m-mman
-
Posts
1,266 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Forums
Gallery
Events
Posts posted by m-mman
-
-
WTH is that plastic(?) air filter doing on the top of the oil bath air cleaner?? 🤨
A 1955 Cadillac oil bath lower should be covered with the “Star Wars” part that is sought after by rodders.
Looks nice but that’s a lot of work for a low mileage car. (Rear wheel bearings? Balance drive shaft?). Maybe it just needed it.
-
50 minutes ago, Dave Mellor NJ said:
There was a small Edsel and a Big Edsel
Not in 1960. 😉
Not in 1959 either.
-
383-430 was the “standard” engine.
The Y block 312 was the smaller “economy” engine.
The FE (352) was a Ford-Edsel engine during those years
-
1
-
-
19 hours ago, Terry Y said:
The subject car looks like it has a later 1970's early 1980's Ford V-8.
It’s a 70s 429-460 engine.
-
In the 20s there were limits to how big a piece of metal could be stamped into a car body. This made all metal bodies unusual.
In the 20s there was no shortage of skilled workers who understood woodworking and carriage building. This made the production of wood framed bodies cost effective.
However as you have discovered, wood rots and rebuilding a wood framed body is a very involved process that takes special skills. There does exist wood “kits” for very popular cars but the effort required to make these limits them to only very popular cars.
Unfortunately for you 1929 Buick coupes are not on the list of common and popular cars.
I can understand the sentiment of wanting to bring back dad’s car, but if the wooden structure is as bad as you describe, you are facing a monumental task that again requires specialized tools and skills. (Read time and money)
We don’t know your background, but if you want to enjoy an old car “just like dad’s” then the easier more realistic path is to get a better example and utilize parts from the deteriorated one.
-
2
-
-
4 minutes ago, B Jake Moran said:
I personally can’t stand white on these cars. They need a darker color to pop, again my opinion. Yet many were made in white or of course black.
49% were white, 49% were black. Only 2% were “other colors” hence the reason you see these two colors in the survivors.
7 minutes ago, B Jake Moran said:This one being a 1957, if verified, does make it “rarer”. I think they made 305 or so 1957s
Think about all the carmakers that tried to end the concept of “model years”. If they got their car right why should they make unnecessary changes just because the calendar turned over? (I’m looking at you Packard)
The Mark II was the same idea. It’s perfect just the way it is. Why should we make any changes? We don’t want to identify it with a specific year, we will let it be a “generation”.
Problem is, that’s not how the marketplace works. Finance companies want a year model (to calculate depreciation)
. Insurance companies want a year model to calculate premiums and claims.
Ford never really stated a year model or a separation between 1956 and 1957. It took a lawsuit from an owner who was dealing with either a bank or insurance company about value to force Ford to declare a specific serial number that ended the 1956 version and started the 1957 version.
The differences were in the mechanics. The 56 used an air cooled transmission the 57 was water cooled. There was a carburetor change and air intake for the A/C. But these were changes that came from regular Lincoln production.
Today I see no difference in value and except for an ultra-connoisseur I don’t think many people would care between having a 56 or a 57.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, DrumBob said:
What's with the dolls in the trunk? That's a bit creepy.
Those are the time out kids that were very popular (and yes creepy) back when grandpa was taking his car out to cruise nights.
They are in the trunk, they should be in the trash.-
3
-
4
-
-
https://sandiego.craigslist.org/ssd/cto/d/chula-vista-1964-dodge-dart-gt/7706463826.html
How about a 4 speed convertible asking less than!10k?
-
1
-
-
38 minutes ago, DrumBob said:
I wish I had the car I learned how to drive in, a '64 Dodge Dart convertible
They are still out there, and rather affordable.
-
2 hours ago, DrumBob said:
I still fail to see why any self respecting old car buff would want one of these Detroit malaise era family sedan dinosaurs
Nostalgia. And sentimental memories.
The car grandma droveThe car my parents took me to school in.
My first car. The car I bought with my own money. (After dad approved of course).
Car buffs don’t need transportation. They want to remember their past.
The cars of their youth.
They want the comfort of long ago even if it never really happened that way but it’s how they want to experience it as an adult.
That’s why we want Detroit dinosaur family sedans……..-
10
-
1
-
-
1958 Courier sedan deliveries also use 1957 taillights.
Decades ago when I was working in a wrecking yard a guy comes in to buy a 1958 Ford custom front clip. Seems his car was wrecked.
Talked to him, he had a 1958 Ranchero. I talked to him about 57 vs 58 styling. He told me that he really doesn’t like 1958s and wished that his Ranchero was a 1957……I told him that a 57 front clip would bolt right on and he could have a 1957. He got quiet, stared at me, asked if I was sure…..then sighed saying, “Oh well, I just bought this one.”
FYI the wagon taillight lenses are shorter. Put car lenses on a wagon, open the tailgate and you have 2 smashed lenses.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, JamesR said:
Thanks for the education, m-mman. Another great reason to look for old cars on this forum: some astute observations from people who know.
The car is shiny and would likely be a fun thing to drive around but it has issues. The #1 (rather large) hurdle is that it is a 1958.
1958s are very similar to 1957s. However the styling of 1957s is significantly preferable to 1958s. Like maybe 50% in value for a comparable body style.
And even if you think 50% is too much then those who know will recognize that the pool of buyers for a 1958 is 2/3 fewer than those who want a 1957. So you either heavily discount it to get it sold, or you wait a loooong time to hook a 1958 buyer.
The current seller is experiencing this:
On 1/19/2024 at 7:44 PM, 6T-FinSeeker said:Thought car was sold 3 times now but people change their minds or their pocketbook is empty I guess?
No sir I think people thought that it is a neat 50s car, but before they handed over the cash they found out that they could get a (beautiful) 1957 for the same (less?) money and walked away.
The car has issues in the dashboard. On 57-8 Fords there is a speedometer cover and 3 bezels; one for the heater, the radio and the clock. 57 & 58 are similar but not identical. This car seems to have a mixture between the two.
It is equipped with the (cheap) recirculating air heater, but the dash control is for the fresh air heater.
These are of course warnings that there are corners cut in other areas too.
(the door handles and window cranks are 1963 Galaxie, not 1958)The wheels & tires don’t add to the looks. It is a cheap Custom 300, blackwalls preferred maybe wide whites, but not narrow whites. And lose the trim rings they are not a 1958 trim item.
1958 Fords can offer an inexpensive entry into a 50s car, but as the saying goes: worth less when you buy it, worth less when you try to sell it.
-
7
-
-
1 hour ago, Crusty Trucker said:
Note to Lief: CL ad on this post is for the '55 Packard you also posted, not the Buick
Multiple vehicles in one listing.
Flip through the pictures -
This is a 1960 Flxible (spelled correctly) Flxette combination car.
Built by the Flxible company on the Le Sabre standard wheelbase chassis. It IS NOT a converted station wagon.
Flxible started with a stripped chassis and built their own complete body from the firewall back. The seller talks about "reinstalling the wagon seats". This is no more possible than making your Cadillac Fleetwood 75 limousine back into a Sedan de Ville.
The high headroom made working space possible in the rear area.
Total production for 1960 Flexettes was 110 units in hearse, ambulance and combination car styles.
Flxible also offered a long wheelbase professional car. Total production for these was 86.
Imagine operating a manufacturing company where your total production didnt even top 200 units!
-
5
-
2
-
-
The trunk seal is (was) glued to the lid in 1958.
The cylinder head and the valve cover are post 1960. Possibly 1964. I wonder if they used the 64 zero lash valve train?-
1
-
4
-
-
1 hour ago, DrumBob said:
I'd love to see this car in my driveway every morning
For just a small down payment and an affordable monthly payment we can make that happen tonight.
Would you step inside and just sign the paperwork. 😁-
4
-
-
1 hour ago, Sal Hepatica said:
Was that Motorola FM converter a dealer add on?
Aftermarket……
The only factory “extra box” FM radio was 58-60 Lincoln
-
1
-
2
-
-
The story is told in a book by an insider who was there in the Hudson testing lab.
Hudson was using Spartan horns. Salesman drops by from Jubilee horn company. Says that he can supply horns that are half price from what Hudson is currently using.
Lab guy says “No way, your horns wouldn’t last through one Polish wedding”.
Guess Hudsons sold well in that area so Hudson catered to their audience instead of constantly looking to find money for keeping their products relevant.
And when they had some money, they made the Jet.
-
3
-
2
-
-
Nobody was more resistant to change than Henry Ford. BUT he was always ready for change if it made the cars cheaper and simpler.
Yes the wet clutch works well (I have a 1942 Commodore 8). But what was the cost comparison between building your own components vs buying them from a (dry) clutch supplier?
Same with the Hudson built single lever transmission. Again it works but others would have gone to B-W for the whole transmission. I have a hard time believing that building it themselves was really cheaper.
Fitting the overdrive would have been easier too. Speaking of OD Hudson used 2-3 extra switches and relays in their OD that nobody else did.
I see Hudson spending extra money in places that didn’t matter rather than cutting costs to make money to keep their products current. Not even cutting edge.
Not talked about by collectors but critical to the corporation is their break even point based on production.
No the independents were never going to outsell the majors, but can they profit from the volume that they are selling? The less efficient the plants and costs, the more you have to sell. The more spent on getting it out the door the less money available for improvements.
Break even points is what brought down Packard and Studebaker.-
2
-
-
20 minutes ago, Xander Wildeisen said:
Once the 308ci engine was available, it was basically lights out for the straight 8
Well it was a splash lubricated engine from 1930, so by the start of postwar production it was way out of date.
Hudson only used it because they had to.
Hudson was very resistant to change Economically, for sure but also the culture in the corporation.
Who else used a wet cork clutch from 1912? (to the end in 1954) Yes it worked, but I bet they could have bought dry clutch parts cheaper-
1
-
1
-
-
13 hours ago, rocketraider said:
But didn't someone mention a while back that if they had electrical issues they can quickly turn into a nightmare?
It’s a gadget laden all electric car…….
Cadillac, Lincoln or Imperial any of them are going to need a lot of fixing.
The only difference is how easy it is to access the components (crawl under the dash or remove the door panels) and the availability of parts.
-
2
-
-
“4**”. Huh🤨
After 1957 Thunderbird was no longer a sports car. Personal Luxury was the descriptor.
The FE with a four barrel carburetor was the only available engine. 352 until the 390 came out in 1961.
The only high power engines were the 430 in 1959 & 60. A huge heavy Lincoln motor that had bigger numbers than the 352 but those numbers included a lot of additional weight. It was wisely a Lincoln only motor from 1961.
There was pressure to bring back a 2 passenger Thunderbird. It was never going to happen because the volume would have been too low. But someone got the idea to cover the back seat of the convertible and imply that it was a 2 passenger car. So in 1962-63 the Thunderbird Roadster.
Ford was offering high performance versions of the 352, 390 that included solid lifters, dual point non vacuum advance distributors and cast iron headers. These morphed into the 406 and 427. As you would expect these high performance engines are not smooth all weather maintenance free engines. Fast for sure but not suitable for a Thunderbird.
But high performance was the theme of the day and Ford did offer a Tripple carb 390 in the 1962-63 Thunderbird. Hydraulic lifters, no headers (they wouldn’t fit) but they were available with power steering and Air Conditioning that was denied in a high performance Ford.
The engine code for the 6 barrel version was M. (Z for a 4bbl). This engine was available in all body styles hardtop, Landau, convertible and roadster.
Today there is a lot of talk about the rarity of an M roadster but I suspect that M powered Landaus are even more rare.
But beyond the 1962-63 M motor all the 60s Birds were the same 390 hydraulic lifter 4 barrel that came in a Galaxie.
-
1
-
1
-
-
-
1
-
-
This is from the 1967 facts book.
Posting to give the information about the 1967 7 Litre.
-
1
-
1
-
1929 Cadillac - $35,000 Unfortunate choices
in "Not Mine" Automobiles For Sale
Posted
Hummmmm…… If an automaker released something like this and the inevitable happened, there would be serious lawsuits.
A person creates a poorly engineered “accident waiting to happen”, shouldn’t they be liable for the consequences?
Have the builders of hot rods ever been sued?