hmmca Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 Not mine, but I really like it, what do you think? http://nashville.craigslist.org/cto/5928115059.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Shaw Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 Appears to be in very good original condition and should qualify for preservation class display. Price is reasonable, but seller would do well to hook up a pony fuel source and get it running. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian_Heil Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 Truss bar under rear axle is not correct or not installed correctly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmmca Posted December 21, 2016 Author Share Posted December 21, 2016 Thanks Brian, Is that a big deal the truss bar? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Phillips Posted December 22, 2016 Share Posted December 22, 2016 Do you suppose this is a custom body on this car? I have never seen a sedan of this period with what looks like exposed wood for the windshield and side windows on the outside. And the only other "high roof" car of this period I have seen is the 1926 or '27 that was built for the Prince of Nepal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oregon Desert model 45 Posted December 22, 2016 Share Posted December 22, 2016 January 2016 issue of the Buick Bugle has an article on a 1918 center door sedan with similar woodwork and high roof. http://bbonline.buickclub.org/201601.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROD W Posted December 22, 2016 Share Posted December 22, 2016 (edited) hmmca, They all have that bar, but that one seems to be hanging down, it should be running along the bottom of the diff actually touching the bottom of the diff. Only closer inspection would tell if there,s a problem there. This 1918 sedan was for sale a couple of years back. Similar to my 1920, but mine has an Australian body. on a 118"wheelbase chassis. That car would be on the 124" wheelbase chassis Edited December 22, 2016 by ROD W (see edit history) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian_Heil Posted December 22, 2016 Share Posted December 22, 2016 5 hours ago, hmmca said: Thanks Brian, Is that a big deal the truss bar? It's that 1/2 inch diameter rod under the rear axle. It's there to keep from breaking the rear axle case on bad roads. It should be under light tension and touch the bottom of the differential in a cast groove in the bottom of the diff.. There is a large nut inside each brake housing to tension it but based on the large gap something is goofed up. Easy enough to fix, its just a threaded rod with a bend in the middle. Maybe the nut(s) have fallen off as a guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian_Heil Posted December 22, 2016 Share Posted December 22, 2016 Vacuum fuel pump is missing too. Guessing they changed over to an electric pump which has potential issues of flooding since the needle/seat/float in the Marvel carburetor was never designed for electric fuel pump pressures. I've seen this car before in pictures somewhere. Same thought, that it looks too tall and perhaps a custom job or modification. But then, not that many closed cars from back then to have a good mental picture either. Not running will keep the price down. Question/gamble for the buyer is why is it not running? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cxgvd Posted December 22, 2016 Share Posted December 22, 2016 Is running really an issue in a hundred year old car? I'd rather leave the drive line be, buy the car as is, go through the mechanics. Repair as needed and it will run. Think of all the potential problems which will be avoided, stuck valves, mice nests, ketchup jars full of gasoline, etc. Gary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian_Heil Posted December 22, 2016 Share Posted December 22, 2016 11 hours ago, cxgvd said: Is running really an issue in a hundred year old car? I'd rather leave the drive line be, buy the car as is, go through the mechanics. Repair as needed and it will run. Think of all the potential problems which will be avoided, stuck valves, mice nests, ketchup jars full of gasoline, etc. Gary No. But a car you can take on a nice shake down drive and can be verified it has been on recent tours before you buy it is worth a lot more than a non-running car with unknown issue and expense. They are two very different purchases is all I'm saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Schramm Posted December 22, 2016 Share Posted December 22, 2016 (edited) I am not sure it is the correct axle. I thought the axles for that year were split in 1/2? and did not have a rear cover. Edited December 22, 2016 by Larry Schramm (see edit history) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian_Heil Posted December 22, 2016 Share Posted December 22, 2016 2 minutes ago, Larry Schramm said: I am not sure it is the correct axle. I thought the axles for that year were split in 1/2? and did not have a rear cover. Good point. What year was it Buick made the big axle change? The axle shown looks just like the one in my '23. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Schramm Posted December 22, 2016 Share Posted December 22, 2016 Up through '18 on my trucks, the axles are split. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROD W Posted December 23, 2016 Share Posted December 23, 2016 1920 has the one piece axle and a 1918 six cylinder I had, had the one piece axle. I,m guessing it came out with the 1916 when they started the six cylinder engines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now