Packard Forum Index » V-8 (1955-56)

h,

was going off milled slot, the cam plate is the only thing blocking the cam oil gallery,

the oil gallery is 9/16ths....that volume to me is where lost of pressure,

by using a plug,,mini freeze plug, with a hole in middle,,will hold back oil.

rt side i was thinking, 7/64ths, maybe left too..but my left is not milled to end.

Riki, just my opinion but overthinking this or trying unproven notions which may work or may cause further problems isn't called for, as Jack Vines said (who probably has more experience with this than all the rest of us combined), just install the correct cam retainer plate and be done with it, move on to the next project.

I don't think anybody is going to argue that using a General Motors oil pump on a Packard will not yield better performance. However, whether the capacity of the original pump was insufficient is open to question because there isn't any data or controlled test results. Only anecdotal trials.

What I find interesting are stories of Studebaker owners having lifter noise after installing the Packard pump on a Studebaker Hawk. Then when they deleted the vacuum pump the noise went away. As well, the upgraded shaft bushings in the revised Packard pumps seem to be doing well.

So take your pick. If you want better filtration the GM pump is definitely a superior choice. An the rerouted rear main oil feed is certainly better than the Packard design.

What I find disappointing is that Packards have a long history of oil pressure problems going back into the 1920's. The old timers used to swear that if the gauge wasn't pinned the bearings were being oil starved. I have since found some evidence that what sounded like superstition was actually a fairly accurate conclusion.

your right , dave, i need to move, on, have my dads cars to get on the road.


thanks,

thanks,to, all,,,

riki