Pilgrim65
-
Posts
1,409 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Content Type
Forums
Gallery
Events
Posts posted by Pilgrim65
-
-
27 minutes ago, Restorer32 said:
We restored a '53 Skylark that was in much worse condition for a client. Sometimes money isn't the only thing. Figure $150k at least for a full on show restoration. Lots of chrome on a Skylark. Complicated hydraulics, complex interior, Dynoc dash. Not an easy car to restore properly.
Many thanks ,that's what I'd imagined so can stop dreaming and get back to reality. ?
-
1
-
-
15k is good , but only someone who has taken on a skylark would know the materials cost so total cost still unknown.
-
53 Skylarks , probably my favourite Buick , can't afford a restored one , so if 25/30k buys this one , I would like your opinion on what a resto shop in the US would likely charge to carry out nut and bolt restoration , I know what my max budget is so then I would know it is impossible for me and I can stop dreaming.?
-
2 hours ago, 1953mack said:
You might want to spend some time and do a little research to determine whether or not you have an OE 1953 open or closed-car frame under your Model 46C. Judging from the garage owner’s comment, I doubt that he could answer that question or explain to you the differences, if there were any. Owning three Caddys doesn’t mean anything to me except that he might be looking for contribution$ for a fourth one.
Buick did not add stiffener plates to the [-shaped side rails of a closed-car frame to turn it into a convertible frame. The 1953 46C frame has its own part number . . . different than all other 1953 40-Series closed-car Models. What is the difference? Typically on convertible frames during the 1950s, Buick added inner and outer body-to-frame brackets for additional body support in the door latching area on convertible bodies (B-pillar area on closed cars). In 1953, Buick added steel plates welded to the underside of the X-member to strengthen the 50-70 Series open cars and Estate Wagon frames. Some prior years might have these plates also. I do not know for sure whether 40-Series convertible frames had these plates and if they didn’t, why Buick eliminated them for this Model. 1953 Buick frames for 50-70 Series are obviously different due to the V8 engine and body dimensions. In addition, the removable rear fenders on the 50-70 Series Models might have been a contributing factor to the number of additional inner and outer body brackets; whereas, all 40 Series Buicks had integral rear quarter panels that should have strengthened the body tub assembly.
Does your frame match the picture of the 1953 Buick 40 Series frame in the 1953 Buick Shop Manual and shown in the first picture below? The picture might be deceiving. I say that for several reasons: (1) the 1953 46C Model was introduced months after the production run started and information on this Model didn’t show up in many pieces of original Buick showroom literature or in the 1953 Salesman's Facts Book; (2) the picture does not note if it is applicable to either an open or closed car; and (3) the 1953 Buick Shop Manual or Service Bulletins do not explain why the Model 46C has its own part number. The explanation could have been overlooked.
Two questions: (1) What do you have for inner and outer body brackets compared to what is shown in the first picture, and (2) does your frame have the steel plates welded to the underside of the X-member? Once you know that information, you need to compare information with another 1953 46C owner with a known original frame. That’s the only way you’re going to find out. Any additional Information on this matter is most likely non-existent. I’d be interested in what you find out.
Al Malachowski
BCA #8965
"500 Miles West of Flint"
As usual AL, great information, very helpful and greatly appreciated.
will compare info with Ruby next week and post
-
8 hours ago, SC38DLS said:
Agee more from the blue grass
What a place , any room for a lodger ?
-
On 26/10/2017 at 6:22 AM, Xander Wildeisen said:
Wow,magic on wheels
-
4
-
-
Thanks again guys , will be staying away from 2 post lifts !!
Concerning bumper jacks , had never seen one before until I found mine in boot of Ruby , I have two occasions to use and both times , been a nightmare , they go up ok , but release under load is big problem , have had to loan scissor jack or garage type from friend , to take weight and enable release, otherwise Ruby would be still flashing her underside !
Furthermore think stress on bumper may actually damage chrome.
not being to critical of GM or whoever invented , but not the greatest of designs , think a few of you Americans must have had similar experiences changing a wheel, can't imagine how the fairer sex managed with them. ( perhaps they didn't ,but used charm instead ?)
-
1
-
-
29 minutes ago, dei said:
My '58 Special convertible flexes a lot too but always has.
One actually has to be careful on placing your hand on the door spaces when going down an uneven road as it can pinch a bit if fingers are in the right spot.
My frame is not rusty, ever had repairs of any kind or in an accident so have considered it the nature of the beast.
I do know my Limited with her extra length in the trunk and the bigger frame being a two door hardtop always gave me a more solid feel and ride.
As suggested, checking for any cracks at welds would be the evidence of something more serious.
Cheers Dei, comforting to know , not unique and evident on others peoples cars , not so concerned now.
pilgrim
-
1
-
-
Thanks guys , some great advice , actually picking up tomorrow so will post .
-
Bob , interesting thought , wonder how I could check ,would the correct size and thickness of channel section be listed anywhere .
i d be surprised if it where the case as there is no evidence of cost cutting anywhere else., apart from vinyl instead of leather, which I doubt would have been original on special anyway . Thanks for your input , on the case ?
Cheers
pilgrim
-
Noticed gearbox oil leak , from torque ball assembly , so bought repair kit from bobs . As concerned about oil low level in gear box , put Ruby up on friends ramp to sort . however they use swinging arm 4 point support type lift here ,noticed drivers door popped open , unable to close ,but returned to normal when car grounded. Didn't think about any door gap issues . Yesterday took Ruby to a restoration workshop to repair torque ball oil leak problem , when they lift her they noticed quite a large widening of same door gap . Concerned they adjusted ramp and lifted again same problem but not so bad . They Garage owner works on early American and owns 3 caddys , he inspected underside and although he commented the restoration was correct and professionally done , he says the chassis is flexing to much and thought the section size of the chassis frame could have been more substantial . He's going to strengthen the sides and thinks it will cure problem. I'm concerned door gap will never be correct ,but he's confident they willbe able to align in conjunction with strengthening . Picking car up next week will see.
Wondered if any of you convertible owners had noticed similar problem when lifting car.
cheers
pilgrim
-
On 25/10/2017 at 3:56 AM, JohnD1956 said:
LOL, Isn't there just one road there? I might notice the hair color but I hate to generalize.
Careful John, married 3 blondes, perhaps enough said ??
-
2
-
-
Don't want to be controversial, but I think the namers win ?
-
Quite amazing selection , very sad , bet many were in better condition when they were placed there and left to rot , like the chieftain , if I were capable.
-
6 hours ago, pont35cpe said:
Is that alligator skin on the door panel?
Looks that way, but not keen , like the decals , step to far ?
-
Keep posting
-
Think Scam , Seen same model and colour car on eBay for 72 k , but think may be different car , just be careful
-
On 27/09/2017 at 5:12 AM, Frank DuVal said:
Here you go, even the tail lamps (at back window, "backlite" to purists) have Art Deco lines.
.thumb.jpg.5df1546b97637c9f3c83c5c32fa625e2.jpg)
Love Art Deco , being ignorant of many 30s American cars , please identify for me .
thanks
-
47 minutes ago, GregLaR said:
I generally find those who name their cars to be of the same ilk that leans these stuffed kid dolls against their cars at shows.
Having never been to show in the US , and having no young kids., not sure if comment is derogatory or not ?
-
Read all responses , particularly like , 'objects of desire ' and ' needs attention, unpredictable and high maintenance , but the clincher for me is the curves , take a look at Ruby , has to be feminine ??
-
2
-
-
Great pics , loved the 59/60 Electra s and the maroon skylark , didn't like how to spoil a BMW 2002 ?
-
Cords are amazing design creations , sacrilege to alter , bit like tacking bits on to a Henry Moore sculpture, sad
-
9 hours ago, dei said:
Well, those things are brutal on the carpet and or floor mats.
Might take the risk with her if she wanted to drive my car ?
-
1
-
-
11 hours ago, Elpad said:
Stunning , won't be doing many miles on those hot shoes , but who cares ?
.jpg.df8f71ba3c3a88ae0a288316e81177a8.jpg)
SOLD: Significant Price Reduction: Gorgeous, 1953 Packard Caribbean Convertible
in Automobiles and Parts - Buy/Sell
Posted
This car intrigues me , current asking price 60k , considering the low production figures and original cost , should I compare it to a skylark or caddy and as such looks great value . It is a lovely car and not being au fait with specific make/ model values where does Packard lie in the value stakes compared to other makes, just curious as first carabbien I've seen for sale.
Good luck with sale , I'd offer if I was looking
cheers