Jump to content

1949 Roadmaster Convertible vs 1941 Cadillac Convertible??


Guest 41buick

Recommended Posts

Guest 41buick

Hello,

I'm interested in opinions. I would like to purchase a fully restored 1949 Buick Roadmaster convertible or a 1941 Cadillac Convertible and would like to get some opinions as to which would be the better choice. Some of my concerns are as follows:

reliability

driving and riding comfort

ease of repair and parts

ease of resale

appreciation

desirability

thank you for any help you can provide.

41buick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both excellent, would depend on what style you like better. If both cars are to be automatic I would choose Cadillac. I like Hydra-Matic better than Dynaflow from a performance point of view because it's more flexible in many aspects. With equal vehicle weight and engine horsepower HydraMatic is quicker and more fuel efficient-it takes less horsepower in it's operation. Parts are no problem on either.

If your into styling (and neither of the cars you mentioned has this feature) Buick had a styling feature no other GM product had. The 49 Roadmaster has GM's flow through styling that was first used on all 48 Cadillac's and 48 Olds 98. The 1942-48 Roadmaster and Super get their own special body that has low flow through styling that goes into the rear pontoon and fender skirt mid way. No other GM car has this except the 1941 Cadillac Sixty Special built by Coachcraft Ltd. for the Duke of Windsor. This makes the prewar 1942 Buick really appear in Oldsmobiles term Futuramic.

Don

42 Buick;http://www.caranddriver.com/var/ezwebin_site/storage/images/news/autoshow_articles/concours_d_elegance_at_cranbrook_auto_shows/concours_d_elegance_at_cranbrook/concours_d_elegance_at_cranbrook_gallery_001/915596-1-eng-US/concours_d_elegance_at_cranbrook_gallery_0011_cd_gallery.jpg

Edited by helfen (see edit history)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

hi, i'm guessing that you already have a 1941 buick, does the caddy have hydra-matic, and does the 1949 roadmaster have dyna-flow ?, now i like both cars, i think your choice won't be an easy one. ease of repairs should be the same, both engines have strong points and weak ones, i've never been fond of chevies and buicks having babbit bearings. parts might be alittle easier to get for the buick's straight eight over the caddy's flathead V8. if both cars have automatic transmission, the caddy's hydra-matic is better at getting good fuel mileage than the buick dyna-flow. both cars will be highly desirable, and hold their resale value well. if the choice were mine, i would pick the buick over the cadillac. charles coker, 1953 pontiac tech advisor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name=pontiac1953;922301

i've never been fond of chevies and buicks having babbit bearings.

A 1949 Buick 320 motor will have replacable shells' date=' not babbit bearings.

I wouldn't have thought a pre war car ( 1941 ) would compare in any way to a 1949 model.

It would be more difficult to decide between a 1949 Caddy and a 1949 Buick Roadmaster but if comparing a 1941 Caddy and 1949 Buick Roadmaster the choice is easy - the BUICK wins hands down!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a tough question, but ultimately I would echo Steve's comments that CCCA eligibility is a plus for the '41 Cadillac. I think the Buick's driving dynamics will feel slightly more modern and its performance envelope will be slightly larger, but otherwise I'd say it's a wash. Both are comfortable 5-passenger convertibles with the same amenities, although I believe the Buick can be had with power windows and seat, which may be a plus or minus depending on how you look at it. The Buick's styling is a flat-out home run, although the Cadillac is one of the best pre-war designs around.

I don't envy you this decision, but if it were me, I think I'd go with the Cadillac just because of the CCCA eligibility, which opens up some great events. I also believe the Cadillac will always be more valuable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boy is THAT a tough choice, you have selected two of GMs best efforts! If it were me and I had no other preferences I could probably be swayed by the idea of the Cadillac being a Full Classic. Not to mention absolutely gorgeous and historic. But it is a very tough call, can't go wrong either way. Todd C

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do yourself a favor, drive a good 41 Cadillac, you could be surprised, I know I was. I bought a 41 series 62 coupe not long ago, and drove it 1,000 miles back home. I was really impressed with the harmony of design, both asthetic and mechanical. Silky shifting (manual) plenty of power and good highway manners, all at 15-16 MPG on the highway. It scoots around town really good too, totaly impressive.

I used to own a fully sorted 1950 series 62 cadillac convertible and what surprised me was that the 1941 drove every bit as well as that 1950 and was even more fun with the 3 speed manual vs the 4 speed hydramatic in the 1950.

I would also think that the 41 Cadilac will retain it's value a bit more than the 49 Buick as it's the most popular touring car in the CCCA....those old dudes know the good stuff.

-Tom M.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, no offense intended. I just wanted to clarify it though so people didn't think the Caddy did have babbit bearings. This style of Cadillac flathead V8 engine was used from 1936 through 1948. It was also used in a couple different tanks during WW II along with the hydramatic transmission.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WOW !! -- Some great opinions --

Given the space and the affordability, I would get BOTH

I have the 1941 Caddy convertible, and really love the way it drives - prefer my stick-shift and have the no-cost-optional runningboards - just my personal preference.

Our Roadmaster convertible is a bit older - a 1937 - but it drives just as nicely.

I've driven the 1949 Buick Roadmaster convertible with Dynaflow - also a fantastic car!

Your funds are just languishing in that 1.2% CD -- get some real enjoyment, and drive both while they appreciate.

Your beneficiaries will appreciate it too.

post-54863-143138634423_thumb.jpg

post-54863-143138634425_thumb.jpg

post-54863-143138634426_thumb.jpg

post-54863-143138634434_thumb.jpg

post-54863-143138634457_thumb.jpg

post-54863-143138634459_thumb.jpg

post-54863-14313863446_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest 41buick

Thank you all for the very thoughtful and informative responses. They were all great and very helpful. I have made a decision to go for the 49 Buick roadmaster convertible. Now for the $64000.00 question, where can a I find one that is fully restored. If anyone out there knows of one for sale please let me know. Thanks again for your help. 41buick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that you've made your decision, join us as a member of the Buick Club of America, attend club functions, tour with us, read our monthly publication "The Buick Bugle", peruse the classifieds. You may find your dream car.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...
WOW !! -- Some great opinions --

Given the space and the affordability, I would get BOTH

I have the 1941 Caddy convertible, and really love the way it drives - prefer my stick-shift and have the no-cost-optional runningboards - just my personal preference.

Our Roadmaster convertible is a bit older - a 1937 - but it drives just as nicely.

I've driven the 1949 Buick Roadmaster convertible with Dynaflow - also a fantastic car!

Your funds are just languishing in that 1.2% CD -- get some real enjoyment, and drive both while they appreciate.

Your beneficiaries will appreciate it too.

Hi Marty

The Picture with your 41 Cadillac convertible, with the sky view, is one of my favorite, Pictures at all

It looks like the rearend have been lowered when you compare to the other Pictures, if so how much lower is it, if i may ask

What a beaty.......

Best Tim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Marty

The Picture with your 41 Cadillac convertible, with the sky view, is one of my favorite, Pictures at all

It looks like the rearend have been lowered when you compare to the other Pictures, if so how much lower is it, if i may ask

What a beaty.......

Best Tim

Thanks Tim,

The other pictures (not the one with the sky of the Blue Ridge Parkway) show that the rear of our '41Caddy has NOT been lowered at all - actually the caddy had NEW springs front and rear in original specifications. the only reason that the one photo seems to have a lowered rear, is that we were on an 18-day rolling tour/family vacation with our grandson, leaving New Orleans and traveling through Cherokee, NC - driving to White Post, Virginia, and then working our way back, mostly driving the Skyline Drive and Blue Ridge Pkwy. We visited sites for several miles on either side of the beautiful and historic road. The trunk of the Caddy was filled with tools, spare parts, and luggage - so the tail end was hanging just a bit at the time, but again, look at the other pics.

When I was a teen in the '50s, that tail-dragger look was very popular - mostly accomplished with lowering blocks - and then in the '60s the California rake raised the tail.

Thanks for asking - your Avatar appears to be a chopped tail-dragger with bubble skirts - right out of my teen years!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Tim,

The other pictures (not the one with the sky of the Blue Ridge Parkway) show that the rear of our '41Caddy has NOT been lowered at all - actually the caddy had NEW springs front and rear in original specifications. the only reason that the one photo seems to have a lowered rear, is that we were on an 18-day rolling tour/family vacation with our grandson, leaving New Orleans and traveling through Cherokee, NC - driving to White Post, Virginia, and then working our way back, mostly driving the Skyline Drive and Blue Ridge Pkwy. We visited sites for several miles on either side of the beautiful and historic road. The trunk of the Caddy was filled with tools, spare parts, and luggage - so the tail end was hanging just a bit at the time, but again, look at the other pics.

When I was a teen in the '50s, that tail-dragger look was very popular - mostly accomplished with lowering blocks - and then in the '60s the California rake raised the tail.

Thanks for asking - your Avatar appears to be a chopped tail-dragger with bubble skirts - right out of my teen years!

Hi Marty

Just wanted you to see the build thread on HAMB, not for faint hearted original Minded, but a very prewar era correct custom build:

http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=740119

I have started on the next car and it is a 1941 Cadillac Convertible

Nice to see the low rear stand on your Cadillac, loaded up with spareparts :-), a very very nice cadillac you have!!

Looking for the outside windshield stainless, do you know any one who might have spareparts

Best Tim

Edited by Devilswillys (see edit history)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Marty

Just wanted you to see the build thread on HAMB, not for faint hearted original Minded, but a very prewar era correct custom build:

http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=740119

I have started on the next car and it is a 1941 Cadillac Convertible

Nice to see the low rear stand on your Cadillac, loaded up with spareparts :-), a very very nice cadillac you have!!

Looking for the outside windshield stainless, do you know any one who might have spareparts

Best Tim

Hi Tim,

You might try:

lauren@allcads.com

www.allcads.com

702-454-1147 in Nevada - they advertise in Hemmings

Also:

www.nosandrestoredcadillacparts.com

514-808-3347 in Ontario, Canada

Good luck

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...