Clash of the Classics - 1949 Buick Roadmaster vs. 1949 Cadillac Series 62

[@tjmusa]

in 54 the parents drove a gloss black with blood red interior 49 buick roadmaster convertable. father just returned from Korea and wanted a new car. so he ordered a 54 buick roadmaster riviera with a factory continental kit. My mother cried when they left the 49 and drove the 54 buick home. she said it sat on the car lot for only a week. she said 2 collage kids heading to the west coast came thru saw it, bought it and drove it away. she was happy she wouldnt see anyone around town driving her buick. she said the 49 was the most gorgeus car. we still have the 54 riviera and the lasalles. they are made to last for ever. keep up the good work like your show.

[@tattyshoesshigure5731]

That cream coloured Buick drophead @ 0.45 is absolutely beautiful!

[@seanmeisner3190]

!949 is possibly my favorite postwar model year for both Cadillac and Buick. They're among my favorite postwar American cars. My dream garage would include the hardtop and convertible versions of the Roadmaster and the 62 Series, along with a Roadmaster wagon and a Fleetwood 60 Special. I very much enjoyed your presentation, comparison and above all, appreciation for these truly fine cars...very well done, sir! :)

[@youssefhakim1055]

I agree with you for the 1949 models. I like the 1957 too.

[@richardfeibel3154]

in 1953 when i was 14 yrs old i went to work in a standard oil gas station and the owner my boss owned a 1949 cadillac series 62 club coupe fastback in light metalic green, buick called the fastback a sedanet. and in 1954 when i was a senior 17yrs old my friend bought a 1949 buick super conv in black with a black leather interior and it had stick shift but power windows power seat. both cars rode like a cloud no performance stiff suspension. on saturdays i washed cars at work and usually 20/ 21 total by hand.including the white walls for $.65 an hour.

[@paulthomasshepherd5156]

1949 Buick had a Roadmaster Riviera model. I had one. Leather headliner had chrome strips across it. Power seats, power this power that inside.

[@pudnbug]

I agree that the 1949 Cadillac was a beautiful car. In about 1962 my best friend owned a fastback model, and it rode like a dream!

[@pilsudski36]

My first car was a 1949 Roadmaster with Dynaflow. It was on its last legs, but no rust, no dents, and a good interior. I couldn't drive it on the expressway, but it was great for dates and beach trips. It lasted for eighteen months, and then the timing chain went. Sixteen years old, and I felt like a Persian king driving that old Buick - good times!

[@glennweaver3014]

Cadillac and Buick from '49 were outstanding cars and a preview of great cars to come from both of these manufacturers.

[@chuck8835]

My first car was a 1948 Roadmaster convert. First year for Dynaflow. 8 mpg. The Cadillac tail fins first showed up on the 1948. Looked much the same as the 49 but a very different dash. The 48 still had the flathead V8.

[@michaelbenardo5695]

Also, the 48 Cad also had a fastback model, as did all GM divisions by 1941, except Chevrolet, the small Pontiac, and the small Olds, who got it in 1942.

[@davidbolt5113]

The Cadillac emblem on the chromed exhaust pipe is true luxury.

[@bmeierkord]

Pleasantly surprised to see a photo of my actual car at the end of your video. That picture was taken prior to the sale when I purchased over 3 years ago. Outstanding video!!!

[@bomaite1]

My dad had about a 1952 Roadmaster. Yellow and white. I remember washing and waxing that car every Sunday. My job was to wax those ports. It was really great to be able to help as a little kid. The next car was a Bonneville, and I remember even at that young age being disappointed in how cheap it looked. No ports, either.

[@josephdunlap6747]

Truly spectacular! Both are prime examples of classic elegance! Bravo to the original GM! 🙏🙏

[@kermitefrog64]

I need to work on my 1955 Caddy but what great cars the cars were at that time.

[@williamegler8771]

My grandfather was a cardiac surgeon and he drove Buicks exclusively for decades. He felt Cadillac was too ostentatious although he did buy my grandmother one for her fiftieth birthday. Buicks of the era conveyed success but wasn't in your face like Cadillac.

[@JohnnyCNote]

This reminds me of my grandfather, who was a factory trained Buick mechanic, and had his 30th Buick. Beyond that, he had other cars, too. The main one I recall was the '64 Riviera, his last, with the massive V8. After he died my grandmother sold it and bvvessvny of the dearly departed to rotate in their graves…

[@tomtransport]

I owned a 1951 Buick Roadmaster Convertible that was quite the show boat of the hood.

[@edwardluth7740]

It was beautiful. Road master. My Grandparents bought Roadmasters all through the 1950s. Grandpa loved these cars. He thought they beat Cadillac.

[@Random-rt5ec]

$2,600 retail price in comparison right around this time my parents paid $3,100 for their 1st home. Today that $3,100 starter home sells in the $600,000 dollar range.

[@heatherwood2664]

my grandpa had a 49 Cad, and what impressed me as a little boy, was the location of the gas cap (you pressed the button at the bottom of the tail light) :wow:

[@steveperry1344]

i just found your channel and really enjoyed the video. i grew up around that time period and got to see alot of the classics like these up close and personal. my whole family like my dad, mom, aunts and uncles were all GM owners. my dad was a modest chevy guy like me but everyone else had chevys, pontiacs, buicks, oldsmobiles and caddys. i always liked the look of those old buicks but that 49 caddy was just gorgeous and fast looking.

[@guycraig2030]

Those 1949 Buicks,,get better and better, The Roadmaster for sure,,,in 49, my best friends father, came home one day with a dark blue RM Sedan, we could not go near it,,or!!! Beautiful all..Cadillac is also a beautiful design,,The buick had more models,,RM, Super think the special was still the older style prewar

[@rosewhite---]

49s had super back ends. Detroit seemed to forget about car's needing a nice rear end!

[@johnkendall6962]

I loved the looks of the Buicks from that era. While not a high horsepower engine the Buick straight 8 was smooth and reliable. The Dyno flow was very smooth but also used some of the horsepower. The over head valve V-8 in the Cadillac became the most common type of engine for the next 40 years and is still popular in trucks and performance cars.. The 4 speed hydra-matic in the Caddy was not as smooth but was probably the better transmission. A lot of things we take for granted on today's cars were starting to be introduced at this time. a 1949 car has more in common with a 1979 car than a 1919 car would with the 49s Great era for American cars

[@katana258]

dyno flow trans would spin the input shaft brg and the oil hole return would be blocked and the oil would be pushed out of the frt seal ..

[@frankgiaquinto1571]

john kendall - The Hydramatic was far better,IMHO - Much better acceleration, and better fuel economy as well - The only thing good about the Dynaflow was its smoothness.....

[@johnkendall6962]

@@frankgiaquinto1571 Not many Buick owners cared about acceleration or fuel mileage they wanted a very smooth drive which the Dyno-flow did. The first generation started in drive. The only way to get low was to use the selector lever. That's where it got its dyna-slush name . Later versions started in low and had a kick down with much better performance. Actually if Buick had built it with a locking torque converter it would have been great with gas mileage about the same as the Hydra -matic and a much smoother operation.

[@michaelbenardo5695]

Yup, the HydraMatic was much more efficient as far as performance.

[@Benjaminwolf]

My mom and dad had a 49 Roadmaster, maroon. Traded it in on a 55 Century. They drove to California from Tulsa more than once in the Roadmaster.

[@fordtruxdad5155]

..."professionals who couldn't quite reach that Cadillac territory." That wasn't necessarily the reason a lot of people drove Buicks. Many well-to-do people drove Buicks because they felt Cadillacs were too ostentatious. My uncle, a wealthy merchant, could have driven anything he wanted, but always drove Buicks, usually Invictas or LeSabres.

[@warringtonfaust1088]

That wasn't uncommon in my family either. BTW, the "name" for the ports in the hood is "cruiserline ventiports". As kids, because of the weight, we referred to "Roadmasters" as "Roadsmashers".

[@ethelryan257]

My grandfather as well. He felt it would make people think we were overcharging. I do drive a Cadillac, a lovingly restored vintage '74 Sedan DeVille. I wouldn't be caught dead in the pregnant hippopotamuses Cadillac now offers.

[@edwardluth7740]

My Grandparents were loaded also and drove Buick Roadmasters. Why no Cadillac? Grandpa said Buick was better built. Simple as that and from my research I believe him to be correct.

[@edwardpate6128]

Exactly! Buicks were about understated luxury.

[@edvardgarabedian200]

The difference between the two is that the Buick is used by the hitmen whereas the Cadillac is used by the Capos and The Don

[@jeremythompson9122]

The coolest car on the road in 1949 was an Olds Rocket 88 or a V8 Mercury Coupe. Love the 49-51 Merc's. My dad had a 50 Mercury convertible. He's still got pictures of that car and still talks about it. He also had a 39 Ford Coupe at one time with a 1957 312 Police Interceptor in it that he got out of a wrecked 57 Ford Custom Highay Patrol Car that was in my grandfather's junkyard. He put dual 4 barrels on the 312 and also put in a 4 speed transmission. I love hot rods like that

[@shicoff1398]

james dean merc's! 1949-51 Worth big money now.

[@rogerstill71]

I've always felt Buick was the best value of the GM cars. Cadillacs may have more bells and whistles, but no more real luxury than a Roadmaster.

[@rhythmrivertrio]

I have a 49 Cadillac, happy days

[@domingodeanda233]

That was pretty damn good, thanks.

[@farshimelt]

In high school, 1956-57, I had a series of 1949 cars, incl.; Oldsmobile 88 convertible, Mercury 2 door and a Plymouth business coupe. My stepfather was a used car salesman and kept changing out the cars when he had a buyer. My favorite was the Plymouth, it was a 2 seater and had a trunk long enough to lay a full size string bass in it. It was traded in by 2 Lesbians and was painted pink with a purple padded naugahyde dashboard. One day I was stepping out of the car and hit my shoe on something. I looked down and saw a metal cap attached to a pipe. I took off the metal cap, started the car and it roared like a midget racer. I had discovered the cutout. It being illegal, because of the noise, I put the cap back. Each of those cars had a horror story to go with it. In 1960, just out of the army, I bought a 1949 Buick. I drove it up and down the hills of San Francisco for a year then, in L.A. for 6 months, before selling it to a friend for $120. Never had any problems with it.

[@waltertaljaard1488]

The 1949 Caddilac 62 was my dad's first car in 1962 when he acquired his driving license. Beautiful automobile! Problem was its gigantic fuel consumption; 1 liter every 3 kilometers. Which wasn't suitableat all for the budget of a Dutch bricklayer and family father.

[@aaronwilliams6989]

Two of my favorite classic cars. Two of a great many.

[@markbirkeland5643]

The 1949 Roadmaster convertiable would be my favorite car of all time. Of course I was born that year.

[@jimzaharia5327]

LOVE this video! (Tho actually the Buick's portholes were called "ventiports"- not "ventports"- just sayin') :)

[@alanstrong55]

1949 was such a fine model year for almost any American car make.

[@vladimirprovotorov580]

Beautiful cars !

[@jeffgolden253]

My first car in high school was a '49 Buick Super convertible. Paid $100 for it. Comparing '49 Buick and '49 Cadillac is an unfair comparison. Cadillac had its new overhead valve V-8 engine (that became the hot-rodders' favorite), and Hydramatic transmission. Buick has its straight 8 and the Dynaflow transmission that worked fine in tanks during World War II, but lacked rapid acceleration.

[@mikekaatman3194]

The Buicks look sleeker though.

[@BitchinSpectre]

6:14 brown Studebaker lark doing what it does best...being obscured in the background...well the second best thing...but it's probably rusting too.

[@jeffkarrow6924]

Overhead valve V-8's came in '49 Caddies and one "Rocket" Olds only in 1949. They could finally shorten the front hood!

[@edwardpate6128]

Nobody ever complained about the 320 Buick straight 8 being "underpowered". Especially the pre-war dual carb models.

[@michaelbenardo5695]

It was the most powerful car you could buy in 1941 and 42, and one of the most powerful in 1938 - 40.

[@stevennelson9024]

I liked the Lincoln with the V-12 back than .

[@MostlyBuicks]

1949, the birth of GM's "Hardtop" --two door pillarless coupe without frames around the windows. Also known as the hardtop convertible (as opposed to the convertible hardtop).

[@samsum3738]

They are straight out of a film noir .

[@jimwelsh1908]

Both cars are made by General Motors and they will have equal Amounts of special amenities But you would have to order it in your package when you order the car from the factory. MR WELSH

[@matthrivnak6572]

I like em both

[@paulwieben4948]

The saying at that time was : "When Better Cars Are Built , Buick Will Build Them" . (I have a Buick advertisement poster) One year later (1950) there was a picture in a Buick add that showed a 50 "Special Fastback" and said it's the One Millionth Buick !! (ps: I've been a car buff all my life and I'm 87) . I've had many makes including a perfect used 46 Cad '62' then a used 50 '88' 2dr Holiday Hardtop while in high school , (very fast) and i still have a beautiful 54 Chry Imperial 2dr Newport (with original working Airtemp ac) and Kelsey Hayes ww , and of course 331hemi eq w 2sp Powerflite . Many big beauties have come and gone , sadly , cant keep'em all , but of all the cars , this was my 'keeper' for the last 55 yrs ! Very rare and rides smooth and quiet like all those big beautiful monsters of that Era !! Even at 4700lbs it can break those big rear tires loose on blacktop . I did once in about 1970 take it up slightly over 120mph on hwy#3 in Canada while I actually had a OPP in the passenger seat --lol !! He said , "oh my God , and they want us to catch you Yanks with a Pariesian !? ( 6cy Canadian Pontiac) it was a Pontiac body on a Chev chassis and motor -- lol ! Wish I had another 55yrs to go , but afraid the clock is count'in down . Enjoy !!

[@moboutmen]

Greatest car name ever......Roadmaster

[@Parrot_Toucan]

My favorite car

[@califdad4]

49 was the first year for both the ventports and dynaflow, but Cadillac has the all new overhead valve V8. Buicks were what doctors and other business owners purchased because it was as nice as a Cadillac but not concerned as expensive and showy. The odd thing about the 1949 Cadillac is surprisingly the bathtub 49 Packard outsold it

[@balesjo]

In my eyes, that Buick Roadmaster is a thing of beauty, either hardtop sedan or convertible. Very sleek. The 49 Cadillacs are also a step into the future after the country's auto designs were frozen at the early 40s through the war years and during the time it took for the auto industry to retool for auto production again after years of war production. The Cadillac 62 is a beauty as well, and seems to be a model that has been restorations with engine, drive train, and interior updates to bring it into the 21st century. But to me, that Buick is pretty perfect as it is!

[@MDavidG1]

I believe that is some very early previously unreleased Rush music I hear at the end of this video.

[@michaelheffernan7528]

You remember that the from the movie Mulholland Falls cops drove a Buick convertible

[@williamcardenassanchez8188]

Hermoso automóvil y buenos motores. Calidad y excelencia.

[@2good2often]

Great style in the Cadillac . There was one at car show I attended 4 yrs ago , The owner had 2 of them . He said they were classic styles but not the easiest to drive . There was no power steering in 49 so parallel parking was not something you wanted to do . Most women would not be able to park it or want to . The fast back did not allow for any amount to trunk space so forget the idea of a suitcase back there . He installed power steering and that made the car actually pleasant to drive . Airconditioning would also be a nice addition i.

[@douglasmancini4219]

I have a ‘49 sedanette, also commonly called a fastback. With bias ply tires the steering is surprisingly light and it is a delight to drive, very easy and modern In Many respects. Trust me, there is more luggage space in the trunk of a sedanette than most luxury cars built since the turn of the century...

[@bill90405]

Most Main Streets had head in or angle parking then. This is why. Chrysler had the first full-time power steering in 1951.

[@marksandstrom4248]

a bit more precision about transmission terminology is in order, especially given your sponsor - a torque converter may be a "fluid coupling" but not all fluid couplings are torque converters, and this distinction is critical to comparing the older Buick Dynaflow and Cadillac Hydramatic. Dynaflow had a torque converter, and in its early years when that was a big deal, Buick thought driving around without any gear shifting at all would be a good idea. Yes it was for smoothness, but not so much for quietness quickness or economy. Hydamatic's fluid coupling lacked a stator section, thus was not a torque converter, and did need all of its four gears automatically shifting back and forth to give adequate performance. I can't cite any solid data, but I think the '49 Cadillac probably gave much better acceleration and economy than the Buick, even though it had only a little more horsepower. Fluid coupling 4-speed Hydramatics lasted until about 1963-64 in Cadillacs and Pontiacs, dying out at the same time that regulations forced Reverse gear to be next to Park in all cars. Fluid couplings persisted in Mercedes-Benzes into the 1970s, which were 4-speed automatics with the "extra" gear being a really low ratio rather than overdrive. Dynaflow evolved in the direction of becoming a fully automatic transmission during the 50s and 60s, and about the time Hydramatic died, Buick started to share GM's new TurboHydramatic transmissions, which were great, but much more similar to Ford / Chrysler / AMC automatics.

[@donreinke5863]

What you didnt mention was that the Dynaflow was the first mass produced CVT (although lacking overdrive capabilities and not using a belt drive system) The Cord of the 1930s had a CVT available but it was not a design that held up well under use and was really not successful. American Motors (as well as International Harvester light truck and Scout transmissions) were mostly Borg Warner until 1972 when they were replaced by the Chrysler Torqueflite, (the Torqueflite using the modern common sun gear Simpson gearset) and the AMC automatics were nearly identical to the Fordomatic (1951-57) and Cruiseomatic units. Both were 3 speed although not everyone knew that the low gear was available in the Fordomatic IF the accelerator was fully depressed OR it was manually selected. Starting 1958, the Cruiseomatic would always start in low if the "green dot" position was selected and would start in second if the "white dot" position was used. The first Ford C-6 automatic in 1966 only also used the "green dot-white dot" selector positions being replaced by "select shift" in 1967 and subsequent models

[@marksandstrom4248]

@@donreinke5863 I don't think your definition of "CVT" matches the general accepted use of that term. A Buick Dynaflow replaced all of the torque multiplication of a set of mechanical reduction gears, with only the slippage of the hydraulics of its torque converter - which is part of the function of all torque converter automatics of the last 70+ years. We don't call those conventional automatics "CVTs with added gears" even though they do achieve some torque multiplication from their torque converters. Neither do I agree that the Cord had a CVT - it had a preselector transmission, which is a close relative of a regular manual transmission, with added servo mechanisms. Preselector transmissions were also in various rather obscure pre-war European cars - see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preselector_gearbox Thanks for all that Ford / Chrysler / AMC detail; I was quite a car geek even as a kid, but I was in a mostly-GM family so I had little exposure to the other makes.

[@donreinke5863]

@@marksandstrom4248 I dont consider the mechanism by which variable ratios are achieved.as the definition of continuously variable. Successively locking (and releasing) stators still provide infinite ratios up to 1-1 That said, a little more on Ford transmissions as well as Chrysler.. Replacement of the factory Simpson gearset found in the C-6 heavy duty unit with one from the newer electronically controlled E4OD transmission will provide a low gear ratio of 2.74 to 1 vs the C-6 first gear ratio of 2.40-1, something Ford didnt do from the factory but is easily accomplished during overhaul. Additionally, swapping a 4R70W gearset (this is the Ravagneau type) utilizing long and short planet pinions into the earlier Ford AOD (and AODE) units will produce a low gear ratio of 2.84-1 rather than the stock 2.40-1, but in doing so the dual path lockup feature of the AOD is lost. The Ford AOD, AODE,and 4R70W are actually continued evolution of the Fordomatic, continuing through the Cruiseomatic and finally the MX/FMX which differed from the earlier transmissions through the deletion of the rear pump rendering push starting impossible. Chryslers A999, a variant of the A-904 light duty Torqueflite also provided a lower first gear ratio, which is also found in the A-500 light duty overdrive unit. The 618 is the pinnacle of heavy duty old school Torqueflite development and is commonly found behind the Cummins diesel in Dodge trucks. Chrysler automatics had push start capability through 1965 after which its rear pump was deleted as with the Ford units

[@michaelbenardo5695]

@@marksandstrom4248 You are quite correct.

[@cliffordkiehl3959]

At this time the GM divisions had their own engine plants. If you bought a Buick you were assured of getting a Buick engine and the same for Cadillac.

[@jimjardine4705]

I agree it is so cool!

[@slicksnewonenow]

You get points for pronouncing 'sedanette' correctly! Seems like a lot of people can't, along with the word 'console', for some reason. Hey! I love stockers, kustoms, customs, hotrods, resto-mods, rat rods... all of 'em... But man, some of the modifications that I see people do to otherwise NICE cars are pretty questionable, no? Doesn't that drive ya nuts?👀

[@durandjohnson1321]

Harley Earl had a lot to do with the design!... he worked for GM back in the day!

[@herrunsinn774]

08:17 I noticed some artistic renderings of the 49 Caddy showed no split windshield, while it's split in all the actual photos. Did a few of the 49s have a seamless windshield or did the artists drawing the cars take a few liberties?

[@warringtonfaust1088]

The one piece windshield came in 1950. I am not sure the fastback coupe was produced by Cadillac in '50, Buick made it.

[@michaelbenardo5695]

@@warringtonfaust1088 They both had it in 49 and earlier.

[@talclark9552]

Hey Donny do you still have a podcast? Listened all the time but doesn't come up anymore. Good video thanks

[@Horsepower4anHour]

HiTal, thanks for asking. I discontinued the podcast last year, it got a bit too demanding for me. I own and operate an automatic transmission shop which consumes much of my time and energy. As of now, I have committed to creating the clash videos. I enjoy it and it is not as demanding as the radio show and podcast episodes. Thanks again for the kind words.

[@Samuelfish2k]

@@Horsepower4anHour Appreciate the reply. These videos are good. 👍🏽

[@musclecarfan74]

I have to pick the Roadmaster as my favorite.

[@imagrandpa]

The doctor’s car!

[@dondesnoo1771]

Dyna wontcha flow dyna wontha go in my 49 roadmaster fireball 8 .🤗

[@tomtransport]

At 7:49 That should be Lockheed P-38 Fighter plane not Fire plane.

[@michaeltroster9059]

My dad bought a 1950 Roadmaster which he had imported because the Roadmadter was not normally for sale in Canada at that time. My dad become ticked off with GM because in 1954 Buick came out with a cheap Buick called the Soecial. In other words GM cheapened the brand and my father bought a Chrysler Imperial in 1956.

[@chuck8835]

The Special came out in 1950.

[@frankgiaquinto1571]

I believe that the Buick Special series began in about 1936 - I believe it was originally called the Series 40, and it was the name of the lowest priced Buick series through 1958. After that,the lowest priced Buick was called the LeSabre.In 1961,the Special name was brought back for a new series of compact Buicks....

[@michaelbenardo5695]

The Special came out in 1934 as the all-new Series 40, officially given the Special name in 1936.

[@drwombat]

Any Buick guys here know anything about a tidbit I saw on an classic car auction TV program it basically stated that for certain very early years Buick(s) on the title or MSO was either a Cadillac insignia and/or titled/known as a Cadillac in the very early years as Buick was not yet a definite and separate entity from Cadillac... Anyone ever hear any info like this? The commentator clearly mentioned this in the auction info and the title was shown with a Cadillac logo on it

[@williamcardenassanchez8188]

Sencillamente lindos automóviles.

[@jimjardine4705]

This is "The One"!!!!!!

[@mnbalfour1985]

New car buyers could still get a factory 3-speed "three-on-the-tree" manual transmission in brand new 1949 Cadillacs. This transmission was ironically called the "standard" transmission, even though fewer than 5% of new 1949 Cadillac buyers ordered their new 1949 Cadillac with the factory 3-speed manual transmission. The other >95% ordered the automatic transmission, which was an optional extra, even though it cost $200 in 1949 money ($2429 in 2022 money).

[@williamcardenassanchez8188]

La vanda Blanca que elegancia

[@jimwelsh1908]

Is one beautiful Buick. MR WELSH

[@gassanbehno7952]

👍 👍 👍 👍 👍 👍 👍 👍

[@rjr-yp9uj]

The Buick Roadmaster was the largest and top of the line. The Cadillac model 62, on the other hand, was the base model. Are you sure the auto trqnsmission had 4 speeds or did it have 3 or even 2 like the rest of GM.

[@ezequielalberto720]

Looks like rain man car

[@kevinlachowicz5997]

Cadillac tailfins started in 1948 not 1949.

[@glynluff2595]

Ah yes, but they were both designed under the supervision of Harley Earl who took his design team to a hush hush showing of the P38 with its twin tail booms during the war. These were the first manifestation of that and fins became the mantra of the next decade. As you say the interiors related to the Y model which became his personal transport for a while. Interesting S C H Davis was more enthusiastic about it than the rather tongue in cheek comment from Italy! Do remember Ferrari made his money from war time rip offs of Cincinnati grinding machines but all is fair in love and war.

[@michaelbenardo5695]

If you manually put it in Lo, you could easily better that 0 - 60 figure. The engine has no problem moving the weight because it has 280 lbs. feet of torque, and it is TORQUE, NOT HORSEPOWER that moves weight.

[@dbbrown1949]

it's the year I was born,they both look a lot better than me but I still prefer the Buick.

[@smacdiesel]

My next classic car will be a 1949 Cadillac.

[@phillipthomas3214]

The road aster was the best car built in America!

[@tomdraper7698]

I almost bought a '49 turtleback Caddy in gray, but I didn't so I killed myself. (My ghost wrote this.

[@steventhorson4487]

Buick!! All the way!!

[@geoben1810]

Anyone remember the Buick slogan; Wouldn't you really rather have a Buick? If I'm not mistaken it was used around the mid to late 60s. ✌

[@Random-rt5ec]

Poetry dressed in steal - Great quote - Build one with a modern chassis/suspension/engine/transmission/electronics and you would have a spectacular vehicle.

[@michaelbenardo5695]

Spectacular? It would have computers and stiff suspension with a rough ride, and you would have to get smog checks. I say NO WAY. Stock is where it's at.

[@Random-rt5ec]

@@michaelbenardo5695 LOL - All valid points.

[@williamcardenassanchez8188]

Siento pena, por lo de hoy.

[@jamesmooney8933]

Buick was always a class car. Cadillac was too pretentious. In the 60's, Cadillac was a premier car.

[@LeventTopcuUYUMLU]

🙏🌹🦋🇹🇷❤️

[@LeventTopcuUYUMLU]

beyaz buik nefis

[@zxtenn]

WOW, 20 seconds to 60, yeah that's SLOWWWWWWWWW, even a VW from the 60's was faster, in my opinion Cadillac was always the car to look up in the 40s -60's--I like the factory Imperial/Mopar comparisons from the 50's here on youtube, when giant beast roamed the earth

[@aaronwilliams6989]

Cars didn't have a lot of power or speed in the 1940's, and that was before interstate highways, so that wasn't too bad for the time.

[@zxtenn]

@@aaronwilliams6989 I am sure most were slower since Cadillac despite their weight had big engines but in those days owners were more concerned with luxury than 0-60 but i agree cars then didnt make much power. My Father had a new 51 V-8 Ford and from what i read was a 100 hp

[@aaronwilliams6989]

@@zxtenn But MAAAN, did they get fast over the next 10 years!

[@marksandstrom4248]

in 1949 few people were thinking or reading about 0-60 acceleration times, so there may be very little solid data to show what a Buick could do that year when in as-new shape. another question is the operation of the Dynaflow transmission, which in normal driving was intended to function as a 1-speed automatic using only the torque converter slip to aid acceleration away from a stop. Dynaflow Buicks did have a low gear that could be manually selected with the "L" detent on the shift quadrant, and I imagine would have greatly aided drag-strip type performance (as well as vital engine braking for hills). So we need to know whether the "20 seconds" came with using "L" or with leaving it in "D" the whole time. I don't have a guess.

[@michaelbenardo5695]

If you started in Lo, it would do 0 - 60 in about 10 seconds, but shifting from Lo to Drive under power would soon ruin the direct-drive clutches.

[@frankgiaquinto1571]

Both are fantastic cars,with each having its own individual styling,engine, and transmission.The Buick has many fine features but,IMHO, the Dynaflow transmission is not one of them.It provides very slow acceleration from a standing start,and fuel economy is quite poor.If I were to own a Buick from this era,I would either switch to a Hydramatic from the same time period,install a modern automatic transmission,or install a manual transmission.That Dynaflow simply has too many drawbacks for driving in today's traffic conditions....

[@michaelbenardo5695]

That is easier said than done. The Buick has a torque tube, and the only HydraMatics that you might be able to use would be those of the 57 Nash or 57 Hudson. It would be easier to convert it to a 3 speed on the column from an earlier model.

[@jimjardine4705]

Gee cars were cheap back then!!!

[@ickoachkov1008]

Би битка

[@vanrozay8871]

those early fins were stupid-looking, detracted from the lines. so the buick is much better looking.

[@michaelbenardo5695]

The fins were FANTASTIC looking. But the Buick is still a beauty.