Owen,

THANKS for the picture. What a clever design. If I'm looking at it correctly, it had a "pent roof" piston top and head. Unfortunately the pic doesn't show the piston at TDC, but it seems like one side of the piston provided the "squish" area, and the side nearest the valve fit up close to the valve seat, and the machined "wedge" in the head completed the "wedge." Part of the combustion chamber was thus alongside the cylinder, not directly above it, but as close to the source of the air/fuel mixture could get.

Am I reading that right?


I still wonder if I'm reading this quote right, but I think PackardV12Fan wrote:

Quote:

Well, this is going a little too far. As Kev pointed out, Packard was by then building its own bodies, had the ONLY automatic transmission built by any independent auto manufacturer--even the "big three"--had a brand new Packard designed and built V8, and one thing Kev forgot, introduced a proprietary 4-wheel torsion bar suspension system.

Maybe the build quality wasn't the best, and they had some teething problems, they were no joke, especially to the automotive press, which especially gave credit to the Torsion-Level suspension. That alone, had it survived the corporate stodginess of the "big three" would have made a huge difference in suspensions to this day, I think.

Peter: I made a mistake on the weight of the lightest Packard produced during the 30's. The lightest Packard V12 produced was in 1933.

1005 Twelve wheelbase 142 inches
631 body style 5 passenger Phaeton
Weight 5,095 lbs.

Sorry I was off by 145 lbs. During the 30's there were several Packard V12's built that came in under the 5400 lbs you quoted as being the lightest Packard V12.

John F. Shireman

I see you are using "underhood" black. Is that high gloss? I was under the impression that from 1939 throughout the L-head eights they were gloss. Am I wrong, missing something?

Quote:

Dan, Thanks for the suggested DVD's! I'm always looking for more help, especially the kind I can rewind and watch again.

I didn't know about the Packard Workshop in November. I will really try to make it, but the Clipper may not. Thanks for the encouragement!

With cars of the early 50's era I was most impressed with the products from Chrysler. My first car was a 1952 Windsor and it was as close to my '47 Packard in build quality and reliability as any other car I owned from this period including a 1947 Cadillac 75 Limo which I bought with a "broken axle".

JV writes :
" I'd say 80% of Packard V8s have had main bearing replacement and the crank turned .010", but less than 50% have had rod bearings..."

Any idea as to why the mains wear so much faster than the rods???? I wouldn't think oil delivery is a problem since the mains get oil FIRST and then the rods second. What do u think it is??

I think it looks pretty good. Level in both directions. The slight fore aft isn't a major concern. When I had the 54 Pacific, I believe that also went a bit aft. The height appears to be about the same as what shows in the get acquainted with 24th series book and parts manual. IIRC there was about 3/4 inch clearance on the Pacific hood--just touched the hood insulation.

Peter: Marmon V16 weight for 1931 through 1933.

1931 V16 145 inch wheelbase

coupe 2 door 4 passenger 5090 lbs
sedan close coupled 4 door 5335 lbs
sedan 4 door 5200 lbs
sedan 7 passenger 5400 lbs

1932 V16 145 inch wheelbase

coupe 2 door 4 passenger 5090 lbs
sedan close couple 4 door 5335 lbs
sedan 4 door 5360 lbs
sedan 7 passenger 5440 lbs

1933 V16 145 inch wheelbase

coupe 4 passenger 5090 lbs
sedan 4 door 5360 lbs
convertible sendan 5 passenger 5285 lbs
sedan 7 passenger 5440 lbs

John F. Shireman

Looking through the 51-54 STB's and SC's and I never really saw a trend to there being significant problems with the 51-54 series cars. The motor design was pretty much the same as it was for the previous 10+ years. Of course there were early issues with the Ultramatics, but by 1954 they were pretty well seasoned (except for the GearStart).

IMHO think one of the things that hurt Packard was how long it tool Packard to come out with a V8 compared to it's competitors. If you looks at the Salesmen Databooks from 1946-1954 that still made reference to V8 engines as being "to complex". Thats eight years beating the same drum. Packard was laggin style wise and by 1954 the Rheinhart body style was now in it's forth year, and it was showing competitively, and hence the changes to the Rheinhart body style in the 55 series.

Also think that the move to Conner, and the fact that Packard had to rapidly start making their own bodies again in '55 really upset the applecart, and caused the build problems that were evident in the early 55 series cars. Also the first year of any new redesign is going to have it's bugs and adjustments. So look at everything that was happening at Packard for the 55 model run in the last quarter of '54:


-Move to the Conner Plant
-Updated Body Style
-Bodies now produced again by Packard not Briggs
-First year for the new V8 after 20+ years of Straight Eights
-First year for the Twin-Ultramatic
-Still in the process of dealing with the Studebaker merger/purchase
-Economy was in a downturn between '54-57

But again...all this is just my

Ok the first coat is dry so I thought I would quickly mount the air cleaner to see if any "adjustments" need to be made to the support bracket before the final coats as the bracket appeared to have a few bends in it.

So after a little bit of adjustment, I got the cleaner to sit level from side to side. One question I have is that when the filter is mounted the oil bath side of the cleaner has a bias to towards the firewall. If this normal? Or should it be exactly perpendicular to the motor/carb? I noticed the bracket mounting hole in the head, is not perpendicular to the carb inlet.

Also if you look at the first picture the clear sit up pretty high. Is this going be ok for hood clearance. Obviously I am asking those with a Oil Bath cleaner on the 51-54 motors.

Attach file:

---

  (29.96 KB)


  (32.71 KB)


  (24.19 KB)