Tpc #167

Received # 167 here today and it is fantastic. Another fine job by all of the staff at the PCS magazine. These Gentlemen never cease to amaze me.:thumbsup:

Hopefully this will be my first issue since joining the PCS. The way you all rave over TPC is going to make me hang out on the stoop waiting for the mail ?

Waiting patiently(?)

I am also looking very forward to it's arrival. This will be my first issue since finally having a procar again and rejoining. I was out for about nine years. No doubt at all that it will be worth the wait!

Spoiler alert

I read mine cover to cover. It was a fascinating read!!! Of course we all know that S&S products were always a premium offering, but this issue explained the extent to which H&E went to produce the highest quality S&S professional cars. And compared how Superior and M-M built theirs, to how S&S built theirs. Worlds of difference.

It reminded me of Ed's comments about his feelings about Superior's build quality (or lack there-of) based on his experiences working on all these brands over the years.

S&S spared no expense in creating the most exquisitely high quality cars for the most discriminating customers who were happy to pay for the privilege of owning an S&S.

I used to always think S&S cars were rather ugly, bland looking, and their high-top ambulances always looked more like campers to me than ambulances but after reading this issue, I have a whole new opinion of S&S professional cars.

had they just drilled some drain holes or tilted the ledge down were the top met the quarters they would not have that rust issue there. the one I had was a solid car.

David & Bill - Welcome to the PCS. Getting your first edition of our magazine should be exciting. As this will be the first either of you have seen of this publication, please let us know your thoughts - what you liked and...didn't like. Feedback from our member/readers is important to the publications staff and lets them know if what they are publishing is what the membership wish to see and read. So...let us know your thoughts. Thanks.

Just got my copy and I have to say I was tickled to see my coach on the back cover and in the article. It really means a lot to me. Thanks are due to Danny Ryder for finding the car as well as Tony Karsnia, Ron Devies, Ed Renstrom, and the "Steves" (Lichtman and Loftin) for helping with period correct equipment, lights, and mechanical advice.

Thanks again!

Jon Van Dermark

Good Looking Crew

I still remember the good old days. Whenever we would make a home removal we would have to put on a coat and tie and take the combination with the curtains pulled.

Tpc-167

Received mine in Southern CA yesterday as well. Having owned (2) S&S's a 1964 Park Row Combination, and a 1973 Medic Mark-I (with a "camper shell top") as discussed they were definately the top of the line (quality-wise) compared to the M-M's that I have owned. Again my hat is off to Tom McPherson, Walt McCall, Brady Smith and all the others involved in this incredible publication! MM

Today was a good day, received my very first copy of TPC. More than I ever expected. The publication team did an excellent job and very impressive. Nice blend of discussion of hearses and ambulances.

I should be done reading everything by Friday, can I get the next issue yet, lol

Thank you for such a quality publication

John ED Renstrom said:

had they just drilled some drain holes or tilted the ledge down were the top met the quarters they would not have that rust issue there. the one I had was a solid car.

Click to expand...

Hi Ed, I do have a question. Do you think they could anticipate in the 60's and 70's that their cars would be prone to leak in these areas, and cause rust issues years later? My guess if they would have realized this, they would have done it. But were they anticipating people collecting these "workhorses" 40 years later, and lamenting about the rust prone areas?

After reading this issue, I was surprised to see what lengths S&S went to in order to rust-proof their cars "under the skin", even providing Ziebart rust-proofing treatment, with orders that the rust-proofing needed to be maintained by an authorized Ziebart service center, which many owners neglected doing according to the article.

While this may have been a design flaw, it may not have been realized at the time I'm thinking.

Kind of like DC-10s were found to have spotty (and microscopic) metallurgic flaws in some of the titanium fan discs, which would operate flawlessly for nearly 20 years before the flaw finally reared its head, and in one case (United Airlines flight 232 with service from Stapleton International in Denver to O'Hare International in Chicago on July 19, 1989) caused the top fan disc to suffer catastrophic failure inside the tail-mounted engine, it literally flew apart while en flight, severed ALL the hydraulic lines to the plane, which led to the loss of all controls. They were able to somehow control the plane by "steering" it with the left and right engines, accelerating speed to the left engine and reducing speed to the right in order to turn left, and vice versa to turn right. The plane, having zero flight controls could not be controlled any other way, and continued losing altitude, and they somehow managed to crash land at Sioux City Iowa.

Of the 296 people on board, 111 died in the accident and 185 survived.

This plane was delivered to United in 1971, and after continuous service the next 18 years the flaw was not discovered until late 1989 when the crash happened.

After the NTSB completed their investigation, all DC-10s were grounded until their fan discs could be examined, and all microscopic metallurgic flaws uncovered and new fan discs installed.

Abe Bush; said:

After reading this issue, I was surprised to see what lengths S&S went to in order to rust-proof their cars "under the skin", even providing Ziebart rust-proofing treatment, with orders that the rust-proofing needed to be maintained by an authorized Ziebart service center, which many owners neglected doing according to the article.

Click to expand...

Abe - You may have misunderstood. S&S never applied the Ziebart rust-proofing to their vehicles. That was done by Miller-Meteor. The anti-corrosion measures taken by Hess & Eienhardt with its S&S products included the extensive use of zinc-coated, rust-resisting metal in areas known to be prone to rusting. Miller-Meteor was the first company to apply Ziebart to its vehicles. Later, Superior began to use a similar product but, not Ziebart. If I recall properly, Superior used a Quaker State rust inhibiting product. And yes, the warranty for these rust-proofing applications required that the vehicle owners had them inspected annually - something that was rarely followed up-upon.

Great issue!

I always fancied myself a Cadillac expert and had always assumed that the 68 models were just 67 models with a refined grille. I had no idea until I read the article that there was such a marked difference between the two years. I love it when I learn something new!

The body was designed to last ten years and it did. I would guess that the way the panels sloped were to help center it for assembly. Would they under stand that condensation would form on the inside panels. Yes they did. Hence the rust proofing inside. They were in the business of selling new cars not building ones that would last forever. Who in their right mind would bring a year old car in to disassemble to check the condition of the rust proofing? S & S built a solid car. You get one apart you know. No cheap card board in the interior but ply wood panels and thick cloth. But they never had any finish under that cobra top. They cut there corners were they could also. Tops was one place that goes fast in them.

Jon VanDermark said:

Just got my copy and I have to say I was tickled to see my coach on the back cover and in the article. It really means a lot to me. Thanks are due to Danny Ryder for finding the car as well as Tony Karsnia, Ron Devies, Ed Renstrom, and the "Steves" (Lichtman and Loftin) for helping with period correct equipment, lights, and mechanical advice.

Thanks again!

Jon Van Dermark

Click to expand...

Congrats Doc!! Great to see your stunning car in TPC 167.

John ED Renstrom said:

The body was designed to last ten years and it did. I would guess that the way the panels sloped were to help center it for assembly. Would they under stand that condensation would form on the inside panels. Yes they did. Hence the rust proofing inside. They were in the business of selling new cars not building ones that would last forever. Who in their right mind would bring a year old car in to disassemble to check the condition of the rust proofing? S & S built a solid car. You get one apart you know. No cheap card board in the interior but ply wood panels and thick cloth. But they never had any finish under that cobra top. They cut there corners were they could also. Tops was one place that goes fast in them.

Click to expand...

Thanks Ed for answering my question, this is fascinating to understand how low-production vehicles built on the Cadillac commercial chassis were designed, and manufactured.

To read the article written by Mr. McPherson, you'd think S&S professional cars were hand-buildt true masterpieces but it sounds like a lot of that might have been just a tad bit exaggerated in their advertisements (but not in their new-car prices).

Do you think it's too late to collect on the Ziebart warranty on my '74 M-M Lifeliner??

Approximately when did M-M start using Ziebart on all of their vehicles?

everything had a weakness. knowing your cars is the key to preserving it. not many people will remove the aluminum trip that covers the seam between the superior glass panels and the steel but to not do so and re caulk it during a repaint is a big mistake. the as is true for the MM door drains. and the one on this Stageway I have here. you need to get in there drill them out and treat the inside of the door before it goes not after. the S&S remove to panels over the wheels will and clean up and treat that seam you get it before you see it on the out side and you only need to do it once. then each modal year has there trouble spots. you find out by asking people that have had that car what they were. that way you can take steps to inspect and correct trouble before it becomes major. that the way you can preserve your car you love. not by pretending that troubles don't happen on it.

Kurt Arends said:

Approximately when did M-M start using Ziebart on all of their vehicles?

Click to expand...

Kurt - Good question. From available materials (press releases and literature) it would appear that Miller-Meteor began applying Ziebart rust inhibiting to all of their vehicles with the 1968 models. Available photographs give the impression that this was carried out within the Piqua plant although I have no recollection of seeing this being done during the many visits I made to the plant over the years. I know that it was a popular selling feature with the dealers and was welcomed by many customers - that usually neglected the annual follow-up inspections. I would guess that competitive factors coupled with the wide-spread popularity of such products was why, a few years later, Superior began offering the Quaker State rust inhiniting application for its vehicles. And, yes, it's probably a bit too late to make a claim on that warranty.

I Got Mine!

I received my copy today and it was well worth waiting for. We have owned a number of 67 and 68s, only one of which was a convertible, the rest were professional cars. So, it is great to see them recognized, because they are nice cars.

Being from NJ, I really liked Rich Litton's Ambulance Archives, there are some fabulous ambulances pictured there, great history. My personal favorite would probably be the 1956 Memphian Chrysler ambulance from Sea Isle City, NJ. Having said that, I like all of them!

Yet another fabulous edition of The Professional Car, Bravo!