Register now to get rid of these ads!

QUESTIONS: Pros and Cons About 1955 BUICKS?????

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by KIRK!, Nov 11, 2009.

  1. KIRK!
    Joined: Feb 20, 2002
    Posts: 12,031

    KIRK!
    Member

    I am tentatively looking at a 1955 Buick Special-mostly stock with wide whites and Caddy covers, also 322 Nailhead with Weiand dual quad manifold and 2 Carter WCFBs.

    I don't know anything about '55 Buicks.

    Pros and cons? Suspension issues/options for lowering? Do they have an enclosed driveshaft this late?

    Any input would be appreciated.

    [​IMG]
     
  2. MEDDLER1
    Joined: Jun 1, 2006
    Posts: 1,590

    MEDDLER1
    Member

    Me and my brotherin law are building one.It does have the enclosed drive shaft and looks like its gonna be pretty easy to lower.BUY it man these cars are super classy!If thats the actual car even better wow that things nice!!!
     
  3. KIRK!
    Joined: Feb 20, 2002
    Posts: 12,031

    KIRK!
    Member

    That's the actual car. He wants to trade it and cash for the Starliner.
     
  4. MEDDLER1
    Joined: Jun 1, 2006
    Posts: 1,590

    MEDDLER1
    Member

    Coil spring rear should be easy to bag,The front doesnt look to complicated and there is tons of room in the trunk for a tank and stuff.
     

  5. MEDDLER1
    Joined: Jun 1, 2006
    Posts: 1,590

    MEDDLER1
    Member

    Nice!!& cash to boot?Its a nice car for sure I hope he makes a great cash offer for ya!
    I will say this though,the one complaint that i keep hearing is the trannys suck.Havent dealt with that issue yet,but im sure I will soon.The car we have runs now,so we will see.
     
  6. One con I can think of is, they are nowhere near as badass looking as a '60 Starliner.
     
  7. zman
    Joined: Apr 2, 2001
    Posts: 16,730

    zman
    Member
    from Garner, NC

    low points are the dynaflow and the torque tube. high points are styling and the Nailhead. Unless you got real lucky and it's a 3 on the tree. But it does look really good from the pics.
     
  8. phukinartie
    Joined: Oct 8, 2008
    Posts: 965

    phukinartie
    Member

    I don't know either way, But dayum that car is purrrtay!
     
    Last edited: Nov 11, 2009
  9. rocket8
    Joined: Sep 14, 2006
    Posts: 621

    rocket8
    Member
    from antioch CA

    +1
    i have a 55 roadmaster, and the dynaflow is sluggish (but its a dual pitch tranny, and if you start in LOW and shift into DRIVE you can take off pretty quick off the line)

    specials and supers and clean, and id say GO FOR IT!

    ive got a ton of extra buick literature if you ever need any, but im sure you wont have a problem with any of it!
     
  10. Zephyr3789
    Joined: Sep 10, 2007
    Posts: 312

    Zephyr3789
    Member

    Sorry I have no information to help, but that car is bad!
     
  11. PhatCaddy
    Joined: May 31, 2005
    Posts: 1,453

    PhatCaddy
    Member

    Trade it for the GT Bentley on the background!! J/K
    Seriously you have seen how the market is for your beautiful Starliner. Very hard to sell for straight $$. If the Buick is as clean as it looks it may be worth the trade, and the Buick would be easier to find a buyer if you wanted to sell that later.

    Just my 2 cents, good luck,

    Brian
     
  12. kustomdlux
    Joined: Dec 27, 2004
    Posts: 149

    kustomdlux
    Member


    +2
    I had a 56 with the Dynaflow and enclosed d-line. Super easy to lower but not so easy on parts. Found a place back east that had parts for that era Buick, but every time I spoke with them they were pricks. Love the styling, hate the drivetrain (except the nailhead). If it has the Dynaflow, it leaks. If it doesn't leak, your probably low on fluid.
     
  13. VAPHEAD
    Joined: May 13, 2002
    Posts: 3,257

    VAPHEAD
    BANNED

    I forget what years..but the tredlevac power brakes cost bucks to fix.
     
  14. CJ Steak
    Joined: Sep 23, 2008
    Posts: 1,377

    CJ Steak
    Member
    from Texas

    GOD that car is gorgeous. I've always been a two tone red and white kinda guy, but that thing just looks sinister in red and black.

    Wow.
     
  15. zman
    Joined: Apr 2, 2001
    Posts: 16,730

    zman
    Member
    from Garner, NC

    I thought they were a 56 thing
     
  16. PRIMERDAVE
    Joined: Jun 8, 2005
    Posts: 895

    PRIMERDAVE
    Member

    I've had mine going on ten years now....so I'm kinda partial to them....yes the tranny will leak but it can be taken care of....and no parts are not a problem to find if you know where to look....mine has been bagged for about a little over a year now and I've driven it to Santa Maria, Sacramento and San Fransico with no problems to date...so i would say go for it....and if you need info on parts vendors gimme a call...
     
  17. I think the biggest issue with them is having the torque tube you need to add trailing arms or somesuch to locate any open drive rearend you want to swap into it, should you decide to go that route. Motor wise you're limited to the 264 and 322, bell bolt pattern changes for '57 with the 364, although I suppose if you swapped in a later (57-60) motor and trans you could make it work. But its coils all around so lowering is no big deal. If you just want a mostly stock cruiser, it should be fine, although the Dynaflow may not be your cup of tea to drive. I've never driven one, so I don't know how they feel to compare to a regular automatic.
     
  18. zman
    Joined: Apr 2, 2001
    Posts: 16,730

    zman
    Member
    from Garner, NC

    The bellhousing on the dynaflows unbolts from the transmission, you can use the bellhousing from a 57 to put a 364 right in there.
     
  19. I've had two of them. The chassis is pretty much 1930s-1940 GM technology. Closed drive-train, lever action shocks, really lousy brakes and handling like a hog on ice. Dyna-flows are sluggish by nature. The 322 is a good little motor. In my experience I've found 55s to be highly susceptible to rust so inspect carefully.
    On the other hand they're flashy, comfortable and make great cruisers. I enjoyed mine.
    Your Skyliner is much rarer than a 55 Buick Special so I presume the cash terms should be very attractive.
     
  20. citcapp
    Joined: Oct 18, 2008
    Posts: 172

    citcapp
    Member
    from Bothell WA

    I have met two people who have installed buick 455's with turbo 400's. both were clean looking swaps and both hauled ass as well. Just a thought
     
  21. Beautiful car tri year Buick's and Olds look way better than their Chevy cousins. As nice as that car is he must still be waving some heavy $$$ in your mug in order to drive away in your Ford. Hope it works out for you. One other cool thing is the Poor Boys paint sheme ha ha
     
  22. Bigdaddy
    Joined: Dec 12, 2002
    Posts: 2,203

    Bigdaddy
    BANNED

    How much cash we talking!!! 0-10K 11-20K 21-30K 40K plus.....
     
  23. Gambino_Kustoms
    Joined: Oct 14, 2005
    Posts: 6,561

    Gambino_Kustoms
    Alliance Vendor

    nice car
     
  24. Gambino_Kustoms
    Joined: Oct 14, 2005
    Posts: 6,561

    Gambino_Kustoms
    Alliance Vendor

    ditto
     
  25. teddyp
    Joined: May 28, 2006
    Posts: 3,197

    teddyp
    Member

    the 55-57 buick are super nice cars my buddy has this 56 with a 401 400 trans and a 9 " ford rear nailheads are great i say yes
     

    Attached Files:

  26. put me down for +2
     
  27. Flat Roy
    Joined: Nov 23, 2007
    Posts: 533

    Flat Roy
    Member

    The second car in my life was 55 Century. My Dad was a Buick tunup man all the days of his working life. I remember several of the things that he did to improve what I thought was a fine ride. #1 changed the front spindels to 56. The 55 had no caster. the 56 did and handeled much better.#2 later aluminum brake drums, hugh improvement on brakes. #3 56 dinaflow beafed up with switch the pitch in low range. A set of antipump up lifters and later model aluminum rockers improved engine performance some what. I still drool every time I see one as nice as yours. Mine was cobalt blue.
     
  28. belair
    Joined: Jul 10, 2006
    Posts: 9,013

    belair
    Member

    I have a 55 2dht with a 264 and a 3-speed. It is a lot of fun. It's like driving a couch. That car is absolutely beautiful. Red and black just kills. I didn't like the lever action shocks on the back of mine and put in modern ones. I don't know how well a good set of lever actions work; they can be rebuilt, but not cheap. Tail light housings are pot-metal and real hard to find, headlight rigs are pot metal too, but not hard to get. I would imagine the ones on that car are perfect, but still something to be aware of. The cars tend to rust out where the stainless comes to a V, but that's probably not a problem on that beauty.
     
    Last edited: Nov 11, 2009
  29. sawzall
    Joined: Jul 15, 2002
    Posts: 4,721

    sawzall
    Member

    I worked on and drove a 60 buick a few miles..

    in 60 buick still had the stupid auto trans and torque tube..

    ask the seller if the c/v u joint whatchamacallit leaks..

    if it doesn't yet.. it will..

    and it will suck..

    i believe later buick open drive center sections bolt into the earlier housing.. dont know about the 56 though..
     
  30. Shawn M
    Joined: Sep 10, 2008
    Posts: 408

    Shawn M
    Member

    Fatman makes dropped spindles for the front, I'm hoping to bag my 53 soon, I believe the underpinnings are similar, theres a two link setup on the rear with coils. My 53 is currently dropped with Fatman spindles (uprights) in the front, and Chevelle springs front and rear.
     

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2021 The Jalopy Journal: Steal our stuff, we'll kick your teeth in. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy.

Atomic Industry
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2014 XenForo Ltd.