Ever seen a 1953 Roadmaster Super? Now's your chance!

[Pete Phillips]

Rare opportunity to see a 1953 "Roadmaster Super" on Ebay, and just a listing or two below that is the extremely rare 1953 "Roadmaster Special"! Wow, what a chance--don't think I've ever seen any of these rare Buicks. Maybe the Bugle ought to do an article on these rare beasts? What will they think of next--a "Roadmaster Roadmaster", perhaps?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Buick-Roadmaster-SUPER-1953-buick-super-2-door-hard-top-71000-miles-all-steel-restored-/261287840115?forcerrptr=true&hash=item3cd5f80973&item=261287840115&pt=US_Cars_Trucks

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Buick-Roadmaster-53-buick-special-/271275940898?forcerrptr=true&hash=item3f294e5c22&item=271275940898&pt=US_Cars_Trucks

[60FlatTop]

Pete,

All Buicks are Roadmasters. Didn't you know that. Unless its an Electra. Then they are all "Deuce and a Quarta". You have been spending too much time with facts. They muddy things up.

Check the feedback. Its a Model A Ford guy.

I'm thinking about trimming my herd down to one car in the spring. Wait until you see the sprinkling of BS in those ads.

Bernie

[PONTIAC1953]

i happen to agree with pete, the sellers should call the buick what really is, not add wrong model names to get more lookers at the listing, all that does is make the seller look uneducated. charles coker, 1953 pontiac tech advisor.

[buick man]

Yes buick man agrees and is unanimous with his opinion

Oh and one other thing, There is only the Un Cola in the world of Un's, otherwise this guy would be referred to as non educated.

[60FlatTop]

Oh, you thought is was intentional? That's giving a lot of credit.

Bernie

[NTX5467]

(Unless somebody confronts the seller with the incorrectness of his vehicular references, who's to know if the seller really DOES know better . . . OR is going on the "information of others, who also tend to be "experts in their field", according to the seller?)

Possibly such bold mis-representations might come under some "truth in advertising" legislation? As few in here might be "unsuspecting purchasers" of those vehicles, that could mean they'll show up at some auction, in the future, billed exactly as what the seller now proclaims them to be. And it can get worse from there!

A few weeks ago, I was looking at a nationally-reputable vehicle auction company's website. I found a '67 Coronet 500 2-dr hardtop in the vehicle listings. A really nice car! Only thing was that the description (probably supplied by the seller) was overly flowerful. It was verified by a "Mopar expert" I hadn't heard of and it was also billed as having a "first year available" 383/335 V-8 . . . only thing is that THAT engine was "new for 1968", not for 1967. I sent them an email and it probably got deleted as what was on the website did not change, although the particular facts could be easily verified from many sources, in print, even from Chrysler. I just hope the ultimate purchaser might discover the truth rather than believing they bought something they didn't. But then, too, 5563 ran across a '59 Cadillac that is now a convertible, but started life as a coupe . . . ALL of which should be easily verified by the model number of the original car . . . but apparently wasn't, somewhere along the line.

As always, look at what you can see rather than what the seller might say . . . whether about cars for sale or parts for sale.

Take care!

NTX5467

[smithbrother]

As you probably know, it's thought by many sellers that ROADMASTER gets more attention, so they list it that way. They think that buyers won't look at an ad if it doesn't say ROADMASTER.

This way they get more lookers, and it makes their views number higher, and that just MAYBE they will be interested in their product after viewing such.

I have written sellers, and they seem to always get mad, and tell me to mind my own business.

Dale in Indy

[PONTIAC1953]

i did write to the seller, letting them know of the wrong information, but alot of times, they just don't care.

[NTX5467]

A good while back (which gets to be farther back each year!), I was looking for a nice grille for a '62 Impala for a customer. This was in the early days of the first parts locator services and I'd already bought a few from that channel, but I was at the Pate Swap Meet and found a nice one. I inquired about the "62 Impala grille" and was told it was for a '63 Impala, not a '62 as I'd said. I then asked how he came by it. He said it was off of a buddy's car and that he was just trying to sell it for him. I asked about the price and it was about double what market value was back then. So I looked onward and found one a few rows over from a guy just cleaning out his garage, with a card table with parts on it. I bought the grille at a good price and we both were happy, as was my customer.

I'd seen guys try to educate sellers about what parts they had, but I'd ALSO noticed that it was futile and wasted effort. Reason is that the seller has their own "expert" whom they believe and if a stranger steps up and disputes that "knowledge" of the "expert", then it's the potential purchaser that doesn't know anything, from the seller's perspective. As a knowledgeable seller, there have been potential purchasers who came up and told me what I had would fit the car THEY had, which was NOT what the part actually would fit. I've seen both sides of that situation, as a buyer and also as a seller. I finally determined that the "least effort" method was best . . . if the part was what I wanted and the price was right, then I'd purchase it . . . as I knew what it would or would not fit from my own research and past knowledge. That way, I didn't spend time trying to educate somebody that didn't want to be educated in the first place. As in the case of the Impala grille, there was NO way a '62 Impala grille would "fit as designed" in a '63 Impala grille's place. Perhaps the buddy had defective information, himself, but such information was extended by the guy selling his stuff.

Just my experiences . . .

NTX5467