Jump to content

neil morse

Members
  • Posts

    1,584
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Posts posted by neil morse

  1. Bill Anderson's "Restoration Facts -- 1941 Buick" offers this on page 67 in the "Interior" section under the heading "Levers," 

     

    Levers consisted of one to operate the emergency brake (painted grey or tan depending upon the primary interior color) located along the left side kick panel ..."

     

    I assume '40 and '41 were the same, but that's really too vague to be of much help to you.  I would call Doug Seybold and ask him.  He has been very friendly and helpful the times I have called him.  440-835-1193.

  2. 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?  😄

     

    5 hours ago, Grant Z said:

    Perhaps I should state that what I'm trying to establish is; did Buick go to Fisher and say "can we have some of those bodies you're producing for Chevrolet so we can produce an inexpensive entry-level Buick?" If so, I assume there Fisher may have had to modify the firewall & cowl area to adapt make the Buick hood & front fenders mate up. This is the crux of what I'm trying to establish. Am I barking up the wrong tree here? Perhaps there is something fundamentally flawed in what I'm saying?

     

    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.

  3. 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?

  4. On 9/10/2021 at 5:24 AM, Grant Z said:

    However, my body is definitely different to my friend Geoff Pollard's 1941 Super Sport Coupe (model 56S)

     

    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.

  5. 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.

  6. 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.

  7. 20 hours ago, 38Buick 80C said:

    I had to try my new toy... in dress clothes no less...I got yelled at... it was worth it...

     

    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!

    • Like 1
  8. On 8/28/2021 at 9:18 AM, The 55er said:

    This is all guesswork & conjecture on my part as I haven't listed a car for sale in years but "Definitely not a Buick" might have something to do with what available terminology you have to select from to list an item for sale on a website. You can't proceed with your listing unless you pick a word that the site has available to you. Possibly the word DESOTO wasn't available so the seller selected BUICK (a far more common car) because that word was available to use.

     

    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! 🙃

    • Like 1
  9. 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!

    • Like 1
    • Haha 2
  10. On 7/24/2021 at 10:12 AM, JamesR said:

    Beautiful car, though I can't quite figure out what the seller's quip, "Definitely not a Buick" is supposed to mean. ("Definitely" stated as "Diffidently" in the ad...which is even more confusing.)

     

    This seems to be a reference to the fact that the banner on the ad refers to a "1955 Buick Buick Cascada."

    • Thanks 1
  11. 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.)

×
×
  • Create New...