If they followed the original specs there would not be a resistance range but you would probably get a reading thru the heater itself. I am wondering if they might have done something in their repro sender similar to what HPH is contemplating with his external circuit.

It is possible the Ford gauge works the same way electrically but is constructed so it mechanically works in the opposite direction. I have no idea whether Fords park at the low or high end but if they park high then instead of the bimetal heating and bending to raise the needle as is done with the K-S gauges Packard used, the Ford gauge would bend and lower the needle. I suppose it is also feasible the Ford gauge is the same but mounted upside down as compared to Packard. The gauge would work the same but needle position at rest and C - H lettering would need to be different.

Again, we have run into the issue that even though they might work electrically, without someone previously trying the Ford senders and reporting back it is unknown if they are a direct replacement. If other wiring issues are ruled out and the gauge is still backwards it seems like perhaps we have an initial NO as to compatibility and it's back to square 1 on finding a replacement or a workaround.

Quote:
Email sent, awaiting reply.

I only find vague "Moss Tread" references in post-war Packard citations...never run across it in the pre-war realm.

However, in the 37 sales brochure, there is an image and narrative describing how the carpet type with underlying rubber water-resistant lining is part of the design...in essence they describe the same configuration as the post-war "Moss Tread" references. I think a marketing slogan was introduced post-war to communicate the same condition more easily.

I believe this was touched upon in one of the books where the author mentioned Packard making improvements and running changes throughout a series production and in many instances would offer the upgrades to previous owners of that series or even older series when possible or feasible.

This was initially done to counter other mfgs who typically sold a brand new looking car every year which instantly made the previous model obsolete. Packard owners noticed this too but tended to be long standing more conservative customers not necessarily wanting the latest and greatest flash. By doing the upgrade program many still got the current improvements for a minimal cost. This way they did not feel or see their cars immediately losing value and would realize that buying a Packard did not mean early obsolescence..

When the junior cars came along this retrofit program was not as prevalent although Packard did do something similar by making some accessories available for older models. To some extent the programs to retrofit the R11 ODs and the new 52 Easamatic into the 51 models was the same thing. OD was initially promoted as a reliability and Easamatic a safety issue but they were still a throwback to that make it look less obsolete era..

Quote:

Cleaned up the post and terminal, reinstalled the cable, and she started up within a single revolution. No flickering on the lights now either. So, maybe it was just a corroded connection? I would think that if it was a short in the solenoid or starter that it would be that way all the time.

I really need to get a cut off switch that can handle 6 volt applications. I'd rather not be removing the ground cable every time I'm done driving.

You for sure dodged a bullet there!

Trade Letters added to Factory Service Index

Skimming through these, and the other Letters, as I am checking them for relevant content, I do find it interesting in the 1st through about the 11th or 12th series that they made retrofit parts to update prior models with changes in later models. Not just things like mechanicals (engine parts, shocks, brakes, etc), but actual body styling.

Here is one example I thought was interesting:

https://packardinfo.com/xoops/html/downloads/TL/T-2545.pdf

It talks about the optional equipment needed to mimic the appearance of a 9th Series V Radiator/Grille on an 8th Series.

There are also several other instances like this. I wonder how many folks had these factory-approved alterations and fast-forward to the future and are perplexed why their car has different equipment on it than expected. They probably figured that was done by an owner way later in a car's life or/and have been told it was incorrect when it was a "factory" approved change.

This could be the meat of a great article for the Commorant or something.

Got some good news from the radiator shop this morning. The only issue they found was a small crack in the top tank. That is where I knew I had a small leak. They can solder that up. They said everything else is in good shape. They mentioned that the radiator has been re-cored at some point as the core is not original. That was almost certainly done back in 2004 with the work Dad had done. As I’ve mentioned before, though, Dad doesn’t know what was done and didn’t keep any records.

Anyway, I should be good on the radiator.

Thanks Howard.

I suspect that disconnecting the steering column from the mount, then removing dash assembly bolts and just kind of laying it against the wheel and floor would work.

The main thing is I want to polish up the dash properly on my 400 sometime too and to do that requires the removal of the instrument cluster of course.

Frogmagic, for including your '50 Eight Touring Sedan in the Registry. Looks good!