From reading CC I know that Paul (and some of the commenters) are not fans of this car, and I can understand why. But I love this car–can anyone understand why?
For sale on eBay, located in Munster, Indiana. A 1958 Buick Limited 4-door hardtop. Top-of-the-line. A one-year-only design proudly bearing the vaunted “Limited” name which goes back to the 1930s. A delightful shade of green which could be Spray Green, Green Mist, or Gulf Green. Yes, Buick offered three shades of green in 1958. There were a total of 24 different colors available in solid-tone or a myriad of two-tone combinations.
Here’s where the limitations of language fail me. If I were to describe this design to you, I would say that it somehow combines rounded, voluptuous forms with a rakish sharpness. All the added details: the jutting Dagmars, the parking lights set in a rocketship, the graceful sweep-spear, the three bands of louvers on the rear fenders, the backslanting “Twin-Tower” taillights ribbed in chrome and so much more–all suggest fleet, forward motion combined with heaviness and solidity. This design is saying something, and I think we all can sense what it is, but we can’t really put it into words.
When new, this Limited was priced in the low Cadillac range. I think the rear-end coachwork (if I may use such an archaic term for such a “futuristic” car) features more sparkling chrome and intricately-wrought details than the 1958 Cadillac Series 62 or de Ville. There’s an element of the grotesque here, but in one of the universe’s odd paradoxes, sometimes things that are grotesque can possess a delectable kind of beauty.
The closer you look, the more you see . . .
Original, light patina. Just the way I like ’em. I think Paul and I would agree on that.
This car must have an interesting history. Purchased new in Oklahoma City . . .
Then wound up in Mexico? And now located in northern Indiana–I guess this Buick is reliable if it can do all that long-distance traveling.
1958 Buick Limited dashboard, from the website kingoftheroad.net
The instrument panel continues the same themes as the exterior styling. The impression is that this is not so much a “car” as a jet fighter or an intergalactic spaceship. In fact, Buick ads state that the B-58 “appoints you chief pilot of the B-12,000 engine, which produces 12,000 pounds of thrust behind every piston stroke.”
“We began with a clean sheet of paper and a dream that burned bright as a flame.”
Which brings me to “What is this Air Born B-58 Buick like to drive?” I haven’t driven one, but I have owned two 1958 Cadillacs which share the same body structure as the Buick Super, Roadmaster, and Limited series. Based on that, I would say the Buick is like the Cadillac, only more so.
I consider the Cadillac ride to be a tad over-soft on anything except smooth- or almost-smooth pavement, and the Buick is even softer. So there will be an incomparable “dream-car” smoothness on good roads, but then it will get rather squishy when the going gets rough. The Cadillac has Hydra-Matic transmission, where you feel the shifts, but the Limited offered the new “Flight-Pitch” Dynaflow–a super-complex transmission where, like regular “Variable-Pitch” Dynaflow, the driver feels no shifts at all–just “an unbroken surge of smooth, soaring power!” Both these Dynaflows emphasized smoothness over efficiency. I remember getting about 8-11 MPG driving around town in the Caddy–I suspect the Limited’s mileage will be even lower than that.
1958 Buick Limited I recently spotted in my own hometown!
I should also mention that the Limited is 10″ longer than a base 1958 Cadillac sedan, and 2″ longer than a Sedan de Ville. It also has six mufflers (one muffler and two resonators on each side of its dual exhaust system) while Cadillac has only four. This is designed to give the Limited a truly mellow, quiet exhaust note. When you add it all up, what this means, kids, is that the LIMITED is longer, smoother, quieter, and chrome-ier than a Cadillac!
The 1958 Buicks are not really about “practicality” or “basic transportation”, but a kind of fantasy. Travel is now romanticized–you sit on soft, tufted cushions, ensconced behind that enormous ivory and chrome steering wheel. You start the engine (with your foot!) and it purrs, suggesting great thundering power within. You select “D” and surge smoothly, powerfully forward. You look out over that bulging hood, with two Vee’d gunsights guiding your way. You reach cruising speed effortlessly, without harshness. Much of the time you’re not pressing the accelerator, because Dynaflow glides with little hold-back. The car feels solid–like you’re driving a bank vault. Steering, braking (all power-assisted) contribute to the relaxing feel. This is advanced, this is the future; this is America leading the world!
Of course, the fantasy didn’t last very long.
In 1983 LIFE magazine called the ’58 Buick “a thunderous amalgam of outdated ideas.” The critics can say what they want, and they may have a point, but I still love these bold and dazzling 1958 Buicks, with all their imaginative design elements. To see one, to drive one, is a rare excursion into automotive dreamland.
Related CC reading:
Curbside Classic: 1958 Buick Special – Anything Worth Doing Is Worth Doing In Excess
As cool as this is, (and no argument there) I’d go with a Roadmaster. The Limited has the best tailights of the bunch, but I just don’t care for the backslash trim on the rear quarters. The ribbed arrowhead thing the other models all got is both sleeker and more over the top.
Not Mr, Earl’s finest hour, in my humble opinion. As always, beauty is in the eye of the beerholder… I’d hate to pay the re-chroming bill on restoring one of these.
It would be interesting to know what portion of the GM’s cost of production went to chrome plated trim in 1958-59 – probably more than enough to finance technically advanced (but less flashy) features such as FI, disc brakes, independent rear suspension, seatbelts, or better rust-proofing.
In those days, more chrome meant more status and a higher price, but I remember reading that Ford accountants discovered it actually cost the company more money to make the cheapest variants because the body pieces were punched out with the holes for the chrome trim attachment already in place, and hence a base car without all that chrome trim needed to have those many holes leaded in and smoothed before painting at great cost in labor.
I still remember from metallurgy class we learned 1958 was the all time peak year of zinc die castings in the USA.
Interesting point. I do believe the American manufacturers very much hobbled themselves with thousands of slight variants of the same car. Complicating the manufacturing process for the sake of making penalty boxes out of lower end models was unsustainable if your competitors pursued a more standardized process, likely improving quality in the process.
The Japanese manufacturers certainly put an exclamation point on that in the mid 1970s.
I remember reading that Ford accountants discovered it actually cost the company more money to make the cheapest variants because the body pieces were punched out with the holes for the chrome trim attachment already in place, and hence a base car without all that chrome trim needed to have those many holes leaded in and smoothed before painting at great cost in labor.
Citations? Links? Verification? Another urban myth? I have a very hard time believing that Ford and other company accountants just woke up one day from their deep slumber at their desks and discovered this. Every penny of expense of materials and production processes had been fleshed out decades ago, going right back to the Model T.
Maybe not Earl’s finest hour, but definitely GM’s most Harley Earl-est hour. I recall reading an article a while back that said Earl initially approved a design with even more chrome, hard as that is to believe, and someone sneakily removed some at the last minute, when it was too late for Earl to do anything about it.
That was the 1958 Cadillac Sixty Special.
Not my favorite 1950’s design, but I can see the appeal. The word I would use to describe it is “busy” or perhaps “fussy.”
160 squares in the grille? (I had to Google it). 15 strakes on each side set inside two spears? And if that weren’t enough, there is the “Limited” script text, along with that weird helmet with sergeant stripes looking thingie.
I need to visit the eye dentist after looking at all that eye candy!
That ’59 or ’60 Buick in that same wrecking yard pile (just to the left) still looks ready to take a bite out of an unwitting bystander. Growlyface.
Stephen, Thanks for featuring this car and I love it! Sure it is over the top, but that is part of its charm.
We had a neighbor that had a 58 Roadmaster in the same color, and it left a major impression on me as a kid. If you like something, it does not matter what Paul or anybody else thinks about it. No apologies are needed.
Tastefully over the top. I like to believe Mr. Earl’s passion for Buick shows here, the 1958 Oldsmobile is the car I have the toughest time getting my head around.
Aqua, loaded and Limited. I’d really rather have this Buick.
I like the sticker from Mexico. I think that’s a tourist sticker that was issued by Customs authorities – there was a paper permit as well (from what I understand) and tourists would often be stopped and asked to show both the sticker and the permit.
If I went through that hassle, I’d keep the sticker on my car too.
Yep…it just means that the car was driven into Mexico, not that it stayed there for any length of time. I recall back in the 1970s that having a Turista sticker indicated that you had driven into Mexico further than Tijuana and thus required your getting the necessary permit and to pay the requisite fee. I recall from a trip to San Diego when I was a kid that one could get out of buying the permit/getting the sticker if you weren’t going any further than Tijuana…which wasn’t a problem for us since my mom insisted that we return to California after about 15 minutes south of the border. Oh well.
Anyway, the sticker was sort of a badge of coolness for some (it wouldn’t have been for my mom I guess).
They probably also indicated that your car was ripe for breaking into when you were in Mexico. Which may be one reason why they stopped being a thing by the 1980s. I think.
My God, what a beast!
I wonder how many tubes of Semi-Chrome paste are needed to polish all the chrome on this example of Harley Earl’s “taste”, each time it needs brightening??? This, the ’58 Olds and Pontiac’s AZdreks certainly remain prime examples of GM uhh…”design”! 🙁
Pretty color though, and with the matching interior in lieu of todaze BLA black, very nice!! 🙂 DFO
I can easily see why many like and others hate this car .
It screams wretched excess .
Not always a bad thing I think .
I’d want to see close up pix of the undercarriage before bidding on it .
-Nate
If you pay to have this car detailed, I wonder if they charge you for the “Hazard Pay” that they will have to pay their detailer employee?
Personally, I like all that chrome, but wouldn’t want to have to deal with polishing it. I personally think that the ’58 Impala is ostentatious enough.
I absolutely love the color. Normally I like my fifties cars two-tone, but this is beautiful the way it is! This car is a Brougham before that became a thing.
Tom mentions the 160 chrome squares in the grille above. That reminds me of the 240 holes I had to poke out when cleaning the rims on my ’97 Grand Prix GTP. What a pain that was every time I washed that car.
I love it! What’s not to like? A genuine survivor of the American Rococo period.
This design is saying something, and I think we all can sense what it is, but we can’t really put it into words.
Overwrought? Excessive? Self-indulgent? Heavy-handed? Flowery? Flashy? Exaggerated?
When I looked at the profile shot of this car, it suddenly reminded me of a ’58 Packardbaker on steroids.
I can just imagine this taking its owners on a trip into Mexico with an Airstream trailer. (I could only find an image with a Cadillac)
When I was a kid the tri-5’s already had hot rod cachet, at least the Chevys. The ‘59 and ‘60 GM cars were just wild, and the 1961 and newer GM’s looked modern (but maybe not because they were everywhere). When the ‘65 Chevy came out it was stunning. But the ‘58’s, whether Chevy or B-O-P just looked lost. Old cars even when they were 5 or 10 years old. Of course, 60 years later I appreciate them more. A bit.
The 1958 Buick Roadmaster limited. Longer than a Cadillac. And the Cadillac people at GM was not happy about that. When I was in school, one of my friends father bought one. Riding in the back seat was like being a a living room. Oldsmobile was just as ugly. My dad bought a 59 Electra 225″ long
I have always debated which were worse GM design years 1958 or 1959, but I find that 1958 Buick dashboard to be truly SWEET!
I didn’t know what to make of it as an 8-year old when it came out. But, if I’d been a pack rat pup instead of a kid, I would have taken as much chrome as I could drag home. There’s certainly a battle between ornamental elements on the rear fenders.
Sputnik was launched a year before this space yacht came out. We second graders went outside to watch it streak by. Wonder what the Soviets would have thought if the Joneses from Dubuque dressed up and invited their neighbors, Buddy and Millie on an evening drive to catch a look.
Those GM ads from the 1950s that only show part of the car (with the rest seemingly gone) and with the car headed to space always remind me of Elon Musk’s roadster; except with happy 1950s people in them instead of the creepy “Starman”.
https://www.cnet.com/science/space/heres-where-elon-musks-tesla-roadster-is-after-five-years-in-space/
A truly weird set of ads.
Stephen, thanks for posting. My take on this car…and I almost think that this is yours too…is that there are so many cool bits/doodads that there are actually too many cool bits/doodads. It’s like if they just could have stopped adding things about 75% of the way to what they wound up with it would have been terrific.
That said, my problem with the dagmars is that they actually look too small. I mean, if you’re gonna have dagmars, then the whole idea is that they be a bit more resplendent.
Great post!
I vote “yes!”
Outrageous Americana in the genre of the Atonic Bomb Cake.
Always a Buick fan, about 1973 I had a chance to buy a black 58 Special convertible for $150.
It was rough but basically with less chrome it looked better than this
It’s the Cadillac of Buicks.
I was in the 3rd grade when these cars came out and have liked them ever since. I still don’t know why. The first AMT annual kit I bought was a ’58 Roadmaster convertible which I still own. I have redone it twice. I also bought a ’58 Roadmaster hardtop promotional when I was in high school and felt I was lucky to find one. The ’58 Buick is still one of my top favorite ’50s cars and I am not a fan of large cars. Go figure. I did get to drive one that belonged to a friend who had a small car collection once. It was for a local parade and, of course I was more than happy to drive one. It was smooth and very comfortable. Incidentally, it was also in this pretty shade of green.
Anybody remember the ROAD HOG SUPER AUTOMOBILE that Milford the pig won in a contest in the 1953 “Maw & Paw” cartoon?
1958 was the year of peak chrome at GM, the trend went the other direction after this. I had a ’57 Cadillac which I preferred over the ’58 facelift. In ’58 the stylists just ladled on the chrome and shiny knicknacks.The Buicks and the Olds fared the worst. Why were these cars so big? Standard Fords and Chevys had gotten pretty big by then, but there was still room for growth. Consider Lincoln.
This green Buick is a wonderful survivor, it is a window into the late ’50’s mindset. It displays what the designers wanted the public to be persuaded to buy, as well as what many buyers thought was finally over the top. GM brought out their new line of compacts, only a few years later.
I would say that things returned to a more sane standard, but cars got even bigger as the 70’s went on.
It’s rather an “amalgam” of cars from the “late 40’s” to about “1960”.
And to think Harley Earl had a mild facelift of these on tap for 1959, before the GM stylists revolted while he was on a European vacation. This was perhaps the last totally Earl design. A fitting sendoff really, taking many of his legendary styling cues to the extreme. In many ways Earl was the father of automotive styling, but his 1958 retirement came none too soon. Bill Mitchell had a tough act to follow, but his era proved to be just as successful and significant as Earl’s.
I can imagine that the longtime owner of this car being glad he bought when he did, and avoided those funny-looking 59s. 🙂
And to think Harley Earl had more of this planned for 1959, until the GM styling staff revolted while he was on a European vacation. This was perhaps the last totally Earl design. A fitting sendoff really, taking many of his legendary styling cues to the extreme. In many ways Earl was the father of automotive styling, but his 1958 retirement came none too soon. Bill Mitchell had a tough act to follow, but his era proved to be just as successful and significant as Earl’s. GM’s legendary place in U.S. history was due in no small part to these two men.
American as Apple pie. Who wouldn’t bow down to the chrome beauty! You have to love it. Chrome chrome whop bop a lu bop.
I saw one of these when I was a young teenager. I loved it then and I love it now. The chrome in the grille is exquisite and the design. Shootie boys it looks fast sitting still.
Had a 1958 Buick Century and a 58 Supper 88 Ol ds. Loved both. They didn’t call them the crome horses for nothing. Very nice!!