1934 buick speed problem

[A by the sea]

I should have done this search to start with, see the link at the end.

You will find the top speed of a 34 Buick should be 85 MPH.

From 10 to 60 MPH in 21 seconds.

And all you guys think the top speed of a 1934 car was 45??

Please take some time to understand the cars you are dealing with before you spread the wrong information. We are supposed to be maintaining the correct history of the cars, not re-writing history. We are suffering from too many history re-writes as it is.

1934 Buick Model 40 Brochure - The Old Car Manual Project

[Seldenguy]

A by the sea-- Amen!

[Guest DeSoto Frank]

I should have done this search to start with, see the link at the end.

You will find the top speed of a 34 Buick should be 85 MPH.

From 10 to 60 MPH in 21 seconds.

And all you guys think the top speed of a 1934 car was 45??

Please take some time to understand the cars you are dealing with before you spread the wrong information. We are supposed to be maintaining the correct history of the cars, not re-writing history. We are suffering from too many history re-writes as it is.

1934 Buick Model 40 Brochure - The Old Car Manual Project

Thank you for posting the link to the advertising brochure for the 1934 Buick.

While I agree with your desire to spread accurate information, I believe the orignal poster's question involved "how fast should he drive his '34 Buick TODAY"... which I took to mean "how fast can I drive my '34 Buick w/o wrecking the engine."

Parts are not as readily available or as cheap for a babbit-Buick as they might be for early Fords, or insert-bearing MoPars.

I don't think a new '34 Buick 40 would have lasted very long driven at 85 mph for any legnth of time.

"Henry Ford told the dealers in 1928 to take the customers out and show them the car does 60MPH."

For how long, and how many Ford owners them could/would actually try this stunt ? In 1928 ? Where ?

I'll make the point again, that I don't believe there were many places in 1934 where one could actually drive at 60 MPH , let alone 85 MPH; we simply didn't have modern high-speed roads everywhere, as we've had since the Kennedy administration.

Certainly there were none here in Northeastern Pennsylvania prior to WW-II.

Ply 33 offered some very sound research on his Plymouth site (find his post near the top of this thread), referencing engineering data from SAE, Chrysler Corp. and other reliable sources.

Read the section where it talks about "overspeeding an engine" and use of governors.

Original poster is trying to avoid destroying his vintage car from abusive driving; where's the harm in that ?

[A by the sea]

I am only trying to get people to understand their engines.

What makes you think that running those high speeds will ruin a properly rebuilt engine. You are only making assumptions and have no facts. I think you will find that the original engine was well built and quite capable. The problem lies in the lack of care in rebuilding. Much of that lack of care is outside your control. A prime example is when you send your crank out. They will grind it off center, with the wrong radius, and with different crank throws. How do I know this, my brother has rebuilt thousands of engines. Hundreds of them are Mercedes and he can not get those cranks done right. We know for fact that the guys doing the machine work are working to tolerances way outside reasonable.

How long and how fast can you drive a A that is set up to original specifications. I would say 50,000 miles. How often can you go that fast back then, talk to people who lived back then and you might be surprised. I know my father talked about running those cars that fast back then. Our first A was my brothers that he rebuild when he was 15 in 1970. We still have that car and until recently still drove it 60 MPH. Now the top speed is 55 as one of the rods threw its babbitt and now the engine is out of balance some. That out of balance cost him 5 mph on his top end.

How do I know all of this. We are in the process of setting up a machine shop to do our engines properly. We do our own babbitt and the crank grinder is almost up and running. We have spent years chasing down the facts of what these engines are capable of running. What we learned is most are horribly out of balance from poor machining and not correctly rebuilt. You would not believe how many shops are just not pouring and machining the babbitt correctly. From a driving standpoint the most damage to babbitt is cause by underspeeding or lugging the engine as that pounds out the babbitt. Running at high speed is little or no load on the babbitt to a properly balanced engine. So the most damage to the engine is from not running the engine at a high enough rpm when starting out.

As I say, take some time to actually learn the facts. Quit making guesses.

In the mean time if you see a stock Model A keeping up in traffic you are likely to find me driving it.

[eric_b_1937]

For Buick performance tests look at “Brook lands books - Buick Cars 1929 - 1939, by R.M. Clarke” this book has re-prints of the British Autocar and Motor magazine from 1930’s which is similar to today’s car and driver magazine.

The Motor magazine article that was written in 1934 for a Buick Viceroy Saloon with 235 cu in motor It states that ”A normal main road cruising speed for this car is around 60 mph at which figure it runs very quietly at about half throttle. The maximum speed recorded on the level (level ground) was 74 mph but with a little help from wind or gradient it is possible to top 80 mph without much difficulty.”

Since we know that drivers expected 70 mph car’s in the mid 1930’s then we need to know if it was safe to stop.

I picked a comparison to a modern truck that weighs about 5,000 lbs the suspension and driving characteristics are similar to an old Buick and a lot of people drive a similar vehicle every day.

According to motor week test data a 2004 F-150 with disc brakes will stop from 60 mph in 150 feet.

The 1934 weighs 3,850 lbs. and has vacuum mechanical brakes the Motor magazine test data shows that the Buick will stop from 50 mph in 119 feet. Correct for speed and they should be similar distances.

Modern car's and trucks have disc brakes because of overheating of the drums brakes on curves and mountain terrain which cause brake fade "longer stopping distance". Thus crashes. So well maintained brakes on a collector car should be safe as long as you do not overheat them in stop and go traffic or several high speed stops in a row.

Fuel milage specs are interesting too.

15 mpg to 17 mpg for the 1934 Buick

14 mpg to 18 mpg for the 2004 F-150 truck

Look at the performance data of the day and come to a reasonable conclusion on how you should drive your car.

Edited December 11, 2009 by eric_b_1937
Miss print (see edit history)

[Guest kaycee]

:)Amen!

I'm in Illinois right on interstates 80 and 39, both heavily trafficked 65? mph four lanes, and I've met and talked to a lot of owners of everything from Ford A s to many other prewar and 40's cars traveling from Iowa, Wisconsin, and farther out of state to shows in the midwest and going faster than the posted 45 mph minimum. They may be in the right lane and passed by the newer cars and semi trailers running 65-85 mph, but these old cars can run at speeds a lot higher than 45 if they're on good roads and in good driving condition, and their owners feel confident driving them realizing the limits of their cars braking, steering, etc., and are'nt afraid of an engine blowing to pieces because they know that their car's been properly restored or well maintained.

These are'nt 'street rods' or Corvettes or Vipers etc., they're well restored or, in some rare cases, excellent original cars in their 20's-50's.

We're not driving on dirt or gravel roads as were the rule of thumb in the 20;s and 30's and even then there were a lot of STOCK cars being raced in big races all around the country that were'nt set up ( other than fine tuning) and running way over 45. It was used as advertising for many makes.

My personal choices in cars range fom the early 20's through the mid 80's with the prewars being my favorites and for drivers, Buick my 'pet' make, and, yes I have two cars in the 20's, a'71 Corvette conv. , and my current driver ( a '85 fully optioned Riviera.

The biggest fear old car buffs should have today is the drivers of some newer piece of iron (Should I have said plastic?) on a cellphone or whatever and not watching their driving with little if any respect for other drivers or cars new or old. That's why I (like others) like the nice, lonely blacktops to drive on whenever possible even in the Corvette!

Hope you get that '34 Buick to run like it's capable of doing. I really like the'33's and '34's.

:confused:

kaycee

[Guest DeSoto Frank]

I strongly suggest that everyone who has participated in this thread go to the link below, and read the page carefully, thoughtfully, and several times.

Plymouth First Decade: How Fast Should I Drive?

Pay particular attention to the Section under "Wear and Tear", especially where it describes "overspeeding an engine".

Find the "Road Speed Calculator" on the right side of the page, about 1/2 way down, and plug in the numbers for your own car / truck, whatever the vintage.

Using the data supplied elswhere on this thread, and from MoToR's shop manual,

a 1934 Buick 40, 235 cid straight-eight, producing 93 HP @ 3200 RPM, with 4.33:1 final drive, and (presuming) 6.00 x 17 tires charts-out at a top speed of 64 MPH at 3200 RPM.

To get that same drivetrain combo up to 85 MPH road-speed, engine RPM will have to increase to 4250 RPM.

"[Cannon 2002 14] Notes that over speeding an engine is defined as exceeding the RPM that maximum BHP is generated. In addition [Cannon 2002 14] notes that “for long engine life, maximum engine RPM should be held a couple of hundred RPM's below the rated RPM at maximum rated brake HP”. " ( From Ply33's site)

So, if we get this Buick up to 85 MPH, we are overspeeding the engine by 1000 RPM.

A by the sea, I respect your knowledge and experience regarding the Model A, and the issues with modern rebuilders not machining cranks or pouring bearings correctly. Much of that talent and care has died with the men who worked on these beasts when they were new. Old Henry certainly placed a very high value on precision machine work & manufacturing process, and both the T and A Fords were quality machines.

Original poster mentions his Buick 40 is "completely restored", but we have no definition of what that means with regard to the engine work. It may be an unrestored engine with a new coat of paint and a crankcase full of 1930's sludge... it may be rebuilt with NOS parts to factory specs, or it may fall somewhere in-between.

With respect to comparing the '34 Buick 40 with other marques of the same era, another poster made a valid point: Fisher-bodied GM cars used heavy wood-framed bodies up through 1935-36, whereas Chrysler Corp and Ford went to all-steel bodies around 1928. Thus the Fords and MoPars didn't have as much weight to drag around. The model 40 was Buick's least expensive and lowest powered offering.

Also, running the '28 Model A Ford through Ply33's calculator, with a 3.7 final drive, running on 4.75 x 21 tires, at max output of 40 HP @ 2,200 rpm (?), the Ford should be running at 53 MPH. The Ford was light enough to tolerate a fairly tall final drive ratio ( for that era) w/o sacrificing hill-climbing ability or acceleration. By design, the Ford has quite an advantage.

By further comparison, the Essex Six of the late 1920's had final drive ratios around 5:1; they had great acceleration, but fairly low top speeds. They were quickly nick-named "High-winders" because of their screaming engines. Not saying they weren't a good car (Hudson pioneered the "balanced" engine in the Teens), just their design limited their performance.

Back in those days of low-compression / low-powered engines, heavy wood-framed composite bodies, and 3-speed transmissions, automakers were forced to use "stump-puller" rear-ends for their cars to have reasonable "get-away" and hill-climbing power.

Cetainly luxury makers such as Packard, Buick, and others were aware of this, and generally put 4.1 to 4.9 rears in their senior cars, so as to minimize the chances of being out-run by a light-weight Ford or Plymouth in urban traffic or on hills. Top-speed would be a moot point w/o high-speed roads.

( And I am not including period "super-cars" such as the Duesenberg J or Caddy V-16 in this discussion.)

If Original poster has a "perfect" engine in his Buick 40, then by all means, run it up to 60-65 MPH "all day", as others have suggested. I still think this is an invitation to find-out that the engine may not be in "perfect" condition, and reap the consequences.

By claiming in their advertising brochure that the Buick 40 was good for up to 85 MPH, Buick was trying to SELL cars, not necessarily ensure that they would last a long time. And how many Buick owners were actually going to be able to drive their Buick at 80-85 MPH, to the point of failure ? (Calling Buick's bluff, essentially...).

Again, I'm not trying to slam Buick; they were a fine car, but also a product of their era. I'm suggesting some careful thought and research as opposed to un-informed flogging of a 75 year-old car.

Cheers !

Edited December 17, 2009 by DeSoto Frank
correcting some data (see edit history)

[Guest caronagreen]

Again, thank you everyone for your input. By way of clarification, when I restored my 34 buick, I pulled the engine and rebuilt it. Rods were rebabbitted, new valves, pistons and rings were installed, and the engine was blue printed and balanced. I did so, because the pistons went from being the original forged iron type, to aluminum, as supplied by Egge. The engine runs beautifully, but I also know when an engine is being worked too hard. I grew up on a grain farm and have worked with and on, many tractor and grain truck engines. Every engine has its 'sweet' spot, where it feels and runs comfortable, without overdoing it. I have also owned many vintage cars and motorbikes over the years, including Packards, Fords, a Hudson, and even a 36 Pierce Arrow V12. With the greatest of respect for Mr. 'A by the Sea', my 1930 Ford model A, Murray bodied Town sedan, was most comfortable at 40-45mph. Yes, it could probably do 55 mph, and yes, its rods would likely throw babbit, but why would you want to that, if there was an easier way to achieve safe highway speeds, with less wear and tear? Unfortunately, unlike Model A and early Ford V8 owners, I do not have the luxury of going into a repo shop and picking parts off of the shelf. Even when new, 34 buicks were few and far between (being more expensive than Chevs and Fords, and also being the end of the Depression). Consequently, for many parts, you have to find a parts car, that hasn't been crushed or canabalised. When driving the Pierce, I simply had to lift my foot off of the gas pedal at 40mph, wait for the overdrive to kick in, listen to the revs drop by about a third, and we were off to the races! It would still be my preference to find some type of overdrive arrangement that would give me the extra gearing, as I wish to prolong the life of my engine as long as possible. And NO, I do not believe that the suggested 85 mph advertisement, was intended to be the standard by which these cars could be comfortably driven at. For one thing, the roads of the day, coupled with the independent knee action front end, would have been suicidal. The suggested top end speed of 85 mph, for a relatively heavy car, with only 93 hp and an axle ratio of 4.33 to 1, was nothing more than mere sales 'poppy cock'! Some one suggested going to a larger rim size, from 16 to 17 inches, which would supposedly increase my speed. However, I am not sure that the increase would be substantial enough to offset the cost of finding and buying new wheels, tires, etc.... but it is a thought. The torque tube drive also limits my options some what. But I concur with you Frank----even if my engine were perfect, why would you want to flog a 75 year old engine, if you didn't have too--- could the answer be something about 'metal fatigue')? Has anybody out there tried the larger rim size with any success? Are there any over drive units that might work on these early buicks? Again, thank you for you time and ideas. Happy Trails!

[DizzyDale]

Dear A by the Sea,Let's just say you were driving your A at 55 and a new ANYTHING had to stop short quickly.You can have a PERFECTLY working mechanically restored chassis and you sir have a PROBLEM with that :eek:small contact patch:eek: you best be deciding which ditch to dive for.I believe his or her ability to stop in an emergency situation has the antique auto driving enthusiast driving at a slower pace.I just see it as someone recognizing their limitations.As i said before if ALL that was on the road were cars with 30s stopping ability you would be fine.:)diz

[F&J]

Every engine has its 'sweet' spot, where it feels and runs comfortable, without overdoing it.

And NO, I do not believe that the suggested 85 mph advertisement, was intended to be the standard by which these cars could be comfortably driven at. The suggested top end speed of 85 mph, for a relatively heavy car, with only 93 hp and an axle ratio of 4.33 to 1, was nothing more than mere sales 'poppy cock'!

I agree with the sweet spot completely. Either a person can grasp that concept, or not

I spent 10 years upgrading 1960 to 1966 GM pickups to be more friendly in todays world. Most of the 1/2 ton pickups used the standard ratios of: 3:90 for 60-62, and 3:73 for 63-66. I found that even by upgrading to a 3:07 ratio, it still made these trucks rev too much on todays highways.

I would balance each customers ratio to what they were doing. Most were not hauling 1000 pounds up hills all day These trucks can easily handle a 2:76 ratio. I'd have to figure in the engine size, trans type, tire size as well as what speeds they preferred.

I still own two of these upgraded trucks: One is a 63 Suburban with a 400 V8 auto with a 2:76. The other is my tow vehicle, a 66 Camper Special 3/4 ton 4X4 running a 350 V8, auto trans with 3:21/3:23 ratios. Neither is underpowered feeling with their MAJOR change of original ratios..even when towing heavy loads with car trailer..and they are not aerodynamic by any means.....

As far as tire up-sizing, you need to run some math on a calculator, just like calculating the RPM drop by going from a 4:33 to a lower numerical gear.

Let's use easier numbers for an example: Say you had a 4:00 gear and swapped to a 3:00. Your RPM drop would be 25% less at a given road speed.

Doing the same math on "tire diameters" just requires converting the tire diameters to tire circumfrence to figure out what percentage to deduct from the RPM.

A very rough way to estimate what RPM you really want at say 55 MPH, is to run the car in high gear until you are at "your" sweet spot as far as RPM only. Then calculate the different speedometer readings to find the approximate percent of change you want. I say "rough idea" because I don't know of a way to allow for wind resistance, which compounds as you go faster. Some stuff I read years back, said that wind does not affect much until you reach 40 MPH, but that seems wrong to me, as I've read that these old body styles were proven to have less resistance while going backwards! (Early Chrysler tests with a Plymouth 4 dr sedan done in 1933 or 34 to promote the Airflow)

One more thing to check on the test ride: Let's say you find that the RPM at 40 MPH is what you want at 55. Then you need to hit some different sized hills at that 40 MPH to see how the motor does.

[Guest DeSoto Frank]

Using the calculator on Ply 33's site, you can plug & play with different tire/ rim sizes and see how that affects enging rpm / road speed.

28 to 30 % seems to be the ratio that Detroit standardized for overdrive. Most OD-equipped cars of the 1930's and '40's had rear-axle ratios between 3.90 and 4.6. A final drive any taller than 3.90 tended to be too tall for practical driving.

I recall seeing ads in Hemmings about 20 years ago for "Mitchell Overdrives"... they made a point of advertising that they did OD conversions for torque-tube cars, such as Buicks. Don't know if they're still around, but theyr'e probably worth "Googling".

I know what Caronagreen is speaking of regarding certain vehicle's / engine's "sweet spot"...

My full-pressure /insert bearing '41 DeSoto with 4.1 rear, 3-speed tranny and 6.50x16 tires begins to sound "strained" at speeds above 50 MPH... I wish I had a "fourth gear" to shift into when out on the open highway.

Ironically enough, Chrysler Corp, who pioneered Overdrive with the Airflows, dropped the OD option after the 1940 model-year, as they were introducing their first semi-automatics in 1941. So, whereas the 1940 De Soto with the same drivetrain as my '41 had an OD option, my '41 De Luxe "stripper" had to make-do without.

Not a big deal in 1940's NE Pennsylvania, with its steep mountains and two-lane WPA roads... no one was going anywhere fast back then; not around here. There were some flat, straight stretches of US Route 6 where you might have been able to speed-up above 50 MPH for a couple miles, but there was no place to cruise at 60 MPH for hours on end.

It's a different story trying to take the De Soto out on Interstate 81, or the PA Turnpike these days, with the "modern motorist" zooming along at 75+mph.

I am planning to swapping an OD tranny from a '40 De Soto into my '41, for easier highway cruising.

Personally, I like the idea of multi-speed trannies ( tranny with more than 3 speeds) and Overdrives more than I do changing a ring & pinion; changing a ring & pinion is a compromise - you'll sacrifice "get-away" and hill-climbing abililty for higher cruising speeds.

The multi-speed transmission is what has made European and Japanese cars, with their tiny engines, feasible in this country.

It's a shame that Chrysler's "double-high" 4-speed transmission of 1930-31 never caught-on.

Edited December 14, 2009 by DeSoto Frank (see edit history)