Looking to buy advice

[mathgirl]

How does fuel efficiency compare between the flat heads and the overhead valve motors?  I know HP is a difference in the two.

[Bloo]

Not much difference in horsepower either until the early 50s. Overhead valve engines of the passenger car type just made a bunch more mechanical noise.

 

Flathead performance is limited by breathing, as is performance in any engine really, but in flatheads breathing is linked to the compression ratio. When everyone had low compression ratios, that didn't matter much. When the horse power race really got going in the early 50s, compression ratios shot up and the flathead was obsolete almost overnight.

 

I'm probably going to get crucified for saying this, but due to some interesting design choices, Ford V8 flatheads must be considered as a separate group from the inline flatheads offered by most other makes. That doesn't mean you shouldn't buy one. It does probably mean it is going to be more temperamental. The flip side is that generally they were faster cars than their direct competition at the time. Parts availability is very good, and there is a lot of help online.

 

American cars of the prewar and early postwar period generally speaking were built for low octane gas and get really lousy gas mileage. A Mobilgas Economy Run winner in those days most likely had a flathead six and optional overdrive. Maybe a supercharged car like a Graham, or maybe an economy car with a tiny inline six, something like a Nash 600 or a Studebaker Champion . Those last two are not what you are looking for if you want speed, even with overdrive.

 

Edited January 11, 2022 by Bloo (see edit history)

[nick8086]

Here is a flat head motor from you tube..

 

 

Or look up Brian Thomas - Blown Straight 8 Packard - Hot Rod Hill Climb 2016 on you tube..

Edited January 10, 2022 by nick8086 (see edit history)

[nick8086]

 

[Graham Man]

1904 Model B Buick 1902 Franklin was the first car with overhead valves (Richard would never forgive me, he has a 1905)

1934 for Overdrive, Borg-Warner Chrysler and DeSoto Airflow

 

I stand corrected...

 

Added 1902 Franklin engine...

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 10, 2022 by Graham Man
Incorrect picture (see edit history)

[oldcarfudd]

Yes, the 1904 Model B Buick had overhead valves.  But that picture is of a 1904 Model B Ford, which did not.  Also, Franklins had overhead valves in 1902, before Buick.

Edited January 10, 2022 by oldcarfudd (see edit history)

[bryankazmer]

Bloo's comments are spot on.  What advantage do you expect from overhead valves?  The brand new 1949 Cadillac OHV V8 made the same HP as the Packard straight eight flathead introduced in 1940.  There may be a window around 52-54 where the OHV designs were more powerful than the last big flatheads.

 

I think you need to pick a time period.  The experiences of driving a car from 1948, 1957, and 1966 are very different (and each great in its own way).  I would also advise getting a car factory-equipped with any power assists/conveniences you insist on (PS, PB, AC) instead of trying to adapt aftermarket parts.

[mathgirl]

1 minute ago, bryankazmer said:

Bloo's comments are spot on.  What advantage do you expect from overhead valves?  The brand new 1949 Cadillac OHV V8 made the same HP as the Packard straight eight flathead introduced in 1940.  There may be a window around 52-54 where the OHV designs were more powerful than the last big flatheads.

 

I think you need to pick a time period.  The experiences of driving a car from 1948, 1957, and 1966 are very different (and each great in its own way).  I would also advise getting a car factory-equipped with any power assists/conveniences you insist on (PS, PB, AC) instead of trying to adapt aftermarket parts.

My husband is under the impression that OHV give you better efficiency (gas milegae) for the HP they deliver.  This is true of tractors but does that extend to cars?

[Walt G]

Photo of the early "cross engine" Franklin shows the car with a much later hood adapted/installed most likely adapted from a 1916-1919 era series 9 car.

Re OHV, my 1940 Buick Roadmaster has the OHV 320 ci in engine and wow is that a fast car. "Speed to spare"...........................

[mathgirl]

Just now, Walt G said:

Photo of the early "cross engine" Franklin shows the car with a much later hood adapted/installed most likely adapted from a 1916-1919 era series 9 car.

Re OHV, my 1940 Buick Roadmaster has the OHV 320 ci in engine and wow is that a fast car. "Speed to spare"...........................

I'm leaning more towards a Buick like that.

[bryankazmer]

All else equal, probably so because of the ease of achieving better breathing.  But all else is almost never equal.  Most cars of the 1940's - 1960's will get poor mileage by today's standards. Single digit mpg not unknown on larger engines.

 

If fuel economy is an important criterion, look at the smaller, lighter cars with overdrive and 6 cyl engines, like Studebaker or Rambler

[Ed Luddy]

7 minutes ago, mathgirl said:

My husband is under the impression that OHV give you better efficiency (gas milegae) for the HP they deliver.  This is true of tractors but does that extend to cars?

Probably yes. They are more efficient using modern gasoline for higher compression ratio's. Without knowing all your personal preferences maybe a 60's era car with a somewhat modern engine may best be suited for your 1st old car?

[bryankazmer]

suggest you share "must have", "would like to have", and budget.

otherwise the suggestions will be endless

 

Mathematically, there are too many degrees of freedom.  More unknowns than equations at present.

[Studeous]

Mathgirl: regarding auctions- reading this thread reminded me of something said regarding a local auto auction.  “Not all cars at the auction are junk, but ALL the junk cars are at the auction”.  Good hunting, and good luck. 

[mathgirl]

23 minutes ago, bryankazmer said:

suggest you share "must have", "would like to have", and budget.

otherwise the suggestions will be endless

 

Mathematically, there are too many degrees of freedom.  More unknowns than equations at present.

I guess we are trying to figure out what exactly we want.  My husband wants OHV.  I like the style of the 50s vs the 60s.  Fuel efficiency would be nice but not a must have.  We do plan to drive on the highway since we would like to take it to shows that require us to use the highways.  Plus it would be nice to drive to work to keep it going and not sitting.  Hopefully that can help narrow it down some.  This thread has given me some great advice and has helped us better figure out what we are looking for.

[mathgirl]

7 minutes ago, Studeous said:

Mathgirl: regarding auctions- reading this thread reminded me of something said regarding a local auto auction.  “Not all cars at the auction are junk, but ALL the junk cars are at the auction”.  Good hunting, and good luck. 

I'm sure that's true!  We plan to visit the local clubs and get advice.  We also are going to try to find out who is a reputable mechanic to do a possible restoration.  We are hesitant to buy already restored because of the unknown quality of the restoration work.  The other option would be to buy from a trusted source something that is already restored.

[tomcarnut]

MathGirl,

 

 I have number of era collector cars that I tour with 

 

1911 Ford Model T touring cruising speed 30-35 Mph 15-18 mpg (ruckstall rear end would add 10 mph)

1912 McLaughlin Buick Model 35 cruising speed 30-40 Mph 15-16 mpg

1936 Ford Phaeton cruising speed with 4:11 rear end 45-50mph 15-16 Mpg(Columbia rear end would add 15 mph 

1948 Cadillac flathead 4 speed Hyrdramatic cruising speed 65Mph, 10 mpg(this what I hear from others as mine does not run yet

 

1957 Ford Thunderbird with 312cu,  3 speed manual with overdrive cruising speed 65-70, 16-20 mpg

 

1966 Chevy Impala convertible 327 four barrel cruising Power Guild  speed 70 mph or more, 15-17 mpg

 

1967 Chevy Camero rs Convt 327 Two barrel cruising Power Guide cruising speed 70 mph, 14-16 mpg

 

1970 Chevy Corvette 350 4 speed manual cruising speed 70 plus, 16-19 mpg

 

1996 Buick Roadmaster 350 Lt1 4speed automatic overdrive cruising speed 70 plus mph 20-23 mpg not towing 7-8 mpg towing a 4500 pound covered trailer. 

 

all mpgs are either highway speed with the newer cars or tour at slower speeds. Not a lot of city stop and go when I check mileage. Small block Chevys V8 or Ford YBlocks and later small blocks from the mid 1950’s to 1970 will keep up modern traffic and get at least 15 mpg and have the best part availability. But if you only run a 1000 miles a year gas mileage is not a big deal.  None of mine except the Roadmaster have ac

 

Tom
 

Edited January 10, 2022 by tomcarnut (see edit history)

[mathgirl]

5 minutes ago, Jack Bennett said:

And, while shopping for a hobby car, keep in mind that the term “rare” is as overused as “patina” to elevate the sale price of a older car.

Actually, a car may truly be “rare” because it didn’t sell when new, last for any length of time after it was sold, and the few which did, are now recycled into plow shares.

A survivor car may be called “rare” because it was abandoned in a barn for 50 or 60 years, while all its siblings died, parts are unobtainable or ultra expensive, and the car should have died a decent death decades ago.

And “rare” can mean “hurry, buy me”………because nobody else will.

We try to stay away from the "rare" stuff because of parts availability issues.  

[mathgirl]

23 minutes ago, Jack Bennett said:

Gee….my old Willys has NO valves, and when manufactured, the absence of poppet valves, either overhead or in block, was a selling point for the sleeve valve engine. I really have no idea what gas mileage I get from the Willys for the same reason I drive a V-10 powered motor home, several hundred miles, to get some crabs….or not..or a fish or two I could buy for a few dollars at Albertson’s. And I don’t keep track of how much fishing line I use or how much bait the fish steal, before I decide hamburgers, or hot dogs will have to suffice for supper.

When it progresses beyond anything other than a hobby, and the costs overcome the fun…..whether it be fishing, or my old cars, it’s time to spend some quality time with my dog.

That's definitely true!

[nick8086]

Old cars do not have bad gas  mileage.

 

I can do the math..

Edited January 11, 2022 by nick8086 (see edit history)

[Grimy]

Mathgirl:  At this point, my recommendation would be for you to join AACA (which is all marques) and a local AACA region.  The tour season begins about April.  Go on local (regional) tours without your own car and I'm sure you'll be offered rides--and you'll probably be able to choose several marques and vintages for those rides.  You'll get a much better idea of what cars spin your beanie, as well as fine-tuning your judgment on amenities you want.  The old car driving experience is what most of us enjoy, so you need to weigh the experience aspects of different marques and years.

 

If you're focused on Hudsons and Packards, check the national club websites for local regions.  Part of your research is the cost of joining clubs focused on your prospective-purchase marques.  Research costs involve membership fees for national and regions for one year for openers.  If you buy a Packard, you can drop the Hudson club membership next year, or vice versa.

 

I don't think anyone has said it yet in this thread, so I will:  buy the best car you can afford, one that has years of successful touring.  That is, since you guys are not mechanics, and want to enjoy an acquisition immediately, stay away from projects!

[54Coupe]

mathgirl, I am an avid (or maybe rabid) Hudson guy. The Hudson Hornets from 51-54 had 145 to 170 horsepower in stock form. They make great drivers, are comfortable, and not terrible (for their time) on gas. The majority of us average 15-20 mpg. My wife's 1940 2dr sedan with a Hornet engine and automatic with overdrive gets 23mpg at 65mph on road trips. There are local Hudson club chapters all over North America, supported by a worldwide club. I have been in the club since the mid 70's, and through contacts there, there has never been anything I couldn't find for any of my cars, ranging from 1919 to 1954... sometimes you need to be patient... The only year that Hudson had power steering was 1954. This setup can be put on all of the long wheelbase six cylinder cars from 48-54. Collecting all the bits and pieces would typically cost 2-3 thousand dollars. Mechanically, The Jets from 53 and 54 have some of the hardest to find parts, because they only produced them for two years... Main bearings are tough to find, and so are front suspension parts. The stepdown Hudsons are good, reliable, roadworthy cars, that many of us drive regularly in traffic, and on crosscountry trips, and everything in between. Good luck in your search.

 

Dany

 

1925 speedster project

1929 rumble seat coupe

1936 sedan

1936 LWB sedan

1940 2dr sedan

1941 coupe drag racer

1954 Hornet coupe

all Hudsons

 

[Steve_Mack_CT]

Mathgirl, I apologize if I missed this suggestion as I tried to read through this and have been following but,

First, great that you both share these related interests!  My wife likes our cars as well.

Second, since your starting with one vehicle, you want it to appeal to both.  Do some more research, live and virtual shopping and try to get a few rides as has been suggested.  Then, maybe each of you come up with your top ten lists, and see what might intersect and why.  If you can find two or three vehicles you both like, you have a narrower group to shop in.  Then focus on value for your dollar.

All good till you both stumble onto a "dark horse" neither of you thought of, that's perfect. 😊👍 if so, let it happen.

Good luck.  Keep us posted!

Edited January 11, 2022 by Steve_Mack_CT (see edit history)

[mathgirl]

My husband likes the idea of a Thunderbird instead.  We would want a 1958-1960 model.  Not quite what I had in mind to start with but I'm good with a T-bird.  Any good advice on what to look for when buying would be helpful.

[bryankazmer]

2 minutes ago, mathgirl said:

My husband likes the idea of a Thunderbird instead.  We would want a 1958-1960 model.  Not quite what I had in mind to start with but I'm good with a T-bird.  Any good advice on what to look for when buying would be helpful.

Decide if you want a hardtop or convertible - significant price difference.  "Squarebirds" are pretty plentiful.

[mathgirl]

1 minute ago, bryankazmer said:

Decide if you want a hardtop or convertible - significant price difference.  "Squarebirds" are pretty plentiful.

We'd want a hardtop.  What do you mean by "squarebirds"?

 

[carbking]

Nick8086 - A Tucker engine with a Carter carburetor???

 

Mathgirl - Classic Auto Supply in Coshocton, Ohio is a MAJOR of parts for T-Birds, should you need them.

 

Jon.

[Graham Man]

Don't discount the 55-57 birds, prices were crazy the last 30 years, but prices are dropping like a rock, this one sold on Bring a trailer for 18K a couple years ago, this one has the removable hard top.

 

 

I like the Turquoise

 

[mathgirl]

We want one with the back seat which I believe the 55-57 are all two-seaters.

[Steve_Mack_CT]

@Mathgirl, forum member @JAKrecently posted a very nice, very reasonable 60 Tbird convertible on the forum here.  I believe it is in this section in a post asking about a different thunderbird.

I can tell you since a friend had one, if you shut doors too hard with glass halfway up, it will break.  He did that twice. 😯😁 Has to be in the design.

 

Here:

 

Edited January 11, 2022 by Steve_Mack_CT
Added link (see edit history)

[Steve_Mack_CT]

51 minutes ago, Graham Man said:

Don't discount the 55-57 birds, prices were crazy the last 30 years, but prices are dropping like a rock

I keep thinking about one of these as well.  Less than a 55 - 57 Chevy two door sedan now.

[John_S_in_Penna]

5 hours ago, mathgirl said:

We'd want a hardtop.  What do you mean by "squarebirds"?

A "Square Bird" is car-enthusiast jargon for the 1958-60 style

of Ford Thunderbird, because the body is squarer than the

previous style.  They came in either a 2-door hardtop body style

or a convertible body style.  They were the first Thunderbirds

to offer 4-passenger seating, because the first style, 1955-57,

seated only 2 people.

 

The 1961-63 style is nicknamed the "Bullet Bird."

 

This shows that car fans should be careful to explain things

and avoid jargon.  Slang or jargon is in every field and doesn't

aid communication.  We want to be helpful!

[hidden_hunter]

Some of the English stuff from that period gets decent mileage and has good parts availability (if you don’t get some of the more obscure marques) though some that weren’t really designed for export can be pretty spindly

 

I have an ad somewhere in my collection that advertises they my 22 Cadillac has “vastly improved” fuel economy of… 8mpg 

 

I’ve never bothered to try and measure it

[Marty Roth]

Welcome, Mathgirl, to our AACA FORUMS,

 

Your analytical background encourages you to weigh, evaluate, and consider alternatives and variables (as does mine).

Now long retired, My MBA concentration was in management, and my primary career was Information Systems Administration, but I also taught Software Development and Architecture at several major universities. After leaving both Corporate America and Academia, I turned my attention to marketing and legal representation.

 

 When stress of the "real world" caused personal/family stress, my wife, children, and I would find pleasure and relaxation by just going for a ride - maybe for ice cream or lunch, or maybe a weekend tour with a local club. Initially, our driver-type old cars were somewhat of the more pedestrian variety - affordable, reliable, and extremely dependable. We had a low mileage 1958 Chevy Bel-air 4-door sedan, and living in the sunny south, soon added an aftermarket air conditioner, and did the same for our big series 1962 Rambler Classic "400". At the same time our early collectibles included a 1927 Chevy Roadster and a 1917 Franklin Touring Car. 

 

Matt Hinson shared great advice: Basically any year Buick Century would give you a highway capable car with overhead valves. While surely correct, others are comparable and affordable. Noting your preference for a closed car rather than a convertible, you have dramatically lower purchase price and greater availability. I've appreciated "orphan" cars, owning Kaiser, Nash, Hudson, Packard, Rambler, and many others, and find good parts availability with trim somewhat lesser - all depends on what you want. Some folks want to show up in what they think everyone else thinks is best. We cruise both locally, region-wide, and cross-country with our air-conditioned 1954 Cadillac convertible which averages 17-18 mpg, but also with our 1965 Corvair Monza which averages 28 mpg (as does our 1988 Corvette). The Caddy and Corvair both allow back seat passengers.

 

We enjoy knowing that while all of our cars have received showfield recognition,

all are capable of driving cross-country at the drop of a hat,

and all but the two earliest are fully highway proven over thousands of miles and thousands of smiles.

 

Seek out a local AACA or VMCCA region,

meet the folks,

share your ideas, and listen to several others.

Join in the weekend activities and catch rides in differing types of cars to develop a game plan.

 

You've received lots of sage advice - now go out and enjoy both the hobby, and those who make it so.

[EmTee]

2 hours ago, John_S_in_Penna said:

The 1961-63 style is nicknamed the "Bullet Bird."

Those are the ones I have always liked...

 

[61polara]

Consider a late '40's or early '50's Cadillac.  1948 was the last year of the flathead V8, which is a wonderful engine.  1949 was the first year of the overhead valve engine.  Cadillac in these years was consistently a Moble Gas Economy winner.  Most will have HydroMatic which has a more economical rear end ratio.  Very highway capable.  This is my '48 Cadillac 60S below.  Buicks of this period are also great road cars but you should look for a Roadmaster with the larger engine.

[Ed Luddy]

9 hours ago, mathgirl said:

We'd want a hardtop.  What do you mean by "squarebirds"?

 

Good choice! These are plentiful and a very nice driving car. Biggest problem is the chassis for rust. These were a "monocoque"' style welded 2 layer design.  Make sure you see it underneath before putting out any cash. I love these cars for the style and late 50's luxury. To me they always showed the world how America rolled, and could build a reliable, distinct car. Instead of a fragile European beauty that spent most of it's time parked, leaking fluids, and waiting for parts!

[nick8086]

☺️

[mathgirl]

10 hours ago, Ed Luddy said:

Good choice! These are plentiful and a very nice driving car. Biggest problem is the chassis for rust. These were a "monocoque"' style welded 2 layer design.  Make sure you see it underneath before putting out any cash. I love these cars for the style and late 50's luxury. To me they always showed the world how America rolled, and could build a reliable, distinct car. Instead of a fragile European beauty that spent most of it's time parked, leaking fluids, and waiting for parts!

We definitely know to look underneath for any significant rust.  What if it is undercoated?  Is that a good or bad thing?

[mathgirl]

3 hours ago, nick8086 said:

☺️

What is this?  I can't tell by the picture.