neil morse

At least on my '41, the bottom cushion of the front seat is just held in place by gravity like the back seat. Once you pull the bottom cushion out of the frame, you can get access to the bolts that hold the seat rails in place on the floor. On the '41, there are four bolts on each side. I figure the '39 must be similar.

I made it out to an informal "Cars & Coffee" event this morning. Very heavily skewed towards hot rods and muscle cars, but I was able to find a few kindred souls.

Sounds like you hate the car so much you have to make up defects that aren't there! 😄 Pretty sure the roof is brown.

It was the matching "1941" front plates that fooled me. 😄 Great photo!

@valk You bought another one?

On my car, we used a similar idea to what Ken suggests. We had ramps in front and jack stands under the frame in front of the rear axle. We lifted the car high enough so the rear tires were just touching the floor, then used a come-along to roll the rear axle back on the tires just enough to get the torque tube out. You can push the torque tube up above the back of the transmission and more-or-less out of the way after you get it out.

Dude, at least tape that wire back up inside the trunk before you take the picture! Or maybe even secure the wire correctly so it doesn't hang down in the first place. I can never get over these ads where someone is asking for top dollar but doesn't even take the time to tidy up a few things before taking photos. But, yes, looks like a nice car.

Very cool. I think if you got the clock in the steering wheel, they put a compass in the center of the dash where the clock would normally go. I can't quite make it out from the photo of this car, but I think that's what it's got. Unfortunately, it looks like this car also has the not so desirable "someone hacksawed a hole in the dash to a fit in an 80's radio/tape deck" feature. 😝

That characteristic whine in first is completely normal for the reason you mention.

I hear you Chris -- especially since I live in a city where there's a stop sign at the end of nearly every block. In some local trips around the neighborhood I never get into third gear at all! It gets tedious, no doubt about it, and I freely admit that I've been known to "cheat" a bit and roll through a stop sign in second to avoid having to come to a full stop and go back to first. But I figure that's just the price we pay for the enjoyment of driving a vehicle from another era.

I am very happy driving my '41, and I frankly have never understood the kind of objections that are being voiced here about the standard 3-speed transmission with non-synchromesh first gear. The only reason to "mash it into first gear" is if you're in too much of a hurry, and if you're in a hurry, you shouldn't be driving a vintage car! My advice is either accept the fact that the car has to come to a full stop in order for you to shift into first gear or get a different car. It's not complicated to drive the car as originally intended, it just results in a more measured and leisurely trip, which is the whole point of driving a vintage automobile, as far as I'm concerned. The owner's manual for my car also says that you can start off in second gear on level ground, but doing so has a very labored feeling to me. (It also reminds me of the way my mother drove when I was a kid, which I hated!) I'm happier just using all the gears. As far as the problem with the wife, again I'm afraid that's a reason to get a different car, not a reason to try to modify the car you have.

I see you're getting no response so far. Do you have any other photos? They would be a great help in identifying the car.

Better fix that parking brake, Peter. 😄 As usual, your car looks outstanding!

Here's a photo of the wheel of @Gary W's '37. It looks close to the photo you posted, except for the different horn button set up, so you may be right. Maybe Gary can chime in here and help you out with the identification.

You basically have to detach everything holding the rear axle in place and pull it back to get the torque tube out of the back of the transmission before you can replace the seals on the torque ball. I had a link to a great procedural checklist that someone else had posted in the past, but when I tried to pull it up just now I got an error message. This might have something to do with the new reshuffling of the forums on this site. I will look for it. However, I DO have a link to my thread where I go through the replacement of the torque ball seals. (Click on the arrow in the top right hand corner.) I did it with the transmission out of the car, but you could do it without removing the transmission. However, since you have to pull the rear end back anyway, I think you might just find it easier to go ahead and pull the transmission so you can check the front and rear bearings while you're at it.

Mike, I think you'd be better off just using the 120 for your car. No one's going to notice except an expert. If you use a 110 and try to adapt the plastic insert from a 120, I don't think it's going to look good. Just my opinion.

Haha -- OK, that's what I get for going out on a limb. I just saw the long hood.

Looks like a very nice '37 Roadmaster sedan in a rather unfortunate color. As Lebowski says, what kind of guidance are you looking for?

GM was certainly all about setting up a class hierarchy in those days, which is why it's unusual to see an ad which implied that Cad, Buick and Olds were all similar. But when you think about it, there was a pretty clear line separating these top three brands from the bottom two, Pontiac and Chevy, so it makes sense to me that Pontiac was not included. As far as the "class" of people shown, again it seems unusual to me that GM would momentarily drop the idea that there was a definite difference moving up the chain between Olds, Buick, and Cadillac. But the people in this ad all look to be from the same general group of prosperous-looking upper middle class folks. It's interesting that there are no children, no "family" scenes -- it's all about the adults doing stuff without their kids. I think this would be in contrast to Pontiac and Chevy ads which would more likely show the whole family. And one of the most surprising things -- no white walls! It makes the cars look a bit odd compared to the restored versions we're all used to seeing. Were white wall tires unavailable because of the Korean War?

In fairness to the seller, he didn't say it "looked like" a Caddy. He said it shared a body with the Caddy, which is accurate. But you are of course correct about the more "snub-nosed" look due to the shorter hood, as 58L-Y8 states.

NADA Guide seems completely worthless. I defy anyone to find a '56 DeSoto wagon that has sold for $102K. The "low retail" seems about as accurate.

I see what you mean about the write-up, but this looks to me like a very nice car at a very reasonable price. The interior looks perfect, and that "bubble" dash is one of the all time greats. If he really wants to sell the car fast, he should post a nice photo of the dash at night! 😄 Cosmic!

If you read the full description of what the seller did and what his goal was for this car, you will see that he was not going for a contest restoration that was going to be subject to judging criteria. He was going for a nice dependable driver that was mostly "correct," and I think he accomplished that goal. The '40 engine is very similar to the '39, but has some improvements as indicated (insert rod bearings). The seller also installed the '41 dual carb system. This kind of "upgrading" is fairly common for these cars and I think probably increases their value as long as it's understood that it's not being sold as a 100% "correct" restoration. I agree with Earl that this is a very desirable car and would be a lot of fun for "knocking around town."

Maybe it's like my magic shoes that repel elephants. I just tap them on the floor and they work perfectly. How do I know they work? I haven't seen an elephant in my house the whole time I've lived here! 😄