Scored the backhoe. It works fine. It was the little tractor that decided to cause some "issues." But it does have that four-letter F-word script on it, so I'll blame that. And clearing the lot and taking down a few trees and cutting up a few more. Visiting folks.


Other than checking to see that all is well with them, I got absolutely nothing Packard done all week.

Thinking that possibly the switch was reassembled incorrectly, I took it apart, not easy with the hard sealer the rebuilder used to hold it together but it appears that it can go together only one way. In the event that I had actually forgotten the switch positions which is very likely, I had a look at the owners manual but it’s a bit vague on which position is off and which is accessory. Nevertheless, when it’s in the position where the key can be removed, there is continuity which obviously isn’t right. Does anyone have a solution?

I don't know what a 40 switch looked like but Packard also used rectangular shaped pillar light switches such as these.




Before buying your switch also verify how power is being supplied to your light. Powering of courtesy lights in the immediate prewar years seems to have been in somewhat of a transition with some courtesy light bulbs getting power thru the switch as was done in the 30s while others started using what became the postwar method of power going to the bulb first and then getting ground thru the switch and would light when the switch was turned on and grounded the wire.

If there are two wires at the switch chances are one of them comes from a fuse or other power source and the other goes to the light bulb and then gets grounded at the light housing. That setup needs an isolated two terminal switch.

If you only have one wire at the switch then it is probably handled like later years where power would go directly to the bulb and a single wire runs to a single terminal on the switch and gets grounded via a direct metal connection between the switch and one of the mounting screws on the switch. Both of the switches in the ebay photo are of the later style single terminal switch

Yes, that part of the shaft looks like it was thrown in a blender, but what matters is the sealing lip area which I thought "we" inspected before. Looking now, I see nothing under the shaft (blue), but fluid pooling by the bore (purple).

Attach file:

---

  Screenshot 2025-07-05 174451.png (894.76 KB)

Considering that all those cars used the same frame, rear axle, springs, and skirts, I think the ride height would all be the same. Only if the fender stampings were different, but I doubt that.

They were on the B-pillar on a 1940 110 sedan.

I was primarily looking at Cavalier's and Patricians when looking for the correct ride height of my car. I hadn't noticed that other models were different, but makes sense, particularly for the 2 doors to have a bit lower stance when it comes to styling.

Maybe it was a styling choice that the senior sedans had a bit higher ride, or maybe it was more expected that they would have rear passengers, which my car rarely had given the lack of wear and tear in the back.

Either way, it's 2025 and we should accept that all ride heights are okay, even if cars that sit a bit higher are better.

This is presumably the group, but I don't see a model 1382 listing. Is the switch right on the light itself?packardinfo.com/xoops/html/modules/parts ... &SearchValue=30.626&ButtonLookup=Go

packardinfo.com/xoops/html/downloads/par ... 41_PartsList_Group30_BodyGroups.pdf

They look like this and were common on all cars of the era. I have a '60s replacement somewhere but don't see it in my Classified Ads at the moment so found this eBay listing instead.

Quote:

No kidding. I'm going to soak the heads in my non-acidic desrusting solution and (hopefully) be able to salvage everything. The actual heads and manifolds are getting scrapped (unless anyone wants them) except the one exhaust manifold on it which somehow appears to be nearly NOS condition. Not insanely pitted like usual.