Re: 55/56 QUESTION

Posted by Dave Brownell On 2014/4/28 8:20:04

Given the comments and learned opinions of Randy, O-D and the boys from Nevada, my 56 may be "cruisin' for a brusin." The previous owner, after four or five attempts to get a leak-free re-coring of the original Packard radiator, installed a brand-new F-250 Ford radiator (I'm not sure if it was Diesel or gas, but it's all-metal and no plastic) that fit the space beautifully, requiring only a bit of fabrication work on the lower cradle. Of course, it came with the internal transmission cooler and fittings, so that's when the original Packard cooler went into the box and new lines were fabricated from the radiator to the Ultramatic. His work looks good and 5-6 years later, no apparent problems with the expedient Ford solution.

I agree with the comment Craig made about it being more of a heater than a cooler, although heat exchangers work that way. But being installed on the lower end of the typical radiator flow, the cooled water coming out of the bottom of the radiator, wouldn't it be the lower temperature coolant flowing over the heat exchanger and trans fluid than the hotter stuff coming from the engine into the top of the radiator? I also wonder if the esteemed Packard engineers were forced to work with the contemporary Type A trans fluids of the time (Sperm-oil, etc) instead of the more modern Type-F that followed. That's what I'm using in the temperate Georgia climate and my Ultramatic seems to be shifting fine, having not been opened up in a very long time. Then again, we're all on borrowed time, aren't we?

Just in case, the original Packard trans cooler awaits an encore in a box on the shelf. And I wonder if the NAPA number for a standard transmission 55-56 Packard V8 might someday be the proper replacement part should I ever need a lower radiator hose replacement?