55/6/7 differences/ terminology

Discussion in 'Classic Buicks' started by Donuts & Peelouts, Aug 10, 2018.

  1. OZGS455

    OZGS455 Oh what a wonderful day!

    Yeah my '47 Buick Special Hearse has the Torque Tube with a 4 foot extension jack shaft, once you get your head around what actually propels the car its very different.
    The wheels propel the whole drive train forward which is anchored the the frame as is the body which is just along for the ride 20180730_205949.jpg
     
  2. Donuts & Peelouts

    Donuts & Peelouts Life's 2 Short. Live like it.

    Sponging all this info. Thanks Guys.
    Now how about all across GM during the the late 30s- 1959, did other companys use the torque tube.

    As far Buicks whats the parctical thing to do if you run a different engine and trans out of the 60's or 70's.
     
  3. OZGS455

    OZGS455 Oh what a wonderful day!

    With Buicks of the torque tube era I think if you want to run a later engine, say a 455 , you need to change the whole driveline.
    I think....
    Theres possibly ways of marrying things up with fabricated adaptors but logistics and cost would preclude that....I think.
    With my 47 Hearse the easiest way for me to upgrade the driveline for instance would be to refabricate body to chassis mounts and fit the body to a newer, later model A body chassis, complete with better brakes, suspension, differential, engine and gearbox, as well as all the associated electrics.
    With my hearse the viable option would be the 1971-84 commercial utility chassis.
    Ive already had a 46 Buick sedan sitting on such a chassis and its a good fit, almost natural.
    All GM and GM products seem to marry up well regardless of age.

    My diff man from local diff specialist shop says a Pontiac or Camaro of a mid to late 60's ran a torquetube setup, I cant remember the specifics but someone in here will know if thats true.
     
    Donuts & Peelouts likes this.
  4. Donuts & Peelouts

    Donuts & Peelouts Life's 2 Short. Live like it.

    Is it the 61-63 tempest? They had a unique setup.

    When shopping for frames what messurments do you need, firewall specifics do you need. And is there a database on the internet that has frame info like Engine weight and dimensions?
     
  5. OZGS455

    OZGS455 Oh what a wonderful day!

    Could be....Ill ask him if you like?
    What are you trying to do specifically?
    If its all hypothetical then its pie in the sky.
    On the other hand if you have a specific thing in mind then its possible to investigate the logistics with a tape measure and a boneyard.
    As for a database . Well ya may have to start one ;-)
    Tell us what ta wanna do?
    Id like an Aussie A body chassis under a 47 Buick running either a 350 or 455...
    Acheivable.
     
    Donuts & Peelouts likes this.
  6. OZGS455

    OZGS455 Oh what a wonderful day!

    Another shot of my stalled project.
    Havent touched her in 20 years well, except for firing up the 248 straight 8 every 5-10 years.
    Runs sweet!
    Just buffed the 20+ yrs old acrylic laquer paint I sprayed way back when......
    Looking back to your first post the guy who imported my car into Tasmania in 2012 has built a 1955 thats 455 Motorvated.
    Surely theres more Stateside...
     

    Attached Files:

    Donuts & Peelouts and Footbag like this.
  7. WQ59B

    WQ59B Well-Known Member

    Your goal would steer your course of action here. I don't believe it's possible to keep the proprietary Buick rear out of a TorqueTube car and go to an open driveshaft. If I recall correctly, there's something about the way the 2 pieces work together -like conjoined twins, so to speak- that pulling one means pulling the other.
    For me, going down the road of high performance... there's no good gearsets available for the Buick rear in my car, so swapping out the rear made more sense (besides the TorqueTube issue). But there was nothing to gain from pulling the factory boxed frame and fabricating in another frame, especially from a smaller/weaker A-Body, for example.
     
    Donuts & Peelouts likes this.
  8. John Codman

    John Codman Platinum Level Contributor

    As I recall, the mentioned Tempests ran a flexible (!) solid driveshaft to a transaxle in the rear. It was an odd setup, but I don't remember it as being particularly troublesome. AMC also used the torque tube setup into the '60s. Ford used it on their passenger cars through 1948. Present day Corvettes use a setup vaguely similar to the old Tempest. Chevy used torque tubes as late as 1954.
     
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2018
    Donuts & Peelouts likes this.
  9. OZGS455

    OZGS455 Oh what a wonderful day!

    Yes, probably better to go to a Ford nine inch rear hung off leaf springs, a huge choice of rear gears and high strength
     
    Donuts & Peelouts likes this.
  10. John Codman

    John Codman Platinum Level Contributor

    For strength the Ford axle is tops, but you will end up with two differing bolt patterns on the wheels. If you are planning to use different width or diameter wheels front and rear, this is not a problem, but if you plan to use the same all around it becomes a PIA. I'd probably find a GM big-car rear axle such as Oldsmobile if I were planning to convert to an open driveline; this would enable you to keep the Buick bolt pattern all the way around.
     
    Donuts & Peelouts likes this.
  11. Donuts & Peelouts

    Donuts & Peelouts Life's 2 Short. Live like it.

    Lets talk 56 Super.
    Any one have any info on them.
    The good, bad and ugly...

    Seen one a couple weeks ago and put my phone number on it. The guy called me today..
    Contemplating selling my 55 Packard Clipper to buy the Super.
     
  12. John Codman

    John Codman Platinum Level Contributor

    The Supers and Roadmasters are really nice cars, but they have what are essentially Cadillac bodies and are heavy. They ride beautifully - perhaps even better then the Cadillac, but if you are into performance, you would be far better off with a Century or Special.
     
    bhambulldog likes this.
  13. 66electrafied

    66electrafied Just tossing in my nickel's worth

    The 56 also had the added advantage of a better Dynaflow. They introduced the Twin Turbine that year, which made a fast Century even faster. The Roadie of the year was the Electra 225 or Park Avenue version, the Super was pretty much the same body-wise but usually had a scaled down engine. It'd be the base Electra. The 4 door hardtop was a hot seller in that year, and I think 56 was the peak year until sometime in the 60s. They were all reasonably good, but suffered a bit from quality control issues, they were cranking out so many of them that quality started to slip. The other bad thing was the brakes, this were the pre-aluminum drum days, so braking was an issue. To Buick's credit they already knew that and were working on it. As the car got faster, it did get scarier. I think 56 was the first year for telescopic shocks too; so they were starting to modernize the suspension. Not that the knee-actions were bad or anything, it's just that no one ever serviced them.
     
    Donuts & Peelouts likes this.
  14. 322bnh

    322bnh Well-Known Member

    You should probably edit the misinformation in your post: no Electras or PA in 56 (just Special, Century, Super, Roadmaster); the Twin Turbine came in 53 with Switch Pitch in 55 (drive only); Switch Pitch in 56 worked in all ranges including Low and Reverse; they made more 55's and that was where the quality control issues happened; brakes were not bad...just better in subsequent years.
     
    WQ59B likes this.
  15. John Codman

    John Codman Platinum Level Contributor

    '56 had oleo shocks all around, '55 had them in front, Houdailles in back. I'm not positive, but I think the Super and Roadmasters had the same engine.
     
    bhambulldog likes this.
  16. 66electrafied

    66electrafied Just tossing in my nickel's worth

    If you had read into the post a little deeper you would have seen I offered those terms as a comparison, and not a fact, I was stating that the Roadmaster was the Electra 225 of the day and the Super the baseline Electra.
    Yes, Super and Roadmaster used the same engine in 56. A 322 cu. in, with 9.5 :1 compression rated at 255 hp. It was the last year of the 322.
    According to Zavitz, "Big Buicks, A source Book (1984) 1956 was the first year the Variable Pitch Dynaflow or what I understood to be the Twin Turbine to be was offered as standard equipment on Roadmaster and Super. The Variable pitch along with the horsepower increase made the cars even faster than the previous year. (0-60 in 9.8 as opposed to 11.8, standing quarter of 17 seconds in 1956 Century, Roadie or Super would be slower because they're heavier)
    According to Dunham, Gustin, "The Buick, A Complete History" (1997) the quality control issues that were there in 1955 hadn't changed much in 56, they were building too many cars too fast. The brakes were something that were not talked about during the Ragsdale years, but by 1958 with the introduction of the aluminum drum they went from being mediocre to the best drums in the industry. You will notice that I stated that they were already working on the problem and improving it.
     
  17. John Codman

    John Codman Platinum Level Contributor

    I had three '55s and a '56. I thought that the build quality was excellent.
     
    Donuts & Peelouts likes this.
  18. 322bnh

    322bnh Well-Known Member

    Apparently you have never driven a 55 or 56, never owned one, and have never rebuilt a dynaflow from 55,56. Citing "sources" does not make it true.
    One more time: the Twin Turbine came in 53 with Switch Pitch in 55 (drive only); Switch Pitch in 56 worked in all ranges including Low and Reverse. Twin turbine and variable pitch/switch pitch are two different things.
    Please don't comment on what you do not understand. Misinformation on the web is permanent. Some of that misinformation might hinder the sale of one or all of my 55's when I get too old to drive.
     
  19. 66electrafied

    66electrafied Just tossing in my nickel's worth

    I guess the guys who write the books lie then. I will burn them all tomorrow. I'm really feeling bad that I wasted all that money on them, I should have come to you first.
    I'm not going to argue, you're absolutely right, misinformation is permanent, and I will not be party to or contribute anything more to it, so you can have your "win".
    I'm done with this thread.
     
  20. Donuts & Peelouts

    Donuts & Peelouts Life's 2 Short. Live like it.

    Dont get offend anyone, you know if we were in person we would not get offend. Thanks for both of your input
     

Share This Page