1933 Buick sighting "on the street"

[Fletch]

Last month while walking thru Dobbs Ferry I encountered this magnificent old daughter of Flint, Michigan (minus hood!) stopped at a light. Luckily our local lights are loooong and I was able to snap a few phone pix.

 

[Sefton]

Even "topless" she's got class to spare! Thanks for sharing the pictures.

 

[Flivver]

In my opinion, car design reached its zenith in 1932-33. Aerodynamic design was just beginning, but cars still had the classic proportions that placed the radiator over the front wheel centerline and consequently pushed the passenger compartment as far rearward as possible. Not ideal for space utilization, but *so* great to look at.

And this '33 Buick is a prime example. Thanks for posting it!

 

[AmateisGal]

That car is beautiful. Wow. Wish I could talk hubby into buying one like that, but he's obsessed with getting an El Camino.

 

[David Conwill]

Even "topless" she's got class to spare!

Agreed, though if they're going to run around like that often, they need to retrofit "Compound Carburetion" from a 1940s model. It looks a bit "Howard Hughes" right now, doesn't it?

-Dave

 

[Samsa]

Thanks for posting those. I'm not sure what happened to aesthetics as far as car design goes, but I wish it would come back.

 

[MrNewportCustom]

Beautiful! Simply beautiful! :eusa_clap


Lee

 

[Fletch]

In my opinion, car design reached its zenith in 1932-33. Aerodynamic design was just beginning, but cars still had the classic proportions that placed the radiator over the front wheel centerline and consequently pushed the passenger compartment as far rearward as possible. Not ideal for space utilization, but *so* great to look at.

Space utilization? Is that a problem when you have an interior bigger than some people's bathrooms?

 

[Flivver]

Space utilization? Is that a problem when you have an interior bigger than some people's bathrooms?

True...but these cars had long wheelbases. By moving the engine and passenger compartment forward (as done on the Chrysler Airflow, for example) it was possible to move the back seat forwad and down; off the rear axle centerline. This allowed a lower roofline and improved ride comfort...and a wider back seat.

So the reason for moving everything forward in 1934 was to reduce vehicle height and improve ride quality. But, today, if a car designer wants to add wheelbase to achieve a visually pleasing set of proportions he/she will find it difficult to get that design approved because increased wheelbase adds vehicle weight...not desirable when fuel economy matters. It's been done on specialty cars like the current Mustang and up-coming Camaro...but not on mainstream sedans or trucks.

 

[rmrdaddy]

But, today, if a car designer wants to add wheelbase to achieve a visually pleasing set of proportions he/she will find it difficult to get that design approved because increased wheelbase adds vehicle weight...not desirable when fuel economy matters

True to an extent, but only if you are thinking "inside the box"
The current Jaguar XJ has an aluminum monocoque chassis and an alminium body. To this end, The XJ weighs in around 3700 pounds, while a close competitor, the BMW 745 iL is a whopping 4300 pounds.
I'm of the opinion that many late model manufacturers will need to look long and hard at weight saving materials VERY SOON in order to boost overall fuel MPG....


Oh, and beautiful car ! Nice catch!

 

[StraightEight]

A grand old dame of the roadways. A terrible year for Buick, 1933, with calender year production of just 45,150. Except that it was the year Harlow Herbert Curtice took over the division. It would take four years to fully revive the brand, but Buick's best days were still ahead. Note that Buick had overhead valves on its 8s more than a decade before Packard and 20 years before Ford. As this one is missing the hoods, we can see that it's also missing the spark plug cover. It's a common item to be lost--generations of mechanics take them off to pull the plugs and then misplace them--and they are quite hard to find as they tended to change from year to year.

The first alloy XJ we tested was 3838 pounds, the last Super V-8 was 4080 pounds. Point taken about it being lighter than a 7 series (the short-wheelbase 745i was 4545 lbs, the 750Li was 4620 lbs.

We all should be driving aluminum cars, except that aluminum is expensive, about 2x the cost of steel unit-body to unit-body, and, being a commodity, it's price is unpredictable. Car companies hate unpredictability when planning a product with a five to ten-year lifespan. And it's fussy to handle. The stamping shop at Castle Bromwich that produces the exterior panels for the XJ runs at positive pressure lest dust mar the delicate stampings. Aluminum welding, riveting, and gluing are slower, more power intensive, and thus more expensive than sheet steel welding. Storing and handling aluminum replacement panels is more challenging and generates higher losses from damage.

A space frame of aluminum extrusions laser-welded to cast alloy nodes is the most elegant solution for small cars, but Audi, which is the global leader in aluminum car construction right now, proved how difficult it is to extrude near-net piece shapes with the failed Audi A2. The new R8 is a brilliant execution of the concept, but at an exotic-car price. Thanks to improvements in high-strength grades and design optimization, steel has closed some of the weight gap on aluminum and will probably always be king in car construction. If you want to blame someone for the creep in car weights, blame your government and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) and their utterly inane 45-mph barrier test. Each model-changeover adds 100-150 extra pounds that loaded on solely to meet new regulations and IIHS ratings.

 

[Fletch]

True...but these cars had long wheelbases.

Did they ever. And with that tacked-on trunk, out past the visible back end of the car, it would be like backing out the Ile de France.

In my opinion, car design reached its zenith in 1932-33.

I'm inclined to agree. Was there ever a production car as spare, elegant and unpretentious as the 1932 Ford?

Not for years to come. Maybe the Karmann Ghia.

And...just my philosophy here...things from the pit of the depression years are precious for their rarity, and as a reminder that life goes on and values like beauty, art, and craft are unsinkable. Even the legacy of a fatal hunger march on the plant can't take away from that first Ford V-8.

That's why my favorite music, clothing, culture in general, are from the 30s. The material culture itself was a triumph of the spirit.

 

[Flivver]

And...just my philosophy here...things from the pit of the depression years are precious for their rarity, and as a reminder that life goes on and values like beauty, art, and craft are unsinkable. Even the legacy of a fatal hunger march on the plant can't take away from that first Ford V-8.

That's why my favorite music, clothing, culture in general, are from the 30s. The material culture itself was a triumph of the spirit.

I seem to remember that around the time he took office, FDR suggested to American business that they do their best to create irresistable products. This would entice cash strapped consumers to part with their scarce dollars and therefore put more people back to work.

I find the design of most depression-era products to be incredible. And, Fletch, your example of the 1932 Ford is one of the best...a truly timeless design...simple, elegant and inexpensive.

 

[Flivver]

True to an extent, but only if you are thinking "inside the box"
The current Jaguar XJ has an aluminum monocoque chassis and an alminium body. To this end, The XJ weighs in around 3700 pounds, while a close competitor, the BMW 745 iL is a whopping 4300 pounds.
I'm of the opinion that many late model manufacturers will need to look long and hard at weight saving materials VERY SOON in order to boost overall fuel MPG....

QUOTE]

We*will* see a rapid increase in the use of weight saving materials in the near future to meet CAFE requirements and consumer demand for improved fuel economy.

But expect to see the price of new cars rise sharply over the next few years. The easy ways to improve fuel economy were employed years ago. What's left are expensive light weight materials and powertrain technologies...thus the anticipated price increases.

And regarding the need for "out of the box thinking", I fully agree with you. With an emotion-driven consumer product like a car, sometimes aesthetics should over-rule efficiency. I was just echoing what I hear all the time from automotive engineers. I was part of the early design strategy team on the current Mustang where one of our main objectives was to give the car classic proportions. I think the results speak for themselves.