Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





1946-1954 American Cars

2»

Comments

  • fintailfintail Posts: 33,580
    Nah, that's a lot of money, You could have found a nicely restored driver for the same, without the same inflated claims and issues.

    I know a lot of low mileage cars were stored poorly and suffered with bad paint and rotted interiors, but I would rather that be left for me to deal with. The market is different now than even 10 years ago though, now "patina" is very desirable and people like old and original - where before they wanted to erase it at all costs.
  • texasestexases Posts: 5,534
    "DO NOT let that engine get low on oil and try not to wind it out too hard in the lower gears. These weren't bad engines but they don't like high RPM's. "

    While one wouldn't want to swap a new(er) 250 cid Chevy 6 into a 'low mile original' '52, is that an option for a less 'special' one? Would seem to really improve the drivability factor.
  • isellhondasisellhondas Issaquah WashingtonPosts: 17,633
    Then the car is no longer original.

    Those old 216's and early 235's weren't that bad PROVIDING you treated it well. They can easily cruise all day at 65-70 MPH. they can get up to 95 too (trust me) but they don't like that.
  • isellhondasisellhondas Issaquah WashingtonPosts: 17,633
    15 minutes from where we live.

    He tried selling it on CL last summer. I remember I actaully called him and he didn't return my message for two weeks.

    If it drove by 50 feet away, I would probably think..." That's a nice '48 Plymouth"

    The harder you look, the worse it gets!

    http://seattle.craigslist.org/est/cto/3076855159.html
  • fintailfintail Posts: 33,580
    Photographs well but isn't exactly concours up close...my fintail can relate :shades:

    Looks like the seller is trying to show off that Viper too...not impressed.
  • isellhondasisellhondas Issaquah WashingtonPosts: 17,633
    It looks like a total rust bucket to me and not worth the cost of restoration.

    Even if someone wanted to make it a daily driver, they would HAVE to do an interior and replace the glass. Even then, who knows how it runs.
  • oldbearcatoldbearcat Posts: 170
    Isell:

    I know about the bottom end that this engine has. So far I'm doing my own wrenching on her. I just redid the valve gear myself, and, now she's much happier at speed. Yeah - I decided just to put up with the rear main leak at this point. Putting a seal in with the engine in the car looks like a pain.

    Regards:
    Oldbearcat :)
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,564
    I see this all the time. It's a tired old car tarted up with newer paint---the interior is tired, the chassis and suspension is decrepit, etc etc. He did the easiest part of the rwstoration of a car that's not worth very much even properly restored.

    MODERATOR

  • isellhondasisellhondas Issaquah WashingtonPosts: 17,633
    Yep, throw on a cheap set of wide whites and a brgain basement paint job and you may end up with a "50 footer".

    The closer you look, the worse things get. Like digging in a pile of manure. The more you dig, the worse it smells.

    I think he may be an owner for quite awhile.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,564
    If it runs really well he might get 1/2 of what he's asking.

    MODERATOR

  • fintailfintail Posts: 33,580
    edited June 2012
    And even if it is mint, a prewar style postwar 2 door sedan isn't going to be much fun, useful mostly for in-town errands or low stress country roads.
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Posts: 4,192
    Speaking of Plymouths, I think they were better cars than Chevys in model years '46-'54. The demand for Chevys is greater, of course, but Plymouths are more rugged and durable.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,564
    Most pre-war cars of this type can barely run on modern freeways, and they are ponderous at slow speeds. They are neither fast, nor fun, nor agile, and in most cases, not very pretty either. There are a few exceptions, like 40-41 Ford V8s, the Air Flows and of course some pre-war foreign stuff.

    MODERATOR

  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 21,905
    Years ago, one of my friends had a 1950 DeSoto Custom 4-door, which had Fluid drive and, IIRC, a flathead six that was 236.6 CID or something like that and maybe 110 hp gross?

    Now true, this is a postwar car, but I doubt that engine/performance-wise, it was much different from the '41-48 models. I rode in my friend's 50 a few times, and followed him, in my '57 Firedome, to a car show once.

    I have no idea what 0-60 would've been in it, but I remember reading that when the Firedome V-8 came out for '52, it knocked 4 seconds off the 0-60 time versus the 6, and the time I've seen listed was 17.6 seconds. So that would put the 1952 6-cyl model at around 21.6 seconds, and I'd guess the 50 was similar?

    In normal driving, as a passenger, the car seemed fine. And it also didn't seem to have any trouble keeping up with interstate speeds, maybe 70-75 mph. I'm sure it would be a bit scary though, if you had to do a high-speed merge onto a highway from a dead stop though!

    It was a nice car for loafing around, and in good shape. But admittedly, pretty dull. Not something I'd exactly clamor for. He ended up buying a '55 Fireflite Coronado, one of the earliest triple-tone models, and sold the '50 to an old guy up north of Baltimore. It was a much cooler car, with the 291 Hemi and 200 hp. But still, just a nice old 4-door sedan, and I think he really wanted something flashier.

    I think I ended up being a bad influence on this guy, because soon after I bought my '67 Catalina convertible, he got the 'vert bug really bad. But he tried to satisfy it with an '83 or so LeBaron convertible, with the 2.6 Mitsubishi 4-cyl! And after that it was one of those little Aussie Capris. Finally, he sort of found a happy medium with a '72 Corvette. Not a convertible, but it did have the removable targa panel.
  • isellhondasisellhondas Issaquah WashingtonPosts: 17,633
    I used to commute 60 miles a day in my 54 Chevy Bel Air and it kept up just fine with L.A traffic. It would easily cruise at 80 MPH without complaint.

    It was a Powerglide and I was lucky to get 14 MPG out of it.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,564
    That's a considerably more modern car than a wheezy flathead 6 pushing a pre-war behemoth I think. If you had Powerglide, you had the 235 engine and I think higher highway gearing than the old flatheads.

    MODERATOR

  • isellhondasisellhondas Issaquah WashingtonPosts: 17,633
    Yeah, all Powerglaide Chevys had a 235 and by 1953, they all had full pressure lubrication. The last of the 216's were the 1952's with sticks.

    Old pre war Buicks were wonderful highway cruisers too and there were probably others too.

    I agree, the flathead sixs weren't really made for the freeway.
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Posts: 4,192
    Beginning in '51 you could equip Plymouths with overdrive. Since I never rode or drove in one, I can't say how they cruised on the highway.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,564
    if you want a 50s domestic car with adequate power and handling for modern roads you are somewhat limited. I would guess that a Hudson Hornet and maybe an Olds coupe would get you by okay. Cads are too freakin' big, Buicks are...well...Buicks...Chevies still old ladies cars....maybe the 49-51 Ford coupe would work out okay..at least it's a V8 and not such a heavy car. Kinda primitive suspension, though. The Mopars haven't quite made it to the good handling stage of the 55s on up.

    MODERATOR

  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Posts: 4,192
    A '53 or '54 Dodge with the hemi V8 and overdrive, or a Chrysler Saratoga (hemi in a relatively small body, ala Olds 88) would probably hang in there with the Hornet and the 88, don't you think?
  • When I was 5, my Dad bought a 53 Pontiac Chieftain 2 door with a straight 8 and a stick, about the same color as the 52 Chevy at the beginning of this thread. He kept it until 59, when he traded it in on a new Catalina. I remember him taking it up to 85 a few times. My Grandpa had a 56 Star Chief hardtop, turquoise and white, that seemed like a rocket in comparison. A
    "perfect" example of THAT car would sorely tempt me, were it available. I haven't seen one with an original spec interior....
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,564
    Nah, you'd be in the trees on the first turn I think. The Hudson was a pretty formidable car in its day---hence its great success in early NASCAR.

    MODERATOR

  • isellhondasisellhondas Issaquah WashingtonPosts: 17,633
    I believe those Hudsons held some kind of a track record for many years.

    I remember an old timer telling a story about how he was driving his new 1950 Olds 90 MPH one night when he saw headlights behind him. he figured it was a cop and he was about to get nailed so he didn't let off the gas.

    To his great surprise, he was passed by a Hudson who he guessed had to be doing well over 100 MPH.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,564
    Olds and Hudson competed in NASCAR but the overhead valve V8s finally won out.

    MODERATOR

2»
Sign In or Register to comment.