Packard Forum Index » Post-War (1946-54)

In other posts we have covered the shortcomings of the coin end stabilizer bars in 21st series and earlier cars. It has been suggested that the improved 22-23 series bar with eyelets will fit the 21st series.

I'm trying that approach, but I am stymied. Shown is the original bar on my 2106, with a bend in the center to clear the center of the lower radiator bracket. Underneath is a 22-23 series bar that has no center bend, and won't clear that center bracket.

Can anyone tell me where I have gone wrong?
Thanks.

Attach file:

---

  (82.88 KB)

Are the basic dimensions of the bar the same and just missing the bends so would line up in all other respects? If that all works, there are different mounting brackets between 21 and 22-3. Am wondering if the bar might be at a different height or fore/aft position in the later cars to miss the radiator support.

Did you get the mounting hardware with the bar? This might be the clearance problem if trying to use 21st hardware.

Thanks gents. I thought at a glance that the brackets are the same, but they are not. The newer brackets are in fact different. They have an extra piece that drops the bar lower, perhaps 2 in., to clear the radiator support. Mystery solved, many thanks.

I thought I would take a break from tedious stuff and install the stabilizer as sort of a therapy project. Well, its not working.
First picture shows the brackets that came with the 22/23 series bar I got from Ross some months ago. As Howard and Dallas pointed out they are different from the 21st in that they are a two piece affair and the top piece lowers the bar in relation to the frame. I thought that the top piece would lower the bar enough to clear the radiator brace in the second picture, and moved on to other stuff. Nope. The brackets put the bar right about in the middle of the brace and I can't see how this is going to work.
Other folks have successfully made this swap, so I am stymied. Is there something peculiar about the radiator brace on a 2106?

Suggestions or guidance appreciated.
Thanks,
Mark

Attach file:

---

  (74.26 KB)


  (88.73 KB)

It appears the shape of the stock 47 bar and the configuration of the mounts puts the bottom of bar about even with the front support end and approx 1" in front. On the 47 bar the straight line distance from the center of the bar as it exits the bushing to the center of the round can on link dropping to A arm is just shy of 9". Is that the same on the 48 bar? Parts manual doesn't indicate any different bar between models. No separate listing for the frame piece that interferes but I doubt there is anything special for the Custom.

I'm thinking on the 48 bar they increased the length of the mounts by that extra approx 2" to drop the bar down below the end into the angled section just below the front tip. Is that not happening with the 48 piece? Where does it end up and how much more is needed? This factory photo is hard to see but that kind of looks like what is happening and looking at mine and imagining a straight bar located lower, I think it would cross just below the radiator cradle bolt.

My car is apart, but IIRC, there is nothing in that area that would prevent the bar from hanging slightly lower on the frame if needed thus clearing the radiator mount. Perhaps an additional small amount could be made up with a flat bar across both bolt holes used as a lowering block or some spacers.

Attach file:

---

  (63.88 KB)

Many thanks Howard,
I really thought the lower bracket was the fix. But, the '48 brackets put the bar about 1" below the top of the radiator support, about in the middle of the curve. In other words, right through it. The geometry from the links to the frame brackets seems to work fine.

Strange there are different part numbers for the 19th-21st stabilizer bars for models with the 356, but all 22-23 models use the same bar. I suppose anything is possible, but I wonder if Packard changed the radiator support after '47 towards uniformity. I would like to see a radiator support for a 22/23 356 - none here to look at.

I don't think spacers on the brackets would work because not only would we have to clear the rad bracket by 2-3 inches, wouldn't we also need to allow space for movement? I think we are talking several inches of extra drop.

Worst case scenario - I still have the original coin end bar with the curve in it, and Max now has remanufactured links, so I could go that route. Max would refund the cost of the new '48 links so I am just out the cost of the '48 bar and shipping.

Still, I wish I understood why this worked for other Clippers. I'm going to revisit this afternoon and see if I am missing something...

Thanks Howard.

It looks like they did change the cradle support for 22-23. The bar appears to go over it. Check out the first and last two photos in post 13 of the 48 Conv. Victoria project.https://packardinfo.com/xoops/html/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?post_id=126457#forumpost126457

Now you have me curious what was done to use the bar on a Clipper.

Yep, I see that. Also, it looks like the holes in the support are different. Can I conclude that the bar could go over the bracket? Wondering if that is going to interfere with the radiator. Hmmm. Late for the dentist, I will be revisiting later this PM.
Thanks Howard.

I'm thinking the bracket is mounted low on the cross member -- different shape without the angles and mounted equivalent to upside down to ours with the actual supporting surface on the low point of cross member.

The radiator cradle has a different part number for 22-3. Not sure if it is longer for the different support or same height & just mounted lower with a thicker cushion. The grill is not as tall & no idea if the 22-23 fender mount brackets are same as ours. Height or any of those fender items could be the reason for a different cradle.

I don't think the bar could go over the support on ours -- at least not on mine. The cushion separating the cradle from support is about half as thick as bar and occupies a fair amount of space on the support where the bar would need to pass -- if it could even fit under the cradle. Also think the bushing would have almost nothing left on top side to get the bar to raise high enough.

Looking at mine again to imagine the path of the 48 bar, am still surprised the bar is so far back that it wants to go thru the angles. Can't get a good judge of the distance away from cross member from the photos so curiosity is now tweaked on how it was used in Clippers. Unless you have a photo, will try to find a long straight piece of tube to parallel under mine just to see where my uncalibrated eyeballs are going astray.