Go to car


Latest Comments
Car: 87080   By: Low-Tech Redneck   Comment: "Push down, pull it back, and watch it go right up ..."
Car: Fpost   By: wannabemustangjockey   Comment: "That sucks. :( If I was more willing to dilute my ..."
Car: Fpost   By: DiRF   Comment: "So... they're just outright lying now? In random ..."
Car: Fpost   By: Skid   Comment: "Fuck 'em. They've dug their own grave, now they'll..."
Car: 92199   By: wannabemustangjockey   Comment: "That's what my grandpa thought in 1980 when he bou..."
See last 25 comments
 Go to

Next picture
Ricecop Home
Linkage
Plates
Bling Bling
Photo
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

 Other

Submit a picture
Profile Lookup
FAQ
Site Log
Leader Board
Site Stats

 Online Now

0 Ricecops
1 Guests

Detailed List

 Login

Username:

Password:


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
Description:
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.


   Comments

Showing page: 1 of 1
[
1 ]

#1
12-19-2005 @ 04:20:47 PM
Posted By : Adambomb Reply | Edit | Del
I wouldn't mind one of these, though
47797


#2
10-24-2008 @ 10:49:54 PM
Posted By : Adambomb Reply | Edit | Del
That's some good hash mang.

#3
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.

#4
1-07-2009 @ 08:33:50 PM
Posted By : DiRF  Reply | Edit | Del
#3, That's not saying much, though.

#5
1-07-2009 @ 08:58:35 PM
Posted By : Skid Reply | Edit | Del
#4, Truth.

#6
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

Classifieds 
Click here to post your own classified ad






Want to send some feedback? Click here.

Server time: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 06:12:09 PM

All pictures on this site are property of their respective owners.
Copyright 2000 - 2017 Ricecop. All rights reserved.