan in the trunk of the Hornet and use it to scoot around at car shows . . . eliminates all that walking.:D

Unknown

Dave53-7C wrote:

Although the author is entitled to his opinion regarding the Hudson he owned, he shouldn't let his experiences or emotions taint his story. He must have missed class on the day when they were teaching this. Since he graduated college in 1955, he must be approximately 80 years of age. So, I'll chaulk his rant up to old age and the onset of curmudgeonitis. LOL

I chalk it up to the author being a DRAFT DODGER! :rolleyes:

Unknown

Ted W wrote:

I chalk it up to the author being a DRAFT DODGER! :rolleyes:

Yeah, he was probably 2-S, defered because of collegiate studies...:rolleyes:



He probably could have written a more insightful article if he had done a stint in the army or taken auto shop somewhere along the way.

Unknown

In all fairness to the author, y'all gotta read the article - Granted, his comments concerning Hudsons are incorrect, unsubstantiated, and have no basis in fact... And, there is no proof that he actually was drafted, but the article does say that he sold the Hudson because he was drafted into the Army...

About mid way down the article - quoted in part:

"... I was able to keep the car running until I was relieved of the need for private transportation by being drafted into the Army a year later."

After reading the erroneous car related content of his article, I wouldn't trust any statements made by him.