Just bought something - Page 6 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

Colorado220 · #76 04-01-2011, 03:38 AM

Super awesome!

barry123400 · #77 04-01-2011, 09:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by t walgamuth

IIRc the buicks have torque tube rear ends which would make fitting an od or two speed rear axle problematic.

Tom is right. This would be a tough one or almost impossible to convert to a two speed rear end.

The torque tube was a driveshaft totally enclosed in a tube. The front universal ran in oil and there was no rear universal. The motion of the shaft was dealt with by a large sealed ball joint type assembly on the transmission/tube junction.

The downside of this setup was it increased unsprung weight and was possibly costlier to produce. A known difficulty was the rear seal in the setup failing in the transmission junction area. This allowed thinner transmision oil from the dynaflow transmissions to flow down the shaft into the differential.

This setup was a logical way to engineer in coils springs for the rear end. I am not sure if buick was the first to employ them back then or not. Maybe cadillac as they were Toms passions for a time so he might know.

Back then Cadillac built quite a car by the way. After decades of having good engines they put what I consider junk under the hoods starting in 1957. Junk in my opinion that is compared to what had been.

I think I got about twenty miles per gallon around town with my 1954 model cadillac. The only cadillac I ever owned. The new engine starting in 57 probably did half as well milage wise. There was no lack of ;power in the 54 either. Cadillac slogan the standard of the world was ultimatly thrown away by the corporation eventually.

Like the mercedes constant velocity joints the buicks single universal lasted almost forever with the constant oil lubrication.Buick continued the torque tube set up into the 50s.The same torque tube set up is on the standard transmissions.

My 39 buick is converted to a standard type rear end and driveshaft. The buick torque tube both would have been impossible to hook up to the 350 auto transmission and even if possible probably would not have survived the current engines torque. This car is heavy and goes like a bullet if you get into it.

The most severe long hill in the maritimes makes most new cars work pretty hard to maintain speed on. Most in fact cannot hold the desired speed. The 39 buick resto rod does not even seem to hardly notice it as I pass all of them. This hill would force a 240d standard to stay in second gear. You cannot get a real run at that long hill. Even if you could you would still land up in the second gear part way up I think.

PaulC · #78 04-01-2011, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by barry123400

Tom is right. This would be a tough one or almost impossible to convert to a two speed rear end.

The torque tube was a driveshaft totally enclosed in a tube. The front universal ran in oil and there was no rear universal. The motion of the shaft was dealt with by a large sealed ball joint type assembly on the transmission/tube junction.

The downside of this setup was it increased unsprung weight and was possibly costlier to produce. A known difficulty was the rear seal in the setup failing in the transmission junction area. This allowed thinner transmision oil from the dynaflow transmissions to flow down the shaft into the differential.

This setup was a logical way to engineer in coils springs for the rear end. I am not sure if buick was the first to employ them back then or not. Maybe cadillac as they were Toms passions for a time so he might know.

Back then Cadillac built quite a car by the way. After decades of having good engines they put what I consider junk under the hoods starting in 1957. Junk in my opinion that is compared to what had been.

I think I got about twenty miles per gallon around town with my 1954 model cadillac. The only cadillac I ever owned. The new engine starting in 57 probably did half as well milage wise. There was no lack of ;power in the 54 either. Cadillac slogan the standard of the world was ultimatly thrown away by the corporation eventually.

Like the mercedes constant velocity joints the buicks single universal lasted almost forever with the constant oil lubrication.Buick continued the torque tube set up into the 50s.The same torque tube set up is on the standard transmissions.

My 39 buick is converted to a standard type rear end and driveshaft. The buick torque tube both would have been impossible to hook up to the 350 auto transmission and even if possible probably would not have survived the current engines torque. This car is heavy and goes like a bullet if you get into it.

The most severe long hill in the maritimes makes most new cars work pretty hard to maintain speed on. Most in fact cannot hold the desired speed. The 39 buick resto rod does not even seem to hardly notice it as I pass all of them. This hill would force a 240d standard to stay in second gear. You cannot get a real run at that long hill. Even if you could you would still land up in the second gear part way up I think.

Was the '57 Cadillac engine that much different than the '56? Was '57 the first year of the 365?

Txjake · #79 04-01-2011, 10:39 AM

What a wonderful car, Tyler. Great find!

barry123400 · #80 04-01-2011, 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PaulC

Was the '57 Cadillac engine that much different than the '56? Was '57 the first year of the 365?

I think that was the year of the change. The engine was really bad on fuel compared to the earlier one.Of course the corporate viewpoint was gas was cheap and if you could spring five grand for a car the cost of fuel did not matter perhaps.

Again Tom may have a better memory. The last one I thought was a real cadillac was the 55 and 56 coupe de villes. Remember I am far from an authority on this brand.

t walgamuth · #81 04-01-2011, 05:30 PM

Caddies had an open driveshaft. The cad v8 was very derivative up til the 429 about 1964 IIRC. Just kept increasing displacement, camshaft lift and duration each year.

PaulC · #82 04-01-2011, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by t walgamuth

Caddies had an open driveshaft. The cad v8 was very derivative up til the 429 about 1964 IIRC. Just kept increasing displacement, camshaft lift and duration each year.

I think that the 1963 390 was new, and held that displacement for just one year, morphing into the 429 for '64.

daw_two · #83 04-08-2011, 08:10 AM

Wow! I haven't been to the Open Discussion forum is months. Look at everything I've been missing.

Fantastic car, Tyler. You need to call me when you find things like this!

TylerH860 · #84 05-02-2011, 04:24 PM

I listed it on CL then submitted it bring a trailer.

They featured it. Interesting comments.

http://bringatrailer.com/2011/05/01/original-black-lacquer-1941-buick-club-coupe/

TheDon · #85 05-02-2011, 04:28 PM

very cool

Skid Row Joe · #86 05-02-2011, 04:46 PM

Tried to email the CL listing to a collector - didn't work. Nice looking pictures.

The Swede · #87 05-02-2011, 05:15 PM

BAT, one of my favorite sites. You got some positve feedback as well...

TylerH860 · #88 05-02-2011, 05:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Swede

BAT, one of my favorite sites. You got some positve feedback as well...

I was surprised given how harsh the audience can be on things like price.

Also looks like I have a serious buyer.

Aquaticedge · #89 05-02-2011, 05:36 PM

I love this one comment that said " Some of the best looking Garage doors I've seen on a Craigslist ad" Beautiful car, Hope it sells well for you

Skid Row Joe · #90 05-03-2011, 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aquaticedge

I love this one comment that said " Some of the best looking Garage doors I've seen on a Craigslist ad" Beautiful car, Hope it sells well for you

Rich! Being in architectural products, that's the best part of the home pictured from what I can tell. That, and the quality of the rainwater drain system.