I have a '32 I have been restoring to road worthy condition; why would I want to get a '52 project? Please help.

Mike

Well, why settle for one bunch of hassles when you could have two???

Why would you want to get a 1952.........perhaps because you can drive it at freeway speeds, cover 500 miles a day in comfort, have hydraulic brakes and an all steel body with a roof thats doesnt leak. A heating system that works and a smooth ride. There is no way a 1932 equals a 1952 except it is not an "old car". I guess it depends what the vehical is used for, etc.

The '52 you are lookin at or bought didn't happen to come from Windsor did it? If it is. You've got a great all original car there. Paint and all. Two are always better than one.

I have both a 1932 and a 1951 (which is basically the same car as a '52), and there is absolutely no comparison between the two! The '51 is far superior in mechanics, drive-ability, comfort, cruising speed, trunk space, braking power and host of other things. The '51 and '52 Chevrolets are cars that you can drive........anywhere!

There was already a ton of difference between a 1932 and a 1934 Master. Thats why a member sold his '32 and bought my '34 after comparing the two. My '39 is OK but still does not compare to my '50. They just kept improving.

Chevygene, JunkYardDog, et al,

My '32 is not licensed for the road yet and it hadn't seen the road since 1953. However, I did drive it around the neighborhood one night after I fixed the clutch a couple of weeks back.

From that first experience driving a '32 I have this nagging feeling that I may never be comfortable driving the car more than 50 miles from home!

I have to conclude that this Chevy bug is an incurable disease!

I know nothing of the fifties other than the engine is basically the same and the brakes are not mechanical like my '32.

Assuming that the tri-5's are sweet but maybe high priced and over done, what model and model year in this decade would be a reasonable project?

(this is all very subjective I know but I to start somewhere)

Earlier this year I began to think about adding another car and since I had a more "modern" Chevy-69 Full size,I decided to look for a fifties era car.Well the tri fives were out of reach price wise as well as the '58s and '59's,so there was not much choice left.After doing a lot of research and talking with others,I chose a 53.Why?
1.Reasonable price
2.Parts availability
3.If I chose one with an automatic,I would get the 235 full pressure oiling system,therefore making it easier to take on the highway.
4.I prefer the styling of the 53-54 to the 49-52 models.
I settled on a older restoration 210 4 door,mainly because it was rust free and I feel I made the right choice.Also I drive my cars,so a trailered 53 convertible just wouldn't work for me even though I would love to own a drop-top.I also had to consider my abilities-I can turn a wrench,but,I am unable to weld or do bodywork,so it limits me to acquiring a "project".Hope my rant helps!!

PS. I knew next to nothing of the fifties era cars,but with some help from all the wonderful people on Chevy Chatter, I felt more confident that I could handle issues when they came up!!

The 1949-52 cars were basically the same. I would avoid an early 1949 (has hood lock inside of car) due to structual problems, water leaks, etc.The 1949-50 have the Huck brakes which require high pedal pressure. The 1951-52 have the better Bendix brakes. 1950-52 available with Power Glide, 3.55 axle ratio and hydraulic valve lifters. Makes for a good, smooth quiet high speed road car. Stick shift cars have 4.11 ratio. Best changed to 3.70 or 3.55 for long distance high speed driving (over 60 MPH). All engines had dipper/trough rod lubrication. Adquate if all in good shape.Much improved over 1932 version.
The 1953-54 cars were refined and improved. Bodies more solid, good brakes lot of trim and body style choices. Power Glide improved by have automatic low gear starts, P.G cars had full pressure oiling as did the sticks in 1954. Sticks had 3.70 ratio and 235 engine for good performance (Canadian 1953 sticks had full pressure oiling)....parts available for all years at reasonable prices. Would not start off with a rusty car, and many of these are.

Chevnut; Are you saying that all '54 sticks had the 3:70 diff? And are they interchangable with the '46 gears. My '46 will be doing alot of hwy driving.

The 1953-54 sticks had a 3.70. A 3.73 was optional in 1946 but very rare. I believe that the 3.70 is an excellent choice for a 216. I have a 3.73 in my '39 and 65-70 is smooth and quiet. The center section and torque tube from a 1953-54 will slip into your 1946 They do have a heaiver torque tube.This is a plus.

ChevNut; Thanks. That makes the hunt alot easier.

Chevgene & The53TwoTen,

This is very useful information! I can appreciate the technical difference between '52, '53 and '54 model years you have highlighted for me. I can now make an informed choice.

I have leads on a Canadian '52 Deluxe sedan, a '53 210 sedan and a '54 Bel Air sedan. I won't be looking for a "project" car in this decade. I'd like to be able to pay the money and drive it away this time.

Gene, did you change out the complete torque tube differential and axle housings and rear brakes and get rid of those Huck brakes on the rear? Would it be a problem on a 48? having Hucks on front and Bendix on the rear?

For my '39 I installed a new ring gear and pinion that I had on the shelf for many years. The 3.73 was used on the Master 85 so was easy to find new years ago. I put off making the change until I began using the '39 for the long distance driving going to and from the 6 Cylinder tours.
On the '46 you can only use the center carrier and the torque tube, not the banjo housing. This can be done back to 1941. The Huck brakes perform well on the 1936-48 cars. The 1949-50 are the years they were so poor. Especially on the 1950 PG cars.
My 1950 is now my long distance tour car. I have improved the brakes with a 1953 M/cyl and the after market brake floating pins. Other than that the 1950 is a very comfortable good handling highway car.

Thanks for the info Chev Nut. Very interesting for sure. You're knowledge base is nothing short of awsome!! This really gives me alot more options to make the '46 more hwy. friendly.
Sorry 32Confed. for hijackin the post.

32 confederation,good luck with the choice!!As always,the best choice I think,would be the one with the least amount of rust,even if that means a little higher price.Keep us posted as to your decision.These cars are overshadowed by the tri-fives so much that a lot of people are missing the boat on how much fun they are to drive! Cheers!

You asked me to keep you posted so here it is...

I found a driver! It is a '54 210 4-dr Powerglide that I couldn't pass up.

Why should I settle for one set of hassles when I can have a bunch!

Mike

Do you have a photo of the car you can post?

Gene we have talked about this before, I looked for the 3.70 for my 52 and was not able to find one, I went with the 3.55 matched to the 216. On the flats it is great, I have noticed that the car works a little harder on two of the mountain passes out of here. About a week ago we went over Flesher pass, a two lane with some pretty severe curves, on one I had to shift car down with the 4.11, still have to shift down with the 3.55 but can wrap it a little higher and it recovers better. On the long haul over MacDonald Pass the car will pull it in 3rd but is working hard to maintain 45MPH near the top. This is a long climb. Both these passes exceed 6,000 feet.

JunkYardDog,

Yes sir I do.




Original paint, original interior (so I have been told). Now tell me, has this one been rode hard and put away wet?

Michel,

GREAT looking 54 Two-Ten.

It looks like you really followed thru on your comment from back on Aug 23.....



(Please be sure to check out the email I sent you just now.)

I'll bet you're going to have lots of fun with it. Enjoy...

Bill.

Where did you find this car? Its looks familar.

Dick Dennis, long time So-Cal VCCA'er, has a 'twin' to this car. (At least from these two exterior shots.) I'm thinking he's had it for 25 years. I doubt this is it. It'll be interesting to
hear from 32 Conferation about your question, Gene.

Bill.

If it is the Car that I think it is , its probably one of the best original 1954 Chevrolets that you will find.

It doesn't matter what trim level or body style,I could look at those cars all day,beautiful car,good luck with it!! mmmmmmmm Horizon blue!!

In my eyes, the 210 with skirts and full wheel covers looks as good as a Bel Air.

I'm with you,Gene.As far as a 53 goes though,I just don't care for the full wheel covers......too plain.I'll take the small hub cap and trim ring set up! Plus with a full wheel cover,you don't get to see the pin stripes on the wheels!!

When I bought my new 1953 210 Installed the full discs that fit behind the hubcaps. They were not a 1953 accessory, just 1950-52, but liked the looks better. For some reasom the hub caps kept popping off. When the 1954's came out I installed a set of 1954 covers. and head light rims, and front fender top ornaments, and ??

I would like to contact the 32 owner and the 54 owner, if he owns both of them. Chev Nut should know who the previous owner of the 54 was. Dick Dennis does own a fully restored 54 like the one pictured and the paint and interior on the one pictured is legit. The car originated out of Montana.

Well now, a post from Mr. D after almost six years!!!

32 Confederation's contact info can be found in his profile. Simply click on his name, 32 Confederation, then on "view profile" and you'll find it.

You know, you are welcome to post more than once every six years....

Bill.

I'm here on Chatter, PM and email would be glad to make your acquaintance billd.

Mike