Jump to content

neil morse

Members
  • Posts

    1,586
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Everything posted by neil morse

  1. I've never understood what happened to Exner with the '61 designs for Dodge and Plymouth. Yes, they are just bizarre, there's no other word for it. It was as if he dropped some really bad acid! As a kid during those years I used to look forward every year to September when the first issues of Life Magazine would arrive at the house with the ads for the new models. As a 12-year-old in 1960 I remember just being dumbfounded when I saw the new designs for Dodge and Plymouth. The Plymouth front end is even worse than the Dodge. And, in contrast, it was a fabulous year for GM! I remember vividly that the '61 Pontiac just blew me away -- and it was in the era when Pontiac had those wonderful illustrations in their magazine ads. I wanted my Dad to get one so bad!
  2. Beautiful car! If you mean what kind of jack to use in the shop, I would suggest that you get a good floor jack and a pair of jack stands. They are not expensive from places like Harbor Freight. The placement is really anywhere on the frame. Under the differential is good for the rear. Never on the bumper or the body, obviously. As far as a replacement for a portable jack to carry in the car, I can't help you there. I just carry a AAA membership, and hope I don't get a flat!
  3. Of course you are correct, Grant. If you want to compare an apple to an orange to show that you know they are different, why not? 😄 Thank you for stating what you are trying to establish. My understanding is that the answer to the first question you pose is "Yes." Buick went to Fisher and asked for some of the Chevy "A" bodies to use to make a less expensive entry-level Buick Special. (Although some on this thread have argued that Buick got the bodies from Chevrolet instead of from Fisher -- which I gather is irrelevant to what you are interested in.) Now, if I'm following you correctly, we come to your second question, "the crux of what you are trying to establish," which is whether the bodies then had to be modified to make the Buick hood and front fenders mate up or whether the Buick front clip fit on the Chevy body without any modification. And I'm afraid I don't know the answer to that. I don't think you are barking up the wrong tree or that anything you are saying is fundamentally flawed -- you are just asking a question. Maybe someone who is following this discussion knows the answer.
  4. No, you are misunderstanding me. I'm saying that in 1941, the Buick Super and Roadmaster used the General Motors (Fisher) new "C" body. This body was also used by Pontiac, Oldsmobile, and Cadillac. The 1941 Buick Special used either the "A" body (shared with Chevrolet -- your car) or the "B" body. So all I'm saying is that your comparison of a '41 Special to a '41 Super is "apples to oranges." The Super simply had a different body than the Special, so you are not shedding any light on the Chevy/Buick question by comparing your car to a Super. Your car is obviously an "A" bodied Buick that shared a body with the Chevy on the 118" wheelbase. As I understand it, it is not "exactly" the same as a Chevy from firewall to trunk because it used Buick fenders (see Matt Harwood's post earlier in this thread). This thread seems to meander a bit into questions about fender skirts and whether the "A" body was a "Fisher body" or a "Chevrolet body," but I don't think anyone has ever questioned that your car has the "A" body, and therefore "the body shell (firewall to trunk) is the same as a '41 Chevy." I don't think it's really that confusing. Does that help?
  5. It's tough to tie up 107 horses! [edit] That's Evelyn Keyes, by the way, during the filming of "The Desperados" (1943) with Glenn Ford.
  6. Yes, the Super has the "C" body which is different than either of the bodies used on the Special. So that fact that the Super has a different body doesn't really answer your initial question about the comparison between the Chevy body and the Buick Special "A" body.
  7. I take Matt's point, but it seems odd to apply it to this car which has a total of ... two accessories? Apart from the curb feelers and the hideous fender guides, what else do you see? As Hudsy says, this seems more an indication of white wall anxiety than a tendency to over accessorize. Seems like a very nice car from the photos, but grossly overpriced in my opinion.
  8. Just the perspective in the photo. The same reason that the front tire is much "bigger" than the rear. PS [edit]: Does anyone know where the photo of the President is taken? Some kind of museum where folks are standing in front of a painting of the Golden Gate Bridge? Just curious.
  9. Are any of these parts of any use to you? https://www.ebay.com/itm/124292299325
  10. Well, at least you have now definitively identified the pump as the problem! I suspect the solution will be found soon.
  11. What Gary said. Ben, I think a bad ground will just cause the gauge to read "full" all the time.
  12. I know that "all" available senders are not crap because I got one from Bob's Automobilia that's working fine in my '41 Super. Your post is a little unclear -- did you install this sender or your "Buick Guru?" Are you saying that he installed two different senders in your car that gave bad readings even after checking the operation before installation? It would help to know what kind of "bad readings" they were giving. With regard to the one currently in the car, apart from giving an inaccurate reading with 6 gallons in the tank, what other "wildly inaccurate" readings is it giving? A more detailed description of the symptoms would help diagnose the problem. With some senders, you need to bend the arm a bit to calibrate it to fit the size of the tank (i.e., the distance of the "drop" from full to empty). That seems to be a more likely explanation for the symptom you describe than a leaky float. If the float is leaking, the gauge will just always read empty because the float doesn't "float" and remains at the bottom of the tank. It also seems unlikely that a float would be leaking on a brand new sending unit.
  13. That's a @GaryW move right there. 😄 Your thread was already reminding me of his. I think the photo of Gary hanging a door while dressed in his tuxedo set a record for views!
  14. This is a still from another one of those fascinating vintage video clips -- this one from New York City in 1945. A lot of interesting cars to look at -- another '42 Buick flashes by at about 4:10.
  15. As has been said, it doesn't matter how ridiculous it might look. But I think ramair makes an excellent point about safety. Please proceed with caution!
  16. And ... the gold star goes to @The 55er! I had only gotten as far as noticing that the ad identifies the car as a "1955 Buick Buick Cascada." I hadn't questioned how the misidentification had occurred. After reading 55er's post above, I went on the Facebook Marketplace site and clicked on "create new listing." You are absolutely correct. There's a drop down menu for the make of the car you are offering for sale, and DeSoto is not on it. Probably because some robot at Facebook figured that the only cars that could be for sale are the ones that are currently being manufactured! Anyhow, mystery solved. PS: Yes, I have a FB account which I opened under a pseudonym so I could see family photos that were being posted by various relatives. That way I can avoid being tracked down by some classmate from Kindergarten who wants to get together with me. But don't tell Zuckerberg -- he thinks that there's some kind of enforceable requirement that you use your real name! 🙃
  17. Great to get this progress report, Ken! My favorite on your list is "poor quality enamel" for the frame. That would certainly provide a level of accuracy that's rarely seen in restorations. So many people can't seem to resist powder coating or applying six coats of hand-rubber lacquer!
  18. Squirrely, you say? Could that maybe have something to do with the lack of any kind of reinforcement of the body and frame when this 4-door sedan was turned into a convertible? On the other hand, you gotta love the dash and door panels!
  19. I have a '41 Super, which has the same engine and drive train as the Special. The standard rear end on the Special and Super is 4.4:1, but my car has the optional 3.9:1 rear end. My car handles the freeway just fine. It's very comfortable at 55 or 60, and I sometimes creep up to 65 without even noticing. I've heard that the cars equipped with the 4.4 rear end are quite busy at those speeds and that it's not comfortable to drive them on the freeway, but I have no personal experience. Maybe someone with a 4.4 equipped car can chime in here and answer this question. (I don't know if the 3.9 rear end was an option in '37.)
  20. Can't lose at that price. Horn rim obviously not lined up correctly on steering wheel. Easy fix. AND you get that excellent spare tire in the deal! Someone could have some cheap fun with this car.
  21. Looks like a very nice driver for a very fair price. I agree that it's hard to tell the color from the photos, but I'm pretty sure that it's all one color. I would definitely want to take a look at this car if I were in the market. Plus, you know if you had any questions about this particular model, @Gary W could immediately answer them!
×
×
  • Create New...