Re: Considering Packard v. Hudson

Posted by Eric Boyle On 2009/12/31 0:08:55

The stroke on a 359 is 4.5".

And that's what I was thinking, Packard was trying to fit as much in the given space as possible, therefore all the "monkey business" with the crank and the counterweights. That, or when the 356 was developed, the engine of the day was the 320/385, and they just used what they knew, bolt on counterweights. OR, maybe it was just too hard to forge the crank and make it work without bolt on counterweights, and that's why they went that way. And as for needing more counterweight, it just makes sense since the rods being longer would obviously weigh more.

As for the hijacking, maybe Kev can divert this part to a new thread, and call it "Packard crank specs" or similar.