All pictures of the featured car are from Singleton Classics, the selling dealer.
This 1951 Buick Super Sedanet is one of 1500 produced before the fleeting-postwar-fastback era fizzled out at that great brand from Flint, right around the same time it fizzled out everywhere. Replaced in the hearts of a fickle public by the hardtop convertible body style in 1949, fastbacks hung on a couple more years as their sales rapidly plummeted. At the time, the hardtop was modern and the fastback was not; today, they’re both old cars and few would know the difference.
But I do. I have kept this Super bookmarked on my desktop for over a month; it’s for sale at a dealer named Singleton Classics in California for $19,900.
My first impulse was to send an online inquiry about the car, but the long arm of my personal law prevailed. Although I feel that a little old fashioned wheeling and dealing would make this Super attainable (yet ill-advised), there is a tacit rule I have thus far followed my whole life.
No duplication of vehicles. My ’53 Special (with its swanky hardtop styling) is fundamentally the same car as that beautiful ’51 Super. The engine is the same, the transmission is almost the same, the frame is the same, the shocks are the same. It’s the same car. There’s a reason I would never buy a second Corvair, Mustang, Thunderbird, Riviera, Dart, Skylark, or Firebird – duplication. I crave variety in my life in everything but wives.
Even so, there’s something winsome about this Sedanet. My Special doesn’t have the grand piano hood, so there’s one difference. The Special body is a few inches narrower, that’s another. This one’s maroon, the Special is blue. Those are different colors, right?
And my experience keeping a Buick straight eight burbling away for almost 20 years leaves me almost ostentatiously qualified for 1951 Super ownership. I’ll tell you anything you want to know about a 263. See the bottom of the picture? The fuel pump is slightly different than it was in ’53, there’s another difference.
It is worthwhile to note that the Super Sedanet (Model 56S) wasn’t even listed in the 1951 sales brochure.
A “Series 44” labeled the Custom Special and using what I presume to be the 1950 Special body was listed in the brochure, but it never came to market. It must have been at the last minute that the Custom Special Sedanet was instead offered in the Series 50 Super line, since the bodies were the same anyway. There couldn’t have been much of a deviation between the two cars at all, which is certainly why the Custom Special was considered superfluous.
The featured Super looked far different when it emerged from Flint assembly over 70 years ago. Paint code “5” denotes Barton Gray, whose hue varies based on internet color chips (It is sometimes a greenish gray and sometimes more of a light blue).
There was only one trim code available for the Sedanet: “42,” or Dark Gray. This car has clearly been reupholstered, and the interior trim has been thankfully painted maroon to match the car’s exterior.
I like maroon. My ’65 Mustang is a shade of maroon that I’m very fond of. But I wish this Buick were Barton Gray. I also wish my ’53 wore this “Dynaflow” script; unfortunately, 1952 was the last year for that fun piece of gimcrackery.
To make up for that soul-crushing hole in my life, I bought this brochure from an eBay vendor last week. I’ve driven tens of thousands of miles in Dynaflow-equipped Buicks at this late date, but there’s always room for a musty brochure, if not for a Buick Super.
Singleton Classics clearly states that this car is not perfect. The paint on the hood is cracking in various spots.
Here, the hood has come to conspicuous blows with the door or some other errant object, which is not uncommon for 1950s Buicks. Hood fit was not one of the strengths on their resume.
Though it has some flaws, the advertisement claims that it’s been fully serviced and is running well. For almost twenty grand, it’s worth checking that claim out for oneself, but there are dozens of pictures to help a potential buyer get a feel for this potential purchase.
That potential buyer will not be me this time. I really want for it to be me but it will not be me. If anyone wants to buy this car and let me drive it for a week to get it out of my system, please see the advertisement below. It will not have been purchased by me.
https://www.singletonclassics.com/vehicles/455/1951-buick-super-sedanet
Not a Buick fan. Not a huge fan of the early Fifties GM fastbacks, though I’ve come to appreciate them recently, thanks to CC. But this one really caught my eye, and when I saw the Berkeley dealership stamp on the manual, that really made me pause. It seems like a lot of car (and I say that in a good way) for $19K. But I didn’t recognize that dealership name though Berkeley was my hometown, and sure enough it had changed ownership by the time I came along (as a late 1956 model). I remember it as Turner Buick.
http://berkeleyheritage.com/berkeley_landmarks/howard_showroom.html
Here’s where this car would have been sold, when new.
I love the BUICK name painted above the doorway. I can’t decide if the font looks more like Americanized Chinese writing or something lifted from the Batman TV show. I never seen it done like that. A passenger side mirror should have been factory installed on these fast backs. The back window was mostly ornamental.
Honestly, the passenger side mirror is worthless in my experience. The frame of the vent window is in the way and you can barely see it; maybe some of the other brands of mirror are better.
For some reason it was a couple decades later when someone realized that a convex right side mirror would be a good thing.
Our ’56 Olds didn’t have a driver’s side mirror until 1970. When did they become standard or required?
Thanks for your comment! It’s a small world; that’s just a random manual I picked up on eBay.
I thought that manual came with the car but now I realize it was your purchase instead of buying the car. To stretch the CC Effect a bit, but tying into Paul’s repost later this morning of the Vega test, it was within a block of that dealership that the timing belt broke on my Vega. No interference, no damage, about $20 or $25 in parts and an hour’s work in my driveway, and I had a new belt and water pump installed. I did need to get a tow home using my Mom’s AAA card.
As someone not really “brought up” in/on these and not as familiar with the timelines of the general era, I think I prefer the fastback styling, not to take anything away from your own car, I hasten to add…
Just last week I was perusing one of these (well, a four door variant of it) in my local junkyard, I believe it was a ’51, it did have the straight-8 and while rusty all over and the interior in tatters, was otherwise in good shape (only the people like us that read this here could understand what I mean…). The fastback is specifically what struck me, even in 4-door form. Being out of my wheelhouse and in a bit of a rush I didn’t take any pictures which I now, as is so often the case, hugely regret as I would have posted one here.
I like it, and the chosen colors work very well, makes it stand out. I’ll note that you, an old car connoisseur, are actually voicing a preference for the “GRAY” original color. Hmm, it’s no wonder all new cars are gray! It’s what the people want! 🙂 I’m kidding of course, a car is only original once and I too generally prefer a restoration or maintenance project to keep it as close to what it was as can be.
It is a lot of car for under $20k, the damage to the hood probably hurts its appeal considerably, most buyers would factor in having to fix that and hoping it comes out alright, lest the whole car need going over instead at possibly even greater expense. I’m guessing if it was corrected now the cost would perhaps not be recoverable in a higher sale price?
It’s tough to nail down what this car SHOULD sell for. Because it’s been for sale for over a month, I guess the asking price is too high, but it is a dealer and a buyer has to expect a markup.
Plus, this year and bodystyle are so uncommon that you can’t really look for other sales to guide you; I guess you’d have to look at Super hardtops and see what they’re going for. Early ’50s cars leave most people hot or cold, with very little in between, so prices are generally reasonable. Run-of-the-mill Buicks are always for sale for under $15,000, so it’s a relatively affordable way to enjoy an unusual old car if you like them.
With no point of reference, i find the fastback to be a very attractive design- particularly those glam shots from the back. love it. but i am sure this thing is gigantic when experienced in real life. My preferences are generally for smaller cars.
my biggest ergonomic issue:
I look at that car with its hood up and wonder… why on earth would any division of the General have decided to hinge the hood in that manner? even new, 50s card needed considerably more under hood attention that anything from the 21st century.
imagine having some sort of roadside malady. you pull off to edge of road. now have to stand on the driving surface, back to the passing traffic to evaluate what is going on. and even more so, arent the spark plugs on the opposite side from that access opening? at 6’1″. i can feel the ache in my back just imagining the position. any owner being 5 foot -and a few- the far side must have been unreachable while standing on terra firma.
Mebbe Buick owners let their authorized repair shops do all the service to avoid the indignity of leaning over the engine into the waning headroom to figure out what was going on over the Dark Side of the engine bay.
As the owner of a 51 Super bought new by my dad, I can attest to the difficulty of any under hood access, raising one side then the other is an effort, and just reaching the hood prop to go the other side requires a long reach. I would guess that the length of the eight cylinder is why they did it that way. A recent radiator and water pump repair required the complete removal of the hood, it unfastens on both sides easy enough, but required straps around the hood going to a engine lift to lift the thing off. Didn’t have 2-3 people to manually do it. By the way, the firewall of this featured Buick should be body color, not rattle can flat black.
I had to do a similar thing (but I raised it with a chain hoist rather than pulling out my engine hoist) when I had the hinges rebuilt on my ’53, Duane. It’s got the alligator hood, but it’s just as heavy and bulky.
Although I love the way that the ’51 hood looks when it’s open, for the sake of convenience I’m glad for what I have.
Apparently, as evidenced by the photos, the hood can be opened from either side. The full car image has the hood hinged on the passenger side, and if you were to stand at the left front (driver’s) wheel, the radiator is on the left. The very next image has the radiator to the right.
That is correct, the hood is hinged so you can open it from either side. It’s still inconvenient, but much more convenient than opening from only one side.
IIRC, 1952 was the last year of the side opening hood. There were two unlatching handles under each side of the instrument panel. And, I believe you could actually take the hood off if you unlatched both. One of the endearing quirks Buicks of this vintage had, like the gas pedal starter and antenna mounted above the windshield that could be adjustable from the inside.
The hood could be opened on either side and if it released on both sides, it could be removed with some help.
I love the fastback design of this post-war era just as I like the least popular most contemporary equivalent ; the 442 “Aeroback” . Same engine & chassis as the downsized Cutlass calais .
I do like the paint/graphics package on ’70s 442s, both the Colonnades and the Aerobacks.
Ah, what I think of when I hear or read the word Buick. Cars! I love all of them shown in the article, and I love the maroon color. However, I’d actually prefer that blue one. But I’d happily take any of them.
Yeah, Buick isn’t what it once was, but there are still a lot of great old Buicks out there.
My Uncle had a ’49 Cadillac Sedanette back in the 60’s. I got to ride in it several times. My Grandfather had bought it for him when he graduated from high school in ’59. It always struck as being very old, my Cadillac references came from the mid ’50’s, though I still thought that it was cool. My Uncle never sold the Cadillac. He had started a very slow restoration by the mid 70’s, but never finished. He moved out of the State twenty years ago so I don’t know if he or the car are still around. This particular Buick isn’t perfect, but it looks pretty good. If it is in good mechanical condition it would be a good candidate to buy, twenty grand isn’t chicken feed, but trying to start with a rough abandoned car, or a barn find. will see costs quickly spiral up well over that amount. This car could have the cracked paint touched up and a little care and detailing would be perfect for a driver and weekend show car. There are guys that like performing a long term restoration, but I find that having a car that you can enjoy now is a better idea. I’m getting to the point where I don’t like buying green bananas.
Our featured Super is exactly the kind of car I like to buy. I don’t need it to be perfect; I just want it to be presentable so I can have fun driving it around and working on it. The paint looks shiny enough that you might be able to blend the hood in reasonably well, at least well enough that it won’t stand out.
I have long suspected that the early 50’s Buick Sedanet was the prime inspiration for the styling of Bentley’s R-type Continental fastback.
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/automotive-histories/automotive-history-who-actually-styled-the-1952-bentley-continental/
Don Andreina did a really nice article about the Continental, and he does mention the GM fastbacks. They did come first, so it’s clear that the designers were aware of them, but there were other influences as well.
Both Olds and Buick went all-in on those fastbacks in 1950-51, then they disappeared. I really like them.
It seems there are two kinds of collectors – people who own and keep variations on the same thing, and those who (like you and probably like me) crave variety. We second kind of people find ourselves in a perpetual learning curve, but maybe that’s what some of us like.
One of my favorite things to do when I buy a new/old car is to gather all the manuals and figure out what makes it tick. Becoming a marque expert would be a lot easier, but where’s the fun in that?
From the side and rear 3/4 views, those GM fastbacks were beautiful cars in my opinion. But with the exception of the Chevy, they were all let down by front ends that were ugly and atrocious chrome monstrosities.
With the people who grew up with these cars growing old, younger people are realizing all but a few of them will be really bad investments, and more will come on the market as collections are sold off. Going to car shows in the 70s, I saw a lot of Model As, but where are they all now?
Tyler Hoovie of YT just bought a Chrysler woodie convertible that had been in a museum for decades. He thought he got a great price, but he doesn’t keep many cars for many years, and the market isn’t likely to climb long term above inflation and may not keep up with it.
I watched that video, and I see what he’s saying, but he also said that he paid $58,000 for that thing. His price range and mine are not the same. 🙂
He’s raking it in somewhere, literally buying the farm, adding to the house and building a huge garage, all with two ex wives with a child each. Higher interest rates haven’t slowed him down.
A very pretty car .
My monitor makes it look more Resale Red than Maroon .
The big issue with the hood is : matching the color ~ there’s no spot repairing this, it needs to be removed , stripped and re sprayed properly .
Overall I too think this is pretty good dollar value for $19K but it depends on how the little niggly things are : heater, windows, door latches, fresh air vents, all the stuff that determine it’s future as an enjoyable fun car or one that only gets trotted out now and then .
The two tone dash board colors do this lovely car no favors .
-Nate
For it’s age that is nice looking and I like those body styles. However, Aaron65, I am not going to buy it even if only 350 miles away from me so you won’t get a week to drive it.
Why be so selfish? Well, last night I ran across my counterpart to your Buick here. The car is all I could think about last night and this morning. Couldn’t even get a good night sleep as I kept waking up with it on my mind. It too is a duplicate. Well, the color in the same spectrum but darker so that is different. The roof is different, the number of doors, and the interior. Cost is half your Buick. I inherited money so easily affordable. Yet I too have a “wife” but it is killing me right now. I want it so bad and if I get it I am going to keep it secret.
Tell me more… At the very least I can live vicariously through you! 🙂
Maybe privately but not here. Sorry.
Although you and everyone else would drool over it like me. I’ll talk to the owner tomorrow as I first need to see the car up close. You know how good a 20 footer can look till you get up close and personal. I especially want to see under.
Were those trim tags held on with screws? I’d have expected rivets.
Yes they were (at least the tag is also held on by screws on my ’53). I was also surprised when I found out that my ’74 Firebird’s body tag was held on by screws. I asked if that was normal on the PY Forum and those guys said it was.