Jim65Riv

1922 Model 46 Coupe -The Only One In The BCA

Recommended Posts

1922 Model 46 coupe for sale.  The only Model 22-46 listed in the 2017 BCA membership roster.  Featured in The Buick Bugle, Volume 47, Number 3, July 2012, pages 30 - 32.  Asking $9,995.  Owned from 1963 to 1971 and from 2008 to the present.  History known.  Solid car - no rust, good wood.  Engine not stuck, needs some work to get it to run.  Upholstery well worn with a couple of pack rat holes.  Glass is good.  Should be solid black, was repainted with a dark blue body in 1950.  Brand new (incorrect size) tires; should be 33 x 4 black side wall, are Goodrich Silvertown Cord 35 x 5 white side wall.  Extra parts and literature included.  Located in Andover, Minnesota.  Is stored inside.  I will continue to store until spring if necessary.  Contact me by PM with your email address for more pictures.  The late Dave Corbin verified the car as a "matching number" 1922, and the 307th built out of a total production of 2,293, "making it a fairly early 1922." Quotes from Dave.  Frame #849688 and engine #877138.

100_0513 (2017_11_16 15_00_18 UTC) (2).jpg

Edited by Jim65Riv
additional information (see edit history)
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to the Buick catalog, this car is powered by a six rated at 27.3  N.A.C.C.  (aka taxable) h.p. and 60 brake h.p.

 

The four cylinder engine for that year was rated at 18.23 N.A.C.C. h.p. and 35-40 brake h.p.

 

While the concept of taxable horsepower is commonly understood, I'm wondering if anyone on the forum can tell us why brake horsepower was sometimes expressed in two figures, as in the case of the '22 Buick four.

 

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Buickborn, the original factory literature I have gives the 6 cylinder b.h.p. as 50 and the 4 cylinder b.h.p. as 35.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it had something to do with taxes that were paid on the vehicle in various parts of the world when these vehicles were new.  The higher the horsepower - the higher the taxes.  I read that somewhere way back.  I'm sure someone on here will correct me if this is not correct.

 

Terry Wiegand

South Hutchinson, Kansas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like that !!!

 

what “work” is needed to “get it to run”?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We drove it onto the trailer when I repurchased it.  When we got it home, we couldn't get it to start.  I think that it could use a rebuild of the vacuum tank, the carb, the starter/generator and the coil and distributor.  I had the pan pulled and cleaned out - very little in it.  It was reinstalled with a new gasket.  Replaced a leaking freeze plug.  Has new plugs and wires.  

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Terry Wiegand said:

I think it had something to do with taxes that were paid on the vehicle in various parts of the world when these vehicles were new.  The higher the horsepower - the higher the taxes.  I read that somewhere way back.  I'm sure someone on here will correct me if this is not correct.

 

Terry Wiegand

South Hutchinson, Kansas

Terry --

          Taxable horsepower (the historical basis for vehicle taxation in most parts of the world) is derived from a formula which was quite accurate in reference to very early, extremely inefficient auto engines, that is:  cylinder bore in inches squared x number of cylinders divided by 2.5.  One major effect of this formula was to discourage large bores and encourage  long strokes, which is why the very earliest, relatively "square" engines gave way to the relatively-smallish-bore, deep-strokers with which collectors of pre-1949 vehicles are quite familiar.

           The effect of taxable horsepower was most noticeable in British engines, which largely explains why post-war English cars were so inadequate for American highways.  Those very-small-bore, long-stroke engines just couldn't stand up to the rpm needed for American speeds.

           In any case, the reason I raised this topic is that it is not clear to me why brake horsepower was sometimes expressed in two figures, such as 25-30 or 45-50, etc.  Anyone got that one?

           Thanks!

           ~ Charlie

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at the photo of Jim's Model 46 makes me think that he left it out in the rain and it shrunk - this car is almost identical to my 1922 Model 48, only about 20% smaller😁.  In all seriousness, the closed body cars in this time frame really are far and few between.  The reason being was their higher cost when new and people just did not travel in the colder weather back then like they do now.  This car is about the same physical size as my 1920 K-46.  I cannot tell you how many times that I have told others that these cars were not built for old and fat people back in the day.  Ask me how I know that.  The 1920 is a real buggar to get into and out of for an older and bigger guy:lol:.

 

Terry Wiegand

South Hutchinson, Kansas

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Terry, When I bought it the first time in 1963 I was 18 years old and weighed 147 pounds.  I had no trouble getting in and out and fitting between the seat and steering wheel.  Lets not talk about today.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

This is an extremely nice car that has to b seen. Please tell the miles on this car Jim. This car has been parked more than driven. Unfortunately Im not familiar with starter/generator components or I might have been more help. Merry Christmas Jim and good luck with the car!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the comments, Greg.

The odometer has 29,xxx miles on it.  The odometer had 29,xxx miles on it when I first bought the car in 1963.  It has not been driven much, if at all, in over 50 years.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A mileage like 29,000 is probably typical for

a car of its era.  Cars weren't long-distance vehicles

back then.

 

I like your car, and hope it goes to a new owner

who will appreciate it and use it occasionally on 

scenic back roads!  All the best to you on your sale.

Edited by John_S_in_Penna (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
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