At least that what Buick called it. The Roadmaster was “Custom Built by Buick.” Maybe not custom in the true pre-war sense, but when you look at the fine details of this car, you find all these wonderful little touches that make it a worthy contender in the luxury car field.
You should read this ad copy–it’s really something!
The Buick Roadmaster was like a Cadillac for people who didn’t want a Cadillac–“Too showy, too pretentious, overpriced!” they might say. Roadmasters and Cadillac 62s shared the same body; you can see it in the doors, windows, and roofline. And a Buick saleman was sure to point out that the Roadmaster possessed certain exclusive qualities that made it in fact superior to the lofty Cadillac!
So I found this example being sold on eBay by Gateway Motors of Crete (Chicago) IL, and I thought, “Wow, that’s a real ’50s car as they mostly were–not a ’57 Chevy with flames; not a chopped, leadsled Mercury, or a Corvette or a T-Bird–the cars that get all the pop-culture attention.” No . . . this is what most upwardly mobile, middle class, middle aged people (you know, the ones who actually run the country) aspired to and bought. It was their crazy kids who were tooling around in the hot rods! (Actually, not that many of them.)
Real ’50s adults. No D.A. haircuts, no jeans, no leather jackets. They voted for Ike, and they haven’t heard rock ‘n roll yet. They know their Buick dealer personally. The wife picked the two-tone blue and white paint job herself. “Buick makes the best cars.”
Compare the Cadillac with the Buick. Same bodies, but the Caddy gives you a different grille with bigger “Dagmar” bullets; little fins instead of straight fenders; completely different V-8 engines and suspensions; Hydra-matic instead of Dynaflow; different starter switch location; and quite a bit more. Cadillac prices started at $3977 for the Series 62 sedan versus $3349 for the Roadmaster. That’s a $628 difference, which makes the Buick seem like a smashing good buy!
In those days, the cars of General Motors’ five divisions, even if they shared some components, each had distinct “personalities”. Buicks and Cadillacs, I have found, are at their best cruising the boulevards at low to moderate speeds, where they feel silky smooth and solid. A mid-’50s Chevy or Pontiac would be firmer and have a more “geared to the road” feel, with better handling in exchange for a little more harshness over bumps. So with the variety of engines, transmissions, suspensions, and body lengths (and–of course–looks), the GM car buyer had a broad selection of makes and models available to suit his particular preferences (and price point).
You walk around this car and you can see all the little things that set it apart from the “lesser” Buicks: the B U I C K and Roadmaster names, the gunsight hood ornament, and the heraldic Buick plaque–all rendered in gold; the unique 2-bar spinner wheelcovers; the graceful sweep-spear with four (not three) “Ventiports”. This is like the equivalent of getting dressed up with a suit and tie, but then adding cuff links, a jeweled tie clip, and a silk pocket square–little things can mean a lot!
Incidentally, portholes did not originate with Buick. The 1934 LaSalles had ’em first, and they had five!
Let’s have a look inside . . .
It’s beautiful on the inside too. Highly polished chrome surfaces, inverted silver “V’s” on the round gauges, engine-turned satin silver panel. I can now see where AMC got the idea for the speedometer design in their line of ’56 Hudsons (0 30 60 90 120 in big numerals).
P N D L R, and you line up the red dot. The salesman says, “You feel no shifting jerks in D–just smooth, flowing power. Even Cadillac doesn’t have that!”
All these futuristic-looking, flowing shapes–like you’re piloting an atomic-powered space ship or something . . .
Rear seat luxury–fold-down armrest, upholstered rope strung along the seat back, solidly-fashioned chrome ashtray.
———————————————————————–
1956.
So what happened to Roadmaster? Each successive model year, a freshly-designed edition came out, crafted to be even smoother, more powerful, sleeker, and more daring than ever before.
1957.
All-new bodies arrived in ’57, inches lower with more power, ball joint suspension, and hardtops all across the line.
1958: Last of its kind. Makes our futuristic ’55 look rather dowdy and old fashioned. But wait ’til buyers see what’s coming next . . .
Everything came to a crescendo in 1958. Roadmaster was upstaged by a new top-of-the-line model, the Limited–a longer, even more sumptuously trimmed car, priced in Cadillac territory. What were Roadmaster buyers to think, now that it was no longer the top Buick model? Where do we go from here . . . ?
1959 Buick Electra 225.
. . . blasting off to another galaxy, or so it seemed. Now last year’s sparkly-new “Air Born B-58s” seem obsolete! These ’59s are so new, that the names had to be new, Buick claimed. The “Roadmaster” name is no more, the Limited (which sold poorly) has been dropped after just one year; now the top Buick model is “Electra 225”–named for its 225 gorgeous inches of overall length–and priced right around the traditional Roadmaster level. And that’s the way it would be for many years to come . . .
1991 Buick Roadmaster
. . . until 1991, when it was decided that the Roadmaster name should be revived for a new flagship Buick model. Whereas the Roadmasters of Harley Earl’s day could be seen as trendy, upscale, and modern, this new version immediately comes across as geriatric and contrived. And the vaunted “Buick quality” largely wasn’t there, as this model had reliability problems, leaving their owners with lots of expensive repair bills. In the new Roadmaster’s defense, I will say that it lived up to the Buick heritage by being extremely smooth, powerful, and quiet. This would become truly the last Roadmaster, as the car was continued without significant change before being discontinued in 1996.
2021 Buick Enclave Avenir.
So what do you buy now if you want a luxury vehicle–a Roadmaster successor–priced just below Cadillac and Lincoln; and below Mercedes, Lexus, and so forth? How about a 2021 Buick Enclave Avenir–the most expensive Buick currently offered, with a base price of $55,000. If Buick buyers had trouble relating to LeSabre–Invicta–Electra in ’59, the current Encore–Envision–Enclave–Avenir lineup seems even harder to relate to and compare with anything familiar. Will anyone be impressed by the fact that you’re driving an Enclave rather than a lowly Encore? Maybe if they put three, four, or five portholes on each one, that would help . . .
Double CC Effect! Yesterday I spotted this 1955 Buick and Fiat, parked right around the corner from me!
The polar opposite of the featured Roadmaster, this ’55 Special is a bottom-of-the-line stripper: 3-on-the-tree standard transmission, manual steering and brakes, basic small hubcaps–but it does have 2-toned paint!
That manual tranny is probably what kept that ’55 Buick alive all these years!
Repairs of the Dynaflow would have sunk it…
The windshield inspection sticker is from 1973, so I suspect it has been sitting in a garage since that time. It’s getting new tires now–the tires it has are cracked and dry rotted, as if the car has not moved in many years!
My dad bought my mom a new 1954 Buick Super, it sat in the garage I was told until she got her license. She said that was her favorite car. Her next car was a 1959 Buick Electra 225 which I remember riding in more than the 53, I was born in 1955. On the 59 you could set the speedometer at a certain speed and an alarm would go off if you exceeded that speed.
The Roadmasters would have seemed all the more impressive considering that their owners almost certainly learned to drive on a Model T. Flying a spaceship is right!
You make Buick’s current branding seem completely incompetent by comparison.
This was a very nice paen to the heritage of the Buick brand and the Roadmaster model. I admire both. Thank you.
We had one of these for Driver Ed in 1961, It was a 55 Special. Also, a friend rolled a 55 four door at 100 MPH. He was not hurt.
The ‘56 was by far the most stylish, with the open rear-wheel arches.
I love the bodystyle of these ’54/5/6 models. I think my choice would be a ’54 Super or Roadmaster 2-door hardtop (I took this picture at the 2008 Buick Club meet in Flint).
My Great-grandfather (‘Big Daddy’) was a Buick dealer in Thomaston, GA:
He sold used cars prior to taking the Buick dealership – this pic is a screen grab from a film shot in 1947: https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=GBjVaaW1E8c
He “ate his own dog food,” as you can see by the 1951 (I think) Buick sitting outside the garage (that’s me and my cousins on the swing):
Which would get upgraded to a ’57 later on. They also had a two-tone Buick (possibly the one inside the garage in the above photo), which was the last car they owned before they passed (Big Momma in the mid-1970s, Big Daddy in the early 1980s).
Another shot, parked in the driveway of my parent’s first new home, shot sometime in 1963, I think):
Great essay! Note how the ad for the 1955 Roadmaster does not mention power windows which is because they were only standard, if I remember correctly, on the convertible. Your information regarding who bought these cars and why is spot on. The rope on the front seat’s back is for holding a lap robe, which is a holdover from the olden days of motoring. I remember a family that owned a 1957 Buick Super. The Super and the Roadmaster has six mufflers for the dual exhausts. I doubt that many people replaced them with another six.
A very nice car to see this morning!
The picture of the typical buyer couple is spot on for my grand parents – they looked and dressed very much like your ’50s adults.
And, they did have a few Buicks. The first I’m aware of was a ’55 Special coupe. The kids were out of the house, my Grandmother started working, and she needed wheels for the job. It was originally paired with my Grandfather’s bathtub Hudson, which eventually became a ’58 Edsel!
I’ve heard several extended family members mention the Buick, it seems to be fondly remembered (not my Grandmother’s but very close from pictures I’ve seen)……
That pic of the ’50s grandparents standing in front of their home built, solid, brick barbecue, reminds me of the one they built in one of the last I Love Lucy shows. Lucy loses her wedding ring so her and Ethel take the whole thing apart again, but don’t find the ring until later in a cooked burger. Needless to say, their BBQ rebuild failed miserably.
Great writeup. We had friends who had a 55-6-7 Buick, and I remember having a ride in it once. I was fascinated by all the chromed instruments on the dash panel.
I remember those backyard brick barbecues from the fifties. Seemed like the height of Sunset magazine domestic luxury to me as a little kid. Probably no one builds them any more, but there must be some left in backyards. Not something easy to put at the curb on trash day. Also mostly non-rusting, unlike the rest.
There’s a big one behind my grandparents’ house (now my dad’s) next door to me now. It didn’t draw well, despite a tall stove pipe up the two story chickenhouse behind it, and hasn’t been used in 60+ years. I cut the ivy and wisteria off it every few years. The grill itself is long gone, but the stove part is still there.
Many trash incinerators still dot American back yards, often folks think they’re BBQ’s but no grilling surfaces…
I miss these grand old Buick boats and feel sorry for those who have never ridden in or driven one .
No mention of the “Starterator” .
-Nate
I once owned the world’s most clapped out 1955 Buick Super convertible.
What is most inexplicable to me is how GM built almost completely different bodies with some, like with 54-56 Buicks, ending up as models of the same brand (Special/Century and Super/Roadmaster). People seeing one would mostly just think “Buick” even though they were so different. Those paying more attention than me know which one is an A, B or C.
Obviously the touch points (I think they are called – common dimensions) were the same. The same dashboard fit in all of them. Frames (other than length), suspensions, engines etc. were about the same. All kinds of body and trim pieces were not, since the fender line on the small ones is right at greenhouse level and on the big ones it’s several inches below. On the big ones the A post is vertical; on the small ones it leans forward. Seems like a whole lot of trouble and expense for not much results.
Maybe because it was an emergency crash course to get the 1959’s out, but GM went the opposite direction and everything from Chevrolet to Cadillac were variations on the same body, as the four door hardtop greenhouses make obvious.
A used two tone green ’55 Super (almost an R’master) coupe replaced dad’s origional quest past ordinary middle-class, the ’51 Roadmaster; around 1959, & became my midnight racer as a stupid teenager. And compared to to the ’51 dynaslow, it was a screamer….oh, maybe more of a muffled holler, but put it in “low” it would wind out nicely ’til about 50, where I gave up the race to light weight “lesser” vehicles.
Over the years I’ve owned the following cars, all good running & dependable examples, and all 100% original low mileage vehicles.
1955 Packard Patrician
1955 Buick Roadmaster
1955 Cadillac Fleetwood 60S w/Eldorado dual carb engine
1955 Imperial C-70 limousine
1955 Chrysler New Yorker Town & Country wagon, with C-300 hemi & dual carbs
1955 Lincoln Capri sedan
The best riding of all the above cars was the Packard, nothing else was even close.
The quietest car on the list was the Cadillac, with Buick a close second.
The most reliable on the list was a tie between the Imperial & the New Yorker.
The best stopping was the Imperial limo, with it’s 4 wheel disc brakes.
The best fuel economy was [surprise] the Cadillac!
All of the cars were fully loaded examples, except the Lincoln, & Town & Country, didn’t have air conditioning. Of all 6 examples, 4 I regretted selling, the Lincoln and Buick just didn’t measure up to the other 4.
Those 4 I would want to buy back in a heartbeat, in this order of “want” . . .
Packard, Imperial, Cadillac, Chrysler.
Packard, Imperial, Cadillac. Interesting. In the reverse order to their sales success, alas.
Your observations seem to jive with my own (quite limited) experience and what I’ve read in contemporary ’50s magazines.
Cadillac = quiet. Yup, especially if the resonators are there. T. M. (above) relates that the senior Buicks had a total of 6 mufflers/resonators, 2 more than Cadillac!
Packard = best ride. Drove a ’55 400 briefly once. 40 MPH and under, rode like a modern Mercedes! Would like to try (maybe own) one sometime. Packard buyers who jumped to Imperial (2 torsion bars) got a ride at least as good or better, with less complication, based on the very flat, yet cushioned ride of my ’62.
You’re reminding me of a muffler I saw in a wrecking yard years ago, next to the big old Chrysler of the early-mid ’50s, I think it was, from which it had been pulled. I declare, the damn thing was at least three feet long!
Not to debate the actual merits of these cars’ rides, but do keep in mind that there’s nothing inherently superior about torsion bars; a coil spring is a coiled torsion bar. It’s the actual suspension itself; its geometry, length of travel, springing rates, shock valving and all the other details that determine ride quality. Of course the Packard had that “active” suspension that undoubtedly contributed to its ride over certain types of conditions.
Paul,
Can you clarify what you mean by “active” suspension?
While other [mostly European] cars were using straight torsion bars in production cars by the mid 1930s, [VW had established torsion bars in it’s engineering plans for all 4 wheels by 1936], the US automobile industry wasn’t interested in torsion bars until the 1955 Packard line.
But the Packard design was unique in the industry, in the way it dissipated the energy from the movement of the suspension. ALL the other car companies used the body or frame as the terminus for the “other end” of the torsion bar.
The Packard design didn’t intend for the energy be transferred to the car’s frame and body. It transferred the majority of the energy back into the road surface. This was accomplished by interconnecting the main torsion bars from the front suspension to the rear suspension [or vice-versa]. It’s easier to understand by describing in this manner:
When the front tire strikes a bump, the energy is transmitted to the front of the torsion bar by twisting the bar, just as in other torsion bar suspensions. But on the Packard, that torque is sent down the torsion bar to the other end of the bar, some 111 inches away. on reaching the back end of the torsion bar, the twisting action is transferred to the rear suspension, pushing downward on the rear axle, and ultimately on the rear tire & the roadway surface.
Since the ground is typically hard, not all the energy can be absorbed back into the road surface, and some of the energy is absorbed by the car frame. Plus, when the front suspension transferred energy into the torsion bar, some of the energy is transferred into the frame as well.
In other vehicles this energy transfer is absorbed into the front end of the car, then as the rear tire travels over the same basic bump, the energy is partially absorbed into the back end of the car. Riders notice this as a bump in the front, then a short time later, a bump in the rear.
Because the Packard suspension is interconnected, instead of feeling the 2 bumping actions, the Packard system raises the body slightly ONLY ONCE, and because that involves the weight of half the car, instead of each front/rear suspension taking that bump in only 1/4 the weight, the actual body movement is far less.
Note that as the car’s speed increases, on regular suspension systems including regular torsion bars, the “rocking motion” that results from the front bump then the rear bump action, causes the rocking motion to intensify. If that bump is quite large, the rocking motion of the car can continue even after the bump is no longer even under the car.
On the Packard there is far less rocking motion, so Packards glide over bumps, raising up only slightly. This was a serious problem in the 1950s, as many streets were not as smooth as streets today.
There is a wonderful CD available from the Mid Atlantic region of the Packard Club [PAC] as a club fundraiser. It shows the original cyclecar engineer Bill Allison created to demonstrate what his suspension could do, and a video showing a new 1955 Packard and new Cadillac & Lincoln sedans going over a railroad crossing in Detroit. The Packard takes it in stride, the Cadillac & Lincoln crossing resulted in a dented oil pan on one, and the rear bumper was torn off the other car.
Another video by Packard shows the difference between a 1954 Packard and a 1956 Packard with torsion bar suspension. it can be seen here on youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfR7CModO0w
The torsion bar info starts at minute 9.
I wrote “active” in quotes, in reference to the fact that the interconnection of front and rear torsion bars is a crude form of active suspension.
I’m familiar with the Packard’s suspension system.
And to clarify: in this application, torsion bars were essential to make it work. I was referring to torsion bars in general. There’s a common theme that Chrysler’s front torsion bar suspension was superior because it used torsion bars. That’s not really the case. They put a bit more effort into the whole front suspension, plus until 1966, the springing on Chryslers was stiffer on average compared to other domestic makes, which gave it a handling superiority.
When the torsion bars were softened for ’66 (or was it ’65?), most comparison road tests showed that advantage was lost, and they often came in behind GM cars of the period.
Not at all surprised about the Cadillac’s best fuel economy. The Hydramatic was much more efficient than the torque converter transmissions of the others.
My grandfather had big Buicks from 1918 to the black ’56 Roadmaster sedan he bought a few months before his death in November 1956. Grandma switched to black Cadillacs in ’64, but she sold the Buick to my great uncle, and I got to drive it a few miles about 1980. After driving another dead great uncle’s ’56 Olds 88 in HS, the shape was familiar, but the driving feel was totally different. Ponderous and stable versus the Olds’ Rocket.
The rope across the seatback is apparently for blankets, or at least that’s what the Queen uses it for. I don’t remember a center ashtray on the 56 seatback, but I was in front. My dad also had big Buicks from ’68 on–Cadillacs were too flashy for him.
Jay Leno has many cars, but from what he has said repeatedly on his show is that his ’55 Roadmaster will always be his favorite.
Jay has a soft spot for ’55 Buicks. I believe one was his 1st car.
The Roadmaster on Jay Leno’s Garage was custom built for him by GM. I can’t remember what year, but it has a Corvette engine and modified chassis with a Corvette suspension. The wheels look like period Buick wheels/covers but were custom machined and a larger diameter. He also had custom made high performance wide whitewall tires made for it. Jay would brag that he could stay with Porsche s on twisty roads and imagined what the Porsche drivers face looked like when he saw a ’55 Buick in his rear view mirror and it stayed right with him!
The picture of the ’55 Pontiac and Buick reminds be of my dad and uncle. Dad’s first new car was the Poncho and uncle’s first new car was the Buick, both bottom of the line two door sedans in green. Didn’t the Special outsell Plymouth that year to become #3 seller?
This unfortunately hurt Buick in the long run. Yes they hit #3 in sales, a goal by the then Buick general manager. To make this goal they built more cars than were set up to build, resulting in poor quality control. Between the quality reputation and 1958 recession Buick took a beating in sales later on.
That florid ad copy needs a title. For those of you familiar with the richer parts of Fairfield County, how about Somewhere West of Darien?
This Roadmaster would definitely be my choice over the same year Cadillac. The Cad somehow looks a bit drowsy with its eyebrows over the headlamps, and the fin shape has just been pounded into the common conscience over the last 65 years as being the distilled essence of the 1950’s (sorta like the 1957 Chevy as a whole). It obviously was pretty fresh stuff at the time, though. Oh, and the full instrumentation! Cadillac joined the idiot light brigade circa 1953 (though the temperature gauge didn’t disappear until sometime in the late 60’s); even a gauge with no real numbers, presents so much more information than the binary warning light.
My only point of contention would be the Dynaflow vs the Hydramatic. Driving a 1963 LeSabre convertible with the base 364 and Dynaflow left me a bit cold. I kept finding myself manually selecting “Low” to accelerate instead of ooze. This came to a quick halt when I went for the shift to “L” and hit a huge bump at the same time… went past my gear and into Reverse, skidding to a stop… fortunately on a gravel road at 20mph. I later found that pressing the accelerator much further down in “D” would change the stator pitch in the torque converter, then the car would squirt away from a stop with alacrity. Probably something I would get used to with time, but it’s hard to get past the amount of extra fuel used inefficiently churning fluid into heat, in the name of smoothness.
presents so much more information than the binary warning light.
True, but most people are more likely to notice the light coming on than the needle moving too far right or up. Why not have both?
Our ’56 Olds had a cold light that came on when you started the car, I guess to discourage you from gunning it too soon.
I want to like these, but for some reason they have never really lit my fire. The pre-54 would suit me better, I think. And while it is an issue of personal choice, is this one of the least appealing 2 tone treatments of the 1950s? We are so used to seeing color on cars of that era (as we are used to not seeing it now) but this one is really lacking in that department.
I wonder how much of that $628 price premium for the Cadillac 62 you got back at trade in time, say three years later. I suspect that is where the Cadillac delivered value.
While I like the Buick styling better, nailhead and Dynaflow motorboating is not my style. Give me the more efficient wedge combustion chambers and Hydramatic, please. Great that GM gave you the choice.
Those of us who grew up in the 50’s will always remember this axiom “the only thing that will knock a Roadmaster off the road is another Roadmaster”.
Portholes and a gun sight hood ornament. Couldn’t be any better.