X-161 POLL time to decide...
Okay, let's see what the board thinks....
there has been enough discussion on this bad boy....
Perhaps slated to be the design for the 57 Hudson if it stayed afloat, and perhaps where Hudson motor company headed, if the merger never happened.
we will never know....
Here's your chance to sound off....
Some love it....
Some hate it....
you decide....
there has been enough discussion on this bad boy....
Perhaps slated to be the design for the 57 Hudson if it stayed afloat, and perhaps where Hudson motor company headed, if the merger never happened.
we will never know....
Here's your chance to sound off....
Some love it....
Some hate it....
you decide....
0
Comments
-
Hate it. What a confused jumble of disconnected design elements, most of which don't even look good individually. However the basic shape of the body was adequate. But what's with the blow holes in the top of the front fenders and pipe organ treatment at the rear end? Were they somehow connected so that you could play a tune as you drove it. :rolleyes: This design was so far out of touch with reality, no wonder it, or anything like it, never made it to market.0
-
Neither. I like the car overall, but probably wouldn't own one. I also agree with hudsondad that that this car would probably wouldn't have sold well.
Matt0 -
The x161 makes the hashes look good!0
-
personally, I'd chop it, and put a SBC in it....
:eek:
:eek:
just kidding, I would sell it for far more than I think it's worth....
to someone that recognizes it's historical significance...
then buy a stepdown convertible....
But if memory serves correct, this thing is out there somewhere, in someone's collection....
of course, I wouldn't step forward and admit it.... 0 -
OK once more for the last time. The X-161 is an early '53 concept vehicle for a 1957 Hornet. As with most auto companies, Hudson made test cars for evaluation of design concepts. the X-161 in the form you see would have never been the final deal. For example the body is hand crafted aluminum, not steel, the door cuts on each side were different, again for evaluation. An iteritive process over two years or more with modification and design changes would have taken place before the final '57 Hornet design would have been frozen for production tooling. I am sure, some type of finning, and chrome would have been added to make it more with its contemporaries. To judge this as a final production design, which is being done here, is unfair to Hudson and to Frank Spring. That being said the styling direction of the X-161 is, IN MY OPINION, far better than the final AMC design for its Hudson division, i.e. the HASHes. This poll should be whether you like the direction of the X-161 would have taken Hudson or the HASH design.0
-
50C8DAN wrote:OK once more for the last time. The X-161 is an early '53 concept vehicle for a 1957 Hornet. As with most auto companies, Hudson made test cars for evaluation of design concepts. the X-161 in the form you see would have never been the final deal. For example the body is hand crafted aluminum, not steel, the door cuts on each side were different, again for evaluation. An iteritive process over two years or more with modification and design changes would have taken place before the final '57 Hornet design would have been frozen for production tooling. I am sure, some type of finning, and chrome would have been added to make it more with its contemporaries. To judge this as a final production design, which is being done here, is unfair to Hudson and to Frank Spring. That being said the styling direction of the X-161 is, IN MY OPINION, far better than the final AMC design for its Hudson division, i.e. the HASHes. This poll should be whether you like the direction of the X-161 would have taken Hudson or the HASH design.
Gee Wiz, thanks for setting us all straight. 0 -
50C8DAN wrote:OK once more for the last time. The X-161 is an early '53 concept vehicle for a 1957 Hornet. As with most auto companies, Hudson made test cars for evaluation of design concepts. the X-161 in the form you see would have never been the final deal. For example the body is hand crafted aluminum, not steel, the door cuts on each side were different, again for evaluation. An iteritive process over two years or more with modification and design changes would have taken place before the final '57 Hornet design would have been frozen for production tooling. I am sure, some type of finning, and chrome would have been added to make it more with its contemporaries. To judge this as a final production design, which is being done here, is unfair to Hudson and to Frank Spring. That being said the styling direction of the X-161 is, IN MY OPINION, far better than the final AMC design for its Hudson division, i.e. the HASHes. This poll should be whether you like the direction of the X-161 would have taken Hudson or the HASH design.
Please show me where in my post in this thread I ever said that this car was the final design for the 57 Hudson...
To help complicate it more, If you read my original post, I use the word "perhaps"
Please, enlighten us all, since the only one confused at this point as to what is being said, seems to be you. I think that everyone understands well enough that this thing would never go to production like this (thankfully)0 -
hudsonkid wrote:Please show me where in my post in this thread I ever said that this car was the final design for the 57 Hudson...
To help complicate it more, If you read my original post, I use the word "perhaps"
Please, enlighten us all, since the only one confused at this point as to what is being said, seems to be you. I think that everyone understands well enough that this thing would never go to production like this (thankfully)
Hudsonkid, You're on a roll. Go git um. :cool:0 -
Dave53-7C wrote:Hudsonkid, You're on a roll. Go git um. :cool:
no, it just gets old, having to have pi$$ing matches with everyone on this board.
people don't like to have their opinions challenged, have their inconsistencies pointed out, or told they are wrong. It's just like last year when someone asked about opinions on what they were going to do with their car, and didn't like what the majority of the board told them, which resulted in a half year flame war... and ultimately the creation of a sub-forum that hardly gets traffic'd :rolleyes:
Frankly, my educational level is such, that I do not need someone to type "IN MY OPINION" in each post after I pointed out some concerns, or let's just call them inconsistencies in one member's post. I know that every post on this board, except for those that offer real world solutions, or have historical content, are in fact, OPINION... nothing more.
Further, I think the membership of this board is such that they understand this basic fact as well. So I guess the only other reason for someone doing this is to illustrate their maturity level, since obviously, they cannot present material in a grown up manner.
Finally, the one thing I really hate, is when someone posts, and then states something along the line of it being their final post on the matter. It's like they are saying Here's my final point, you need to read this, and whatever you write in reply, I don't care, because i'm not going to read it. (and in actuality, we all know that they check that thread religiously, to make sure they got the final word... who cares...) If it bothers them that much they shouldn't be participating on the online forums of any kind.
So to all of you out there, that fall into this special group, remember, at the end of the day, why we are here. We all like old hudsons, while some believe they live life better street rodded, some believe a proper restoration is in order, it doesn't matter. Our appreciation for some product of the nameplate, maybe not all models or years, is what brings us together.
Oh yeah, the X-161 is still ugly... 0 -
Its this back and forth crazy ass banter that makes the board so much fun. I for one love it. Everyone's got an opinion and thats never gonna change. Reminds me of the times I have stood around running Hudsons and heard the craziest ideas of what is wrong with them and some guys are vehement they are right. I just shrug and say yes I am sure the gravitational effect of the moon can cause some knock in an engine but I have to disagree.
For me some people like stuff some people don't. I will only post a response if the person is being a real dickhead or I have something to add. Factual, funny or in between.
And I am with Hudsonkid on stating absolutes. I think we all know with Hudsons you will find some really strange stuff going on so its near to impossible to say this was the way they did or didn't do it. Near the end if you wanted to order your Hornet with a kitchen sink installed I am sure some dealer or the factory would have obliged. Thats why I love em.....:)0 -
hudsonkid wrote:It's just like last year when someone asked about opinions on what they were going to do with their car, and didn't like what the majority of the board told them, which resulted in a half year flame war... and ultimately the creation of a sub-forum that hardly gets traffic'd
hudsonkid, if you are referring to me, my problem was not with anyone's opinion, it was the name calling and derogatory comments that were unneccesary. Someone can say "I wouldn't hot rod my step-down" which is much better than, "only an idiot would put a SBC in a Hudson." The reason I created the sub-forum, was to give those of us who want to discuss hot rodding issues, a place to discuss them without the nasty comments. It is true that the sub-forum has little traffic compared to this forum, but that is reflective of the current make-up of the HET membership. If the HET membership grows any "significant amount", I guarantee it will be because of the hot rod crowd and nothing else. This is true for almost any make (except maybe the exotics), even the orphans. Without an "all inclusive" HET club, it will die out eventually. I am in favor of a club embracing both the hot rodders and the purists equally, but I don't think the HET Club is there yet. In the year I have been a member, I have seen one cover on the WTN of a modified and NO articles about any of them. I believe the HET Club still doesn't get what it takes to increase membership. And though I usually enjoy some of the WTN, many of us can only take so many obituaries and WWII era articles. If the Club wants to significantly increase its membership, the WTN has got to change. As I've said before, if the Club wants to remain a pursits haven, then what they are doing is fine, but if you want to really increase membership and HUd awareness, they've got to change with the times. And a 7X, or 8X, or Twin H are not the only way to hot rod a Hud. Some members are inclusivists (is that a real word? lol), but many are not. And yet, at least around here, you never see them taking there cars anywhere on Cruise Nights. In many of the Friday and Saturday night local car shows I have attended locally, I have only seen the same two Hudsons, and they have only been at about 1/4 of the shows I have attended. I get tired of listening to many who are quick to bad mouth those of us that choose "brand x" components for our Huds (or non-Hud modifications, yet we are the ones (me, when mine gets running) who are more likely to drive ours around in public than most (I do understand that a few purists actually do drive theirs, but the number seems to be low).
Some will say, jsrail...just get thicker skin, but I say there is a way to have constructive criticisms and comments which don't have to be derogatory or nasty. And asking for an opinion is not asking for nasty comments. There is room for "all" in this Club, I just wish we started acting like it (though actually I think I have softened up a few of you! lol).
Gotta go to work, be good all!
Jay0 -
jsrail wrote:It is true that the sub-forum has little traffic compared to this forum, but that is reflective of the current make-up of the HET membership. If the HET membership grows any "significant amount", I guarantee it will be because of the hot rod crowd and nothing else.
I would like to see you back this up with some facts. Seems to me you are saying there are no potential members left out there that would enjoy an original car only hotrodders who will buy Hudsons and let me see if I get this right join HET?
I think the membership of HET reflects the reality of Hudson owners. A lot of older members who own their cars couldn't give a rats ass about showing them they just own them to drive them. Me I am in the younger set and I go to shows just to drive it not because I really care about the show. I think you will find over the next ten years hotrodders will have mimimal effects on the club membership if the previous ten years are an indication. That may change but I doubt it.
And does that guarantee come with a warranty
0 -
jsrail wrote:hudsonkid, if you are referring to me, my problem was not with anyone's opinion, it was the name calling and derogatory comments that were unneccesary. Someone can say "I wouldn't hot rod my step-down" which is much better than, "only an idiot would put a SBC in a Hudson." The reason I created the sub-forum, was to give those of us who want to discuss hot rodding issues, a place to discuss them without the nasty comments. It is true that the sub-forum has little traffic compared to this forum, but that is reflective of the current make-up of the HET membership. If the HET membership grows any "significant amount", I guarantee it will be because of the hot rod crowd and nothing else. This is true for almost any make (except maybe the exotics), even the orphans. Without an "all inclusive" HET club, it will die out eventually. I am in favor of a club embracing both the hot rodders and the purists equally, but I don't think the HET Club is there yet. In the year I have been a member, I have seen one cover on the WTN of a modified and NO articles about any of them. I believe the HET Club still doesn't get what it takes to increase membership. And though I usually enjoy some of the WTN, many of us can only take so many obituaries and WWII era articles. If the Club wants to significantly increase its membership, the WTN has got to change. As I've said before, if the Club wants to remain a pursits haven, then what they are doing is fine, but if you want to really increase membership and HUd awareness, they've got to change with the times. And a 7X, or 8X, or Twin H are not the only way to hot rod a Hud. Some members are inclusivists (is that a real word? lol), but many are not. And yet, at least around here, you never see them taking there cars anywhere on Cruise Nights. In many of the Friday and Saturday night local car shows I have attended locally, I have only seen the same two Hudsons, and they have only been at about 1/4 of the shows I have attended. I get tired of listening to many who are quick to bad mouth those of us that choose "brand x" components for our Huds (or non-Hud modifications, yet we are the ones (me, when mine gets running) who are more likely to drive ours around in public than most (I do understand that a few purists actually do drive theirs, but the number seems to be low).
Some will say, jsrail...just get thicker skin, but I say there is a way to have constructive criticisms and comments which don't have to be derogatory or nasty. And asking for an opinion is not asking for nasty comments. There is room for "all" in this Club, I just wish we started acting like it (though actually I think I have softened up a few of you! lol).
Gotta go to work, be good all!
Jay
No Jay, actually not you. It was another one of our members here, that for some reason hasn't surfced in while. I will admit, that we had our moments, but ultimately, you seem like a decent guy, and quite honestly, we seem to be doing well coexisting on the forum. I value your contribution, and think you add to the board. I think you're pretty much in a similar boat as me, while our path is a bit different, we both seem to be messing around with old hudsons, with a kid or two running around, making it all the more intersting.
I would still to this day, tell you to twin h that hudson, keep it all hudson, but in all seriousness, I can now validate your viewpoint, after much OBJECTIVE thinking on the matter. For you needs, it actually makes more sense, and hey, you know what? that's just fine. Maybe the twin h bug will bite you down the road, maybe you'll find another hudson, and that's the one you keep more stock, who knows. But like I said in a previous thread, if I had a SBC in mine, the ole air conditioning thing would be a lot easier to figure out....
Later!
Rick0 -
51hornetA wrote:I would like to see you back this up with some facts. Seems to me you are saying there are no potential members left out there that would enjoy an original car only hotrodders who will buy Hudsons and let me see if I get this right join HET?
I think the membership of HET reflects the reality of Hudson owners. A lot of older members who own their cars couldn't give a rats ass about showing them they just own them to drive them. Me I am in the younger set and I go to shows just to drive it not because I really care about the show. I think you will find over the next ten years hotrodders will have mimimal effects on the club membership if the previous ten years are an indication. That may change but I doubt it.
And does that guarantee come with a warranty
I hate to admit, but I think Jay is right. THe sad reality is that kids in my age group, and younger, don't appreciate originality. The wave of the future is in fact with kustoms and street rodders.
Look at the model t and a fords, for one example. Or how about any 30's or 40's cars....
Unfortunately, it's just a matter of time.
It doesn't mean that I like it though....0 -
Can only speak from what I am seeing. We have 10 guys in my area that joined HET in the last 2 years all about my age only one has a brand X engine in his car. The rest restored to original. I still say won't have much effect on HET.
Model T's and Fords are diff they were rodding those in my Dad's day and when I was a kid and still are. Heck you can buy everything if you walk in with a lug nut. Guy in my area makes all the sheet metal for these. I think everyone and his uncle has rodded one of those.
You will always find that some people get drawn to rodding and some to stock ain't going to change now or in the near future.0 -
Actually I think most of the people that post here are real "car guys" that can really appreciate cars that are nicely done whether they're totally stock, modified, modernized or customized. While someone may not have taken the same path as you would, If it's done well and looks good, who's to argue. My last Hudson coupe, I bought with the intention to street rod. It was a barn fresh one-owner for 52 years with documentation. In the end, I couldn't bring myself around to do that. I bought a 40 Chevy coupe to modify instead. Someone else may have put a sbc in it, but that doesn't make it wrong. It's your car, do with it what suits you best.0
-
I drive both my stock Hudsons all over the place here in So Cal. I get a minimum of 3 to 4 thumbs ups or comments on each trip and this includes kids and teenagers ( I think they like the Hudson's too). I know most of you get the same reactions. People just like and respect old cars that have been taken care of and they love the bygone days of distinctive brand styling. Many hot rods and their engineering look the same but I can appreciate them. Those radical engines at uncommon engineering are HOT RODDING at it's extreme.0
-
51hornetA wrote:I would like to see you back this up with some facts. Seems to me you are saying there are no potential members left out there that would enjoy an original car only hotrodders who will buy Hudsons and let me see if I get this right join HET?
I think the membership of HET reflects the reality of Hudson owners. A lot of older members who own their cars couldn't give a rats ass about showing them they just own them to drive them.
51hornetA:
I will state that I have no numbers to bear my comment and should not have stated it in such a way. I try to stay true to the logical scientific method (yes, a proud atheist!), but occassionally I slip, but am able to admit it, my apologies. You are correct that the membership reflects the reality of Hudson owners, but would add that I feel this is only "at this time." Membership is aging and there will need to be a "replenishing" of new members needed. I did not mean to insinuate that there are no more restorers out there to join the Club. I just get the feeling sometimes that some would rather see the Club only for restorers, or that rodders are relegated to "second class" Club status. But, does the Club only want to cater to the Restorers? Or relegate the rodders to the "back of the bus" status to take care of the rusted out hulks laying around in some field? I hope not. I believe you could grow the Club greatly by welcoming the rodders aboard more than appears to be done now. How many original Mercs do you see vs. custom ones? Or 40's Chevys? Or 50's Fords? Look at the biggest meets, most are customs. Wouldn't many of these cars go the way of the crusher if folks hadn't created the rodding scene? Wouldn't the car scene then be no more exciting than stamp collectoring? And rodders were not always using the worst pieces of junk cars either, alot of them bought decent cars to work with.
My reasons for making my comments, is that I always hear folks complaining about membership roles, but other than word-of-mouth to someone who may have inquired about Hudsons, I personally don't see much else going on (I know a few of you are out there driving your cars more than once in awhile-I'm not referring to you). If, like I stated before, the Club wishes to stay small, then the status qou is working. But again, unless the Club is more inclusive and out in the public eye, its not going to have as wide appeal as it could. As you stated, there may be a number of older folks who don't care if anyone sees their car, but that only makes my point. Its very apparent here in Arizona, even in the nice weather you never see them! They must all meet in someone's backyard under cover of night! Personally, I would like to see the Club grow hugely! I would like to see Hudsons as big as Merc's (probably not likely, but one can wish) as that would mean more folks to talk with and more aftermarket parts availability. But look at most old American cars out there, wouldn't you have to agree that the majority on the road today are hot rods or at least mild customs? This is not necessarily true for some of the exotics like Ferrari's, etc., but who can afford one of those? Not many. Thats not to say that originals are bad, just that it seems that many people who are buying and fixing up old cars are hot rodders or mild custom folks. I think if many of these cars weren't customed, they would have been destroyed. Bottom line, I guess, is the Club needs to decide what direction it needs to go. It doesn't have to be mostly restorers or mostly rodders, just warmly inclusive of all.
AND PEOPLE, DRIVE YOUR CARS MORE OFTEN AND WHERE NON-HUDSON FOLKS WILL SEE THEM! I am sick I can't drive mine yet. I know a couple of you guys are waiting too. I plan to drive mine everyday to work and park it with all the other cars in the parking lot, to the super market and the malls, wherever. It will literally be my daily driver. Now I know some of you have cars that you will not want to put many miles on (especially those low mile originals of course), but you could at least make a couple trips to the market on the weekend during the year, so those folks who know nothing of Hudsons, will see them and maybe become interested.
And thanks hudsonkid for the comments. I agree that maybe we got off on the wrong foot in the beginning, but are able to have fun now. Glad to read your story of driving yours, I'm jealous. There are some great folks on this forum (and the sub-forum!) and I have a great time being here (much to the shagrin of my wife, who thinks I spend too much time on the website! lol And I admit to being a loud mouth). Even though folks like Neils and I may disagree (I guess most of the time! LOL), I have a good time and am glad he and others are here. What I don't like are nasty condescending comments which I do not classify as opinions, just someones attempt to make them feel superior.
And I stick with my comments on the WTN. I thank those who work hard to put it together, but think it could use some updating. And, yes may I dare say, an article on installing a SBC (or any common motor swap-not everyone can afford uncommon engineering set-ups), or a Mustang II front suspension, or a 4 link rear end set-up, tilt wheel columns, 18 circuit wire harnesses, building new tranny humps for the newer automatics, lowering tricks, or any number of modifying tips. I'm sure there are a lot of guys out there with their tips and tricks (and those of us who could really use them), just need someone who can write the articles and get some in the magazine.
I have spent way too much time not working now, I'll shut and get back to work! LOL
Jay :-)0 -
Jay,
I like your reply. You got the fact my only beef was the use of I guarantee. Well done.
I talk to Sam Jackson all the time and he tells me and I believe him that hotrodding Hudson enthusiasts do not send in articles and if they did he would print them. And remember all of our members out there the WTN is only as good as you make it. If you want to see more rod stuff in the WTN get some stuff off. I for one have no beef with rodders and have rodded many a car in my time and I have now moved on to old school rodding Hudsons. Thats why I sit at my bench porting and polishing my two 308's and buying Clifford headers and working on making an aluminum version of the Twin H manifold.
Even if your car is a work in progress send stuff to Sam and share what you are doing I would say the same to anyone working on stuff. If you want to see the stuff you are interested in shown in the WTN get your stuff to Sam and you will see it in there this I can guarantee you 0 -
You ask:
"Okay, let's see what the board thinks....
Here's your chance to sound off....
you decide...."
Then you get a response you disagree with and give us these gems:
"Please show me where in my post in this thread I ever said that this car was the final design for the 57 Hudson..."
":o To help complicate it more, If you read my original post, I use the word "perhaps" "
"no, it just gets old, having to have pi$$ing matches with everyone on this board."
"people don't like to have their opinions challenged, have their inconsistencies pointed out, or told they are wrong."
:eek: "Frankly, my educational level is such, that I do not need someone to type "IN MY OPINION" in each post" (my favorite!:D )
"So I guess the only other reason for someone doing this is to illustrate their maturity level, since obviously, they cannot present material in a grown up manner. "
:mad: "the one thing I really hate, is when someone posts"
Have a nice day
Steve0 -
51hornetA wrote:I talk to Sam Jackson all the time and he tells me and I believe him that hotrodding Hudson enthusiasts do not send in articles and if they did he would print them.
Okay guys, lets see about getting some articles together. Sam, if you are reading this, how is your editorial staff? If we can put some paragraphs together, can your staff make them into a sensible coherent article? Most of us are writing deficient and couldn't write an article if we tried. Or we are only beginning our projects.
Or maybe those of you who have done some of your own websites might like to contribute some words and pics from your web pages as a start?
Jay0 -
Jay, Atheist? No wonder you like to butcher classic cars! LOL
Speaking of the devil or Anti-Christ (my ex-wife), coincindentily, I just won a court battle against my ex-wife and her promoting the Center for Inquiry and it's human secularism to our kids. It's against our parent agreement. I'm an expert on this stuff now. Seems these people always end up finding faith when they're about to fall off a cliff or the plane is going down-LOL. Personally, I think it was a miracle to see my kids born. I know I'm off the subject and it is taboo, but life is interesting. Jay, your still OK in my book.0 -
Neils you have me scared now I did not know you were fighting the CFI I thought that was a football league....:D0
-
nhp1127 wrote:Jay, Atheist? No wonder you like to butcher classic cars! LOL
Speaking of the devil or Anti-Christ (my ex-wife), coincindentily, I just won a court battle against my ex-wife and her promoting the Center for Inquiry and it's human secularism to our kids. It's against our parent agreement. I'm an expert on this stuff now. Seems these people always end up finding faith when they're about to fall off a cliff or the plane is going down-LOL. Personally, I think it was a miracle to see my kids born. I know I'm off the subject and it is taboo, but life is interesting. Jay, your still OK in my book.
Life is interesting, I agree. Don't know anything about the CFI. Sorry, did the religious thing, can't accept it, though that is always a personal choice. Okay, don't want to go down this road! :-)
Use to think of my ex-wife badly, but she's in Houston now and thats gotta be enough punishment! LOL (sorry Texans, only joking)
I'll look you up Neils, next time I'm in SoCal. Where're you at? I've got lots of friends and relatives in SoCal (I used to live in Bel Air, Woodland Hills and Del Mar), mostly in San Gabriel Valley.
Jay0 -
I'm in the Palos Verdes area, about 40 minutes South of LAX. Your welcome anytime. Plan on a Friday evening and I'll take you to a couple cruise-ins in a real car!0
-
smcmanus wrote:You ask:
"Okay, let's see what the board thinks....
Here's your chance to sound off....
you decide...."
Then you get a response you disagree with and give us these gems:
"Please show me where in my post in this thread I ever said that this car was the final design for the 57 Hudson..."
":o To help complicate it more, If you read my original post, I use the word "perhaps" "
"no, it just gets old, having to have pi$$ing matches with everyone on this board."
"people don't like to have their opinions challenged, have their inconsistencies pointed out, or told they are wrong."
:eek: "Frankly, my educational level is such, that I do not need someone to type "IN MY OPINION" in each post" (my favorite!:D )
"So I guess the only other reason for someone doing this is to illustrate their maturity level, since obviously, they cannot present material in a grown up manner. "
:mad: "the one thing I really hate, is when someone posts"
Have a nice day
Steve
Steve, I don;t know what the point of your thread was, but for some reason feel the need to respond. I guess you are trying to argue a point I made, with other parts of posts I made. The unfortunate part is that several of these statements are incomplete, and haven't even been copied and pasted properly. So, before posting next time, take a crash course on message boarding, so you can make it a bit more readable for us. It really isn't rocket science, but perhaps someone needs to show you how to quote, and make the HTML work...
here's the first quote you list....
"Please show me where in my post in this thread I ever said that this car was the final design for the 57 Hudson..."
" To help complicate it more, If you read my original post, I use the word "perhaps" "
since you only scanned over what I posted, and obviously didn't read the thread, let me help you....
this was in response to a certain member trying to say that I was inferring that the X-161 was the actual car to go to production in 1957, for hudson. I was (and I still want) clarification. The statment makes it quite clear that I did not say this, and further left it at "perhaps"
Okay, here's our next one....
"no, it just gets old, having to have pi$$ing matches with everyone on this board."
"people don't like to have their opinions challenged, have their inconsistencies pointed out, or told they are wrong."
Indeed it does get old.... but to let someone post wrongly about me on a public forum, I will either clarify (like I am doing now) or forget about it, if the person isn't worth my time. your lackluster post, which doesn't even make much sense, was on the border, but figure I got a few minutes. I would thing that you are one that does not like having their opinions challenged, but it seems you weren't even brave enough to post much of an opinion. perhaps I misunderstood your post, maybe you are in praise of my prior post. I just don;t know... I am looking for any glaring inconsistencies I have posted here, please illustrate them, and explain.
Okay, next quote...
"Frankly, my educational level is such, that I do not need someone to type "IN MY OPINION" in each post" (my favorite!)
"So I guess the only other reason for someone doing this is to illustrate their maturity level, since obviously, they cannot present material in a grown up manner. "
If you would have read and comprehended my post, you would not have even had to post it here. It seems that no one else except you had a problem understanding it. It is pretty straightforward, if you lack understanding of it, please respond, and I will further clarify for you.
the last quote of mine, was only partially copied, so it looks out of context, and says something different than it originally was intended to, but if you go back anyone can read it in it's entirety. Kind of like a political tactic. Guess you are trying to be deceptive. Maybe I'll make a post of your read completely out of context, and see how you like it....
But, my orignal post makes perfect sense, and everyone else seems to so far.... So i guess it's just you....
FInally I wonder, were you sent here by another one of our forum members to substantiate their argument? If you were, you didn't do a good job. I would have hoped if you were the dissenting opinion, you would have at least offered some valid argument, or at least offered a point.
Good luck!0 -
No Comment Enjoying Life Too Much To Get Involved, Bill Albright0
-
bill a wrote:No Comment Enjoying Life Too Much To Get Involved, Bill Albright
and honestly, this is really what we all should be doing.0 -
" But, my orignal post makes perfect sense, and everyone else seems to so far.... So i guess it's just you...."
:rolleyes: I guess it is just me. All the words in the quotes were yours. I will admit that the last line is clearly out of context. No one else sent me. It just seemed to me that you started this thread and then jumped on someone who had a different opinion. I have no opinion on the X 161.
Have a nice day
Steve0 -
smcmanus wrote:" But, my orignal post makes perfect sense, and everyone else seems to so far.... So i guess it's just you...."
:rolleyes: I guess it is just me. All the words in the quotes were yours. I will admit that the last line is clearly out of context. No one else sent me. It just seemed to me that you started this thread and then jumped on someone who had a different opinion. I have no opinion on the X 161.
Have a nice day
Steve
Nope, only jumped on a wrongful accussation. If I said what the member stated I said, then I would have either issued a retraction, or corrected myself. Not fun to be misquoted.
BTW, I checked out some of your prior posts, nice array of cars in your collection. If It weren't hudsons, or oldsmobiles, for us, I would like to think a 55-56 desoto would be a neat ride to consider.
You have got to have an opinion on the X-161 though....
Personally, I feel either you love it or hate it.
Oh and if it makes anyone feel better, my mom thought about signing up to keep me in line.... She doesn't think that hudsondad is doing a good enough job.....:p0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- 37K All Categories
- 106 Hudson 1916 - 1929
- 19 Upcoming Events
- 91 Essex Super 6
- 28.6K HUDSON
- 561 "How To" - Skills, mechanical and other wise
- 993 Street Rods
- 150 American Motors
- 174 The Flathead Forum
- 49 Manuals, etc,.
- 78 Hudson 8
- 44 FORUM - Instructions and Tips on using the forum
- 2.8K CLASSIFIEDS
- 601 Vehicles
- 2.1K Parts & Pieces
- 77 Literature & Memorabilia
- Hudson 1916 - 1929 Yahoo Groups Archived Photos