1939 Buick Frames

[g-g-g0]

I am on the trail of a 39 Buick Series 40 Business Coupe. Reliving my past as I had one in high school!

Can some one please enlighten me about the frames? I know there was a "short" frame and a full frame. When was the change made? Serial number? There are some obvious drawbacks to the short frame I would think but what should I be looking for/stay away from?

Apreciate any info.

Gary

[1939_Buick]

1939 start at chassis number 13388547 [1 = Flint ?]

Change short to long was made at 13486048

Car with short chassis often have the small wiper transmissions that changed to the larger type as at 13513037

Short chassis was prone to twisting & door problems. Buick came up with a fix of extra steel under the trunk

So long as you do not tow a trailer or put a lot of weight in the trunk a short chassis should be OK

Edited October 23, 2010 by 1939_buick (see edit history)

[Guest Ken J]

Do you if its possible to extend the frame? I think I have a short frame and thinking about towing a trailer...

Ken J.

[1939_Buick]

What size - weight of trailer are you thinking of using ?

If its heavy I would not be doing with a short chassis 1939 series 40 (or even a long chassis : its only a 248 ci engine).

There is information on fitting a trailer hitch to short chassis in the 1939 service bulletin. Can send you a copy if needed

Edited October 25, 2010 by 1939_buick (see edit history)

[Guest Ken J]

It weighs 3500lbs - my plan was to weld plate steel and extend the frame so that the tongue weight (about 300lbs) is on the frame, not on the body - in looking at it, I figured it would worka as the frame itself looks very strong - I have upgraded the engine and transmision

Ken J.

[Ben Bruce aka First Born]

From another thread,post.

[Guest Ken J]

First - I can't really tell from that picture as it is a small picture - but it looks like that frame was extended? Do you have better/larger pictures? From what I can tell, its exactly what I had in mind except I was going to add some cross members in front and back of the gas tank - seems that would make that frame bullet proof...

Ken J.

[Guest Grant Magrath]

Hi Ken.

The frame was re-jigged back to a conventional one part way through the run. The fix for the "bobtails" was an angle iron extension from the rear of the frame under the trunk on each side. we have a 39 business coupe as well, but we won't be doing any towing. We'll leave that for the 38!

Cheers

Grant

[Guest Ken J]

Thanks - Again thats what I was planning on doing - I think - except, I hope to be able to do it with the body on the frame - I'm not sure I understand what you mean by part way through the run - it looks like it was just welded to the back of the frame - in my case I was thinking of using some sort of plate steel cut to fit from the front of the spring area to the back of the car - I had not considered angle iron as I don't know how you would bend it to shape...

Anyway - thanks again for the help - you have given me some more ideas - you know things always look good on paper...

Ken J.

[Guest Grant Magrath]

Part way through the 1939 model run.

When Buick realised they had a serious problem with trunks collapsing, and minor knocks to the rear causing the body to spring, preventing doors from opening, they changed 39 production to a conventional frame. It's not an extension, it's a proper full length frame. The reason for shortening it in the 1st place was part of a cost saving excercise for the 39 model run.

Since you have a bobtail, yours will most likely have had the modification done with the bolt on angle iron extension. If I recall correctly, some more exprienced forum members have yet to see a bobtail that hasn't been fixed by the dealer. I hope that helps!

Cheers

Grant

[1939_Buick]

My original fame image is in post 46 of this thread http://forums.aaca.org/f190/1939-buick-special-restoration-273123.html

First fix was a welded angles by dealers as Grant's post above. Later buick made a full length frame as per the image.

Edited April 7, 2018 by 1939_Buick
added image lost due to software changes (see edit history)

[danhar1960]

I have had 2 short chassis. From memory, they both had a substantial piece of angle iron added on both sides that bolted to the spring tower on the chassis and went down to the body where the bumper irons bolted to the body. The body from the short chassis originally had a piece of angle iron spot welded into the body but no where near as substantial as the dealer fitted correction piece that was also where the bumper irons bolted onto. You cannot fit a body from a short chassis onto a long chassis without modifications to the spot welded iron. The bumper irons for the short chassis are also different to the long. Done it twice now and learned the hard way. I have a bunch of pics if necessary. It was a Holden body though I would assume they would be similar.

Danny

[Guest Ken J]

Very informative - sounds like extending the frame is a good idea - towing or not...

Ken J.

[g-g-g0]

Thanks to all for the additional questions and input. My original questions have been answered and then some!!

[Guest DaveCorbin]

Dear Ken & Gary:

I first got interested in the bob-tail Buick about 35 years ago. Since then, I've had the "privilege" of crawling under probably more than 200 1939's. I've seen a few "fixed" cars but only 1 "unfixed" car, a model 46.

Regards, Dave Corbin

[Guest Ken J]

I did get a chance to crawl under there this weekend - I must say the fix does not very substantial if thats what I was looking at - bascially 1" steel - unless you all talk me out of it, I'm going to beef it up a lot more...

Ken J.

[danhar1960]

Ken,

When you say 1", what is it that you are referring to?

Do you have the added strengthening irons fitted ?

I didn't keep my original add-ons (didn't need them now having a full chassis) but I recall that they were 1 1/2" or 2" angle iron and quite beefy.

Danny

[Guest Ken J]

Well I'll have to look again - they were attached to the frame with bolts and is what the bumper bracket was attached to - I don't think they were that thick - but then I did look at them pretty quickly......

Ken J.

[1939_Buick]

.. recall that they were 1 1/2" or 2" angle iron and quite beefy

About 1 1/2" x 2" angle iron and 1/4" or 3/8" thick is my guess

Attached images show the angle and a flat that goes to the bumper (if I remember this correctly). Images are NOT of my car

Edited November 1, 2010 by 1939_buick (see edit history)

[danhar1960]

That's the buggers Al !!!!!

Danny

[Guest Ken J]

Yup! I looked again and thats what I have - I guess the reason I said it was not very substantial is because it was not near the size of the frame and it was just bolted on - I'm not really sure what they gained by that other than to provide a little support for the trunk, but I guess it worked

[1939_Buick]

Yup! I looked again and thats what I have - I guess the reason I said it was not very substantial is because it was not near the size of the frame and it was just bolted on - I'm not really sure what they gained by that other than to provide a little support for the trunk, but I guess it worked

No. It did now work, Which is why Buick went to a full length frame after a few months (as above images).

[Guest Ken J]

True - good point..... makes you wonder what they were thinking - course I guess it was the first semi-unibody...

[danhar1960]

In defense of the short chassis, some years ago and friend had a short chassised Century. We traveled thousands of miles towing a car trailer with a '35 Buick on it with no troubles to the rear (with no other mods to it). We often used it to tow machinery around the country side too. It also ran on LPG as it was his daily driver.

Having said that, I was still glad to get a full chassis and replace my short one.

Danny

[Guest Grant Magrath]

True - good point..... makes you wonder what they were thinking - course I guess it was the first semi-unibody...

Saving money.

To the Aussies and Kiwis on the forum, is the 39 Buick the equivalent of the EA Falcon?

Cheers

Grant

[danhar1960]

To the Aussies and Kiwis on the forum, is the 39 Buick the equivalent of the EA Falcon?

Cheers

Grant

Oh Grant, that thought has made me feel crook.

I made a few prototype parts for that ???????? Ford.

In my defense I say :

:eek:"I just made what they wanted, how they wanted it!" :eek:

Danny

[Guest Ken J]

Danny

Wow - I'm sure that weighs more than the 3500lbs I was planning to tow - so how/where was the hitch ball mounted and did you do that with the straight 8?

Ken J.

[danhar1960]

It was a standard '39 8/60 off the Holden production line with a std Century engine running on LPG.

When towing he switched to petrol.

The tow-bar was homemade and bolted to the bumper irons. I honestly can't remember anything extraordinary about it. The old girl was always driven steadily and cautiously but none the less, it always made it there and back.

Danny

[Guest Grant Magrath]

Oh Grant, that thought has made me feel crook.

I made a few prototype parts for that ???????? Ford.

In my defense I say :

:eek:"I just made what they wanted, how they wanted it!" :eek:

Danny

Ha ha!!!

I hope you had nothing to do with the electric windows or the head gasket blowing issues! I'm still nursing our old 1988 Fairmont along. But I think the 39 Buick and the EA Ford both tried new under-done ideas, and copped a bad rep in the process. That's my opinion anyway!

Cheers

Grant

[danhar1960]

Ha ha!!!

I hope you had nothing to do with the electric windows or the head gasket blowing issues!

Na, I did some prototype steering rack housings, diff covers, brake calipers etc. All aluminium castings. It was good fun. Did a lot of Holden stuff too.

I miss having a foundry and machine shop at my disposal.:(

Danny

[Guest 66Grandeguy]

Hi, I just joined the forum and this is my first post. I hope this conversation isn't totally dead as I have been trying to find out about the bobtail Buicks for a long time. I have owned one (a Special 4 door) for about 30 years. From what I can find out it was brought to northern Canada in the early forties from southern California. It was driven until 1952 when the engine apparently seized. I bought it in a very decrepit condition (no engine or tranny and squirrels living in it in 1983) and had to do some extensive mods to get it back on the road as parts were pretty much unobtainable at the time. I Have driven across canada in the late 80's but, though it is still registered and roadworthy I just don't use it much anymore. I thought the short frame was normal until I did a bit of reading. Mine is a very early production car from Southgate with a serial number of 23401273 making it #6185 sequentially.

It had the refit reinforcements which I still have on the car but mine consisted of bent u channels from the spring towers to the bumper brackets and also a piece of bent angle iron that fits between the bumper brackets behind the rear bumper itself. Could post pictures if anybody wants

Was there ever any success in determining how many of these bobtail ares till out there?

ken from Northern Alberta

[1939_Buick]

Ken aka 66Grandeguy Welcome to the forum

Hi, I just joined the forum and this is my first post. I hope this conversation isn't totally dead as I have been trying to find out about the bobtail Buicks for a long time.

<snip>

Was there ever any success in determining how many of these bobtail are still out there?

No one that I know has a comprehensive list of '39 chassis numbers. I try to main a list of RHD '39's in Australia, New Zealand, South Africa & UK

There are many short tails still out there. I have 3.

As a '39 owner you can join the '39 team. http://forums.aaca.org/f165/39-buick-team-membership-342274.html

We like photos

[Cesar Garcia]

Hello all, First time here and I just purchased a 1939 Buick Special. I'm having a lot of issues with the chassis and the clutch. First, when i take the car out for a drive it seems to drive fine for the first 15 minutes. Then its very hard to get it out of gear and/or to shift gears. the gears grinded and i find myself pulling to the side and shutting the car off in order to put in second. Any idea what I can do to fix this issue.

Also, does anyone what year, make and model of a car or truck  can use to swap the chassis with my buick?

 

thank you all.

[kgreen]

Most people just chop off the front part of the frame and weld a later model front clip on.  It's a big task with benefits that few ever find.

[EmTee]

On 9/7/2021 at 10:02 PM, Cesar Garcia said:

Then its very hard to get it out of gear and/or to shift gears.

 

It sounds like the clutch is not completely disengaging.  Have you checked the linkage adjustment?  If like other cars, there should be about 1 inch of freeplay in the clutch pedal before the throwout bearing contacts the pressure plate fingers.  If there's too much freeplay the clutch won't completely disengage.  Another possibility is oil contamination on the clutch disk that's causing it to 'grab'.  You'll need to get under the car to investigate...