Go to car

Latest Comments
Car: 96930   By: ricerocketboy   Comment: "XJ wheels...."
Car: 96999   By: ricerocketboy   Comment: "I don't think this was ever intended to sell here...."
Car: 96931   By: ricerocketboy   Comment: "'66?..."
Car: 97004   By: Adambomb   Comment: "https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1875/44700034152_c6c..."
Car: 92571   By: Obsidian   Comment: "AND you could press F or C at any time to change t..."
See last 25 comments
 Go to

Next picture
Ricecop Home
Bling Bling
Free Post

 Top 10

Top 10 Ricers
Top 10 Non-Ricers
Top 10 Other Good
Top 10 Other Bad

 New & Retired

Newest Images
Retired Images


Submit a picture
Profile Lookup
Site Log
Leader Board
Site Stats

 Online Now

1 Ricecops
1 Guests

Detailed List




Remember Login?

Sign up!
Why sign up?
Forgot my password

View this image at full size
Click here to let us know if the image above is broken.

Go back and vote on this image.

Picture Information
URL: http://riceornot.ricecop.com/?auto=47796
Submitted by: DiRF
Comments: 6  (Read/Post)     Favorites: 0  (View)
Submitted on: 12-19-2005
View Stats Category: Car
The death of a once-great car manufacturer...

Hudson, whose "step-down" Hornets of the early '50s were among some of the best looking and well-built cars of the era, became dated, sales went down, and the company was sold off to Nash in 1955. The '55-'57 Hudsons were nicknamed "Hash", due to being merely rebadged Nash sedans, and were pretty horrible looking. Damn shame.


Showing page: 1 of 1
1 ]

12-19-2005 @ 04:20:47 PM
Posted By : Adambomb Reply | Edit | Del
I wouldn't mind one of these, though

10-24-2008 @ 10:49:54 PM
Posted By : Adambomb Reply | Edit | Del
That's some good hash mang.

1-07-2009 @ 06:41:15 PM
Posted By : Skid Reply | Edit | Del
They're actually better looking than the Nash sedans of the same time period, IMO.

1-07-2009 @ 08:33:50 PM
Posted By : DiRF  Reply | Edit | Del
#3, That's not saying much, though.

1-07-2009 @ 08:58:35 PM
Posted By : Skid Reply | Edit | Del
#4, Truth.

10-10-2009 @ 08:53:40 AM
Posted By : DiRF  Reply | Edit | Del
Since I posted this thread, I've learned that the downfall of Hudson is actually due in no small part to the Hudson Jet... Hudson thought the compact-car market was prime to be explored, so they chose to invest their resources into what ultimately became the Jet, rather than updating their large cars... unfortunately, they were 5 years too early...

...I say five-years too early, because Studebaker was nearly bankrupt by 1959, but their new compact, the Lark, was a massive hit and kept the company going for another number of years.

Showing page: 1 of 1
1 ]

Login to leave a comment

Click here to post your own classified ad

Want to send some feedback? Click here.

Server time: Wednesday, September 19, 2018 09:00:42 AM

All pictures on this site are property of their respective owners.
Copyright 2000 - 2018 Ricecop. All rights reserved.