Re: Was this typical of new 1950's cars?

Posted by HH56 On 2014/9/3 9:07:48

I don't know how other mfgs covered their cars at that time but Packards warranty was 90 days or 4000 miles so some expenses could be expected after the warranty was over.

Windshield -- who knows -- but I wish you could get anything done for $113.60 today.

If the driver was trying to hotrod the car as you could some of the other cars of the era then the trans probably suffered. I guess we all know now that V8 Ultras were somewhat delicate and didn't take to hard use but back then I expect that wasn't even considered with that big engine. It could also have had some poor linkage adjustment from the start and suffered as a result. Another possibility is the mechanic might not have been too familiar with what he was working on and helped an early demise. At any rate, it was an expense that shouldn't have happened. Can you imagine what would happen today if a mfg put out such a delicate item. Remember the uproar over the bad O ring in some of Chryslers K car transmissions.

The 55 torsion level was subject to shorting in poor weather conditions what with everything being exposed. No idea where the car was located but if in a place where they used a lot of salt on the roads can easily see shorts and problems. The replacing of the switch with a later version makes me wonder what the car had -- or what was really done. In 56 components were moved out of the wet and into the engine compt or was waterproofed if it stayed under the car. A 56 car should have had that setup from the start -- although there was a shorting problem with corrosion developing around a rivet on some early 56 switches so maybe that was it. No idea what is meant by replacing with a late type levelizer switch because until the modern solid state replacements came about a few years ago, the 56 version was the latest. Maybe they replaced an early corroded rivet switch with another.