Yellowriv

Hi everyone, Whilst I'm not new to this forum, I am new to this part. I just purchased this '47 Windsor Highlander. Here are a couple of photos. It is a one family owned car and is mostly original, certainly unrestored. I will have more questions to come! Regards

Well, I did as instructed and it worked for 20 seconds. I haven't been near the car for nearly 2 months. Drove it last weekend and to my amazement the clock was working perfectly?? Thanks for this thread it has been very helpful.

Hi, I'm not sure I can help you but my very original Super hardtop has black painted cloth welt in this area. All the photos I have seen of Supers and Roadmasters also have black welt. Could it be after market? Can anyone else advise? John

Agree. Come on Guys, I was born on the 13th and you're worried!?

Thanks, I will put it back in and see how it goes.

Thanks for the tips guys, very helpful. I did as instructed and on hooking up the charger the clock worked for around 20 seconds. Should it have worked for 20 minutes?

By the look of the Vee windscreen its not a Lincoln, they had a flat screen, but the front fenders look Lincolnish. It has 41 Ford lower grilles, I wondered about bits of a 41 Studebaker. The cut down doors are Darrin Packardish. The distance between the rear of the door and rear fender looks too long for it to have started life as a convertible. I have no idea what it is from the photos, what about the engine bay? that might give a clue. Whatever it is, the proportions aren't ideal and it would want to have period provenance before I'd get too excited.

Getting back on topic of an exhaust for a 53.....As you know the 53 has holes in the chassis on the passengers side for the exhaust. If you want to run a dual system you'll have to run it under the chassis on the drivers side - not tidy. Frankly, given the modest power output of these first V8s and the lack of encouragement from the Dynaflow, I can't see any point in running a dual system, particularly as it will have to be hung under the chassis on one side. Over to you.....

Most American cars are under sprung and under damped, particularly underdamped. The other problem is horrendously light, no feel steering. The basic geometry of most 60s cars is ok so its not that hard to effect a significant improvement provided you are preapred to spend some time calculating motion ratios on each corner of the car. My original 65 came with 38,000 original miles and nonfuctioning shocks and sagged rear springs. First, we rebushed the entire front and rear ends with particularly emphasis on the rear Panhard Rod bushes. We then took the motion ratios at each corner, taking account of the fact that the car was to run stock height with tall 235x75x15 radial tyres - the closest to the original cross plies. Needless to say as you've all encountered the fronts rub on the inner skirts. Springs. We went to 84% stiffer than stock, again taking into account loadings on the tall tyres. Shocks. The fact is these cars are seriously underdamped from the factory. In fact the easiest way to improve most American cars is put decent shocks on them, not factory replacements, that doesn't achieve much. That's how you get the roly poly factory ride. Given this, unless you custom build shocks to an end requirement, its all guesswork. Even doing it this way is guesswork, to an extent. Nevertheless, we commissioned custom valved Bilsteins for my car at a cost of $1600 for the set. The result is a car that is competent and just on the edge the right ride/handling tradeoff. What this then throws up is the horribly light power steering, which I have yet to address. NTX 5467 is right, its mainly the shocks and springs, the rest is peripheral. Remember what you do to one end of the car affects the other, if you stiffen up the rear, it will induce more understeer (push), not desirable in these cars since thats what the're designed to do. The best idea is to keep the front relatively stiff and the rear a bit soft, that way you get better turn in and less tendency for the rear to bounce around. That's some of what I learned from racing Alfas with a live rear axle and it generally translates, ride height is also important. As to tyre pressures, I run 38 psi, any less is not enough for this weight of car on normal profile radials. Good luck.

She looks a treat John, well done! So the Avanti is now - Refreshed? Regards

Might be easier to list what hasn't been changed..... Bill Mitchell loved wide whitewalls, I've seen a late model Eldo of his with these on. It strikes me that late in their designing lives some great designers who grew up or started their careers in the classic (pre war) went back there, the Silver Arrow clearly harks back to this period. Virgil Exner did also in the sixties, with his Duesenberg revival concept. Gordon Buehrig worked on a 30s revival concept in the 70s, Brooks Stevens with the Excalibur and so on...

Not correct. Supers and Roadmasters used the new V8, the only difference AFAIK is that the former used a 2bbl carb and the latter a 4bbl.

Hear Hear.......

Oracle, The point of your post escapes me, the photo is not of a 48 -215 but a 1957 FE. Your gratuitous history of the birth of the Australian Holden is well known, the story from a UK perspective lacks relevance given these first series cars were not exported. KY 442 was not the first prototype it was the fifth and built in Australia, the first three were built in the US, No 1 still exists in the National Museum of Australia.

John, I cant believe that whoever painted the car even masked up around the number plate!!

I have also enjoyed reading through this thread, an area where I have no knowledge whatsoever, except that I remember a 500/540K roadster that was bought into Australia in pieces in the 80s and then seized by customs for evasion of duty. It was also painted retail red, I dont know where it is now. The reason for this post, though, is that I was struck by the similarity between this car and indeed the early roadsters with the de Sakhnoffsky L29 Cord. If you veed the Cord windscreen, changed the grille and put flow through fenders on it it could be mistaken for an early special roadster.

Congratulations on your purchase Nick. I have a 65 and also live in Sydney. If I can be of any help please let me know. As to concessional rego, yes you do have to be a member of a club to get it. I belong to the Buick Club here in NSW. They are great people and the Club is worth joining. I have also joined the ROA and recommend this also. I'm not so sure about Chick Magnet though. My daughter has never forgiven me for selling my 66 Mustang. When I bought my yellow 53 home I also had a yellow EJ Holden at the time. All she said was why did I want two yellow cars:( Regards

As I mentioned in an earlier post in this thread, I have a 65. Two years ago my car was parked next to an immaculate 66 and I had the opportunity to study them both carefully and I agree with Tom Mooney's analysis. There are a few angles where the 1st gen looks odd. Particularly around the windscreen base where it doesn't flow like the rest of the car. In terms of exterior design cohesion I think the 66/67 is better, but...... As an owner, the part of the car you spend most time looking at is the dash and over the hood. In this respect, in my view the 66/67 is a big disappointment. You can see where the bean counters stripped cost out of the car. The interior of the 1st gen cars is stunning, one of the best in a 60s American car (would have been nice though to have some gauges like my 53 rather than all those stupid idiot lights, if I had a temp gauge I wouldnt need a light to tell me the engine's cold would I? - but I digress) and you can see that the designers won most of the battle in there. The interior in the 66/67 is a big disapointment, particularly with the bench seat, its not simply isnt special anymore and the view over the hood isnt as good either. For me, that rules one out.

I have a 65, so its easy for me. However, if the 66 & 67s didn't have the low rent interior, it might be a close run thing.........

Al, What you say makes sense about running changes. As my 56R is an early car with body No 3473 I guess I have the early set up.

I have an unrestored low mileage 53 Super and the hood on it too binds initially as its opened. All the hinges have been lubricated, I can't find anything wrong with it and have decided to assume its characteristic to these cars. The other posts seem to confirm this view regards John

Ok, so now I'm properly confused. Can someone tell me why a 401 is a better engine than a 425, if in fact this is correct? Secondly, I read that nailheads are very durable engines, but this is not clear from these posts. As an owner of a 322 and 401 am I missing something?

Followed by "I'd like to be, under the sea, in an Octopuses garden........"

Fantastic thread John, I really enjoy it. That Matheson engine is interesting, five main bearings and I cant see provision for a camshaft, is it overhead cam?

Thanks Guys. So if I understand correctly, the plates up to 56 had to be returned/retired annually and the yellow 56 - 62 plates had to be retired and black plates substituted as registration came due in 1963? I am aware that the black plates are permanent, as my 65 Riv came with them, with that car I even got the original temporary red on white paper number plate that presumably was issued prior to receipt of the permanent black plates. Anyone seen one of these? I can scan it if there's any interest.