What are you first hand driving experiences with pre-1930 cars?

[alsancle]

This comes up a lot (See the L29 thread)  and I'm really interested in first hand experience.  Lets focus on the 1920s stuff and no Brass era cars that are a whole nother kettle of fish.   If you can talk about something 1929/30 that would interest me even more.

 

I have done a enough miles in the following three cars to comment wtih some experience:

 

1.  Duesenberg Model J - big, powerful, fast, stopping is pretty good with the Lockheed brakes and vacuum boost,  steering is adequate.   Happy at 70mph,  not terrified of stopping.   Not a blast in tight spaces.

 

2.  Bentley Speed 6,  basically the Duesenberg with RHD, 4 speeds in a smaller format.  Maybe even a quicker as the bodies weigh nothing.  Top ends are similar.

 

3.  29 Stearns Knight J8-90.  Bigger and heavier than the short wheelbase Model J,  probably 1/2 the HP so much slower and the mechanical non boosted brakes are adequate but not as reassuring as the Duesenberg or Bentley.  Comfortable at 50mph it takes a while to get there.  But you are really paying attention to anyone that might decide to pull out or stop in front of you.

 

All three of these require you to be a pro at double clutching.   When the transmissions are cold on the J and Stearns you don't have to do it on the way up the gears, but once the transmission is hot you need to know what you are doing.

 

I've been a passenger in a bunch of others but not driving so can't really comment.  I'm still years away from being able to drive my Stutz.

Edited October 30, 2023 by alsancle (see edit history)

[John_S_in_Penna]

20 minutes ago, alsancle said:

3.  Bigger and heavier than the short wheelbase Model J...   

What is car #3?  I think you forgot to give that information.

[Stude Light]

You said 1920s so I'll give you my two affordable early 20s cars. First off, the early 1920s cars are going to be two wheel brakes so you plan ahead for braking - I refer to them as my 40 mph cars with 25 mph brakes. Both my cars were more typical for an average man to own than the cars you mention but still cost 3 times more than a base Model T, but you also get what you pay for...more power and sturdier. 

 

1921 Oldsmobile Model 46 Touring with the Northway 209 V8 engine with 246 cu in and 58 hp. Has a leather faced cone clutch so it is more of an on/off switch and doesn't like to do a lot of slipping. Although it has a 3 speed transmission, I typically just use 2nd and 3rd as fist gear is geared for creeping. It will drive down to 5 mph in 3rd. Lots of torque and with a 2 stage 2bbl carb, it pulls this 7 passenger car up hills easily. The clutch has a brake so you depress it just enough to release it and I just time my shifts and don't double clutch often. The key is that you don't rev the engine much before shifting and it drops right in. Feels like a heavy car when driving and drives nicely up to 40 mph. Steering is heavy and the fan on the engine is rather loud at cruise.

 

1923 Studebaker Light Six Touring with a 207 cu in I6 engine that makes 40 hp. The plate clutch is easy to modulate but also has a brake so you just push it enough to release it otherwise you'll grind gears. Like the Olds, you don't rev the engine much before shifts and it'll drop right in. This car feels much more nimble than the Olds and steering is much lighter. It has a decent amount of torque so, compared to a Model T, it accelerates much better and will hill climb well at wide open throttle. Although it'll go a bit faster, mine is most happy at a 42 mph cruise.

 

Both of these are open cars so are very comfortable for summer driving. With the side curtains on, they stay comfortable inside down to 40 degree ambient temperatures.

[arcticbuicks]

My first drive in 29 Chevy ......noisy ,wobbly ,wonder,grind .....oops.....grind ......door came open .......smokey exhaust in car .......backfire ......chug .....downshift ......grind.....oops ....grind .....stall.....pull over ......dribble some gas .......start .....chug....bang .....pop......grind...grind .....oops ....dam ......

[Mike "Hubbie" Stearns]

Mine is a 29 Boyer fire truck. It likes 35 mph and has rear brakes only. Not fun in tight quarters. Doesn’t turn sharp at all.  Has plenty of power. Mike

[zepher]

1924 Chrysler Model B Roadster - Nice off the line acceleration and shifting is great, both warm and cold. Handling is fantastic, sometimes feels like you can turn square corners.  Car is nimble but external contracting brakes are not confidence inspiring, especially if they get wet.  Driving position is very tight so if you're over 6ft and have any girth to you, you won't be comfortable in the driver's seat. Freeway speeds as fine as long as you don't push above 55mph too often. 

 

1926 Rickenbacker E6 Brougham - Decent power from the factory 6 cylinder, drivetrain is geared more for around town driving.  Can scoot away from a traffic light with most modern traffic but is not happy above 50mph. Handling is good and shifting is very easy, especially as the trans warms up, but braking is adequate.  Modern traffic can stop much, much faster than it can with its mechanical, 4 wheel drum brakes.  Overall a very enjoyable car to drive around town running errands.

 

1929 Pierce Arrow 143 Enclosed Drive Limousine - Huge, heavy car.  Longest wheelbase for 1929 and probably the heaviest factory body available. Won't win any races stop light to stop light but once up to speed it rides and handles beautifully.  Freeway speeds are not an issue.  Shifting is decent but better when cold, car has tons of torque so not downshifting at times is fine. Just takes a little longer to get back up to speed as long as you don't lug the engine. Brakes are fantastic and I have no worries driving in modern traffic. But, as with any vehicle this size and with a lack of power steering, parking can be a little difficult, especially when backing into a space.

 

[charlespetty]

1930 Lincoln Model L 183 sedan with high speed gears in the rear end about 3.93 to 1 ratio.  Has adequate acceleration from a standstill and feels comfortable at 55-60.  Brakes are huge and stop quite well, but I am sure they would fade with extended use.  Shifts are slow and deliberate with double clutching mandatory.  Downshifting just about impossible.  Starts and runs easily.  Turning circle is very wide, but steering isn't too bad.  Keeps up with modern traffic around town, not so much on the freeway.  Best suited to country roads.  Stays nice and cool at all speeds.  Vacuum tank works like a charm.  Corners okay for a big top heavy tank.  

[edinmass]

My two cents……..

 

I rate all cars of the 20’s. On my dump truck scale. 
 

Fast dump truck….

Slow dump truck……

Worn out dump truck with a full load……

Nice dump truck with a full load………

 

 

Unless something from 1920-1929 is exceptionally high end………they tend to be mostly 35-45 mph cars with varying degrees of steering, stopping, and acceleration. Mostly it was the era…………cars went from horseless carriages to production consumer goods. Everything post 1920 is really a mass production car……….just the bodies were “special” with a few limited exceptions. The big pigs of the era are fun to drive and run out to dinner in………300 mile tour in one day not so much. The small lightweight cars with better than average power plants offer terrific value for around town fun. Mostly the era was uninspiring from a design standpoint. Of course, there are always outliers that don’t fit the generalization. Hell, the 1922 Buck I just got running and sorted is a blast around downtown West Palm Bach. Under 40 it’s a hoot. Get it out in modern fast moving traffic…….and bring a box of depends…….your gonna need them. If taken in context, most 20’s car are fun and reliable in the envelope hey were designed to operate. 
 

OK- The Stearns……….it’s BIG, and heavy. Literally a land yacht. Technically fascinating with a fantastic history and a true one off. Shortcomings on it? Not really……it’s better than 98 percent of what was being offered across the board. For its time……I consider it above average in power and stopping. Steering is heavy, and I would describe it “as I expected it to be” which is difficult below five miles per hour, and fine over fifteen. 
 

It all comes down to power to weight ratios from 1920-1929. By 1932 almost all the quality cars had much more modern and powerful engines, and their chassis soon followed. By 1936………it’s the modern car era…….engines and chassis were basically what we were going to see till the 70’s. Bodies got much larger and more ergonomic by 1936-1937. To me a 1941 Cadillac is a modern car that is too easy to drive and maintain…….no challenge there. 

 

 

Edited October 31, 2023 by edinmass (see edit history)

[John Bloom]

Now this is my kind of thread......keep em coming.......

 

 

[Matt Harwood]

I have 12 years and a lot of miles in a 1929 Cadillac, which I enjoyed owning. It was my first Full Classic and the fulfilment of a dream to own a big Classic with sidemounts, wide whites, and a trunk rack. I modified it with an overdrive, so it was comfortable at 60 MPH and after quite a bit of work, I felt the brakes were adequate for its performance. Acceleration was leisurely but I never felt like a rolling roadblock. First year Sychromesh made the transmission effortless as long as you didn't rush it. Steering was heavy at low speeds, lighter (but never light) at cruise. Ride was punishing even with a 140-inch wheelbase, but I later discovered that my leaf springs were frozen and I never drove it with them operating correctly. It was a big, handsome, high-quality car that won awards and attracted attention. I liked driving it until I bought the '41 Limited and, later, got to drive other Full Classics of the early '30s. The more cars I drove, the more I realized that the Cadillac was pretty primitive despite its impressive looks, tangible quality, and V8 engine. Although it's only six years newer, I like driving the '35 Lincoln a lot more--it's a vastly more polished, usable, capable machine. 

 

To sum up: I sold the Cadillac and don't really miss it.

 

[yachtflame]

  My 1930 LaSalle sedan is a fun car to drive. I use it every day that it isn’t raining. It has a lot of the tendencies that Matt mentioned but I don’t need to double clutch unless I’m in a hurry to slow down. The brakes are adequate if adjusted properly.
 I did have problems with speed and power until I had “he who must not be named” from Florida, adjusted the carb and distributer. It really runs like a dream with all original fuel system. I should say that it hesitates a bit on a steep hill which might be helped with a larger fuel line. It is comfortable running at 45-55mph most of the time.
 I haven’t had the privilege of driving ANY Duesenberg or a prewar Bentley but a prewar LaSalle is a fun car!

Edited October 31, 2023 by yachtflame (see edit history)

[Paul Dobbin]

I bought my first 1934 Ford in 1972, finished my restoration in the fall of 1973 and took it to a AACA Regional Show where I met lots of nice people and joined AACA.   Lots of Model A's there plus the Glidden Tour was in town  (St. Pete Beach, FL)   Joined the local Model A Club too.   Four years later, I bought basket case 31 Model A Coupe that took 4 years to finish while starting 2 new agencies  (Curse of the working class)    I had friends with Model T's and decided a V8, a Model A and a Model T would round out my Ford collection.  Bought a 15 Model T Touring in many baskets.    One of my friends with a T, and A, and a V8 taught me to drive in his 21 Model T Coupe.    All that hand and foot work was like dancing at 23 MPH.    Later when my restoration was finished, he pulled my 15 T with his 21 T, to get it started the first time.

Neighbors came out to ask what we were doing?   "Just getting this old car started".

1915 Model T Touring

Edited November 3, 2023 by Paul Dobbin
Added a picture taken the day I first drove my own Model T (see edit history)

[arcticbuicks]

my old neighbor 80 years old back in around 1980......always said all the old cars up to around 1930 never drove that well.......and broke down a lot ......but came from the factory with a workbench down each side at least to fix things on the side of the road .......as they got more reliable .......they dropped the workbenches.

[1935Packard]

Great thread, especially for those of us who haven't driven this era of cars (or at least haven't done so much).  

[CChinn]

Never had the pleasure of driving a car from the 1920s, but living vicariously through those of you who have through this thread. Thanks AJ and all of you who are sharing your experiences 

[Steve_Mack_CT]

Great thread!  My 2 cents having had a couple of Model A Fords, both 1930s.  If the space they were designed in is largely 35 - 45 on the open road and the 60 mph pre-30 car is more or less a higher end car one begins to understand just how good these little cars were for the money.  But, restoration/sorting is the key.  Lots of shiny A models out there with 90 year old mechanicals...  Ok focus on driving a sorted one:

 

Steering is light and parking shouldn't be a workout.  Handling and turn radius is not bad.

 

Power, for this era is decent, surprising in fact in stop n go situations.

 

Yep you need to be able to double clutch but that is not always necessary.

 

Much over 45 feels a little dicey - wind matters then..

 

Stopping with new mechanical brakes pedal to wheel is ok, not porsche like but i have confidence in the system.  Long downgrades can cause fading.

 

Maintenance is required.  Little things, tire pressure, for example make a difference.

 

Driving it is an activity, but not a chore if that makes sense.

 

Drive an A with a loose front end, poor brakes oe bad/no shocks and it is a different experience.

 

Ideal car for someone thinking about diving into that 22 -32 ish time frame before going large.

[auburnseeker]

3 hours ago, Steve_Mack_CT said:

Great thread!  My 2 cents having had a couple of Model A Fords, both 1930s.  If the space they were designed in is largely 35 - 45 on the open road and the 60 mph pre-30 car is more or less a higher end car one begins to understand just how good these little cars were for the money.  But, restoration/sorting is the key.  Lots of shiny A models out there with 90 year old mechanicals...  Ok focus on driving a sorted one:

 

Steering is light and parking shouldn't be a workout.  Handling and turn radius is not bad.

 

Power, for this era is decent, surprising in fact in stop n go situations.

 

Yep you need to be able to double clutch but that is not always necessary.

 

Much over 45 feels a little dicey - wind matters then..

 

Stopping with new mechanical brakes pedal to wheel is ok, not porsche like but i have confidence in the system.  Long downgrades can cause fading.

 

Maintenance is required.  Little things, tire pressure, for example make a difference.

 

Driving it is an activity, but not a chore if that makes sense.

 

Drive an A with a loose front end, poor brakes oe bad/no shocks and it is a different experience.

 

Ideal car for someone thinking about diving into that 22 -32 ish time frame before going large.

So are you saying we all should just go out and buy one to see?  

Edited October 31, 2023 by auburnseeker (see edit history)

[Gary_Ash]

The world in the 1920s was not limited to Model A Fords, Dodges, Cadillacs, LaSalles, and Duesenbergs.  The Europeans were building fast, nimble cars with impressive technology.  As an extreme example, The Maserati model V4 of 1929 had a 16 cylinder engine (twin 8 ) of 4 liter displacement, double overhead cams, dual superchargers, 300 hp, and large brakes.  It set a flying 10 km record of 152 mph in Italy.  Where does that fit on Ed's dump truck scale, LOL?  The capability for cars like this was available, at a price, but maybe the roads and the markets weren't ready.

1929 Maserati V4

Edited October 31, 2023 by Gary_Ash (see edit history)

[edinmass]

13 hours ago, yachtflame said:

  My 1930 LaSalle sedan is a fun car to drive. I use it every day that it isn’t raining. It has a lot of the tendencies that Matt mentioned but I don’t need to double clutch unless I’m in a hurry to slow down. The brakes are adequate if adjusted properly.
 I did have problems with speed and power until I had “he who must not be named” from Florida, adjusted the carb and distributer. It really runs like a dream with all original fuel system. I should say that it hesitates a bit on a steep hill which might be helped with a larger fuel line. It is comfortable running at 45-55mph most of the time.
 I haven’t had the privilege of driving ANY Duesenberg or a prewar Bentley but a prewar LaSalle is a fun car!

 

"He who must not be named"........is rumored to be a young, good looking gentleman with style and panache well beyond his years. From what most people are saying............He's an xxxxxxx. 😎

 

[Steve_Mack_CT]

39 minutes ago, auburnseeker said:

So are you saying we all should just go out and buy one to see?  

Only if it feels right, but sometimes it's obvious the prior owner put in a lot of love! 😊

 

Best horn ever to boot! 👍😁

 

 

 

[Grimy]

9 minutes ago, edinmass said:

 

"He who must not be named"........is rumored to be a young, good looking gentleman with style and panache well beyond his years.

Wrong.

10 minutes ago, edinmass said:

From what most people are saying............He's an xxxxxxx.

You got that right!

 

Love ya, man! 🙂

[edinmass]

35 minutes ago, Grimy said:

Wrong.

You got that right!

 

Love ya, man! 🙂

GRIMY……..my mentor and teacher of all things antisocial. 😎
 

cogito ergo sum

 

 

Edited October 31, 2023 by edinmass (see edit history)

[jp1gt]

I had a 36 Cad V16 up to 100mph. I wish I had a pic as it was full of my friends!

[Farmallregular]

1924 Dodge Touring, strictly limited to putzing around local back roads at 25 or 30 mph max.  Oddball shift pattern (upside down 3 speed), oddball internal transmission design that makes it difficult to shift regardless of how good you are at double clutching, no front brakes, heavy steering, cramped driving position if you're not a little short guy (which I'm not), but still a fun car.  My 1928 Model A drives like a dream in comparison....

 

Keith

 

[dibarlaw]

My experience is with my (2)1925 Buicks. My evaluation was tempered with my experience with my 1937 100 HP Buick sedan after 10,000 miIes of driving. With several  long term 2,000-3,000 mile round trips. Truly as Ed indicated this era are more like the technology up thru 1970. I am still sorting out my car after 12 years of ownership. Only untill the components are united as a whole can one adequately evaluate. The 50 HP 191 Cu.In. rebuilt engine has (after much tweaking) finally seems to perform as intended. My recient 300 mile round trip to our BCA Tri-Regional provided what still needs to be done.

While leading a tour It powered up a steep, switch back Dureya Drive outside of Reading PA. in high.

At the Pagoda overlook. Also on a 55 mph section of route 30 pulling a 3 mile hill west of Gettysburg at a consistant 45 MPH without losing power. The vacuum tank kept up nicely. This cannot be done with a quick tour around the block or a Veterans Day parade.  Power now seems adequate but the transmission feels worn and the rebuilt multi-plate clutch chatters badly. Double clutching technique is somewhat opposite of some other accounts. Double clutching on up shift (Buick still had the reverse shift patern) when cold and not needed when warm. Ususally a count of 2 will assure a silent shift. Once in a while I can effect a good Quiet down shift.

 The 4 wheel brakes are a bit more assuring if properly set up. But being external bands it got exciting in the rain on my way home from the meet. An exciting moment came when I was holding back in 3rd gear going down a 3 mile hill into Reading. The transmission popped out of 3rd gear! The brakes got a workout for the last mile or so to the bottom. Going downhill in high I now rest my hand on the shift lever.

 The split rims are not as round as they should be and the car has a slight "hop" at speed.

 Steering is light and faily responsive. Although I will need to replace a kingpin soon. All under 5 mph turning is a chore in non power assist cars. Driving the car for over 3 hours with out stopping in a variety of conditions. Highway, innercity stop and go hills, rain and unconcerned drivers (Not all drivers give "Thumbs Up") gave me a new perspective on my "Beulah" driving experience.

Driving on the old Lincoln Highway from Columbia to Wrightsville. Heading toward rain clouds near York PA.

 

[Grimy]

22 minutes ago, edinmass said:

cogito ergo sum

"I think, therefore I am"  -Rene Descartes

 

But coming from you, Ed, I'll repeat the immortal words of Anton Chigurh, "I think that does not mean what you think it means."

[edinmass]

3 minutes ago, Grimy said:

"I think, therefore I am"  -Rene Descartes

 

But coming from you, Ed, I'll repeat the immortal words of Anton Chigurh, "I think that does not mean what you think it means."

 

It means I think I will have another Crown Royal!

[28 Chrysler]

1929 Ford A vs Dodge DA, the Dodge has more room inside and better brakes.

The frame rails on the Dodge are about 8" while the Fords are around 4" making the Dodge feel a bit more sure footed.

You can't go wrong with either of these two, I fit fine in the Ford but I know a few who have trouble.

[Walt G]

Have had some considerable time driving a 1927 RR (Springfield built) Phantom I Trouville town car. Great car, stopped very well despite the weight, lots of power, but you needed a lot of room to turn it around and parallel parking was a chore ( mostly due to the fact I couldn't see anything past my ears no matter how I tried due to the body style.) I also spent some time behind the wheel of Austin Clark's Model L Lincoln dual cowl phaeton from 1929. Great car , nice to drive , and as with any car - once you know where all the corners are.

A friend ( modern sculptor Richard Lippold) had a 4 1/2 litre Bentley I spend some time in, great car but took some learning to shift properly, focus on its RHD etc. Fast car can do 60mph+ all day long. Was an open body style so in warm weather wore you out with all the sun, wind etc.

[West Peterson]

I've been told emphatically that double clutching means that you're trying to drive the car like a modern car. They were meant to be shifted very early. If you get into the higher revs, yes, double clutching is necessary. 

 

So, for all of you who live by the double clutch (I'm one of them, as I'm impatient), try starting out in first and just get the car rolling. Take your time and make the attempt to shift without double-hitting the floorboard. Again, do not try to pick up speed quickly. Remember, most these cars were built when roads were pretty dismal. With high gear meant to be able to take you from slow rolling all the way up to 50, the goal was to reduce the need for constant shifting. Once in third, always in third, until you stop.

Okay, now try third gear....

 

Report back to me. I'm curious.

 

[edinmass]

When I teach people to drive pre war cars, I never teach double clutching........ever. Just shift early. Each cars has its own personality when you shift it. Also, I never down shift a pre war car.......ever. Only use a downshift for long grades, never to slow down like a modern car. 

[West Peterson]

My signature at the bottom of my posts shows the shift pattern of 1930 Packards. Most 1930 Packards you can ignore the stump-pulling first gear, but since my Speedster has an extra large pumpkin in the rear with 3.31:1 gears, first is needed (again, for people who are impatient, like me). With 145hp, and an extremely lightweight body (4,000 pounds), I'd consider matching it up against a Duesenberg or Bentley (a real Bentley). Not so sure it would out perform a Marmon Sixteen or Cadillac V-16, tho.

Steering? As long as the car is moving, its good. I use cornhead grease in the box. It eliminates the leaking, and there probably isn't anything better to use.

Brakes? Who needs 'em?

Top Speed? I get a little nervous going too fast in old cars, but I know that at 80mph, the foot-feed is only about halfway down and the engine is hard to hear. Factory literature claimed 115mph.

 

Of all the cars I've ever driven (from any era), the 1930 Packard Speedster is hands-down my favorite.

[John_S_in_Penna]

28 minutes ago, West Peterson said:

I've been told emphatically that double clutching means that you're trying to drive the car like a modern car.

Report back to me. I'm curious.

16 minutes ago, edinmass said:

When I teach people to drive pre war cars, I never teach double clutching........ever. Just shift early. Each cars has its own personality when you shift it. Also, I never down shift a pre war car.......ever. Only use a downshift for long grades, never to slow down like a modern car. 

My 1916 car, a Locomobile, is a few years too early

to fit in the 1920's range of this topic.  But I agree,

and appreciate hearing from West and Ed that the

method that restorer Rick Hoover taught me is right.

 

By knowing the car through driving it, one knows when

to upshift into the next gear.  My car is a 4-speed.

If I start out in First, I shift into 2nd after about only 

20 feet of driving.  I do not use double-clutching for

any shifts.

 

And the Locomobile's 2-wheel brakes are excellent.

I think they are as good as modern cars'.  Their catalogue

stated that they were designed to stop the car in an

emergency, not merely slow it down.

 

Edited October 31, 2023 by John_S_in_Penna (see edit history)

[John_S_in_Penna]

I might add, on driving the 1916 car:

When I first bought it, I had never really mastered a

manual transmission.  Learning to drive it seemed a bit

daunting at first, but my enthusiasm outweighed that.

 

The first owner might have just graduated from a horse,

I thought;  so if he could learn to drive it, so could I!

[DonMicheletti]

Great thread, but I feel the approach is wrong. Everyone is comparing cars to those which came later.

What should be considered is what came before.

My '10 Buick was noisy, rode rough and was maxed out at about 35 mph. However, I'd bet that the original owner was "driving" a horse before the Buick. And the Buick would have been a heck of improvement (maybe not the noise).

Horse lovers will argue.

[Mark Shaw]

My 1924 Master Series Buick (cut down) truck has plenty of power and has first year 4-wheel brakes.  I drove it from Portland to Seattle on back roads until I missed a turn.  I had to get on the I-5 freeway to catch-up to my group and kept up with slow lane traffic at 55-60 mph.  My son's 1929-27 Buick Sedan can only do about 45 mph maximum and has a much less comfortable ride.

[John_S_in_Penna]

27 minutes ago, DonMicheletti said:

And the [1910] Buick would have been a heck of improvement (maybe not the noise).

From those who lived in those times, the Buick and its

kindred early cars may indeed have been quieter than

horsedrawn traffic.  People today think of the early times

as idyllic, but one who wrote for "The Horseless Age"

magazine decried "the age of noise."

 

Before cars, he wrote, there were ball-bearingless axles,

steel tires, and iron hoofs.  Imagine all that grinding, squealing

noise in a crowded city.  The automobile improved all those.

 

Edited October 31, 2023 by John_S_in_Penna (see edit history)

[Jack Bennett]

To begin with, and to convey my feelings about driving my 1923 DB Roadster and my 1927 Willys Knight, I must admit that my later model KIA Sportage has no worries of being replaced any time in the near future.

I will leave the 1951 Plymouth Cambridge, I recently reanimated, for a more appropriate thread.

The Dodge Brothers Roadster is fun to drive. But it is a car I’d advise any person not familiar with mechanical rear wheel (only) brakes, a upside down gear shift pattern and a steering wheel which is of a size that would compliment a semi-tractor truck, with a similar turning radius, to leave parked.

The DB Roadster is a really light chassis, on a well sprung frame, and, consequently, rides like a buckboard without horses, and takes just about as far to stop.

I rides on 4” wide by 21” in diameter tires, each inflated to 90 pounds, and, while the car is skitters on dry pavement, it is scary on the wet stuff.

But, it is still fun to drive so long as it is only for fun.  
I would never depend on it as daily transportation, and limit my trips to short sojourns along back roads.

The Willys is a rock, and does rate as a car I truly enjoy driving.

The six cylinder, sleeve valve engine is bullet proof, provides plenty of power, and can be assured to irritate the neighborhood with its opulent plume of gray smoke.

It is a heavy car with plenty of interior space, the windshield is large and opens to provide ventilation.

The engine is smooth and is fun to hear as it accelerates. The sleeve valve (Silent Knight) lives up to its name by providing adequate power to propel the car to a comfortable speed of about 45 MPH and still maintain its unique “thrum” sound, rather than the clatter of a engine with a camshaft and poppet valves.

The Willys, too, has a large steering wheel, and an equally large turning radius. But the power provided by the six cylinder engine, as compared to the DB Roadsters four cylinders, makes moving forward and backward, as the wheels are turned, less of a chore.

The Willys, as does the DB Roadster, has mechanical brakes but it is far superior to the roadster since it has brakes on all four wheels. 
It does have external bands on the rear wheels, and it does constrict, for both service and emergency braking. But, it has internal expanding shoes on the front, and a mechanical brake equalizer, which works great, to balance the two. 
I would recommend for anyone who has not driven a car with mechanical front brakes, that they take a few spins around the block before they try driving at road speed.

Both cars are fun, the DB Roadster has a plus of being a convertible, and fits comfortably in the garage.

The Willys is my go-to weekend driver because it likes me, and it likes to be driven. The transmission is smooth, and, while the clutch is a bit jerky, it lets me shift smoothly without double shifting.

The down side to both cars is the poor gas mileage and waste of gas from the open filler spout. It seems as evaporation of gas, while they are sitting idle, equals the amount burned during use.

Again, my old cars provide a irreplaceable source of driving pleasure, and I love both of them dearly as each is unique in its own way.

But, my KIA is always ready to hit the freeway, and in it, I don’t get nearly as many single finger greetings from my fellow drivers.

Jack

Edited October 31, 2023 by Jack Bennett (see edit history)

[Matt Harwood]

1 hour ago, Jack Bennett said:

I rides on 4” wide by 21” in diameter tires, each inflated to 90 pounds, and, while the car is skitters on dry pavement, it is scary on the wet stuff.

 

90 PSI?!? Really? That seems like WAY too much. No wonder it's nervous and rides like a brick.

[Walt G]

1 hour ago, DonMicheletti said:

Great thread, but I feel the approach is wrong. Everyone is comparing cars to those which came later.

I agree completely, many here are used to driving later cars and have not spent a series of hours behind the wheel of the cars in question.

Just to get to an annual week long car event ( newest car at the event was 1934) I had to make a journey in my 1931 car of 3 1/2 + hours , usually more on the + side. up and down long grades , across several bridges in the NY Metro area .  Never a problem ( except on occasion for the drivers of modern cars) . My 6 cylinder car was comfortable at about 52-53 mph but had more speed if required. Thing is to have a car that is well sorted out to start with,, not judge the cars ability by lack of proper care , restoration etc.