Quote:

Brian/ Kev, I would like to suggest that the 1941-47 Clipper be kept as a separate classification from the 48-50 models.
I agree that while the Clippers share much in common with the 48-50 the 356 engine used in all the 1942-50 Clipper Super Eight and 48-50 Custom models and the Junior 245 six are the only common engines among these years. The 48-50 were sufficiently different (heating, ventilation etc.) that my feeling is that the models should be separate. Just my

Was going to do the extractions or more likely, rescan plus an addition or 2 with a better quality and also include the ancillary info wire color etc.

Another question, on the diagrams though. The one you posted is one I had scanned high but reduced in size and converted to pdf. Obviously detail is lost. Was thinking if the dpi scanned were bigger, it would print better, but the original is huge & not practical.

I know we've settled on 300 but trying to print some of those SC diagrams gives a pretty poor quality page. What would you recommend for printing yet still a reasonable file size--or maybe we could do a high pdf for print and low res jpg to view..Suggestions.

Damien -

Thanks for taking the time to scan and send that article. Looks like several viewers have enjoyed it.

Though the text contained very little about the Monte Carlo itself, I enjoyed the additional perpsective on where Packard came from and where they hopes to go.

It's interting that the situation was viewed from the outside as an autmoaker in trouble even before 1953, yet they held out hope with new management team. Also interesting was that Nance & Company was looking all the way to 1960, but knew that pulling it off was a big gamble - boom or bust, with room for nothing in between.

Howard, the '47 Diagram has been added to the Wire Diagram list.

At some point (unless some wants to do it for me), I will go through the SC's and the service manuals and extract copies of the wire diagrams out of those and put them into the Wire Diagram folder. This should make for easy quick access in the future.

Actually, lock-up torque converters were introduced in many GM vehicles in 1980 as an upgrade to a few previously existing transmission models. Their model numbers were simply suffixed with a "C": THM 200C, 250C and 350C.

The 700R4 wasn't introduced until the 1982 model year; used in truck models, it also found its way into a few passenger car models in the early years. 700R4 was later renamed the 4L60.

The 200-4R, based on the marginal THM 200, was introduced in the 1981 model year as GM's first overdrive automatic tranmission and was used in most RWD passenger car models. It was phased out after 1990, in favor of the 4L60 and its succesors.

I'm no engineeer, but have my doubts that the use of a lock-up converter was the culprit behind bearing failure in the SBC or the Packard V8.

Keith's point about "foundry amalagamation" certainly raises an eyebrow, though. In the absence of a genuine bushing, I wonder if the factory made a change in metallurgical specifictions for the second design pump body.

Jack, your 2E is thought-provoking. I've driven several dozen 55/56 Twin Ultramatic Packards and almost all of them (mine excluded for an unknown reason) really can "lug" uncomfortably after lockup when at speeds below 25 or 30. In some cases it can be quite pronounced - you may be on to something with that thought.

BTW, I've a bunch of the cam retainer plates in the cellar and can never remember which is the late "improved" one and which is the original. I believe one has 3 grooves and the other 4, can you tell me which is which?

Will Do!

For my 2?, 46-50 would be logical. I think there are more similarities than differences and as you said, that is the way service manual is laid out-- even if parts are separate.

Perhaps the Service Index grouping should roughly match the Service Manual Editions? Just a thought, as Brian said, feedback appreciated.

Kev -

I've been sidetracked with outdoor work and family visits over the last couple of weekends, but now that the weather has turned, I'm gonna jump back in on the 51-54 info today. I'm at the point now where I have to annotate the topics, assign categories, etc. - still tedious, but a little more creative process.

Also, as I worked my way back through the years, I've been squirreling away info from 1951 and later publications reagrding earlier Series, and I have the resources to assimilate topics from the SCs and STBs of 1948-1950. Perhaps I should put that info together, as well, but hand it over to someone more qualified with those cars for a final edit.

However, while 55-56 and 51-54 are natural groupings, I'm not sure whether we should have a 46-50 index or one for 48-50 and another for 41-47 (Clippers). Anyone out there have any thoughts on organization of this info?