Jump to content

1948 Buick Roadmaster Convertible


Matt Harwood

Recommended Posts

Finally a Buick in the inventory! I like this Roadmaster a lot, even though the color isn't correct. It looks good from 10 feet away, but the frame-on restoration is older. The mileage is 51,221, and as a single-owner car (same family, anyway) from new, I'm inclined to believe it's correct. The engine has apparently never been out of the car although it has been recently detailed with some fresh paint and decals. It runs beautifully, and since this was the first Dynaflow car I've ever driven, it took some getting used to the lack of perceptible shifts. Otherwise, this big Buick just loafs along at 65 MPH and it has a great mechanical engine sound that I hope my own '41 has when it is done.

You can find more details and photos here: http://forums.aaca.org/f119/1948-buick-roadmaster-convertible-316177.html or at www.VintageMotorCarsOhio.com

$54,900 or best offer.

post-31138-143138734996_thumb.jpg

post-31138-143138734999_thumb.jpg

post-31138-143138735001_thumb.jpg

post-31138-143138735004_thumb.jpg

post-31138-143138735006_thumb.jpg

post-31138-143138735009_thumb.jpg

post-31138-143138735012_thumb.jpg

post-31138-143138735015_thumb.jpg

post-31138-143138735017_thumb.jpg

post-31138-14313873502_thumb.jpg

Edited by Matt Harwood
Typo in mileage figure (see edit history)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I once owned a mid-50's Buick with the vane activated transmission.

Beautiful original car, that copper color with white, near mint and low mileage.

A fellow on a tour fell in love with it, I agreed I'd sell it, he came to test drive.

He got very mad at me, told me I was trying to sell him a defective car, it wouldn't even shift. I tried to explain the vane theory of torque transfer, he didn't believe me, and didn't buy the car.

As you say, there's no shift, it just keeps pulling....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Matt

What a nice job you have. You get to drive all these nice cars and stay close to them without having to shell out all that to buy them.

I have seen some 40's Buick convertibles with red leather interiors, usually with yellow paint. So I assume the interior is correct original but the "hot red" paint is the not correct part of the car. Who cares? Looks great!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to the trim tag, the car was originally code 25 Aztec Green, although I haven't yet been able to learn what color a code 75 interior would have been. The bright red is flashy, but it wasn't on the menu in 1948. And I agree, if this were mine I'd paint it something more appropriate. It's straight enough to handle black, which would be dazzling with the red leather (and throw in a set of blackwall tires, too!) but cream would be awesome as well.

It is definitely nice to have these cars around and to be able to enjoy them. A few weeks ago, I was moving a different car across town to be serviced, and asked my lady friend to follow me as my ride home. We stopped at the warehouse and I told her to pick a car she'd like to drive. Her choice was the '49 Plymouth woody. We ended up driving it all weekend, to dinner, to the movies, to breakfast the following morning. Yeah, I do feel pretty lucky. But for me, there's still the pride of ownership and of making something your own, so while I appreciate having these cars around, I certainly don't consider them "mine." I'm always happiest when they go to a home where someone will cherish and enjoy them.

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

  • 1 month later...

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...