1960 Cadillac Superior custom

Actually, let me back that up a bit. There may well be a legal way in which they used the same VIN and called it a limo in their DMV paperwork for a reconstructed title.

I doubt this is what happened, and suspect that the car now wears a different set of digits from another vehicle, but the disclaimer should be said.

All seems pretty fishy to me, given how shifty they were being on the phone, but hey, it's possible I'm wrong.
 
Jay

I would gather all the info you have and get what's out there regarding photos, etc and put it all together.

May be worth the time and effort in the end and something neat to have.

Darren
 
Darren Bedford said:
Jay

I would gather all the info you have and get what's out there regarding photos, etc and put it all together.

May be worth the time and effort in the end and something neat to have.

Darren
Click to expand...

Frankly, I don't care about the car beyond my interaction with it in the past and a morbid curiosity where it goes in the future, just find it a shame that they did something shady with it, and in a very blatant way. The worst part is that center divider breaks up the entire interior of the car and makes the full body length sun roof look absolutely awful with something breaking it up.

Oh well. Guess that's something the new buyer and the state have to concern themselves with. At least the car is still rollin'.
 
at what point is in no longer an original modified car? once you swap chassis a couple of times gut he interior once or twice. change the vin and all. :rolleyes:
 
Jay Gryph said:
I think this should be mentioned somewhere so it's on record.

Thundertaker just sold at Barret Jackson for $110,000.

Too bad it wasn't Thundertaker.

Read this carefully. http://www.barrett-jackson.com/Even...LAC-FLEETWOOD-CUSTOM-LIMO-THUNDERTAKER-192455

Thundertaker now has a reconstructed title, and the information lists it as a limousine. It has a center divider with TVs in it. If that divider looks funky, it's because it wasn't ever intended to be there. The Hotrod Magazine shoot of the car does not have it, nor is there any mention of it ever having been in there.



$110,000 is a lot of money for a car with a reconstructed title, and the wrong VIN.
Click to expand...

First, I am in no way standing up for the car OR BJ, I hate them both. Not sure you can say its not "Thundertaker" when clearly it is.
If you look at any of the many pix or videos online you can clearly see the "tracks" where the partition can be raised or lowered, so VERY possible and even more likely has always been there with the TVs, they just leave it down for a cleaner look. In one video you even hear Bryan Fuller mention the partition switch.
As for the title saying its a limo, the people at BJ are probably just going by whats on the title, and since its now a limo, it was most likely reclassified to legally haul passengers, its not hard to do. I can go to the local DMV and get mine changed from hearse, ambulance, limo, station wagon. I know many people have done it to save fees. Ive had the type changed on several cars over the years. The VIN would never come up as it being a hearse, only that it was a CC. Yes, it is a reconstructed title, which they mention, most likely done because its a custom, so they had the title built to suit its needs. Again easy to do, I have friends that build customs all the time, and have a title issued for something that never had one when they dug the body out of the weeds somewhere. I had a 51 Barnette Pontiac ambulance that the previous owner got with no title. After some paperwork and a officer inspection, it was issued a completely new VIN number, because they couldn't find the old one on the vehicle, it even had the wrong year on it because the previous owner thought it was a year off than what it was. It was completely legal. So just because it does not mention it was a hearse, or have the original VIN (if that's even the case), does not mean anything is shady.
 
John

Good points as your experience of dealing with titles is more than most people ever need to be involved in.

That is why I suggested getting all the facts from what was out there to eliminate any missed facts.

It would be great to have everything about the car in one place or filed with photos, videos and facts. Like a history folder on the car.

Could make a killer detailed magazine story for the car. Likely better than anything out there to date on it.

I dig the car as a custom and think they did a fantastic job keeping most of the original look of the car. Interior is more functional than a roller filled rear of a hearse.

To each their own.

I wonder who owns it now and what their intentions are with it.

Nicest custom hearse I have seen. Make George Barris' Cargoyle look kinda lame in my opinion.

Darren
 
John Royark JR said:
First, I am in no way standing up for the car OR BJ, I hate them both. Not sure you can say its not "Thundertaker" when clearly it is.
Click to expand...

Ya don't mince words do ya?

It's entirely possible I'm wrong. Hopefully the car is all fat an happy in the legal department. That's the new owners problem to deal with if it's not.

I'm still glad to see the thing out and around the internet getting publicity. Hopefully the one I just sold also garners such a following.

Nice to see one of my ol' cars selling for a figure in the top percentage of pro car pricing, modified or otherwise.

I have my doubts that car would have brought as much as it did were it simply a clean original car.

For that matter, does anyone know of other 60's selling for that price or more?
 
No that was not the JFK car that car was crushed it was a clone as most of BJ cars are. the king Hearse went in the 60 as I recall stock car.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top