Jim Nelson

RiKi5156B, Like your "ID". ? 1951 and 1956 Buick ? right? What year did you put the 1950 third member in. I think that in either 1940 or 1941, Buick changed the torque tube to the two piece construction. With that torque tube, changing the rear ratio becomes easier. You mentioned it was off by 1/4". That works even tho the factory calls out for 2-1/4" exposed spline shaft to go into the transmission. The one piece torque tube prior to the two piece makes things more difficult. Still doable. Love it when I can go driving in my Buicks and keep up with traffic. Interestingly, when driving my old Buicks, most cars (people) keep away from me a bit. Some drive in formation, to just look it over. Then off they go.

Kyle, So sorry that I may not have answered your question on pix desired. Wow, where do you keep all those neat cars ? I have pix of the 3.90 ring and pinion gears. Also the ‘54’ third member and pinion rebuild. I take lots of pix so I can discuss issues later. I suffer from ‘old timers disease’ so I resemble that.

Hi Kyle. I used to run a machine shop and creating new gear set would be quite expensive. There is not enough people who would want one to justfy machining, hardning and polishing (the area that the roller bearing runs on) and set ups to make the gears run smoothly (low noise) . If you want a better gear set, the 3.90 set requires the least effort to get our cars running on the roads today. I have run my ‘37’ with 3.90 gears. It runs 55 / 60 OK. I live in a very busy traffic area. Even 60 mph is slow and you would be a problem much of the time. I looked over some older mod’s where the third member is changed to a newer one. Ratio’s of 3.6 and 3.4 are readily available. Those swaps are not cheep (depending on the year of your car.) but your car would not show the change except where the torque tube is altered. I believe if you have a 40/41 or newer, changes are easier and cheeper. I did the rear change with a ‘54’ third member giving me a 3.4 ratio. I now run 60 mph with a rpm of ~2600 or 65 rpm @ 2750. I have this thing that you should NOT run cruise rpm’s of over 3000 rpm. Our straight 8 engines do not like it and will complaign. Plus mileage suck’s. I just finished the 3.4 rear end swap about 2 weeks ago. I will be updating my RPM vs gear ratio chart. This will give you what will work best for you and where you drive. Chart is available —— My ‘38’ coupe has Over Drive. This option gives you the standard 4.44 rear to get going and after using three gears as normal, around 38 mph, I shift into OD and accelerate up to 65 and the engine loaf’s along at 2350 all day long. Last year I took a trip on the Interstate and local state highways for over 1700 miles with ease. Thus, having both systems on my 37 an 38 coupes, I think I have a pretty good opinion of the advantages and dis-advantages that work today. The Over Drive is cheeper but requires modification of the torque tube to insert the over drive. You keep the original ring and pinion that the factory set up. Quiet and trouble free. The over drive is the Borg Warner unit that almost every one who used a OD uses. Parts are available and people who know them can repair them. I highly recomend the guy who did Lloyd Youngs units. Lloyd has passed in Jan (two months ago) and the machinist is continuoing installing Lloyds units. He did mine the summer of 2015. I love the OD for my driving flexability. Slow or fast, my straight 8 just keeps humming along. You take or send the torque tube and third member to Glen and he will fix it and send it back to you. Re-assemble and add the controls and electrical and you are back on the raod with minimum mess. More effort in swapping third member rear ends. Machine shop work. Not dificult but more time. And you will probably need to rebuild the pinion bearing assembly. Lots of fun and very educational.. The rear end swap by changing the third member, was more expensive. But, it only shows the change by visual observation of the torque tube. The interior of the car looks veriually stock. My ‘37’ has been restored to like new ‘1937’ business coupe interior. Nothing shows it has been modified . So, those changes that are what is readily available today. Thus, that is why I would not go to the very expensive job of trying to duplicate the 3.90 set. I can, right now, purchase a 3.90 from a ‘54’ series 40 Buick. Also I can get a 3.90 from a Roadmaster. So, there are some available but in my opinion, if I wanted to “get up to speed”, I would go with the over drive opition. Cost vs performance. If someone wants to do the over drive now, the machinist (Glen) has changed Lloyds phone number to his in Hemmings. We are so lucky to have someone pick up the reins and keep the over drive options available.

I have a friend who has two 3.90 gear sets available. One from a Roadmaster and one from a special. I feel JMHO that the 3.90 is the highest ratio for our old cars today. It depends where you live and drive. Driving 45 mph in cruise just won't work today. If you try to go any place on modern roads, you get run over. OK for 1937,8,9 .... etc when roads and traffic were light but not today. I enjoy driving to visit people and show them what cars were really like "back then". How far things have come. Actually, the newer cars - say - around 2010 and forward are not my 'cup of tea'. Personally I don't like them. To much automation / electronics to fail. Bought my first automatic transmission car back in 09 and don't like it. I have been a shifter guy from my start. (just turned 75). I don't like the transmission telling me what gear to be in. (The queen drives an auto shift)

Wow, great change. Others need to hear of those changes. Having the 3.6 or 3.4 rear ends make our cars easy on the engine while keeping up with modern cars. I put a 3.4 third member in my '37' coupe. It required a bit more machine work but did it. I spent more than I figured as the extra work costs more. I had to marry the '37' front half of the torque tube to the '54' torque tube and third member. This way I kept the leaf springs. Looks almost original. I have a '38' coupe with Over Drive. Having both that I can drive, I prefer the over drive. Less money and more performance sorta. I have the advantage of the original gearing at the low end and better engine speeds around 65 (2350) mph. I get 2600 rpm at 65 with the 3.4 swap in my '37'. Just finished with the 3.4 so I will start checking mpg later this summer.

I have asked for a list of cars with year. They said they would send me the list. When in hand, I will post.

Lloyd was such a wealth of knowledge. So much to loose. For us (older ?) guys, educate anyone who will listen. Tell the younger guys as much as they will absorb. Lets not loose the knowledge we have accumulated over our life times.

Great News ! Lloyd Young's "Over Drives" will be available. The machinist in Circleville has agreed to continue building them and somebody has Lloyds parts and will be provided. So all is not lost. Glen has put his phone number in Hemmings in place of Lloyds so contacting him will get you to Glen. I have delt with Glen as he and Forest put mine together in '2015' for my '38' Buick. He has good experence building them. Any one who was considering buying a car in the 20's and up to the WW II area, his collection will be available at Auction on Aug 10 / 11 this year. I personally saw his collection and it was very nice.

In its day, the 38 was adequate. That is why the 44 and 45 came to be. All for a different subject.

Buick35, IMHO, the easiest way to change your rear to a more comfortable ratio is to replace the rear completely. That is a long way to get there but I think early Buicks (36 and earlier) would need to do it that way. IF we can get someone to pick up Lloyd Young’s over drive systems, that would be the easiest mod. That way you can have youe cake and eat it to. Time will tell. Changing the third member and mod of the torque tube drive works but is a bit more expensive. Just some thoughts. The ‘37’ rear had leaf springs so changing to that year makes it easy in that part. Ole Bob Pipkin also moditied later rear ends by cutting off the coil spring supports and replacing them with leaf spring mounting parts. As time goes by, the options get fewer and more expensive. But they still are there and we have to adjust to 2018 reality. IMHO, I think its still worth it. Our cars are part of history and we need to keep them where folks can see our past.

Atlanta is a hilly environment. I’m in Tampa Fl. With flat land. My guess (IMHO) the 3.6 ratio would be great.

Since I also have a ‘38’ coupe, I can judge the original first gear on the 4.44 rear to the 3.4 ratio on my ‘37’. Even when I get slow (in second gear) there does not seem to be an issue. In my ‘37’ I run it up to about 15 mph and then shift into second. Run it up to 25 / 30 in second and then into third. I have a tach to check my rpm’s. I will do a more accurate run ups. Starting from a stop does not seem to have any lugging issues. Remember, this is a coupe. Two pax max. If you have a sedan and drive with more people in it, and if you have hills (moderate size) you might want to go for the 3.6 ratio. Our tech guy has a coupe with the 3.6 rear end. He would be a better opinion as he has driven his from new orleans area and up into Tenn and around the mid-south. Either way, it makes driving around the country a pleasure. Keeping your car in the garage does it no justice.

Great. I would like to see what he had for our older cars.

That was interesting. I just got one for my ‘37’ a few weeks ago. I sent it old one back as there is a deposite on both pp and disc. It may have been the only one he had. It looked (old one) fine, I just figured replacing the clutch while it was apart was the thing to do. If you still need a pp, call and talk to Bob and mention that you would like the one I sent back. They had the throw out bearing so that is good. Putting my old pp next to the rebuilt one I got, they looked the same. ie surfrace condition etc. It was working fine before I took it apart so I probably should have left it alone. The disc was also good. Disc’s are easy to get repaired.

That is why I could not make it fit ? Duh !! Thanks ! Repairing / rebuilding the disc is easy. The pressure plate rebuilding is a disserent problem. So, Bob’s had it on the shelf and in my hands.

Sorry for the confusion on engine size. I have used “265” in place of the correct size. “263”. Getting old and suffering from Old timers disease.......

Jack., I had the option to get / rebuild a 265 engine. I replaced the 248 engine with a rebuilt 263. I was sreious about rebuilding my 248. I was going to use Terrill in Texas who has / modifies the rods to accept insert style bearings. I found that I had an insert type rod besring in my 248. A bit strange as American mfg rod bearings are stamped with the comp who mfg them and the size. Mine were not ID’d. So, I figured that if I was going to do the 248, I might as well do the 265 with the latest mod’s from the factory. My original issue was low oil pressure. I know that the 248 engine can put out idle hot of 20+ psi. My ‘37’ with a 248 does it. It runs great so I’m not going to drop the pan to see why. I think the ‘38’ 248 engine is avvery good engine. Late 40’s and up to ‘50’ with the 263 pumps with the cooling issues. Finally with ‘rod bearings as insert’s late in 1948. 263 rods will not work in earlier 248 engines. Is this confusing enough ? - - -

Ben Bruce, Do you remember who posted the ability to use a 1995. Jeep clutch in place of the ‘37’ clutch ?

Unfornatially, that kit does not work for the ‘37’ flywheel. The ‘37’ clutch is 1/2” smaller in diameter than the Jeep clutch. Bummer ! I was hoping to find an alternative unit for our cars.

Ben Bruce, Do you remember who posted the ability to use a 1995. Jeep clutch in place of the ‘37’ clutch ?

Hi Carl, I tried to contact him a few months ago and got no reply. Do you know where / which for that data. I believe Frank is in California. From what I have found, his data would be great. So, what do you have and what rear end ?

I spent $500 on getting the complete '54' rear. Then, about another 100 for bearings etc. So I think I had about $600 in my costs. I drove to the Atlanta area for the rear. You get what you can where you can. I wanted the 3.41 ratio. I could have gotten a 3.6 from other car rears. The 3.41 was not as available. ( 1954 road masters and centurys with Dynaflow had 3.41 rears, most were made that way. You could get the 3.6 with a stick tranny). So began the transition to automatic trannys over stick's. I always had standard trans until my last car - got an auto. Don't like it at all. It shifts when it wants to and not when I NEED it to :-((

Thanks Ben, I needed that :-(( How are things going with you? With getting my '37' back on the road, I'm a happy camper.

Tom, you have done something I have not learned. Wood / metal bodies. I'm told their an issue. Lots to learn to keep out cars running. Wow! the 248 engine (38 and later) are great engines. I still have my '38' original engine when I change to the 265. Got it from a friend who got it on a trade. It was a spare engine. I tore it down and found it was only lightly worn. So I chose to rebuild it to factory spec's. I kept the single carb. The twin carb and exhaust must be great (and sound great).