Packard Forum Index » General

Some of the material I have read about the proposed 57-58 Packards that never happened said they were to use a "revised" T-L system. Anyone ever see any diagrams or documents regarding this "revised" system?

Having looked at the T-L display chassis at PPG, and knowing how car profiles were being lowered in the late 50s, necessitating footwells that would intrude into the space occupied by the 55's frame members and the torsion bars, did Packard work out a practical way to fit the the torsion bars in?

Bill Allison published a paper in 58 that showed a way to get T-L into a perimeter frame, but it uses a Rube Goldberg system of levers and cranks that would probably take too much space, too much cost and too much adjustment to be practical.

Attach file:

---

  (145.18 KB)

There is a fellow that has been building a car based on available info on proposed 57s that he found or has access to. He has built a frame which is supposed to have some of the next generation TL layout so might be a start. Been over a year since his last post so unknown what the current status might be.https://packardinfo.com/xoops/html/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=11813&forum=10&post_id=122406#forumpost122406

There are photos of just the frame that was made and photos posted with more of the TL visible. Not sure if that was of the same frame in the link posted above or remember which forum but maybe someone else remembers where and can post a link.

When I tell engineers about the Packard system they get wide eyed because they never thought such a thing existed. Then I tell them it is still the most advanced suspension concept in the world. It uses partial differential equations to translate jounce forces into orthogonal vectors.

"It uses partial differential equations to translate jounce forces into orthogonal vectors"
Tim, never knew that!

Quote:

Thanks for the link. Amazing undertaking. Looks like he's using hydraulic rams rather than electric for the load leveler bar adjustment. The entire frame appears to be 3 or more inches lower than a 56 as the driveshaft is above it, rather than the 56's X member encircling it. The torsion bars are lower too, as in the 56, the bars pass through the forward arm of the X member near the top. Now the bars pass under the crossmember.

Fascinating.