Difference Between Buick and Cadillac?

[hygiene903]

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

 

[kenkart]

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.

 

[dirtmaster37]

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.....

 

[suckolux]

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

 

[s31463221]

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!!!

 

[suckolux]

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

 

[suckolux]

Oh I came home from the hospital in a 56 Century, mom loved to drag race!

 

[kenkart]

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!!!

 

[s31463221]

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!

 

[suckolux]

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.

 

[bnsd60m9200]

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..

 

[arh1953]

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  

 

[s31463221]

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!

 

[kirbysthebest]

Difference between Buick and Cadillac

About $15,000. The Caddy may be a little more posh, but under the hood it's s Chevy.

 

[rugsucker]

$$$ difference

That relates to the old joke-What's the difference between a vacuum cleaner and a 'Home Cleaning System'?About $1000.00 dollars!--The 90s must have been when Chevy Caprice,Buick Roadmaster and Cadillac Fleetwood were most similar.

 

[electrikbroomgu]

Today's Buicks and Cadillacs

are actually very different vehicles. I see little to no similarity with Cadillac using there Art and Science vs Buick's current lineup which consists of an Opel sourced Regal, an Epsilon LaCrosse, a Lambda Enclave SUV and the smaller sized FWD Verano which is one of the few FWD premium compacts other than the Acura ILX.

Cadillac's new ATS is built on a new RWD/AWD Alpha platform, the RWD/AWD CTS is built on GM's Sigma platform and the SUV Escalade uses a GM 900 truck platform which Buick does not even have. The only one sedan platform shared between both divisions is the Epsilon extended FWD/AWD platform which houses the LaCrosse and new XTS sedan. There exterior styling and interiors could not be any more different, they only share one engine with the Cadillac getting a new 3.6 SIDI twin turbo V6 with well over 400 HP which won't be offered on the Buick. Cadillac also has a CTS coupe and wagon which Buick lacks and plans are on the way for a large full sized Omega Cadillac sedan.

Even many of the drive trains are different between the two marques. Buick uses a 2.4 direct injected 4 cylinder in both regular and eAssist form on there Verano and Regal with powerful turbo options. The LaCrosse has the EAssist setup with a 302 HP V6 option. This engine also powers the Enclave. Cadillac has a 6.2 liter V8 in there Escalade, turbo 4 cylinder in there new ATS, V6 and V8 power in the CTS and V6 and V6 twin turbo in the XTS large sedan. I would say that these are two divisions with different focuses. Cadillac to take on the German Margues like BMW, Mercedes and Audi and Buick to take on the lower end luxury marques like Acura, Lexus, Infinity etc. So far this strategy seems to be working as month by month sales see increases across the board on key models.

 

[suckolux]

I believe upcoming in the new GS will be the twin turbo also, prob called Grand National I think?

 

[cocoaboo48]

Buicks and Cadillacs

I have owned a 1967 Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham and what a gorgeous car it was! It was navy blue with a white padded vinyl top and a light blue leather interior. It had heating ducts in the floor for the rear seats. I miss that car. Got 14 miles per gallon on the highway with a 429 cubic inch engine and 375 horsepower. In those times who cared? I also had a 1968 Buick LeSabre with the 400 transmission. It had a rust problem but rode great and had pep! The first new car I bought was a 1986 Chevrolet Caprice Classic Coupe. Very poor workmanship on the interior. Transmission had to be rebuilt at 47000 miles and never shifted right. The A/C was bad. GM used to have the best A/C in their cars but not in my Chevy. Strange though My 86 Caprice got phenomonal gas mileage. It ran like s__t. The 80's was a bad time for american cars. People were buying Japanese cars because they were better. Buicks and Cadillacs were both nice cars. The Buick had class and it was cheaper.