Re: The History of Packard

Posted by Peter Hartmann On 2008/10/8 19:10:27

Brian is correct as to my failure to be accurate - I apologize - I should been clearer that the Ultramatic had ONE foward speed, a 3.54 ratio provided by the rear axle.

If I led you guys to think I said NO speed, Brian is right - I was being a bit too "theatrical" by calling it "no-speed". ! (but that's the way people felt about it who drove them when they were new and in service !).

As I noted, the way it worked was, it had only one speed, starting out with that slippery sluggish convertor, then, depending on throttle position, would "lock up" in direct drive.

Brian is INCORRECT in describing the "lurch" problem between the 2 - 3 shift on Hydramatics. That wasn't anything to do with "seals going bad". That was a problem that would arise from the "bands" wearing, easily corrected.

For those of you with Hydramatic-equipped cars, GET A SHOP MANUAL - DO NOT ATTEMPT TO ADJUST THE BANDS WITHOUT FOLLOWING THE SHOP MANUAL'S VERY SPECIFIC DIRECTIONS.

The band adjustment to eliminate the "lurch" is pretty simple. But do it wrong, and you WILL break something.

There are two "acorn" style nuts covering the lock nut and adjusting screws, both accessible thru holes in the floor-board covering the transmission. Lift up the rugs and you will see the covers.

Yeah - that Electromatic - what a goofy system that was! And what a joy to drive those big Packards were with the "356" engine and over-drive !

But they would have been even neater with a Hydramatic. With a Hydramatic four-speed, they could have been equipped with a very high final drive ratio, and still had gut-wrenching off-the-line performance.

Again, maybe John can prowl thru his rerference material and find out & tell us more about why Packards didnt have Hydramatics.

Perhaps in John's excellent reference sources there is some note or explaination as to why Packard didnt negotiate with General Motors for use of the Hydramatic ? GM seemed all too willing to sell its transmisisons to automobile companies world-wide. ? ? ? ?

Of course there was no way the obsolete "flat heads" Packards could have kept up with the then modern Cad, Olds, and Linclon over-head valve V-8'sappearing in 1949, even WITH a Hydramatic transmission.

But at least a Hydramatic-equipped Packard wouldnt have been so slow as to have been an industry laughing-stock. Drive a properly maintained a '50 Packard Custom with Ultramatic, and compare it with a '50 Cad. if you want a real shock.

Now - come on - you guys - dont be mad at me. I am not clear what benefit there is to trying to cover up the fact that Packard committed corporate suicide, by a combination of poorly engineered, poorly assembled products?

I am also not clear why present owners of these later Packard products should in any way feel badly about having honest discussions-there is much to learn about all this.

Fact is, as noted elsewhere, Packard was pretty much out of the auto MANUFACTURING business by the start of World War II, "off-shoring" much of the parts manufacture to others. Harrison Div. of GM radiators. Carbs., generators, starter motors, traditionally purchased from outside suppliers. Same goes for brakes, radios, steering gear, etc.

So there is no reason, with a little "tinkering", why you cant make a nice, serviceable car out of a 50's era Packard. I did! Out of a LOT of them! What you guys apparently can not or will not understand, is that we in here are all CAR BUFFS. We are willing to WORK on our Packards to keep them serviceable.

BEFORE the Interstate system was up and running, I drove my '51 Packard 250 Convertible from the George Washington Bridge in New York City, to the Barham off-ramp on the Hollywood Freeway, in 2 1/2 days, and I SLEPT AT NIGHT ! And that was in summer, with grueling heat. So you can imagine how fast I was going. So, sure, a little tinkering, and you can get good service out of things.

A buyer of a new car, then and now, isn't interested in a "do-it-yourself" kit. The kind of thinking that believes it can push a shoddy product out the door (that needs extensive re-work at the dealer before it can be sold), is what killed Packard, would have killed Chrysler had the tax-payer not bailed them out. Almost killed GM and Ford (have they learned their lesson - my Ford Excursion seems pretty well assembled.... ? ? ? ).