The S&S Photo Thread

I hope no S&S fans will find this post offensive, but I can't understand why S&S coaches were always significantly more expensive. It appears they have cut corners, at least from a styling standpoint, in all their ambulances and in many of their funeral coaches. And some of the gawdy and flamboyant things they would do to their coaches, like the extra brightwork cresting the hood or flanking the grill to disguise the make and/or age of the vehicle had to look almost hideous to the eyes of some of their clientele when they first got a look. I am shocked to see that their early 60's hightop ambulances are virtually identical from the roof cap up until they stopped ambulance production in the mid 70's. And, their hightop ambulances have an almost RV appearance to them more than an ambulance appearance in my opinion. Plus their use of GM tail light assemblys as tunnel lights is further evidence that they cut a lot of corners stylistically speaking. Anyone can buy NOS tail light assemblys from a parts department, and call them tunnel lights. I know that Eureka did this too, and I confess I've never been a fan of Eureka styling either from the 50's until they closed in 1964...but they were also using wood frames for their cars and they were a small operation in a tiny two story factory and I think everything they built was virtually hand built and assembled.

But S&S, a division of famed Hess & Eisenhardt -- who was world famous for building armoured limousines for heads of state -- certainly had the resources to invest in better styling. They appear to have jacked the prices of all their products sky high, and called it an honor and priviledge to own an S&S, and tried to spin it that only the most discriminating customers deserve an S&S. But the reality is, their prices were really high, their styling was sub par (in my opinion only of course), and as a result they sold significantly fewer products than M+M and Superior.

I have no opinion on the quality of S&S products, as I have never yet owned a professional car of my own. I know that Ed has mentioned on more than one occasion that Superiors are actually *inferior* in terms of fit and finish and overall build quality, and I can only assume that S&S products were actually ultra high quality like Eurekas were known to have.

But from a styling standpoint, to be honest I've always thought that S&S ambulances are ugly and their funeral coach styling doesn't come close to matching Superior and M+M.

Again, I hope my opinion isn't offensive or hurtful to S&S owners and fans, and I have always been and will always remain a huge fan of H+E limousines and armored cars...especially JFK's parade limo that he died in, SS 100 X.

Abe
 
For me, liking S&S is about one thing: Their coach lamp. No other hearse company has a coach lamp(or landau bars for that matter)to compare with an S&S. Now bear in mind that I really didn't start noticing hearses until the funeral home that our family used got a 1994 S&S Medalist, and I know that that 3 panel coach lamp wasn't used on S&S hearses until '78 or '79. Before that, no regular production hearses really had a good coach lamp except Miller-Meteors' Citation models if I am correct, and those were small.

To me, coach lamps identify a hearse at night. When you see that lamp in the side lit at night you KNOW what that car is without a doubt. With no lamp, it just looks like any other vehicle on the road at night. No distinguishing marks.

I must agree about the 'date mark' trim used on the hoods of later model S&S hearses. I've always thought those were ugly.
 
Abe Bush said:
I hope no S&S fans will find this post offensive, but I can't understand why S&S coaches were always significantly more expensive. It appears they have cut corners, at least from a styling standpoint, in all their ambulances and in many of their funeral coaches. And some of the gawdy and flamboyant things they would do to their coaches, like the extra brightwork cresting the hood or flanking the grill to disguise the make and/or age of the vehicle had to look almost hideous to the eyes of some of their clientele when they first got a look. I am shocked to see that their early 60's hightop ambulances are virtually identical from the roof cap up until they stopped ambulance production in the mid 70's. And, their hightop ambulances have an almost RV appearance to them more than an ambulance appearance in my opinion. Plus their use of GM tail light assemblys as tunnel lights is further evidence that they cut a lot of corners stylistically speaking. Anyone can buy NOS tail light assemblys from a parts department, and call them tunnel lights. I know that Eureka did this too, and I confess I've never been a fan of Eureka styling either from the 50's until they closed in 1964...but they were also using wood frames for their cars and they were a small operation in a tiny two story factory and I think everything they built was virtually hand built and assembled.

But S&S, a division of famed Hess & Eisenhardt -- who was world famous for building armoured limousines for heads of state -- certainly had the resources to invest in better styling. They appear to have jacked the prices of all their products sky high, and called it an honor and priviledge to own an S&S, and tried to spin it that only the most discriminating customers deserve an S&S. But the reality is, their prices were really high, their styling was sub par (in my opinion only of course), and as a result they sold significantly fewer products than M+M and Superior.

I have no opinion on the quality of S&S products, as I have never yet owned a professional car of my own. I know that Ed has mentioned on more than one occasion that Superiors are actually *inferior* in terms of fit and finish and overall build quality, and I can only assume that S&S products were actually ultra high quality like Eurekas were known to have.

But from a styling standpoint, to be honest I've always thought that S&S ambulances are ugly and their funeral coach styling doesn't come close to matching Superior and M+M.

Again, I hope my opinion isn't offensive or hurtful to S&S owners and fans, and I have always been and will always remain a huge fan of H+E limousines and armored cars...especially JFK's parade limo that he died in, SS 100 X.

Abe
Click to expand...

Can we "nip this one in the bud" before it goes anywhere? I see no benefit in critiqueing the various manufacturers in these threads. If you don't like/care for/appreciate any one manufacturer for any reason, don't follow the thread. They all had their unique features and styling. Thank God we don't all like the same cars! I currently own a '75 S&S Victoria. I don't care for the "pool ball rack" on the hood either, but I love the car. I have owned 2 Meteors, a Miller, a Eureka, and a Superior. Let's just enjoy the pretty pictures!
 
They all had bad and good years. Take the door panels off a lot of these and look at the creative wiring on a lot of models. Coach built I think means what we have laying around.
 
You Get What You Pay For 101

Abe Bush said:
...I can't understand why S&S coaches were always significantly more expensive.
Click to expand...

That's because you probably aren't aware of (a) how they were built, (b) why they were built that way, (c) the history of their styling, and (d) the clientele they catered to.

I'll try to make this explanation short and yet cover my points: S&S catered to conservative, traditional funeral directors that were interested in prestige*, actual value, and longevity more than initial purchase price or the latest style. Their basic roofline and body design (above the beltline), except for adapting to different windshields, didn't change from 1957 through 1976. Even the downsized cars were kept as close as possible to the S&S "look." S&S products were basically overbuilt - meaning they used better and heavier materials than they had to - and stayed tighter and truer longer than those of the competition. For instance, they used rivets where other builders used screws or nuts and bolts. The cobra top they used on the Park Hill and Victoria models was much more expensive than regular vinyl. Here's proof of their value: When it came time to trade or sell, an S&S was always worth more than a competitor's similar car in the same condition.

As far as ambulances, S&S offered customization that competitors couldn't or didn't want to do. Had I ever been in a rollover ambulance accident, I would prefer it was in an S&S because of their construction. We all know that most ambulances - any make - were "rode hard and put up wet." Yet, as with the funeral cars, an S&S would bring more at trade in or sale time. S&S owners were discriminating buyers that would treat their cars accordingly. Many private operators would wait for a used S&S to come available because (a) they would hold up to hard use and (b) previous S&S owners were known to have taken exceptional care of their vehicles. I know of several fire departments as well as rescue and first aid squads that would rather have spent the same amount for a two- or three-year-old S&S as they could have for a brand new car from a competitor.

There's more to the story, but I hope this explanation answers your question.

*Mostly among other funeral directors; the public generally didn't know the difference.
 
Last edited:
Tell it like it is, Steve. For a great many years of its history S&S products did in, many cases, set the standards for the entire industry. They offered extremely well-built products with a distinctive and conservative appearance. Today the S&S name is owned by a faceless corporate entity with no real understanding of the brand's heritage or traditions - or so it seems of the profession they serve. They have turned the S&S into little more than a premium-priced, badge-engineered Superior. It's true, S&S vehicles have lost much of the distinction that they once had. This may be in part due to the fact that, over the years, many competitive brands have unashamedly aped the styling introduced by S&S in 1977 in attempt to add lustre to what would otherwise be bland, me-too designs. What these manufacturers produced was exactly what they hoped to avoid - bland, me-too vehicles. Without imagination or a visionary at the helm, S&S has not yet broken free of that 1977 styling and moved on with something really distinctive. The reason for retaining the distinctive 'pool cue' hood ornamentation can not be fully appreciated by three-fact experts without a knowledge and an understanding of the history of the company, its products and why these unique decorative appliques are where they are. It's a tradition originally established to fill a percieved need that goes back 76-years. Personally, I'm delighted that someone has seen fit to start this thread. It's nice to once again see these great cars.
 
S&S only made one mistake in there construction. that was there seam for the roof. it was set so that it trapped any water that would get in it. that is the reason you see so many of them rusty at that seam up into the roof. but other then that they were a vary sound body with a heavy duty put together interior. now mind you the chassis was the same on all of the cars. it's the body cowl back we are talking about. but for people looking for changes they were not the coach to go for. the traditional style was incorporated into each of GMs body changed and they were kept simple. people wanting a flashy car went to the superior those not wanting to spend the money went to a MM. but each of them has something you hated. just the way it is. I love there hearses and combos don't care for the style of there ambulances. respect there construction though.

I'll add my 73 to the mix. I know the bars were to be gold I just could not bring myself to do it.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_3581 we'll run it out one more time.JPG
    IMG_3581 we'll run it out one more time.JPG
    73.6 KB · Views: 659
Steve Loftin said:
Interesting; I wondered about the lack of a partition in Mike's photos. Any idea why they were deleted?
Click to expand...

Steve, I have seen quite a few S&S coaches without the division window, and as far as I know the only builder to offer this option, and also have wondered why they were deleted. All the ones I have seen like this have been between the years of 80 through 92. Even on the FWDs.
 
From my archive, a stunning 1962 Superline Parkway.


1962SSParkway-1.jpg
 
Joseph McDonald said:
And some inside details of a 1962 Parkway
Click to expand...

"All are lifetime Formica-covered." Someone should test that by taking their old coach to Accubuilt and knocking on their door :)

Interesting to see the cabinetry wrap along the driver's side rear door also. I wonder what faced the door opening side?
 
You all make excellent points, and my negative opinions regarding S&S cars was more aimed at their hightop ambulances, their use of tailight assemblies as tunnel lights, and of course the weird metal strips that I didn't understand and I was only basing my opinions on a style (or lack there-of) point of view. I assumed there had to be a reason their coaches were always significantly higher priced than all their competitors, but I had no idea why that was unless it was just so they could make more money by building way fewer and jacking the prices sky high. But, the explanations you all give as to why they did that make perfect sense and I appreciate all the input. By the way, I always liked the creased rear door, which I believe was introduced by S&S so it's not like they didn't introduce any new styling cues to the industry.

Also, I LOVE seeing all the S&S ads, and can only hope that some day perhaps a comprehensive book will be written about the history of S&S and its products like has been done with Henney, Superior, Eureka, Flxible, and most recently M+M.

Thanks again everyone for your feedback, I appreciate that you all took the time to set me straight on these things and I have a new appreciation for S&S coaches.

Abe
 
Abe Bush said:
Also, I LOVE seeing all the S&S ads, and can only hope that some day perhaps a comprehensive book will be written about the history of S&S and its products like has been done with Henney, Superior, Eureka, Flxible, and most recently M+M.
Abe
Click to expand...

Abe, The S&S book is being worked on as we speak. :thumb:
 
Another follow up to Post 23

Same car as the one is Post 23? There was more than one of these identical, so we may never know, but here is one of Washburn-McReavy's 1982 S&S Victorias. The ivory front seats can be seen in the photo. This was taken in front of the (then recently-acquired) McReavy's Welander-Quist Chapel on Dupont Avenue S. in Minneapolis, MN. Today, this is Washburn-McReavy's main location; all of the prep-work is done there and all of their rolling stock is housed there.

(Karsnia collection)
 

Attachments

  • Thurs_5_240001.jpg
    Thurs_5_240001.jpg
    89.8 KB · Views: 765
To Bill Carlin, Tony Karsnia, et al
I have been gone for several days, so I missed some of the posts.
My car could have very well been one you are speaking of. The Dash was black and it did have a radio. The drapes were obviously aftermarket purple. I dug out a copy of the title I kept on the car and the owner was Wing Bain Funeral Home in Montevideo, MN. The title was issued 1/14/1985 and traded in later to Great Country Motors in Mason City, IA. I bought it from them and they said it had not run for about 6 years. This was about a year ago. It had 73,000 miles on it then. I sold the car in Dec., 2011.
 
Mike Burkhart said:
To Bill Carlin, Tony Karsnia, et al
I have been gone for several days, so I missed some of the posts.
My car could have very well been one you are speaking of. The Dash was black and it did have a radio. The drapes were obviously aftermarket purple. I dug out a copy of the title I kept on the car and the owner was Wing Bain Funeral Home in Montevideo, MN. The title was issued 1/14/1985 and traded in later to Great Country Motors in Mason City, IA. I bought it from them and they said it had not run for about 6 years. This was about a year ago. It had 73,000 miles on it then. I sold the car in Dec., 2011.
Click to expand...

Great Country Motors is also Premier Coach sales. I do know the car, but never took any pics of it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top