Re: Considering Packard v. Hudson

Posted by Owen_Dyneto On 2009/12/30 20:35:10

Dave, Do you have any idea why Packard went this route? Was it because the technology didn't exist when the engine was designed because of it's length and weight. Just curious.

Certainly not the available technology as the 120 shaft in 1935 had intergral counterweighting. I'd say that it was done to keep the overall length of the shaft and block with 9 mainbearings within a desired length. PS - I suspect the 51-54 9-main engines had narrower main bearingsk thus giving more "room" within the block. Packard couldn't wait to drop the 356, it was a VERY expensive engine to make.

What did you do about bolts?

Not to jump in on a question meant for others, but the shop I'm most familiar with just makes them.