J.Ukrop submitted a new blog post: Fifth Avenue in Full Color Continue reading the Original Blog Post
I had a guy park in front of my car last year as I was about to Pull out & I asked him to Move his Car & He said that he wanted to Get a Better look at my Hudson & I told him that it wasen't a Hudson that it was a Mercury.! Now that I got a Better Look at the Hudson you Posted I can see why He thought it was a Hudson. Just my 3.5 cents Live Learn & Die a Fool
Hudson was a very good quality car but it just couldn't compete with the big 3. In many ways it was ahead of the times. 1954 was the last REAL Hudson production. It had merged with Nash and Studebaker to become American Motors Corporation. Many problems ensued from the merger and eventually the whole thing collapsed. My father was a die hard Hudson man and Hudson mechanic for many years. My first car was a '49 Hudson 2 door, same color as the one featured here. The Hudson was a favorite for circle track races with it's low slung, low center of gravity and powerful engine.
My grandpa was a Hudson man. Bought a brand new one in 46 when he got home from the war, and another new one in 49, looked just like the one pictured. He used to tell me how fast his Hudson was.
Studebaker did not merge with Nash. Studebaker and Packard merged and then died in 1966. Sent from my iPhone using The H.A.M.B. mobile app
On target except for the merger details....Hudson did join with Nash to form American Motors, but Studebaker went a different direction, merging with Packard. Good fortune brought me a ‘49 Hudson Super Six Coupe (a bit darker green) a few years ago. Sadly, languishing awaiting its turn in the shop. When I was a kid the next door neighbors had a ‘48 4 Door Sedan, don’t know/remember the series. Got to ride in it from time to time. Recall feeling very comfortable and secure in its spacious but almost cave like interior. Ray
The Studebaker, Packard, Hudson and Nash merger didn't happen. It was proposed, but the If it had, they might have survived. Studebaker and Packard merged and remained Studebaker until the end in the mid 60's. Nash and Hudson merged and ended up as American Motors.
My memory fails me these days. You're right. Hudson and Nash merged but the '55 Hudson, which more resembled a Rambler only uglier used Packard V-8 engines as an option. I seem to remember they went to Hydamatic trannys with that option, too. Studbaker and Packard was merged into Studbaker/Packard Corporation. Dad bought one of the last of the new '54 Hudsons in "55. Nice car. The Metallic green paint on the example shown , when polished and waxed looked as good as most factory two step finishes of today. Great depth of color and the metallic stood out beautifully. Not bad for baked enamel.
5TH and B street went to school across the street. Seven years old at that time. The Hudson Garage Frank Giest Prop. was at corner of B and Bayview. I lived at 19 Bayview my Grandfather built the house in 1895. SAN RAFAEL CA.
"push start their dragster"! more likely to push start cars with a dead battery, after all it's at a service station. I'm sure every service station in California owned a dragster!
In my past, a couple of these were often winners in stock car circle track races around the MidWest. As previously mentioned the low slung body pan and that big cubic inch Twin H power. They are great looking as well.
Hello, Nice story and great color large format photo of the Hudson. Throughout photo history, it seems like they all started out with large format negatives in individual slide out cassettes (for lack of a better name). The early still photographers, to the early press photos with their 4 x 5 cameras that were crystal clear. The portability of those early cameras were out of this world and those that carried them around were a little overboard for their photos. In the late 40s, our dad had a 4x5 Graflex Press bellows camera, with some accessories. He was a little fanatical in his photos. But, 75 years later, those family B&W photos are still clear and concise. So, there is no going around large format negatives or in this case, a larger Ektachrome color slides. A 2.25" x 2.25" slide versus 35mm slide Larger is clearer, as it is easier to work with for enlarging the slide for big prints. Larger is better… in this case. When we were able to get the 2.25 x 2.25 cameras, the top of the line was a Hassleblad box. Most of us could not afford those small box format cameras, so we stuck to the reliable 35mm color slide film. But, when the editors and publishers require a larger format color slide in order to qualify for a cover or inside full two page spread, one takes notice and the search is on for the next generation larger format color slide film camera. The 2.25 film comes out super clear in any of the top of the line models from different manufacturers. Jnaki Before I faded out of the photo journalism era of my involvement, I had placed an order for a Pentax 6 x 7 film camera from my uncle. He had friends in the industry and could get a good deal for the large format camera and accessories. I was drooling at the thought of getting a large camera that looked like a regular 35mm film camera, but took the 2.25 x 2.25 film, slides and all. It was going to be too involved in customs paperwork, so I bought a pro 2.25 x 2.25 twin lens reflex camera with a pistol grip, for my large film format photos. The one thing that the 6 x 7 camera had was that the camera uses 120 film and exposes images on a 6 x 7 centimeter area (hence the name). The camera was able to use 220 film as well. So, in the darkroom, a perfect 8x10 print was able to be made without any finagling of the projected image. A home made color slide border edge, from color slide film that was not developed and mounted on Kodak borders. This image is one of my long lasting 2.25 x 2.25 color slides, digitally copied and edited to create a color slide that looks like a large 35mm photo.
I'd would have bet money that original shot of the Hudson was on Kodachrome, not Ektachrome. Ektachome tends to shift towards the red end of the spectrum even when they are stored properly. Kodachrome held up a lot better. I have seen Kodachrome slides from the 30's that look like they were shot yesterday and Ektachrome from the 70's that was almost lost.
The Jalopy Journal
