Jump to content

Buying a 1952 Buick Special Deluxe: Where is the frame VIN ?


Looey

Recommended Posts

Hello, all! I'm 15 and the original owner (!) of a 70K mi 1952 Buick Special Deluxe (2dr Sed 263 I8 w/ 3spd) has agreed to sell me his car if I'll restore it, which my Dad will help me do.

But my state Department of Motor Vehicles requires that an officer inspect the frame VIN stamp. The 3rd edition of John Gunnell's Standard Catalog of Buick isn't helping me find the frame stamp. Would somebody who has personally restored or actually SEEN the 1952 frame stamping please tell me where to find it? I sure appreciate it!

post-52914-143137941625_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sometime ago I bought a 1950 and had the same problem finding the frame number.

This is the 50 but it may help.

The stamp was on the left A Pillar, almost at the top of the Pillar. Problem was that the car had small wind diflectors fitted and these had covered the stamping.

Michael M

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest imported_MrEarl

Hey Looey

Welcome aboard. If you haven't already, I encourage you to join the Buick Club Of America too. With it you'll get a great monthly magazine full of great articles and vendoers for parts etc.

Sounds like you made a great find there. It's also great that you and your dad will be working on the car together.

Looey, if you don't know where the A-pillar is, then that makes too of us. Michael,what exactly is considered the "A-pillar" and why is it called that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looey,

It should be on a metal tag rivetted to the drivers side ( L/H ) front pillar, at least thats where it is on my 1950 Super. The number is also stamped on the top of the chassis but I can't remember if it's left or right, doesn't matter though because you can't see it unless you remove the front mudguards ( fenders ).

Good luck with your restoration, I'm sure you and your Dad will have a great time getting the old girl back on the road. We would all love too see some photos when you get the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the welcome! If I can get this car bought I'm for sure joining the Buick Club!

And thanks for the tips. We went back over to the owner and we found the tag on the A-Pillar. It is held on with what looks like original screws but the number stamped on that tag doesn't match the VIN on the title. The firewall tag under the back of the hood on the passenger side does not have any VIN info on it.

The Motor Vehicle people say they won't accept a body mounted tag anyway, so I guess I still need to find the frame stamping. The owner won't let us dismantle fenders, so any other ideas? Getting desperate here!

Also, I uploaded a picture of the car, but the attachment won't click to show the picture. What's up with that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looey,

Funny I should see this today.....I just went through a similar (but much more involved process) in getting my 24 Buick Truck registered. The Washington State Patrol's (WSP) database indicated there should be a stamped frame number next to the gas tank & that riveted nameplates were not used on 1924 Buicks. I knew they were wrong, & I didn't argue with the inspector (not a good idea).

So, I went home & verified the location of the tags via Terry Dunham's website and emailed the guy in charge of VIN inspections with the WSP. He arranged to have the inspector issue the paperwork I needed to get my truck licensed earlier today.

Go to Terry's site & page down to see the VIN locations etc. Try sending it to your DMV inspection office to verify that the nameplate is correct.

http://members.aol.com/buickohv/ars.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest DaveCorbin

Dear Looey:

Part of the reason your tag on the A pillar does not match what's on the title could depend on what state you live in. In the early days, some states used the engine number for the VIN. In a Buick, the engine number in a 1950 car will always be different from the frame number. Post what you've got, and let me decode it for you.

Places to look for the engine number: small flat surface on the lower right (passengers) side of the engine. you're looking for an 8 digit number that ends in 4, which says it's an engine for a Special.

Place to look for frame number: top of right frame rail on a small plate mounted behind the battery and tough to see. You're looking for an 8 digit number here also. The first digit will tell us where the car was assembled, with 1 denoting Flint, etc. The second number will probably be a 6 or 7.

Hope this helps.

Regards, Dave Corbin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Pete Phillips</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The A-pillar is the front corner one that holds the windshield. From the front of the car, it goes "A, B (the post between the two doors on a 4-dr.), and C at the back.

Pete Phillips </div></div>

And don't forget "D" on wagons

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, guys! I'll go over and scrub off the grime on the frame and engine spots mentioned and see if I can find those numbers. This is beginning to be a Holy Grail quest for me now and I SHALL OVERCOME! I'll post what I find and what is on the title.

The only major body problem on this car is some rust coming through on the rear wheel lips and lower quarter panels. They are mostly intact (not rusted away, just holes needing cutting out), but patch panels will be needed if available. I've found, by a huge stroke of luck, a '53 2drHT Super with PERFECT quarters in a local junkyard. The rear wheel lips look the same as on the '52 Special 2drSed, but I'll make a pattern and compare the two bodies to be sure.

By the way, if anybody is needing some '53 2dr HT parts, let me know. I can snag some off the one in the junkyard. Ventiports, anybody?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, guys! I'll go over and scrub off the grime on the frame and engine spots mentioned and see if I can find those numbers. This is beginning to be a Holy Grail quest for me now and I SHALL OVERCOME! I'll post what I find and what is on the title.

The only major body problem on this car is some rust coming through on the rear wheel lips and lower quarter panels. They are mostly intact (not rusted away, just holes needing cutting out), but patch panels will be needed if available. I've found, by a huge stroke of luck, a '53 2drHT Super with PERFECT quarters in a local junkyard. The rear wheel lips look the same as on the '52 Special 2drSed, but I'll make a pattern and compare the two bodies to be sure.

By the way, if anybody is needing some '53 2dr HT parts, let me know. I can snag some off the one in the junkyard. Ventiports, anybody?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welcome Looey. Just a suggestion here, since you are working with the original owner, would he be willing to speak to your inspector directly? If he really is the original owner, that should set the DMV straight right away.

JD

ps: The stick Shifts are really SPECIAL. Congratulations on an excellent find!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, JohnD!

What a great suggestion! I explained what was going on to the owner. He called and talked to the DMV inspector and they told him they will accept a statement of originality from him. No DMV inspection needed according to the guy who runs the DMV office. So that's good news. I guess the ladies at the county tax office weren't sure what I had to do so they kind of shoved me off on the DMV?

I got the tracing of the rear wheel lip and this morning. We're heading over to the junkyard to compare it with the '53 2drHT. I sure hope they're the same or close to it. Doesn't seem to be any patch panels available for this car? Anyway, if they'll fit, they're in great shape.

I'm really excited that the car has the manual transmission. It seems to shift through the gears really nicely although I haven't actually gotten to drive the car yet. And the gearshift being on the column is really neat!!! That book by John Gunnell says that by 1952 85% of Buicks had the Dynaflow automatic transmission. Seems like that must have robbed power or something because the engine power for the automatic cars was higher than in the manual transmission cars. I wonder why they didn't just increase the horsepower of all the engines?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think by 52 the horsepower wars were firing up. The autos got more HP but I don't think it was because they robbed power. I think it was more because the stick shift was just considered an econobox, and Michigan wanted to sell horsepower. But I can't profess to having researched the reason.

Congratulations again on getting a desired car. I believe you'll find that engine and stick shift to be a lot of fun. I would just caution against banging any gears with it though. Look underneath. If you ruin the clutch the entire rear axle has to be removed or pulled back to get the tranny out to get to the bell housing. And back in 52, none of those parts were light. laugh.giflaugh.gif

Speaking for myself and maybe one or two others, pictures man, pictures!!!

JD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yippee! Found the stamped engine number on the right hand (passenger) side of the engine just forward of the distributor and just below the valve cover on a special flat part. It was even tilted slightly so that once the 55 years of gunk was cleaned off I could see the numbers perfectly without even craning my neck. Thanks, Buick, for being so thoughtful! The engine number does NOT match the A-pillar number, but the DMV guy says they don't always and wasn't concerned. I wonder why the two numbers don't match?

Anyway, I took the tracing I made of the '52 wheel lip out to the junkyard. Comparing it with the '53 wheel lip, the '53 is about an inch longer an opening than the '52, BUT... otherwise looks the same in all ways. It looks like the '53 wheel lip and lower quarter can be cut out of the '53 and an inch section cut out, then rewelded onto the '52 no problem!!! The rest of the quarter panel is different from the '52. The '52 has a crease about 3-4" above the wheel lip which the '53 doesn't have. So nothing above that crease line will work from the '53 but since just the '52 wheel lip is bad, that's not a problem.

Hey, here's a funny thing: the color of the '53 in the junkyard is the same green as the '52. What're the chances of that? Actually, what are the chances of any of this happening for me? Most of my friends are going to be driving econoboxes and ricers. I get a '52 Buick Special Deluxe 2dr Sedan with a 3spd manual transmission! Yippeee!

Ok, trying the picture thing again! Thanks for all the help you guys have been so far! This is really exciting!

post-52914-143137941615_thumb.jpg

post-52914-143137941619_thumb.jpg

post-52914-143137941622_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest imported_Thriller

Does yours have the paint code on the firewall plate? My Roadmaster looks like it should be the same colour, but the body plate is missing from my car.

Looks like you have yourself a nice project car there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the compliments. The original owner has had it parked there for years and it's in pretty good shape, considering. All the trim you don't see is in the trunk and back seat. The grill and bumpers are REALLY nice. The the plastic center in the hood badge is missing as the owner said that got broken way back in the '60's. Are replacements available?

I'll check the dash tag for paint code info. There's info on it, but I can't remember what it is.

A question for anybody who may know about the rear axle ratios. The book I've got says the dynaflow cars had a 3.6 ratio while the manual tranny cars got the 3.9 ratio.

The '53 Super at the junkyard has a complete V8, dynaflow and axle drivetrain present. Should I snag the rear axle and put the differential in the '52 for a bit better gas milage (hey, at $3.30/gal, every little bit would help!) or does decent in-town performance make the 3.9 ratio a must? Any interchange problems between the '52 and '53?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My experience with rear axle ratios is with my former 2002 Ford Ranger. It was 4 wheel drive and came with 4.11 gears. Till it was broken in it was quite a shocker at the gas pumps. But whe it was in the 30K range, I had occasion to take the identical trip two weeks back to back. The 1st week I got out there on the NYS thruway and put the cruise at 55 MPH. This in NYS is the equivlent of walking into a drug deal and yelling I'm a cop. Besides the backups I caused and all the tossed fingers I got, I got an average of about 23 mpg.

The following week I put the thing at 65 and the gas milage was around 21-22 mpg.

Now that does not compare a 3.6 to a 3.9 BUT, unless you were dropping to a 2.9, I would venture to say you'll not see significant gas milage difference between the 3.6 and 3.9.

John D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looey,

Congratulations on your find. It sounds as though you and your father will have a great time getting it back on the road. Keep the pictures coming, we like to watch the progress on these restorations. When it is all done, you and your father will have to arm wrestle to see who is going to be the first one to drive it to a local cruise. I would bet that it will cause quite a commotion when you drive into a cruise. You should be 16 by the time the car is finished and will appreciate the car because of what you had to do. You friends will be envious.

Good luck and welcome to you and your Dad. Like Lamar said, join the BCA.

Stevo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I pretty sure I'll be driving an old beater we have until I've gone at least one year as a new driver without any tickets or accidents. I'd hate to make a mistake driving a neat car like the Buick. Besides, this way we won't have to rush to get things done. Looks like parts are pretty much available but not locally so it will take a bit of time to get it done right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
Guest DaveCorbin

Dear Looie:

My invite for you to post your Buick's numbers for me to decode is still good.

The reason that the numbers don't match between the engine and the frame numbers is that Buick started in 1915 with both engine and frame numbers at 100,000. Over the years, Buick built engines for McLaughin in Canada, Flxble ambulances, Sayres & Scovill hearses, and Holden in Ausralia. In addition, there were some service engines and some built for industrial uses, like pumping water, etc. Over the 37 years from 1915 to 1952, it amounts to about 250,000 more engines than cars. The pattern of the numbers in the engines is the same as the pattern of the numbers in the cars with the additions mentioned above.

Regards, Dave Corbin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DaveCorbin</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Dear Looie:

My invite for you to post your Buick's numbers for me to decode is still good.

The reason that the numbers don't match between the engine and the frame numbers is that Buick started in 1915 with both engine and frame numbers at 100,000. Over the years, Buick built engines for McLaughin in Canada, Flxble ambulances, Sayres & Scovill hearses, and Holden in Ausralia. In addition, there were some service engines and some built for industrial uses, like pumping water, etc. Over the 37 years from 1915 to 1952, it amounts to about 250,000 more engines than cars. The pattern of the numbers

in the engines is the same as the pattern of the numbers in the cars with the additions mentioned above.

Regards, Dave Corbin </div></div>

Dave,

Buick didn't just build engines for Holden in Australia, they shipped what were termed " stripped chassis ".

The Australian ( Holden ) content was restricted to body from the firewall back. This should not have any effect on the engine number/chassis number discrepency as they came as a rolling unit and were supplied with both numbers in the USA.

There is a very large discrepency between the chassis and engine numbers on my 1934 Buick. Chassis is 2770924 and engine 42932047. I am sure the engine and chassis numbers are original to this car.

With my 1950 Super the engine number, chassis number ( stamped on chassis ) and VIN on the front pillar are all the same, 56293365.

All seems very confusing but I don't think the exported stripped chassis were the reason.

Would be interested in what info you have on my vehicles numbers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest imported_Thriller

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 50jetback</div><div class="ubbcode-body">There is a very large discrepency between the chassis and engine numbers on my 1934 Buick. Chassis is 2770924 and engine 42932047. I am sure the engine and chassis numbers are original to this car. </div></div>

Serial numbers for 1934 Buicks were from 2706453 to 2777649. So, yours would be a very late production car. However, the <span style="font-style: italic">Standard Catalog of Buick</span> lists engine numbers for series 40 starting at 2984900...for 1935 the engine numbers start at 42937408 and end at 42995237. The book doesn't list an ending number for 1934 engines though. So, either the book is in error or something...there has to be an explanation for the jump in numbers. Based on the fact that your engine # is just preceding the starting number for 1935, it could make sense to also be a late 1934 number.

I'll leave the details to Dave, but the large difference between engine numbers for 1934 and 1935 (over 1 million) leaves me scratching my head.

So, I know that in 1941, the numbers weren't synchronized...but by 1950 they were. When did they start matching the engine number to serial number?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest DaveCorbin

Dear Stuart:

Yours is an easy one. 2,770,924 is a frame number for a car built in August 1934, and as Thriller has correctly noted, quite near the end of 1934 production. The range for August is (approximately) 2,769,057 to 2,774,402.

For the same month, the engine number range is 2,927,408 to 2,932,763. Your engine number of 2,932,047 is within the range and we can therefore conclude that it is an "nmbers match" car. What's throwing everyone off is the 4 preceding the sequential part of the engine number, which tells us that it's an engine for a 40 series car.

Regards, Dave Corbin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest DaveCorbin

Dear Derek:

The "matching" of numbers started in 1957. You should see the mess in 1953, when the old (since 1915) number series was being used for frame numbers and straght eights in Specials, the old frame numbers and the "started over" (at 2105) engine numbers were used on the V8 engined cars.

It's puzzles like this that caused my research on frame and engine numbers to take several years.

Regards, Dave Corbin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest DaveCorbin

Dear Stuart:

I learned during my research that Buick also moved the series identifier around, probably right after the war. Prewar, it was in front, postwar, it's the last digit.

Your car is 5,629,336 (5) for a Super. Sripped chassis had only a frame number. The number indicates a chassis from April 1950. However, the engine and frame number normally do not match. I would suspect that the engine in your car has been changed or reworked to comply with Australian law. There's a hidden number stamped behind the water pump in some years, if you want to take it off and look.

Regards, Dave Corbin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DaveCorbin</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Dear Stuart:

I learned during my research that Buick also moved the series identifier around, probably right after the war. Prewar, it was in front, postwar, it's the last digit.

Your car is 5,629,336 (5) for a Super. Sripped chassis had only a frame number. The number indicates a chassis from April 1950. However, the engine and frame number normally do not match. I would suspect that the engine in your car has been changed or reworked to comply with Australian law. There's a hidden number stamped behind the water pump in some years, if you want to take it off and look.

Regards, Dave Corbin </div></div>

Dave,

The car is a US import, spent it's life in California and arrived here ten years ago and has since been restored. All numbers are original as shown on the import documents and US Title and sale documents?

I had assumed Buick had got logical in the 50's and supplied matching numbers out of the factory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest imported_JPIndusi

The difference between the 3.9 ratio rear differential and the 3.6 is only about 7.5% so there will not be much difference in performance or gas mileage. The rear differential housing is the same for Buicks betweeen 1940 and 1955. Some earlier Buicks had ratios of 4.45 and 4.11 and there are owners that are interested in swapping to a 3.9 or 3.6. So if you can get the 53 rear end for a decent price and have room for storage it might be worth getting assuming that the 53 will likely be scrapped in the future. If the 53 Buick in the boneyard was a Special there would be many parts you could use on your 52, but since it is a super, there are only few things in common.

Good luck.

Joe, BCA 33493

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...