Difference Between Buick and Cadillac?

Hi, I'd like to add my dollars worth. IF you dont want to read it all thats cool. But Im in a mood to explain it as best as one can, so here goes.

For decades, and even now to an extent... Buick and Cadillac to the untrained or unknowing eye, were different as night and day. The reality tho, was that they both, model for model were pretty much the SAME car. What made them different were the different things the did to a basic body, (body-shell) of a car. Also called a platform (today). At times GM had three, two or even ONE basic bodyshells/platforms that was used up and down the Corporate Ladder (Chevy, Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Buick and Cadillac).

For a AWESOME informative read on the WHOLE story, one must check out "Concept of a Corporation, By Peter Drucker). IT explains how Alfred Sloan, an early president of GM WAS the man who developed the formula that ran the whole industry for almost 60 years. The "price class" structure. And how Buick and Caddy found their places within that structure.

Anyway, this manufactuing genius, of using a common body shell for various models, up to including ALL the major models I believe by 1959, and all the different lines of cars was pretty much perfection. When the process began, in the late 1920's; I think there may have been three basic body-shells/ bodies/platforms. All of them were given SPECIFIC design cues by their The G.M. Art & Colour department which became The GM design center later on. What this did was it allowe each make a LOOK that had a common identity, but a curbstone identity to the average man and woman. For expample one could Tell a Buick form a Cadillac. And, from there the rest of the company helped father it, or mother the concept, and it evolved to what it is today.

Lets just say that Chrysler Corp., Ford Motor Company and the Independents (Like Studebaker-Packard) thru the next 50 years emulated or tried to emulate this formula in one form or another.

So, to that end, in the 1940's and 1950's and really even as late as the 1960's the major differences were always in various powertain options like engines and horsepower, interior differences (a different , but strikingly SIMILAR dashboard for eample), option availability. Beyoned the body differences, trims and etc. That was it.

To you vac heads, look at all the MANY variations fo the basic Singer Twin Fan that had occured between 1964, and the ned of them in the 1990's. It's the same process, just MUCH more complex.....

Cadillac for a decade (the 50's), had pretty much the same cross hatched grille in a specific look, with the tailfins out back. Tho bodies changed, but the look did NOT. Even after the taifins went bye bye they just reimagined them. Even in 1990 you could still buy a Caddy that looked almost like the first one of that body shell did in 1977. It was design cues, used in STRICT continuity that made them all different. Again, each one had it's look.

Moreover, at Buick, they had their styling cues ONLY to be used BY them. One only must think of the portholes , and the long toothy grilles etc, that have come and gone several times. That was a Buick only look. With again, those different grilles and taillights, interiors and options available thru the models. Made Buick seperate.

Heres another ideal: Early on, lets use 1953 as the difinitive year. Buick Had the Dynaflow (DynaFLUSHH), and Caddillac had the Hydramatic Drive (or, the HydraJerk). Buick had a Straight Eight engine, Caddy had a V-8. Buick's straight eight engine was LONGER than a Cadillac V-8 so Buick had longer front fenders, and shorter rear fenders. Buick had those different styling cues that LOOKED G.M., but was all Buick. Then you had the smooth, whooshaway Dynaflow, that did not have the same performance of the Hydramatic Drive. The oldsters of the day loved it, and lots of younger folks did too. I think the Dynaflow is pretty neat too honestly. And it sold better than you would ever dream. Add in that slow revving Buick Fireball straight-8...and you can see why Buick was a great car for SOME, but a horrible car for others.

So, what were the ones who were well moneyed, and the ones who also wanted to go 90 NOW , who did not like the Buick to do???

Go buy a Cadillac!! And, the V-8 in the Cadillac's being SHORTER, translated into shorter FRONT fenders, but we put those sexy tailfins (of the Cadillac)on the LONGER rear fenders, and Voila'. It changed the look of the same basic body dramatically. Add in the other various Caddy desing touches, "trims" not used by anynone but them, and the more powerful V-8 engine, and the much faster shifting, and acting Hydra-Matic, and you could see why some who COULD, would fork over a couple a hundred more for the same car, as what the Bucik dealer down the street was peddling.

This all began to degrade heavily tho by the 1970's. G.M. got real good at slowly taking away the various differences and making all the cars have a V-8, but maybe the same one, and all of them having a common transmission such as the Turbo Hydramatic, and now your left with just design cues, and maybe a few different engine options, but even that was changing.

At some point, only someone who was a blind as ever, could sence that the 1990 Caprice was the same as the Cadillac Fleetwood with different (longer) front and rear fenders, and those (special) Caddy design touches. Beneath both was simply (old school G.M. engineering), and not the unique propositions that once was the Cadillac buying experience. Or Buick for that matter.

THe same thing happened to Lincoln and Imperial too. Excpet Chrysler just axed Imperial etc. etc. Lincoln pretty much stayed with it's own body, but by the 1980's a Town Car, looked like a Grand Marquis (Mercury), looked like a Crown Victoria (Ford)!!! And worse is that they all used the same basic platform, and engines and trannys. MADDENING!!!

THe automakers began to let everyone (all the price classes) have everything, and made the middel and upper price ranges of cars,less and LESS special to own. That more than anything almost ruined G.M. , but moreover ruined the price classes that we once had.

Today to me, Buick and Cadillac shoot for that (high 30-Something ON up) who have cash to flash, and dont WANT to have to buy an import or a "global car". THey want the "ideal" of buying american. Cadillac finally got their poop in a group after about a full decade of losing their "Standard of the World" designation. I have a very good inkling, for their current sales figures and from the special they have put back in their cars. That this is changing back to the way it was. BUt I digress. Hope no one fell asleep.

BUT, that is what USED to be the difference between Buick and Cadillac.


Forum Topics & Rules Manuals & Literature	New users Click-here to sign-up

Post# 232099 5/10/2013 at 19:43 (4,002 days old) by bagintheback (Flagstaff, Arizona)
Checkrate/Likes Why is that General Motors has two luxury brands? Are they directed towards different types of people? Being only exposed to Toyota, the majority of GM vehicles look the same to me. Maybe some of you can explain.... -Nathaniel

Post# 232139 , Reply# 1 5/11/2013 at 01:37 (4,002 days old) by tolivac (Greenville,NC)
Checkrate/Likes Buick was a "lower" level car compared to Cadillacs.Yes,"caddys" aimed to higher income folks-Buicks to less affluent folks.Watched my Mom and Stepdad go from Buicks to Cadillacs and Lincolins.Got to drive the "Caddy" was kinda neat.Forgot what years these were-was in the 90's.

Post# 232148 , Reply# 2 5/11/2013 at 04:43 (4,002 days old) by kenkart ()
Checkrate/Likes 1 *As for the new models...* Neither is a true luxury car, to my mind just about everything made is a BMW or Lexus wannabe, Lincoln Town Car was the last true luxury car and its gone, My definition of a luxury car, 1 Bench seat 2 floating quiet ride 3 steering that can be turned with one finger 4 room for 6 big men 5 NO CONSOLE!! as in a true big car. 6 every known option,including the ones you can not get such as automatic headlight dimmer. 7 examples of TRUE luxury..Lincoln Town Car, Imperials and New Yorkers before 1978 Cadillacs that are rear wheel drive!Now as for the OLD cars, Buicks up thru the early 80s were FINE automobiles, and now GM is left with very little choice between models.sad but true, Give me 98s and Bonnevilles and Caprices all from the 60s!!!

Post# 232153 , Reply# 3 5/11/2013 at 06:22 (4,002 days old) by arh1953 ( River Park, in Port St. Lucie, Florida)
Checkrate/Likes What Kenkart said times 5. The new cars are okay, but I miss the plushmobiles.

Post# 232154 , Reply# 4 5/11/2013 at 06:30 (4,002 days old) by tolivac (Greenville,NC)
Checkrate/Likes The big land barge luxary cars were killed off by the new fuel and mileage regulations-SAD.Now just about all sedans LOOK ALIKE!!!-and about the same size and shape.Cadillac and Lincolin went to SUV's and--pickup trucks.I sort of liked the huge land boats,too.Were nice to ride and drive on long trips.And they were powerful enough to pull a trailer of some sort.-boat or camper.

Post# 232180 , Reply# 5 5/11/2013 at 09:10 (4,002 days old) by dirtmaster37 (Ypsilanti, Michigan USA)
Checkrate/Likes 1 *Difference Between Buick and Cadillac?* Hi, I'd like to add my dollars worth. IF you dont want to read it all thats cool. But Im in a mood to explain it as best as one can, so here goes. For decades, and even now to an extent... Buick and Cadillac to the untrained or unknowing eye, were different as night and day. The reality tho, was that they both, model for model were pretty much the SAME car. What made them different were the different things the did to a basic body, (body-shell) of a car. Also called a platform (today). At times GM had three, two or even ONE basic bodyshells/platforms that was used up and down the Corporate Ladder (Chevy, Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Buick and Cadillac). For a AWESOME informative read on the WHOLE story, one must check out "Concept of a Corporation, By Peter Drucker). IT explains how Alfred Sloan, an early president of GM WAS the man who developed the formula that ran the whole industry for almost 60 years. The "price class" structure. And how Buick and Caddy found their places within that structure. Anyway, this manufactuing genius, of using a common body shell for various models, up to including ALL the major models I believe by 1959, and all the different lines of cars was pretty much perfection. When the process began, in the late 1920's; I think there may have been three basic body-shells/ bodies/platforms. All of them were given SPECIFIC design cues by their The G.M. Art & Colour department which became The GM design center later on. What this did was it allowe each make a LOOK that had a common identity, but a curbstone identity to the average man and woman. For expample one could Tell a Buick form a Cadillac. And, from there the rest of the company helped father it, or mother the concept, and it evolved to what it is today. Lets just say that Chrysler Corp., Ford Motor Company and the Independents (Like Studebaker-Packard) thru the next 50 years emulated or tried to emulate this formula in one form or another. So, to that end, in the 1940's and 1950's and really even as late as the 1960's the major differences were always in various powertain options like engines and horsepower, interior differences (a different , but strikingly SIMILAR dashboard for eample), option availability. Beyoned the body differences, trims and etc. That was it. To you vac heads, look at all the MANY variations fo the basic Singer Twin Fan that had occured between 1964, and the ned of them in the 1990's. It's the same process, just MUCH more complex..... Cadillac for a decade (the 50's), had pretty much the same cross hatched grille in a specific look, with the tailfins out back. Tho bodies changed, but the look did NOT. Even after the taifins went bye bye they just reimagined them. Even in 1990 you could still buy a Caddy that looked almost like the first one of that body shell did in 1977. It was design cues, used in STRICT continuity that made them all different. Again, each one had it's look. Moreover, at Buick, they had their styling cues ONLY to be used BY them. One only must think of the portholes , and the long toothy grilles etc, that have come and gone several times. That was a Buick only look. With again, those different grilles and taillights, interiors and options available thru the models. Made Buick seperate. Heres another ideal: Early on, lets use 1953 as the difinitive year. Buick Had the Dynaflow (DynaFLUSHH), and Caddillac had the Hydramatic Drive (or, the HydraJerk). Buick had a Straight Eight engine, Caddy had a V-8. Buick's straight eight engine was LONGER than a Cadillac V-8 so Buick had longer front fenders, and shorter rear fenders. Buick had those different styling cues that LOOKED G.M., but was all Buick. Then you had the smooth, whooshaway Dynaflow, that did not have the same performance of the Hydramatic Drive. The oldsters of the day loved it, and lots of younger folks did too. I think the Dynaflow is pretty neat too honestly. And it sold better than you would ever dream. Add in that slow revving Buick Fireball straight-8...and you can see why Buick was a great car for SOME, but a horrible car for others. So, what were the ones who were well moneyed, and the ones who also wanted to go 90 NOW , who did not like the Buick to do??? Go buy a Cadillac!! And, the V-8 in the Cadillac's being SHORTER, translated into shorter FRONT fenders, but we put those sexy tailfins (of the Cadillac)on the LONGER rear fenders, and Voila'. It changed the look of the same basic body dramatically. Add in the other various Caddy desing touches, "trims" not used by anynone but them, and the more powerful V-8 engine, and the much faster shifting, and acting Hydra-Matic, and you could see why some who COULD, would fork over a couple a hundred more for the same car, as what the Bucik dealer down the street was peddling. This all began to degrade heavily tho by the 1970's. G.M. got real good at slowly taking away the various differences and making all the cars have a V-8, but maybe the same one, and all of them having a common transmission such as the Turbo Hydramatic, and now your left with just design cues, and maybe a few different engine options, but even that was changing. At some point, only someone who was a blind as ever, could sence that the 1990 Caprice was the same as the Cadillac Fleetwood with different (longer) front and rear fenders, and those (special) Caddy design touches. Beneath both was simply (old school G.M. engineering), and not the unique propositions that once was the Cadillac buying experience. Or Buick for that matter. THe same thing happened to Lincoln and Imperial too. Excpet Chrysler just axed Imperial etc. etc. Lincoln pretty much stayed with it's own body, but by the 1980's a Town Car, looked like a Grand Marquis (Mercury), looked like a Crown Victoria (Ford)!!! And worse is that they all used the same basic platform, and engines and trannys. MADDENING!!! THe automakers began to let everyone (all the price classes) have everything, and made the middel and upper price ranges of cars,less and LESS special to own. That more than anything almost ruined G.M. , but moreover ruined the price classes that we once had. Today to me, Buick and Cadillac shoot for that (high 30-Something ON up) who have cash to flash, and dont WANT to have to buy an import or a "global car". THey want the "ideal" of buying american. Cadillac finally got their poop in a group after about a full decade of losing their "Standard of the World" designation. I have a very good inkling, for their current sales figures and from the special they have put back in their cars. That this is changing back to the way it was. BUt I digress. Hope no one fell asleep. BUT, that is what USED to be the difference between Buick and Cadillac.

Post# 232181 , Reply# 6 5/11/2013 at 09:18 (4,002 days old) by dirtmaster37 (Ypsilanti, Michigan USA)
Checkrate/Likes 1 *Look Closely......* A 1953 Buick Roadmaster. This was the TOL 1953 Buick.

Post# 232182 , Reply# 7 5/11/2013 at 09:19 (4,002 days old) by dirtmaster37 (Ypsilanti, Michigan USA)
Checkrate/Likes 1 *And now the Cadillac* Lok closely. The similarities are RIGHT there..... But so are the differences...

Post# 232196 , Reply# 8 5/11/2013 at 10:56 (4,002 days old) by petek (Ontario)
Checkrate/Likes Spot on Chad. I'll have to read that book. There was a lot of marketing genius at play. I never quite understood the dealership though.. They always seemed to be Chev/Olds or Pontiac/Buick dealership arrangement both might also sell Cadillacs.. You never saw or I never did anyways a Chev/Pontiac or a Pontiac/Olds dealership. Another interesting tidbit was employee discounts.. If you were an assembly line worker for example at one of the plants you were only entitled to a discount on Chevs/Pontiacs, not sure, middle management might get to purchase some model Olds and Buicks but only upper management could get a discount on everything including a Cadillac. There was a big brouhaha when GM started sharing engines back in the 70's. Cadillac owners were NOT happy campers to find out that their car had a Chevy engine.. GM was even taken to court by customers over that for misleading them but won.

Post# 232217 , Reply# 11 5/11/2013 at 13:04 (4,002 days old) by NYCWriter (New York City)
Checkrate/Likes 2 *William ...* ... interesting how times have changed! I grew up around some very rich people (Sewickley, PA -- old industrial and banking money -- on the level of the Carnegies, Fricks, Mellons, etc.). These families were among the richest in the world, but back then, you never showed off. A friend of mine who grew up in one of those old Sewickley mansions (which back then, mansions were tucked back in the woods, hidden from view, rather than today's McMansions on proud display on tiny lots) told me that back in "the day", when her mom would drive down into the "village" to shop or run errands, she would take ... the BUICK. No jewelery -- just her wedding band (no diamond) and a single strand of pearls. Timex watch. I remember well when I covered the funeral of Pennsylvania Senator John Heinz back in the '90s, and Elsie Hillman (widow of billionaire industrialist Henry Hillman, and at the time, the wealthiest woman in Pennsylvania) drove HERSELF to the funeral ... in a very downscale silver 1982 Buick Skylark. She refused the valet parking, preferring to park herself. Simple black dress, black ribbon in her hair, and strand of pearls. Parked the car, locked the door, checked her lipstick in the side mirror, and walked in by herself. OLD money. Classy.

Post# 232228 , Reply# 12 5/11/2013 at 15:01 (4,002 days old) by kenkart ()
Checkrate/Likes *Pre 1956 Cadillac and Olds!* That old four speed hydra matic was the STUFF!! I have riden in a 49 Cadillac ,and have personally seen it spin on dry pavement when it took off and again when it shifted from first to second!! rough, but it would leave a Buick like it was standing still, the bootlegers around home loved to put Cadillac and Olds engines and transmissions in 39 and 40 Fords, the police and revenue agents never had a chance!!Junior Johnson told me he rigged up a smoke screen on some of his liquor cars , he drilled and tapped a fitting into the exhaust manifold ,then hooked up a pressurized tank full of oil, he had a lever under the dash that opened a valve and sprayed the oil into the hot exhaust and instantly the police either wrecked or stopped!!!The Buick was the essence of smooth along with Packards Ultramatic!Hydramatic was much smoother after 55, but it was not the performance tranny it was before.

Post# 232274 , Reply# 14 5/11/2013 at 18:48 (4,002 days old) by NYCWriter (New York City)
Checkrate/Likes *Sam ...* ... I was born in Sewickley. :) Where are you?

Post# 232279 , Reply# 15 5/11/2013 at 20:20 (4,001 days old) by xraytech ()
Checkrate/Likes Matt, I'm out in the Burgettstown/Avella area. Not sure if you know where that's located. Sam

Post# 232210 , Reply# 9 5/11/2013 at 12:33 (4,002 days old) by NYCWriter (New York City)
Checkrate/Likes *Buick and Cadillac ...* ... started out as two separate (and competing) companies before their consolidation into "General Motors". Post-GM, and in the years before German vehicles turned into "luxury" vehicles, the Buicks were targeted to professionals and upper-middle-managers. Cadillac was marketed to the truly well-to-do, like C-level execs, doctors, etc.

Post# 232215 , Reply# 10 5/11/2013 at 12:54 (4,002 days old) by williamr1248 (USA)
Checkrate/Likes *Difference Between Buick and Cadillac* Matt, You said it best. That is exactly what I was brought up to think about the 2 cars. We had Real Estate people who when I was young would ONLY by a LeSabre and NEVER an Electra as their clients would think them to be making TOO much money. In the small town I grew up,only the doctor owned a Buick. My family on both sides drove Buicks,but no one ever thought about buying a Cadillac as it would thought to be "showing off" with your money and not in good taste. My how things have changed. Now someone can drive anything, if they can afford the lease payment. Also, now if you drive a high end car,it INDICATES nothing except a high car payment,lease payment,they bought it used or they want to make a statement. I loved the pictures of the old Cadillac and Buick. People look at me strange when I tell them I have driven Buick's for over 40 years. I did buy one Volvo in 1990 but came back to Buick in 1992.

Post# 232273 , Reply# 13 5/11/2013 at 18:46 (4,002 days old) by xraytech ()
Checkrate/Likes I have always had a personal preference for Buick, I grew up with Buick and Oldsmobile being an upper middle class kind of car, it was also a car that the clergy would favor so they could have the luxury since Clergy driving a Cadillac gives a bad impression. Also some of the older doctors would buy Buick to not give the impression of being too well off. I have owned a Buick since I've been driving, I did own a 2001 Cadillac DeVille that I drove to the 2008 Convention in N.Canton which is when it started coming unglued at 69,000 miles. After that not so grand Cadillac experience I couldn't get into a Buick Park Avenue fast enough. Matt, I didn't realize you grew up so close to when I'm located, I'm about 35 minutes south of where you grew up. Oddly enough my last Buick purchase was from an estate sale in Sewickley, PA. Sam

Post# 232438 , Reply# 16 5/12/2013 at 14:03 (4,001 days old) by kenkart ()
Checkrate/Likes 1 *The main problem..* I had with anything GM was I jinxed them....I bet I can take ANY GM car and drive it a month and something wierd will break, I can drive a worn out Chrysler to the moon and back and never have a problem..LOL!

Post# 232443 , Reply# 17 5/12/2013 at 15:13 (4,001 days old) by NYCWriter (New York City)
Checkrate/Likes *Hey Sam!* Yes, I know where that is! :)

Post# 232458 , Reply# 18 5/12/2013 at 17:54 (4,001 days old) by xraytech ()
Checkrate/Likes Matt, I wasn't sure as that area is hit and miss with people from Pittsburgh knowing of it. Would be nice to meet you if you head home to visit sometime. Sam

Post# 232607 , Reply# 19 5/13/2013 at 21:35 (3,999 days old) by hygiene903 (Galion, OH)
Checkrate/Likes *Love Those Cars!* The 53 Buick in the pic is almost identical to the 52 that my folks had when I was little other than a few minor differences in the hubcaps and portholes. The 52 portholes were more round than oval, and the hubcaps were completely different. And it had the Dynaflo (aka "slushpump") as well. Rode like a million bucks. I remember how it used to wind out in low gear before shifting into high. A 53 Ford Customline brought me home from the hospital when I was born, and my folks bought the Buick when they decided they needed a second car when I was about 6 months old. Mom loved the Buick so much that it became the family car, and the Ford was mostly Dad's work car. The Ford had a flathead V8 and Fordomatic transmission, which was also a 2-speed if I reemember right. Know what you mean about bodies being used throughout the GM lines. A good example would be the Chevy Nova, Pontiac Ventura, Olds Omega, and Buick Apollo from the early to mid 70's. Just switch the grill and you have a different car! Same way with the full size models in the 80's and 90's--the Chevy Caprice, Pontiac Paressienne, Olds 98, and Buick Park Ave. were pretty much the same, other than trim and available options. And Pete, I remember the engine sharing you were talking about. And like you said, many people were irate about it, some to the point of lawsuits. As for the dealerships, in Mansfield, where I was born and grew up, most of them were single brand stand alone dealerships. Galion, where I live now, has a Chevy/Buick dealer and had a Pontiac/Olds dealer for many years. Jeff

Post# 232720 , Reply# 20 5/14/2013 at 21:04 (3,998 days old) by kenkart ()
Checkrate/Likes *RE Dynaflow..* Actually in drive Dynaflow does not change gears, the variable pitch stator just changes as the car gets faster, there is a low gear for downhill braking, the Fordomatic was a three speed that started in second gear unless floored, Packards Ultramatic was similar to Dynaflow, except it had a locking torque converter, just as many cars have today.

Post# 232743 , Reply# 21 5/15/2013 at 08:54 (3,998 days old) by dirtmaster37 (Ypsilanti, Michigan USA)
Checkrate/Likes *Dynaflow does not change gears* ....yes, you are right. Most of the early torque-converter transmissions either shifted only once, or not at all. At least, not at first. Packard, Ford, Studebaker and Chevy all ended up doiing that at some point... They did change it in 53 to have two turbines to increase pickup which helped alot, and in 55' to the Variable Pitch which used the moveable stator blades as you mentioned, which helped pickup even more.... And then later still Buick and Chevy teamed up to produce the Triple Turbine monstrosity, Flight Pitch Dynaflow/ Triple Turbine Turboglide. Which in this iteration even banished the use of a low gear option, and brought in a (Gr) detent on the shift selector quadrant for extra engine braking going down steep grades I do not believe that they ever changed it (Dynaflow in any iteraton) to have a low gear start, until it was dropped by 1964. PowerGlide on the other hand WAS converted to a proper two speed transmission after 1953. And stayed that way until it was dropped in 1973. Packard did the same thing. Adding a automatic low gear start. Too many drivers hated the mushiness of the 1949-1954 Ultra, and were handshifting the thing from low to high just like the Dynaflow drivers were doing. Which caused damage to that tranny if done too often. Many drivers learned an expensive lesson with the Ultramatic, that was compounded further when the real Packard dealers all went bye bye after 1956-58. But before all of that came down the road, Packard introduced a new Ultramatic, the "Gear Start Ultramatic" in the middle of the 1954 model year.. used a low gear/torque converter start, with a shift to direct drive at speed or by 55 mph. It also used tow different drive ranges. In one it acted like what was described, in the other it acted like the old Ultra. This transmission was deemed an "improvement", but there was room for improvement!!! In 1955, Packard further revamped that transmission to become the "Twin Ultramatic" , which was even quirkier. It had a newer more powerful Torque Converter with a higher stall, and a revised shift pattern. This transmission was fraught with issues and was a reason why Packard was in the dumps only a year later.... Fordomatic 1951-1954, WAS technically a three speed, but started in intermediate gear for whatever the reason. Low was selected manually. In 1955 that changed with the Fordomatic taking off in intermediate gear under regular gas pedal pressure. IF you floored the pedal, the new trans, past a certain detent, would instead bring in the LOW gear. So, with LOW automatically brought in, with upshifts to int. and third, or full Drive it became a "proper" three speed device. The next iteration was the Cruise-O-Matic. That was a dual range transmission too. In one sector of drive, it started out just like the pre-1955 Fordomatic did. Second and third gear. IN the other sector, it started in first, then second, then third. Hope this helps, for those who care.....

Post# 232745 , Reply# 22 5/15/2013 at 09:14 (3,998 days old) by suckolux (Yuba City, CA)
Checkrate/Likes I think 53 was Buick's first nailhead V8 also, later versions of the Dynaflow got pretty peppy, as the 56 Century would outrun the 56 Chrysler 300 0-60. California Highway Patrol used that model a lot then

Post# 232760 , Reply# 23 5/15/2013 at 11:58 (3,998 days old) by s31463221 (Frenchburg, KY)
Checkrate/Likes *52 Buick* I have to say those cars are indeed amazing. I currently own a 52 Buick Special and it still has the old straight 8 engine in it (and I believe you are correct suckolux, that 53 was the first nailhead Buick had). I've never had a dynaflow and from what I hear, I think I'm better off that mine is a three on the tree as they were awesome transmissions when they worked right, but let one act up and YIKES! My old Buick looks rather rough on the outside, but she purrs like a kitten when running, and the ride is actually decent considering her suspension is probably original! I plan to repaint her this summer if I live (I also plan to repaint my 54 Ford, so I may be biting off more than I can chew taking on two cars!). My ultimate dream car that I will own one day, even if it kills me, is a 56 Buick Roadmaster in good condition. While I like my 52, I think the 56 is absolutely the most beautiful of the 50's Buick lineup! Most people drool over 57 Chevy's and 55 T-Birds, but not me, my dream car is a 56 Buick.....I guess I really am "weird" as my wife likes to say!!!

Post# 232764 , Reply# 24 5/15/2013 at 13:07 (3,998 days old) by suckolux (Yuba City, CA)
Checkrate/Likes 1 The Special was the smallest Buick, had downsized Straight 8 and was a year late to get the V8 also, the Dynaflow does make some heat, and makes things thirsty, so you may be right! The engines are rather bullet prof though, both of them

Post# 232765 , Reply# 25 5/15/2013 at 13:08 (3,998 days old) by suckolux (Yuba City, CA)
Checkrate/Likes 1 Oh I came home from the hospital in a 56 Century, mom loved to drag race!

Post# 232774 , Reply# 26 5/15/2013 at 13:48 (3,998 days old) by kenkart ()
Checkrate/Likes 1 *Re Weird!* You are not the only one...I care NOTHING for ANY Chevrolet, I like DeSotos and Chryslers...Pushbuttons/fins and square steering wheels!!!

Post# 232784 , Reply# 27 5/15/2013 at 15:08 (3,998 days old) by s31463221 (Frenchburg, KY)
Checkrate/Likes *Hans* You would have loved an old car I sold about two years ago then...I had a 1962 Chrysler Imperial, had the push button torqueflite transmission, 413 Wedge engine in it, square steering wheel, and since the gas tank had rusted out, I put a 30 gallon fuel cell in the trunk! It didn't have any exhaust on it beyond the manifold, so it roared like a lion when it started it up. The car looked awful on the outside, but it had the makings of a beast for the right person! Last I heard, it was headed to TN, from there, who knows!

Post# 232801 , Reply# 28 5/15/2013 at 16:02 (3,998 days old) by suckolux (Yuba City, CA)
Checkrate/Likes 2 wow, back in the late 70s I had one of those to play with , Imperial Crown.Purple, raised drivers seat back, push buttom matching ac/ heat controls, throttle only attached at the carpet, Agnes was fun.

Post# 232855 , Reply# 29 5/16/2013 at 02:10 (3,997 days old) by bnsd60m9200 (Akron OH)
Checkrate/Likes 1 speaking of luxury cars... this is mine. 84 ford country squire... and like kenkart said in the early part of the thread " 1 Bench seat 2 floating quiet ride 3 steering that can be turned with one finger 4 room for 6 big men (mine can seat 8 with the optional back 4rd row seats, which im on the hunt for) 5 NO CONSOLE!! as in a true big car. 6 every known option,including the ones you can not get such as automatic headlight dimmer.... and vent windows!!! 7 examples of TRUE luxury. my wagon does all of that and love driving her.... her name is "towanda" from the movie fried green tomatoes..

Post# 232862 , Reply# 30 5/16/2013 at 07:36 (3,997 days old) by arh1953 ( River Park, in Port St. Lucie, Florida)
Checkrate/Likes *Gorgeous Country Squire!* Are you in the Station Wagon Forums by chance? They're loaded up with Country Squires, Colony Parks, you name it! Here's my baby again :P

Post# 232863 , Reply# 31 5/16/2013 at 07:44 (3,997 days old) by s31463221 (Frenchburg, KY)
Checkrate/Likes *Will* That is indeed a lovely wagon....I LOVE the name! So fitting!!! I have always liked those big comfortable cars, my daily driver right now is a 2001 Ford Crown Victoria LX, I also have a 2003 CV LX, but it has over 200,000 miles on it, where my 01 only has 70,000 miles on it. With me driving 140+ miles per day commuting back and forth to work and a bad back on top of it, I HAVE to have a vehicle that won't have me doubled-over in back pain by the time I get to work! (Hence why I no longer have that little Trans AM sports car I used to own) I've never owned any wagons in my life, but we've had Crown Victoria's starting from 1983 on up!

Post# 232872 , Reply# 32 5/16/2013 at 11:10 (3,997 days old) by Kirbysthebest (Midwest)
Checkrate/Likes *Difference between Buick and Cadillac* About $15,000. The Caddy may be a little more posh, but under the hood it's s Chevy.