A Little Post-War GM Humor?

[Hudsy Wudsy]

I acme across this '47 Buick Roadmaster Sedanette for sale on KIJIJI, the Canadian site. I know that this is often a desirable body style, so I posted a link to the ad in the "Buick Buy And Sell" Forum. I also posted one of the pictures of the car that was in the ad. I've been chuckling all evening about it, though. GM chose to add the "ette" ending to the word "sedan" in labeling these bodies in the forties. The Oxford Dictionary says "ette" is a suffix for forming nouns denoting relatively small size. One look at the length of the car and you might think that the rear bumper and the hood ornament might well be in different zip codes. If this is a "sedanette, can you imagine  what a full size sedan looks like?

 

https://www.kijiji.ca/v-classic-cars/st-catharines/classic-car/1512030209

 

[Y-JobFan]

Actually it was Sedanet not Sedanette so.............

 

[Hudsy Wudsy]

12 minutes ago, Y-JobFan said:

Actually it was Sedanet not Sedanette so.............

 

If I've been mislead, it's the fault of others. This whole page of Google images used "sedanette":

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1280&bih=610&ei=p_UPX4fINeiE9PwPq6y_gA4&q=1947+buick+sedanette&oq=1947+buick+&gs_lcp=CgNpbWcQARgGMgIIADICCAAyAggAMgIIADICCAAyAggAMgIIADICCAAyAggAMgIIADoICAAQsQMQgwE6BQgAELEDUL4NWLZCYLuBAWgAcAB4AIABXIgBoQWSAQIxMZgBAKABAaoBC2d3cy13aXotaW1n&sclient=img

[joe_padavano]

Speaking of GM humor, the Olds V8 was called "Rocket" when it was released in 1949, as everyone knows. When the small aluminum 215 V8 was released for the 1961 F85 compact, Olds called it the "Rockette".

 

[Billy Kingsley]

Now I've got a mental image of engines dancing in a chorus line...

[8E45E]

GM could have made three Chevettes out of the steel of just one '51 Buick Jetback Sedanette.

 

Craig

[Y-JobFan]

Sedanet yet again, Every piece of literature from Buick past has Sedanet 

35 minutes ago, 8E45E said:

GM could have made three Chevettes out of the steel of just one '51 Buick Jetback Sedanette.

 

Craig

 

[Y-JobFan]

6 hours ago, Hudsy Wudsy said:

If I've been mislead, it's the fault of others. This whole page of Google images used "sedanette":

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1280&bih=610&ei=p_UPX4fINeiE9PwPq6y_gA4&q=1947+buick+sedanette&oq=1947+buick+&gs_lcp=CgNpbWcQARgGMgIIADICCAAyAggAMgIIADICCAAyAggAMgIIADICCAAyAggAMgIIADoICAAQsQMQgwE6BQgAELEDUL4NWLZCYLuBAWgAcAB4AIABXIgBoQWSAQIxMZgBAKABAaoBC2d3cy13aXotaW1n&sclient=img

It must be true because it’s on the Internet LOL, every piece of Buick literature of that era spells it SEDANET

[Y-JobFan]

[Y-JobFan]

[oldcarfudd]

Imagine them advertising "the steadiness of two tons plus" now.

[padgett]

People keep adding an "e" to my name. Do not want to feminize. Can also mean "small" and not that either.

Have always liked those late 40s GM cars but learned as a "torpedo back".

215 Olds is one of my favorite engines particularly with a turbo and a four speed.

Wonder if the  "Accell-A-Rotor" was the same as the "switch-pitch". Joe ?

[Gary_Ash]

Check the weights on a new Dodge Challenger or Chevy Camaro: the fully-equipped V8 versions are way over 2 tons.  The 1967 Camaro was under 3,000 lbs. as were the early Mustangs.

[joe_padavano]

5 minutes ago, padgett said:

Wonder if the  "Accell-A-Rotor" was the same as the "switch-pitch". Joe ?

 

Sort of...  The RotoHydramatic 5 used behind the 215 was advertised as a "4S" trans. It technically had only three different gear ratios, but the stator (called "torque multiplier" in this cross section) in the fluid coupling (it wasn't a torque converter in the modern sense) could be either locked or unlocked, which had a similar effect to that of the switch pitch and was counted by Olds as another gear "ratio".

 

 

[padgett]

Amazing, my last Grand Prix was 3312 lbs. Consider my CTS heavy at 3900, Jeep is 4400 but was designed to haul,  rest of herd are in the 3500 range. Think I remember that all of the safety equipment now adds about 800 lbs, doors are not light.

 

ps I shudder at the word "Roto-Hydramatic". '64 GP had one and would wind as tight as a Pontiac would go in first, drop to half the revs on the shift and bog. Think they took a Hydramatic 4-speed and left second out.

 

Edited July 16, 2020 by padgett (see edit history)

[joe_padavano]

I've heard only bad things about the RH10 (Slim Jim) trans. The RH5 was only used in the 61-63 F85 line. It is NOT one of GM's better transmissions...

[Guest]

6 hours ago, joe_padavano said:

Speaking of GM humor, the Olds V8 was called "Rocket" when it was released in 1949, as everyone knows. When the small aluminum 215 V8 was released for the 1961 F85 compact, Olds called it the "Rockette".

 

Hmmm, this is getting very confusing. My mother was also a Rockette. 😄

 

[ol' yeller]

1 hour ago, Gary_Ash said:

Check the weights on a new Dodge Challenger or Chevy Camaro: the fully-equipped V8 versions are way over 2 tons.  The 1967 Camaro was under 3,000 lbs. as were the early Mustangs.

You’re right Gary. I just bought a 2019 Hemi Challenger and I believe the curb weight is 4,400#. However, with 375 HP it really accelerates and rides beautifully. It is a great car to road trip in. Best of all, it is rear wheel drive.

[Guest]

Best topic and replies in ages.  This one really shows what buyers, ad writers and manufacturers think/believe about the others in the group.  I think P T Barnum had it right.

[padgett]

Something about "50 Dancing Girls, Count Them."

[Hudsy Wudsy]

Guys, and Y-JobFan, in particular, I certainly do apologize for refering to the sedanet as the sedanette. Of course GM built it, so they can call it anything they want, but I can't figure out what other meaning they meant to convey by putting an "et" at the end of "sedan". Any thoughts? I'd say that the whole thread was pointless, except it's been kind of fun anyway. I have a lifelong list of mistakes, so what's another one at this point?

[Hudsy Wudsy]

I will also add that any thread that conjures up images of dancing girls is refreshing on it's own, right?

Edited July 16, 2020 by Hudsy Wudsy (see edit history)

[Frank DuVal]

Right!

[60FlatTop]

16 hours ago, Hudsy Wudsy said:

If I've been mislead, it's the fault of others.

 

Now I'm going to chuckle all evening.

 

And probably repeat it sometime tomorrow.  Just to fix it in place for the most opportune moment.

Bernie

[Hudsy Wudsy]

11 minutes ago, 60FlatTop said:

 

Now I'm going to chuckle all evening.

 

And probably repeat it sometime tomorrow.  Just to fix it in place for the most opportune moment.

Bernie

Then you think that if I've been mislead it's my fault? I have already accepted responsibility for my mistake. Do you think I should also be responsible for the misinformation?

Edited July 16, 2020 by Hudsy Wudsy (see edit history)

[wayne sheldon]

20 minutes ago, Hudsy Wudsy said:

Then you think that if I've been mislead it's my fault?

 

I think that means Bernie LIKES it! (The way you said that it is someone else's fault is a wonderful way to put it)

 

The "sedanet" (or "sedanette" as often misspelled) is a smaller sedan in the "then" recent past sense as typical sedans of the late '30s had roof-lines  that squared off behind the rear seat, and a "bustle" style trunk if it had a trunk. The "sedanet" begins sloping down to a more gentle taper through the trunk, and has somewhat less headroom in the back seat. To us today, the car simply appears huge.

 

Where I grew up (San Francisco Bay Area Califunny), that body style was usually referred to as a "fast-back" (or fast-back sedan). Maybe just a colloquialism, but I still have a tendency to call them that. I had a '52 Chevrolet (bit smaller car to be sure!) with that sort of a body on it.

Edited July 16, 2020 by wayne sheldon
Additional thought. (see edit history)

[Marty Roth]

13 hours ago, Billy Kingsley said:

Now I've got a mental image of engines dancing in a chorus line...

 

Bet the ROCKETTE engines had some real "KICK" !

[Marty Roth]

7 hours ago, GregLaR said:

Hmmm, this is getting very confusing. My mother was also a Rockette. 😄

 

 

Working in Manhattan at the Time & Life Building with IBM, and a long time Union Musician,  I was sometimes called to sub for other trumpet players who needed a day off.

I was right across the street from Radio City Music Hall where the Rockettes performed daily, and loved being in the orchestra pit there. That was a real KICK. At that time, once in a while working with Doc Severinsen's band on Johhny Carson's Tonight Show, and maybe half a dozen Broadway musicals as long as my IBM projects were ahead of schedule, was a blast, as well as a boost to my finances and musical (2nd) career.

[Pfeil]

On 7/16/2020 at 7:49 AM, joe_padavano said:

I've heard only bad things about the RH10 (Slim Jim) trans. The RH5 was only used in the 61-63 F85 line. It is NOT one of GM's better transmissions...

Ok we have a car that has a real flywheel (no flexplate) a trans that has a small 8" fluid coupling with a fixed stator that is internal behind the oil pump. This small stator creates two ratio's in 1st gear 3.50 & 2.93 in second gear the coupling empties and 2nd gear is in full mechanical  connection, fills for fourth range or 3rd gear and the torque from the engine is split two ways ( called split torque ), one through the coupling 40%, and two mechanical connection 60%.

Making Roto more efficient than TH400, ST300, TH350, THM200, Dynaflow, Powerglide. The only transmissions that are the same in efficiency are the 4speed Dual Coupling Hydramatic and the original Hydramatic-because they have the split torque also.

Why all the bad talk? most people don't  understand it's principals, adjustments and building techniques. In short they are AFRAID OF IT.  

[Pfeil]

On 7/16/2020 at 7:44 AM, padgett said:

Amazing, my last Grand Prix was 3312 lbs. Consider my CTS heavy at 3900, Jeep is 4400 but was designed to haul,  rest of herd are in the 3500 range. Think I remember that all of the safety equipment now adds about 800 lbs, doors are not light.

 

ps I shudder at the word "Roto-Hydramatic". '64 GP had one and would wind as tight as a Pontiac would go in first, drop to half the revs on the shift and bog. Think they took a Hydramatic 4-speed and left second out.

 

Not adjusted right. 

With the multiplying of the stator they were able to take first gear out. All torque converter cars with a stator also do that. 

With the small coupling they were able to eliminate the large fluid coupling and use the small fluid coupling to connect to the engine and also thru evacuate and fill of the coupling to control the front planetary gear set function.

[joe_padavano]

22 minutes ago, Pfeil said:

Ok we have a car that has a real flywheel (no flexplate) a trans that has a small 8" fluid coupling with a fixed stator that is internal behind the oil pump. This small stator creates two ratio's in 1st gear 3.50 & 2.93 in second gear the coupling empties and 2nd gear is in full mechanical  connection, fills for fourth range or 3rd gear and the torque from the engine is split two ways ( called split torque ), one through the coupling 40%, and two mechanical connection 60%.

Making Roto more efficient than TH400, ST300, TH350, THM200, Dynaflow, Powerglide. The only transmissions that are the same in efficiency are the 4speed Dual Coupling Hydramatic and the original Hydramatic-because they have the split torque also.

Why all the bad talk? most people don't  understand it's principals, adjustments and building techniques. In short they are AFRAID OF IT.  

 

I understand the principles. I've been driving mine for about ten years now. The long drawn out shift as that fluid coupling empties is awful. The "two ratios" is a fallacy - the slippage that is required negates any gearing advantage or efficiency. The totally solid drive in second (the fluid coupling is locked out in that gear) makes for very jerky driving as you slow down; the downshift to first does not happen soon enough. Yes, I've adjusted the TV rod multiple times.

 

I've got a T5 to replace it; that's one project for this summer.

[Pfeil]

2 hours ago, joe_padavano said:

 

I understand the principles. I've been driving mine for about ten years now. The long drawn out shift as that fluid coupling empties is awful. The "two ratios" is a fallacy - the slippage that is required negates any gearing advantage or efficiency. The totally solid drive in second (the fluid coupling is locked out in that gear) makes for very jerky driving as you slow down; the downshift to first does not happen soon enough. Yes, I've adjusted the TV rod multiple times.

 

I've got a T5 to replace it; that's one project for this summer.

You have a problem with that trans.  As the trans coupling spools up in first it changes from 3.50 to 2.93 but it's not as perceptive as a  a T400 or a ST 300 with a 52 to a 32 degree pitch change with their switch pitch stator ( which was designed to be imperceptible ) all three are imperceptible. The Roto's multiplication is only 1.3 

The 1-2 shift or 2-3 range shift in Roto can be hard if not adjusted properly because the coupling  drains in 4 tenths of a second. If you have a lazy 1-2 shift suspect the exhaust valves on the coupling. 4 tenth's of a second is very fast ( us drag racers modified the valves to open and close in 2 tenth's for very hard positive shifts.

Also you cannot always depend of the adjusting tool for the TV rod. I have a 62 Catalina and the guy before me who at some point in time or another pulled the engine and trans damaged the length of the tv rod. The angle of the rod must be perfect for the tool to work properly for correct adjustment.

My 63 Catalina which is stock works perfectly.

 

[Pfeil]

22 hours ago, wayne sheldon said:

 

I think that means Bernie LIKES it! (The way you said that it is someone else's fault is a wonderful way to put it)

 

The "sedanet" (or "sedanette" as often misspelled) is a smaller sedan in the "then" recent past sense as typical sedans of the late '30s had roof-lines  that squared off behind the rear seat, and a "bustle" style trunk if it had a trunk. The "sedanet" begins sloping down to a more gentle taper through the trunk, and has somewhat less headroom in the back seat. To us today, the car simply appears huge.

 

Where I grew up (San Francisco Bay Area Califunny), that body style was usually referred to as a "fast-back" (or fast-back sedan). Maybe just a colloquialism, but I still have a tendency to call them that. I had a '52 Chevrolet (bit smaller car to be sure!) with that sort of a body on it.

Chevrolet refers to the sloping back as the AERO SEDAN ( 40's) and 49&  later to be called Fleetline, Pontiac calls it STREAMLINER. Olds and Cadillac call it Club Coupe.

[padgett]

To me that was always a torpedo back. No idea where it came from.

[Pfeil]

1 hour ago, padgett said:

To me that was always a torpedo back. No idea where it came from.

Pontiac started using the name Torpedo in 1940 on the new for Pontiac  "C" body models There were two "C" body Pontiac's in 1940. Those two models were a 4 dr. sedan and a two door coupe.

In 1941 ALL Pontiac bodies "A", "B", & "C"  Were referred to as Torpedoes.

Below the 1940 Torpedo Coupe

 

These are the two Pontiac Torpedo models for 1940 they are "C" bodies ( Cadillac-Lasalle ). You can always tell a "B" body Pontiac 4 dr because it has a less formal look in the "C" pillar and has a extra window; see below;

 

As said before ALL 1941 Pontiac's are called Torpedo's see below

 

the "A" body is Chevrolet which was shared with Pontiac and Olds

the "B" body is Buick-Olds also shared with Pontiac

the "C" is the small Cadillac / LaSalle, shared with Buick, Olds, Pontiac

 

Edited July 18, 2020 by Pfeil (see edit history)

[padgett]

Thank you. Looks like what I thought of as "torpedo" was their "streamliner" (fastback). And the two door was a "Sedan Coupe" just like my DD a "Catera Touring Sedan Coupe" Good to know it was part of GM in the '40s.

[Pfeil]

29 minutes ago, padgett said:

Thank you. Looks like what I thought of as "torpedo" was their "streamliner" (fastback). And the two door was a "Sedan Coupe" just like my DD a "Catera Touring Sedan Coupe" Good to know it was part of GM in the '40s.

Stream liner and F

 

Stream liner and Fleetline, Olds Clube coupe was still part of the 50's These below are 50- 51's

 

1950 Olds

 

 

 

1951 

1951 Chevrolet

Edited July 18, 2020 by Pfeil (see edit history)

[Y-JobFan]

16 hours ago, padgett said:

To me that was always a torpedo back. No idea where it came from.

Torpedo was used on Pontiacs 

[padgett]

Have always liked fastbacks, have had several. DD is close.