Peter Gariepy Posted May 3, 2010 Share Posted May 3, 2010 Any clue what this might be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Saxton Posted May 3, 2010 Share Posted May 3, 2010 Is it a 1916-18 Buick, Peter? Those holes in the valance are likely to indicate that it had single cantilever rear springs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1912Staver Posted May 3, 2010 Share Posted May 3, 2010 I would agree except the cowl doesn't have enough sweep up to the base of the windshield. The cowl has the 1921-23 shape but the door bottoms are rounded in the 1916-20 style. The running board splash aprons don't have the embossed beading of 21-23 cars. It has that Buick line but details seem wrong. Doesn't look quite right for a late teens Cadillac either. Definitely a puzzler . Greg in Canada Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Saxton Posted May 3, 2010 Share Posted May 3, 2010 Those two holes which are almost certainly for convenience in lubricating cantilever rear springs narrow the options unless we can define a different purpose for them. The bonnet length is typical of a six cylinder, and I would say, too long for a four. You can discount Cadillac, which had "platform" rear springs until the appearance of the 314 in 1926. Another exclusion for Cadillac is the size and equal size of front and back hubs. Cadillac rear hubs are very large to accomodate the big flange spline of the full-floating drive axles.Cantilever rear springs are very scarce in Show issue of MoToR for January 1921. The only cars other than small 4 cylinder jobs in that were Brewster, Buick, and the V8 King, which would not have a long bonnet either. Another possibility, maybe, is your Canadian McLaughlin Buick. Body work was their own. Only photo I can find is of a 1922 Buick roadster in American Car Since 1775, and the general roadster concept is similar; though the bonnet on peter's photo says it is much earlier than that. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1912Staver Posted May 3, 2010 Share Posted May 3, 2010 Hi Ivan and others. I agree about Cadillac, they had the general G.M. look of the era but are different in many ways. But it also differs from any of the Buick or McLaughlin roadsters in several details. The rear fender where it meets the running board is the 1921-23 style, but there are no door handles, the hood latch looks wrong, there are two LARGE holes for spring greasing rather than one small one.{ With a dip in the previously mentioned splash apron beading at it's bottom} It makes me wonder if it is an Australian built body? I understand many cars imported to Australia were sent without bodies to reduce the import duty. It might explain the deviation from standard Buick and McLaughlin practice. { From about 1913 on McLaughlin used standard Buick bodies albeit with nicer interiors and dash boards} It seems to blend characteristics from the 1916-20 cars with the updated 1921-23 cars. Hopefully someone can solve the mystery. Greg in Canada Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Gariepy Posted May 3, 2010 Author Share Posted May 3, 2010 More photos of the same car: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Gariepy Posted May 3, 2010 Author Share Posted May 3, 2010 The grill face doesn't look Buick at all. So i think its fair to eliminate Buick as a contender. Agreed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dandy Dave Posted May 4, 2010 Share Posted May 4, 2010 I agree that it is not a Buick. Not sure what it is? Dandy Dave! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1912Staver Posted May 4, 2010 Share Posted May 4, 2010 Whatever it is it was photographed practically in my back yard. I am sure the pictures of it in the hollow tree were taken at the Stanley Park hollow tree in Vancouver B.C. { A popular spot for pictures such as this}. I will have to give the new photos some close scrutiny but it is remarkable that it has a local connection. Is there any known history to the photos? All the best Greg in Canada. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Saxton Posted May 4, 2010 Share Posted May 4, 2010 Top of the radiator looks like King, but the bottom is not like that shown in MoToR for January 1921. I'll ring His Majesty John Ryder the King of Coonabarabran, who has a 1918, to see if he thinks it could be a royal tour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1912Staver Posted May 4, 2010 Share Posted May 4, 2010 The tree is definitely the Stanley Park tree, however the licence plate is not from British Columbia. They all had a B.C. initial on the right side. The one on the mystery car has only a number on the right side. Also note the unusual rear hinged door, I am baffled on this one. Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rust Rustler Posted May 5, 2010 Share Posted May 5, 2010 NO NEED TO RING KING JOHN IVAN, THE CAR IS A 1918 MITCHELL 2 PASSENGER ROADSTER.NOEL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Gariepy Posted May 11, 2010 Author Share Posted May 11, 2010 (from the owner of the photos)" I was happy to hear he could identify the tree in Stanley Park, Vancouver, B.C. My Grandparents drove from Modesto, CA to Vancouver in the late 20s to get married. I have a number of other photos of them in Canada, but wasn't certain where the tree was. I'm actually leaving for Vancouver on Friday and look forward to visiting the site. Thanks again for your help!Best,David" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Bond Posted May 11, 2010 Share Posted May 11, 2010 You guys are amazing! Could identify the tree and the car too!Terry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now