Re: Considering Packard v. Hudson

Posted by Owen_Dyneto On 2009/12/30 22:59:18

Boy, I never thought this topic would occupy half my evening! I really thought most everyone except the V8 crowd would have known about the counterweight issue on the 320, 385 and 356 engines. Fortunately Nebraska is clobbering Arizona so I don't have to pay that much attention.

If what you're saying is that since more counterweight was needed and since the weights couldn't be larger in diameter because of clearance issues to the block, the only choice was to make them wider, then I guess I agree. Without getting into all kinds of stuff I don't understand too well like piston weight, big and small end rod weights, etc., I can't comment on why larger weights were required.

I need a break from this topic for tonight. I'll see what develops tomorrow.

PS - without bothering to look it up, the 356 stroke was 4-5/8, that couldn't have been much more than the 359 as the bores only differed by 1/16th.