Monoblock Engine Introductions

Posted by 58L8134 On 2011/8/14 7:51:09

Hi

The subject of when Packard turned to the monoblock technology for Senior engines relative to industry practice needs consideration and discussion. The following are comments first by myself, then by Owen (Dave):

".....What does strike me as odd about the '36-'39 engines (referring to the 320 ci) is that Packard didn't replace them with a monoblock unit as soon as the 120 was safely in production."

"An interesting subject to ponder, I'd be interested in hearing speculation about why they did hold onto the old design. Of course the 120 wasn't their first successful monoblock design, the 1932 Twin Six (Twelve) was a monoblock as well, and an incredibly advanced casting for the time."

This last point, one which I had forgotten (thanks Dave), points up their early capability with technology. As a 1930-'32 framework, GM was fielding the monoblock V-8 Oakland/Pontiac, various monoblock straight eights were issuing from mid-priced makes, the Ford V-8 shortly to arrive. Beginning with 1936, Cadillac and LaSalle V-8's would be monoblock. The old, barrel crankcase, separate cylinder block method was outdated, more costly to manufacture, needlessly so.

So, the question is: why did Packard, already employing monoblock technology to the Twelve and 120 eight, wait until 1940 to introduce a monoblock Senior straight eight engine?

Steve

(We can address their holding with babbitt bearings long after insert bearings were proven as ancillary, too)