Matt Harwood

OK, I'll dip my toe in the chilly waters we have here. I just have a few comments. First, Americans pay the market rate for oil. There are some taxes, but not as much as in most of the other countries in the Western world. I would not object to paying more for a gallon of gas if the money were appropriated in a way that helped the people who paid for it (i.e. road repairs, improving driver education, etc.). Basically a "use tax" that would make the biggest consumers, and therefore the biggest users, the ones who pay the most taxes. It would probably also encourage a shift in automotive purchases. Second, the conspiracy theory that the oil companies and the automakers are in cahoots to keep us awash in cheap oil so we keep buying big trucks is hogwash. SUVs today are no different that big Cadillacs were 30 years ago (and more). It's a sign of conspicuous consumption: "I can afford it." Nobody NEEDS a 5000 BMW truck that can't go off-road and gets stuck in the snow because of 20 inch high-performance tires. But if you can afford it, why not? I find it funny that many people scoff at the cars our parents used to drive: 5000 pound behemoths with thirsty V8s, terrible handling, marginal brakes, and not very clean. Take a look in the mirror folks: we're still driving 5000 pound behemoths with thirsty V8s, terrible handling, marginal brakes and since they're trucks instead of cars, the emissions standards to which they are held are not as strict. Who says we don't become our parents? Unfortunatley, the only way to encourage Americans to change their habits is to hit them in the wallet. As a group, we're pretty selfish with a myopic view of the world. I haven't seen the collapse of Europe in the face of $5.00/gallon gas, nor have the automakers over there been suffering. We've just gotten accustomed to a certain way of life that is increasingly conspicuous in the world. It might be the reason many of these people hate us, I don't know. In closing, I thought I'd share something that a co-worker of mine said on a visit from his home in Germany: "If I lived in the US, I'd buy the biggest truck I could find and drive it 500 miles every day because such a luxury is unimaginable in Europe. It would be like living like a king!"

Hi Guys, Does anyone have a good procedure for removing the front kingpins from my '41 Century? I've got most of the front suspension disassembled, degreased (what a pain!), blasted and powdercoated (see my web page for details). The only remaining parts of the front suspension that need work are the steering kunckles and spindles, which are joined by the kingpin. Does anyone know how to get these apart without damage? Any help is greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance!

I know that Bob's Automobilia, Cars, Inc., and Steele Rubber all offer repro floormats. They're expensive (about $320). Hope this helps.

Try Steele Rubber for the gravel guards and weatherstripping. Try Cars, Inc. or The Buick Farm for your trim pieces. I have a lot of other sources on my web page (below) that you might want to check out. What model do you have? Give us details! Hope this helps.

I don't see why a dual-carb setup from a Century, Roadmaster or Limited wouldn't work on your car. The engine angle may be slightly different, so the carbs might need a little fiddling, but it can certainly be done. At a show last summer, I saw a '36 coupe with a 248 CID motor and dual carbs. The carbs weren't level, but the owner had gotten them to work nonetheless. Make sure you also get the proper accelerator pedal linkage, or you might have to fabricate your own, since there are probably changes to your car compared to the '41. The guy with the '36 built his own linkage. The only dual carb setup for a big motor I've seen was at CARS, Inc., and I think they wanted $750 or so for it. I have a spare NOS Stromberg primary carb I'd be willing to sell if you're interested. Hope this helps.

First, thanks for the kudos, John. Glad to see you're reading my stuff and enjoying it. I love tools. One that I bought recently that has proven to be quite useful is a strap wrench. I picked it up at Home Depot or something for about $10, and basically it's a heavy-duty rubber strap with a handle and a locking mechanism. Wrap the strap around the part, tighten, and it's got a death-grip on the thing so you can unscrew, twist, or pull on it. Great for removing oil filters installed by the monkeys down at Jiffy-Lube, pulling exhaust pipes out from under the car, and I even used it as a handle for yanking off the wheels on my wife's car when the hubs had frozen to the rotors. I like. Wire wheels are usually about $5 or so. I like the brass ones which don't hurt the metal. Metal files. Get an assortment--they're pretty cheap, too. Cut-off wheels for your Dremel/drill/angle grinder/die grinder. Toothbrushes--great for cleaning little nooks and crannies! That's about all I can think of off the top of my head. Hope this helps--this is a good idea for a thread!

Hi everyone, I'm looking for quality rebuilders for my '41 Century's shocks, alternator, water pump, starter and steering box. Can anyone make recommendations for guys who do quality work? I've heard horror stories, and I don't want to just start picking names out of Hemmings and sending out my rare parts. In the same vein, perhaps we could start a vendor's list to refer people looking for these services. I'd be happy to manage it if anyone has suggestions or comments on people who have helped/hurt them in the past. Thanks in advance for any advice you can offer.

Just because the consignment shop has no insurance doesn't mean they aren't liable for the damages. The car was left in their care and was destroyed. A signature on a contract does not override the letter of the law. I could sign a contract that says you're allowed to kill me, but that doesn't mean that you'll escape being tried for murder, even though you have a signed contract (extreme example, but just as true). I would figure that a consignment shop would be obligated to exercise reasonable care, as our Anonymous friend above pointed out. I think he should contact a lawyer and go over that contract very carefully. I also think that if there was child pornography involved, the FBI should be contacted immediately--they don't screw around with that stuff and things might happen pretty quickly if the shop owner has to give up the driver's name or go to prison on kiddy porn charges himself. Applying pressure in this way might get a lot of things resolved.

I just did a major update to the site to let you all know what I've been up to the past few months--renovating my shop. I also recommend both Bill's and Tom Yang's sites, which are extremely interesting and very well detailed. I agree with Bill: when I can't work on the car, I work on the web site about the car. Enjoy and thanks for all the kind E-mails!

Is that really a valuable car? Typically 4-door sedans and cars from the early 70s don't really make collectors' hearts sing. It might be a nice winter beater for someone, or a good first car for a 16-year-old kid, but I don't think it's worthy of a complete restoration as you describe. 132,000 miles is also going to scare a lot of people away. I know I wouldn't consider a car of that vintage with that many miles, no matter what I was going to do with it. I don't mean to insult you, but I'm thinking that if you're really in love with that particular model, you can probably find a better one for not a lot of money (or at least a clean shell into which you can transplant any motor you want). I looked at your site, and it seems like you've already sunk a lot of money into it with paint and other work, but it needs more. A lot more. If all the body panels have hail damage, there's rust, it needs upholstery and an engine rebuild, I'm thinking that you ditch it for whatever you can get ($1000-1500 maybe?) and find one that is a better starting point. Or if you just like the car and enjoy driving it, drive it into the ground. But I don't think I would sink any more money into this one, unless I'm wrong in thinking that it doesn't have a lot of value. Hope this doesn't rain on your parade, but it'll be hard to justify spending a lot more money on this particular car.

Hi Everyone, I've been getting a lot of E-mails from my web site about other owners of Buicks wanting help with decoding their data tags on their old cars. Unfortunately, all the information I have is simply extrapolated from what I have on my car. Is there a web site or a book anyone can recommend that will provide this information? I've been trying to find the <span style="font-style: italic"><span style="font-weight: bold">1941 Buick Restoration Facts Book</span></span> for several months, but it seems to have gone out of production. Can anyone give me a source? Your help is much appreciated. Also, for what it's worth, I've started a message board for Buicks on my web site as well. Not that it's any competition for this site, but I get about 15 E-mails a day with questions and comments, and thought that maybe the message board would be helpful to many people who otherwise would E-mail me. Thanks for any help and I appreciate your support. /end commercial

Hi Gene, Thanks for the kind words. I haven't done any work on the Buick since August because I have completely renovated my garage/shop in preparation for winter. I'll have pictures of that up shortly. Basically, I insulated my garage, put up 1/2" OSB paneling, rewired it for electrical service (you can imagine the treat of digging a trench from my house to my garage for conduit), and added air compressor hard line drops in the garage and in my shop in the basement of my house. It's been a major undertaking, but I'm in the home stretch. My new compressor was delivered yesterday, and I should have power connected out there by this weekend. All that's left is heat. Anyway, you can click on the Restoration Log Archives section to get a full index of every entry and click directly to each one. I'm really anxious to get busy on the car again, but to do so, I needed a better work space. I'll be pulling the front end sheetmetal off and rebuilding the suspension over the winter. I have a glass bead cabinet and powdercoater in my basement shop, so getting air to the house was a priority so I could work when it is cold. Thanks again for the kudos, and I'll let you know when I've started work again.

Hi Guys, I just thought I'd drop a message in here and let you know that I have a website devoted to my '41 Century sedanette. I've also started a '41-42 Century Registry to track these cars down and keep data on them. You can link to the site here. Also, as a professional writer and part-time car builder, I write a monthly column that I post on my site called "Spinning My Tires." It appears the first of each month. This month, I took one of our discussions from this very board (rodding vs. restoring) and shared a few opinions on it. Perhaps I'll make some enemies, perhaps I'll make some new friends, but I sincerely hope that you'll find it interesting and thought-provoking. If you have thoughts, feel free to E-mail them to me. I also keep a log on my restoration progress (none in the last 2-3 months, unfortunately), and an archive of all past posts and "Spinning My Tires" editorials. This is completely not-for-profit, and done 100% by me because of my enthusiasm for this hobby. I'm hoping that it will be an inspiration to all of you, and perhaps a place where we can get together and share some good times. And if you have a '41 or '42 Buick of <span style="font-style: italic"><span style="font-weight: bold">any type</span></span> , feel free to join the registry. There's no cost or obligation for that. See you soon.

I get magazines that are both glossy and non-glossy, and I have to say that I truly prefer the glossy paper. It just feels better in your hands and really makes the colors rich. I also have some involvement with printing, and I have faced the same problem--and unless it is some catalog or other low-quality publication, we always choose the glossy paper. I think the Bugle is a great publication and look forward to it as much as any other magazine I get. It's head and shoulders better than any other club publication I've ever received, and the quality paper is part of that perception. I think if the Buick Club wants to continue as one of the best clubs to be a part of, then a top-flight publication is mandatory. I don't mind the club dues as they are or even a little more--for what you get, it's a bargain in my opinion. People who gripe about $35-40 a year to be a member of a club ($3.50 a month is a lot of money?!?) are probably in the minority. Just my two cents.

For what it's worth, the '41-42 Buick 320s with dual carbs were the most powerful engines made in America until the early 50s. The '41 Century was widely regarded as the fastest car on the road in stock form until the high-compression OHV V8s started hitting the streets. I'll let you know as soon as I get mine running...

Can anyone tell me where to find the "1941 Buick Restoration Fact Book?" I've been looking all over, and it seems to be out of print. The only place I've even seen it is on the BCA site, but the order form is way too tiny to read or print to mail in. Can anyone help me out? Thanks in advance.

I wouldn't worry about the gauge at all--in most cars these days, they're little more than idiot lights that say hot/not hot. I doubt there's any real analog signal there to define temperatures as a needle position. I bet it doesn't even move once it's warmed up, regardless of load or conditions. It just shows that the engine is warmed up. If it isn't pegged into the red zone, there's likely nothing else to be gleaned from that gauge. Like NTX5467 said, there's little reason on modern computer-controlled engines to try to artificially lower the coolant temperature. The temperature is high for many reasons, including those he cited, as well as for emissions reasons. And heat isn't a bad thing--heat <span style="font-style: italic">is</span> horsepower. What do you think moves the piston? But I know what you mean. The common myth is that a cooler engine will run better, but that's totally false. What you want is a hot lower end and a cool intake charge. On a low-performance engine like the Century's, there's really no point to going to extremes to achieve that, and it might hurt reliability and durability in the long run. Hope this helps. Don't worry about temperature. Remember, your engine isn't overheating until you see steam.

I'm looking for some new tires for my '41 Century. The Century had 15" wheels (all other '41 Buicks had 16s), and that means that there is quite a variety of tires for it. I would like to use modern radials for the handling/ride/wear advantages they offer. Does anyone know what size is appropriate? I'm thinking that a 235/75R 15 would look right and handle the car's weight. Also, what brand? There's the BFGoodrich Silvertown, the Coker WWW and the Diamond Back Classics, all in a size that will work. I'd also like the widest whitewall I can find. Any help? Thanks in advance.

Hello, all. I recently acquired some NOS front fender spears for my '41 Century. However, when I held them up to the fender on my Century, it was clear that the fit wasn't even close (see photo). I believe my front fenders are original and undamaged (there is evidence of some slight body work--the mounting holes were filled by brazing, for instance), but the contours should be correct. Also, the fit is poor on both sides, leading me to believe that the NOS trim I purchased is for a small series car (Special or Super). I think it is unlikely that the trim is bent--it's a casting and would probably break before bending as much as it would have to fit so poorly. Can anyone confirm or deny that there were different contours on the fenders? Any help you can offer is greatly appreciated.

Please note: as I said at the top, it is merely cut and pasted from AUTOEXTREMIST.com. They are one of the most refreshing voices in the automotive world at the moment--they call 'em like they see 'em. They have the experience to back up their words, and they are excellent critical thinkers. You certainly don't have to agree with them. I think their point is that these ads could have (and should have) been much more meaningful to Buick and the heritage that GM is attempting to cash in on. It is a missed opportunity to show the world what they can do. Instead, it becomes an homage to mediocrity--the products they are selling as Buicks today are not the same as the Buicks of lore. For 10 years or more, GM has not only dropped the ball, but they completely lost track of it. The Germans and Japanese are eating Buick alive, and I'll wager that nobody under 60 would consider owning anything on a Buick showroom floor today (even my 64 year old father calls them "old man cars"). I'm 32, and unless they build the LaCrosse or Bengal roadster, I won't be shopping at Buick for anything newer than my beloved '41 Century. And you KNOW that Tiger Woods doesn't drive a Buick (though he probably keeps one around to prevent any "image" problems). I just thought the Autoextremist bit was relevant. Like I said, you definitely don't have to agree. Having seen one of the spots, I thought it was neat, but I also wondered how Buicks, Harley Earl and Tiger Woods were related. The message they sent to me, as a consumer and Buick fan, was that they don't know what they're doing, but they're spending money so we should be impressed. Well, if you want to impress me, spend the money on product, make it a 21st Century interpretation of my '41 Century (fast, luxurious and with standard-setting styling), and I'll be there. But if it's another G-body with a fish-face and a 40-year-old engine, forget about it. Sorry to be so long winded--I seem to be doing that a lot lately. Regards.

This is some brilliant work from the always-spot-on guys at AUTOEXTREMIST.COM: (Three thumbs down): Buick, GM, McCann-Erickson Detroit. The new "Spirit Of American Style" advertising campaign for Buick is such a disappointment that we don't know where to begin. First of all, being ex-advertising creatives, it pains us to have to have to be critical of an ad agency that is obviously trying so desperately to "move the needle" and create something - anything - that will: 1. Establish a distinctive presence and image for the Buick brand that will allow it to stand out from the rest of the pack, and 2. Capture some of the magic that once was such a glorious chapter in GM's history and put it to work on behalf of new and future Buick products. We heartily applaud the cojones it took for McCann to get this campaign through the GM system, and we applaud the creative vision to use Harley Earl in the ads, but that's where our praise has to stop. Harley Earl was a giant in this town and a larger-than-life character who literally forged GM's design leadership with his bare hands. Earl not only created the whole art of Design in Detroit and made it an integral part of the automobile business, he was one of the main reasons GM broke away from the pack in the '50s and established itself as the leader of the industry. And, as if to add an exclamation point to his remarkable career, Earl's star pupil Bill Mitchell continued his legacy and kept GM at the front for another 20 years after him. But the key thing to remember about Harley Earl is that although he did some magnificent Buick show cars like the Y-Job and the LeSabre, he was not linked to the Buick brand more so than to any other GM nameplates. Far from it, as a matter of fact. Most historians would argue that he is more famous for the development of the original Corvette than any other GM car. We could get into some executional quibbles of this new campaign too - like the fact that the authentic GM historical footage is far more compelling than any actor playing the Harley Earl role could be (we find the use of the actor to be insulting to the legacy of Earl more than anything else). And why, oh, why do Buick executives insist on stuffing Tiger Woods into a spot where he has no connection to what's going on whatsoever and no business being in the spot at all? Ladies and gentlemen, please get over the fact that you've committed a ton of money to this superstar golfer and feel the need to "use him" for no good reason. Either craft a separate mini-campaign for him or just give it a rest altogether, because what you're doing now just makes you look foolish. And one more thing - the fact that the the sensational LaCrosse Concept is in the glossy print insert that goes with the television - a car that GM couldn't see fit to build - is just one more indication of the total confusion generated by this new campaign. If anything, this new divisional ad campaign for Buick is woefully misguided and a waste of a golden opportunity. It could have been a spectacular corporate image campaign for General Motors and GM design - a "statement" campaign that would feature some of GM's best concept cars of the most recent major auto shows, coupled with hints of some of its visionary production and concept cars to come. It could have been an elegant image campaign that would have provided a wonderful juxtaposition to the frenetic (but highly effective) corporate retail "overdrive" spots that have been dominating the airwaves for almost a year now. But it was not to be. In the end, we're left with one particularly offensive image of this campaign that made our skin crawl: Harley Earl's signature gray fedora is a running ingredient in all of these new Buick ads, and one print ad goes so far as to have it draped on the left front fender of a Rendezvous - as if Harley Earl's legacy had a hand in its design. The Rendezvous? Harley Earl would take one look at that cobbled-up SUV and puke. We have to believe Harley is surely spinning in his grave right about now... I think that says it all...

Well, I feel as though I'll probably be shooting myself in the foot for this and making a lot of enemies here, but it's my opinion (and only that) that Brad (and others like him) are getting a beating they don't deserve. I recall when I was a kid and my father had a collection of old cars, we'd watch old movies together, and I was horrified to see neat old cars being smashed, burned and raced. But, as my father pointed out, at the time, they were merely used cars. Nobody knew at the time that they'd be anything special. I think a great many people buy new cars today and modify them (I know I have hot-rod wheels and lowered springs on my 2002 Mazda Protege5). Will some collector in 30 years be outraged by my ignorance? I hope not, but I'm not going to preserve the car for him. Modifying cars is a great part of our hobby. Some of us are purists, some aren't. I've been to both ends, and now I'm in the middle somewhere. I've built a few rods, worked for a professional rod shop, and raced my own cars. I just sold a 1997 Ford Ranger Splash pickup (one of only 560 built that year in Toreador Red) into which I swapped a supercharaged 5.0L EFI V8 (you can see it at my HPE site by clicking the logo on the Buick site). I did it with less than 1000 miles on the odometer. I also sold the truck for twice what I paid for it when I was done, and made enough to finance the restoration of my Buick. My Buick will be a restoration. There won't be any large modifications, but I will probably have higher compression in the straight-8, ported heads and manifolds, and a reground cam. There will probably be an FM converter hidden somewhere inside, along with a pair of stereo speakers hidden under some upholstery. It will have WWW radials. It will have base coat/clear coat paint. It will have modern lubricants in it. Externally, it will be stock, and I'll use stock colors and interior materials. To an observer, nothing but the tires will look unoriginal. But it won't be "as the factory intended" either. I guess that's my point: where do you draw the line? Do you still use single weight mineral oil in your transmissions, or ethylene-based coolant in your radiators? I bet none of you do. Do you have modern tires? Do you use vastly superior enamel paints instead of nitrocellulose lacquers that tend to shrink, crack and fall off? Of course you do. No car is perfect unless it's been lovingly kept by a fastidious owner, and even then, you question why. Ever seen a perfect AMC Pacer? I have, and I wonder why it's still perfect. I have an interest in keeping IMPORTANT cars stock. My Century is one of 5500 built that year--it's rare and it's neat because of that. But I don't have a conniption when I see a '41 Special coupe (essentially the same body style as my Century) modified. Why? They built 106,000 of them. It's not an IMPORTANT or unique car. There are plenty to go around for everybody. I cry a little when I see '32 3-window coupes with chopped tops or other irreversible modifications, and I'm happy when I find out they are repros. But I don't hate the owner for doing it--it's his car. I was at a show two weeks ago and someone drove up in a '32 Buick 90 7-passenger sedan that had been "modernized" with a 350 and automatic, modern A-arm suspension and power everything. But it sure was a nice job with great workmanship. It's still a beautiful car, and now it's one that the owner enjoys. I think that's important. It was the only pre-war car in attendance, by the way, and I'm so damned sick of seeing base model mid-50s to mid-60s 4-door sedans filling every parking lot at every show--what the heck happened to the great classics? These "newer" cars are not interesting to me, but they are the only cars that get driven any more. I certainly don't deride the owners for loving them, but it seems obvious to me that these aren't valued nearly as much as the classics that are locked up safe in a barn--after all, they're driven. So to each his own. I'm just a little surprised at the wide dividing line between the purists and the modifiers. We're in the same hobby, and we love the same things. I love a flawless black paint job, whether it's on an SJ Duesenberg or a channelled '49 Mercury. The fine details of an engine compartment, whether chromed to the max or completely stock still make me stop and check everything out with a critical eye, and note the details that are particularly well done. We're all car guys, and can appreciate fine hardware. Brad certainly realizes that any car that has been loved by an owner is cool. Nobody's cutting up a valuable car in this case, so getting all up in arms about these modifications is not productive. Another car has been preserved, regardless of what happens to it in the future. We are merely caretakers of these cars, and a nice car will always find a new owner, modified or not. If you want an original, they're always going to be out there. And if you want to modify it, you shouldn't feel guilty about starting with quality base stock. Nobody's idea of a perfect car is better than anybody else's. And last time I checked, there's no shortage of 50s cars of any caliber out there. I see wasted '59 Cadillacs for sale all the time, and I'll bet there are fewer of those than most Buicks of the same vintage. As someone else said, at least they aren't being scrapped, and the parts are available to the purists who want them. Where's the down side? My wife said something wise when I agonized over selling FrankenRanger: It won't be any less amazing if somebody else owns it. I'm way too verbose. Sorry.

No hackles raised, Loren. I just think these sorts of things are funny in the way they persist in lore and legend despite the complete lack of science or evidence. And I hate to think that some fellow enthusiast might be suckered into a scheme like this. Take a look at that page and you'll see what I mean. He's hooked on conspiracy theories and the thought of oil companies killing inventors to protect their market. He doesn't have any real science.

Ah, the myth of the 100 MPG carburetor just never dies, does it? It's a big oil company conspiracy to keep us buying oil and making them rich. Forget the fact that it's thermodynamically impossible to extract that much power from a gallon of fuel for a moment and just think logically about the situation. Seriously, do you really think that a 4000+ pound car with a big V8 can pull 70+ MPG? Or a not so aerodynamic 4000 pound Grand Cherokee can pull 127 MPG? If so, would you be interested in some land in south Florida I have for sale? Don't you think that if this were true, the first auto company to put it on the market would make a fortune? What if GM were suddenly able to make its trucks get 50 MPG or more without reducing power or payload, would you buy one? Of course you would. Everybody would, and they'd put Ford out of business in a month. And if the oil companies are somehow conspiring to keep these devices out of people's hands to get rich, why don't they simply conspire to raise prices instead? That's a much easier way to get rich, since everyone buys gas, but not everyone will buy this "miracle" carburetor. And why are the inventors of these things always some toothless farmer with a bunch of non-science theories? If it were possible, don't you think the big brains at the auto companies would have figured this out already? Of course they would have, because such an invention would be a tremendous competitive advantage. The people who believe in this stuff are the same suckers who buy the "Fuel Magnetizers" that align fuel molecules for more power, or who buy miracle oil treatments because they think that pouring teflon into their engines will make it magically bond to hot metal surfaces that rub against each other. As Barnum said, there's one born every minute. Don't be one of them. So forget your conspiracy theories--there aren't a bunch of suits in some office somewhere scheming on how to rob us of our money by keeping Farmer Bob's miracle carburetor off the market. It just ain't so. This is one of those myths that just refuses to die because people really want to believe in conspiracy theories...

Hi, In the process of researching my '41 Century, I've acquired an original paint chip chart. From the discussion below and from talking to club members, I know that I can paint the car an original combination, even if the body plate says it should be something else. No problem there. But what about interiors? I would very much like to have a leather interior in my car, but leather was not available on the closed cars (except the 90 series limousines). However, I've seen at least one trophy-winning '41 sedanette (a Special) with green leather (it was restored by Doug Seybold who undoubtedly knows his stuff). Other club members have said that if it was available on ANY car in '41, it's fair game (like the paint). The factory apparently would have installed leather in a closed car if the customer was willing to pay for it, and therefore a restored closed car with leather would be acceptable. Can anyone confirm or deny this? By the way, I don't plan on having my car judged, but I do want it to be "authentic" to the period and production. Once you start down the customization road, things can get out of hand pretty quickly, and I don't want that. Thanks for any help.