Happy Easter and welcome to Packard Motor Car Information! If you're new here, please register for a free account.  
Login
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!
FAQ's
Main Menu
Recent Forum Topics
Who is Online
148 user(s) are online (82 user(s) are browsing Forums)

Members: 0
Guests: 148

more...
Helping out...
PackardInfo is a free resource for Packard Owners that is completely supported by user donations. If you can help out, that would be great!

Donate via PayPal
Video Content
Visit PackardInfo.com YouTube Playlist

Donate via PayPal

Forum Index


Board index » All Posts (DavidPackard)




Re: 1946 Clipper Resto Mod at BJ Auctions
Home away from home
Home away from home

DavidPackard
From Barrett-Jackson's website.

https://barrett-jackson.com/Events/Event/Details/1946-PACKARD-CLIPPER-240311

Sold for 20K + 10% fee

Lot #135.1 - This unique 1946 Packard Clipper four-door sedan has been converted to four-wheel drive. This is a true Resto-Mod. It was designed for all conditions for snow, dirt roads and interstate speeds. Its powertrain comprises a 4.3-liter V6 GM engine with throttle body fuel injection controlled by a GM engine control module, BorgWarner 4-speed manual transmission, Dana 20 transfer case and 3.07:1 Dana-Spicer differentials. Power brakes and steering, electronic cruise control, Vintage Air and an AM/FM/CD sound system have been added. WARN locking hubs are covered by Packard hex bosses for an authentic appearance. A block heater and rear window defroster equip it for extra-cold weather. Its exterior is silver metallic over dark blue urethane. It has a deluxe interior in Midnight Blue. A very extensive operator's manual and technical data are provided.

My wife and I saw this car Wednesday afternoon . . . nice looking car, but since the previous or new owners were not there I restricted the inspection to exterior and whatever I could see through the closed windows. I tend not to pay too much attention to old cars that were not left in original, or near original configuration.

We did look at the '55 Caribbean Convertible

https://barrett-jackson.com/Events/Event/Docket/Scottsdale-2020/Collector-Cars/eaa62748-134b-4e79-af85-a1a5540828d6/01-11-2020/01-19-2020#237106

While we were looking at this one a roaming automotive expert came by and announced the car was a '55 Packard, and that this was the last year for the six volt systems in the Packard product line ???? At that point we went to one of the many concession stands and had lunch, which by the way was not a trivial financial proposition.

dp

Posted on: 2020/1/16 21:08
 Top 


Re: Joe's '49 Club Sedan
Home away from home
Home away from home

DavidPackard
Tinman
Here's a photo. I can take a few more if you would like.
dp

Attach file:



jpg  (102.95 KB)
34287_5e1ce1367c13b.jpg 1024X768 px

Posted on: 2020/1/13 16:30
 Top 


Re: Joe's '49 Club Sedan
Home away from home
Home away from home

DavidPackard
Tinman;

My compressor is mounted on the 'other side' and picks-up the two goose neck bolts and one manifold stud. The car is equipped with an oil filter and power steering which likely influenced the mounting choice.

dp

Posted on: 2020/1/13 16:19
 Top 


Re: ELECTRIC FUEL PUMP
Home away from home
Home away from home

DavidPackard
My two cents worth.

When I bought my '48 it was equipped with a Carter, rear mounted, electric pump. It was mounted on the sheet metal behind the left rear wheel easily visible with the 'fuel filler' door open. It was hooked up without a by-pass circuit and attendant check valve. Because the engine was equipped with a mechanical pump, I thought the previous owner had installed the pump to overcome fuel evaporation during a period of storage in sunny Arizona. The mechanical pump would then be expected to 'draw' fuel through the pump whether it was powered, or not. My '54 is similarly equipped, but the pump is an 'Airtex' mounted on the left frame rail. That car is equally equipped with an engine mounted mechanical pump, so the 'draw through' expectation would also apply.

Now for the rest of the story:

I treated both installations equally, that is, I would run the E-pump for a few seconds prior to a 'wake-up from hibernation' start, and then shut-off the E-pump, and drive the car normally thereafter. The flaw was treating the installations as being equal, they were most assuredly not. The Airtex fule pump ('54) is a pulsating solenoid design that represents very little restriction when the power is removed (there is an integral fuel filter of unknown restriction). The '54 has never exhibited a fuel delivery problem. The Carter fuel pump ('48) is a rotary vane design who's restriction is quite unpredictable. If the vanes park in their slots there is little or no restriction. If the vanes however park further out of their slots some amount of restriction will occur . . . .including enough restriction to completely inhibit flow. The net result was unpredictable lack of power, sputtering, and stalling . . . all of which was quite curable by turning on the E-pump. Worst yet road vibration can promote a vane to walk towards a maximum restriction position, so the sputtering and stalling could strike at any time during the drive.

Over a year ago, I 'deep-sixed' the Carter pump and installed an Airtex model E8011. The Airtex installation is now on the left frame rail just forward of the rear wheel, and is without a by-pass circuit. The symptoms of sputtering, and stalling have not reoccurred since the pump change. While trouble-shooting the Carter equipped system I installed an electric fuel pressure gauge (readable while the car was moving), and that confirmed that at times the fuel pressure would be zero when equipped with the Carter pump un-powered. That gauge also confirmed the fuel pressure after the pump change was approximately 3 psi then the car was underway, Airtex E-pump OFF, and not over 4 psi when the Airtex E-pump has ON. With a completely dry WDO carburetor it took approximately 10 seconds to achieve 3 - 4 psi. The pressure was a few psi lower while the carburetor was filling.

I've concluded from my experience that if the engine is equipped with a mechanical fuel pump an Airtex E8011 (also assumes a six volt installation), without a by-pass circuit, is suitable for carburetor priming purposes. That configuration will not require power once the carburetor is 'primed'. To expand on West Peterson's observation, I believe the initial location of fuel vaporization is the inlet fitting of the mechanical pump, or inside the mechanical pump's strainer cup. If the E-pump is not powered (Airtex only) I do not believe the pressure at this (these) location(s) will be any different whether the E-pump is mounted in the rear, or up forward, therefore 'vapor lock' is not likely influenced by the location of the E-pump. With respect to the by-pass circuit; if a regulator is not included, as supported by West Peterson, then what we have is a parallel flow circuit one with the pressure drop of an un-running E-pump, and the other the pressure drop of a check valve. Most of the automotive check valves I've seen use a spring loaded 'ball check' that will unseat at a particular pressure, mostly 2 psid, but others are also available. This pressure will essentially become the pressure drop of the device for most of the flow range. I believe an un-running Airtex E-pump will have less pressure drop than a check valve of this design. This leads to most, if not all, of the fuel flow will be through the E-pump, and little if any through the check valve. All of this applies to the Airtex design only. In the case of the Carter design, the by-pass circuit is required if the E-pump will be un-powered after the priming process. The pressure loss of the check valve will still apply, and this pressure drop will persist throughout the remainder of the suction side of the fuel delivery circuit whenever the rotary vanes are restricting the fuel flow.

My experience suggests an Airtex E8011 (assumes six volt application) can be used powered or unpowered without over pressurizing the carburetor inlet valve, therefore a pressure regulator is not required. And if a regulator is not included the entire by-pass loop is also not needed.

WauhopM, if your car is six volt, I suggest an Airtex E8011 fuel pump, mounted either forward or aft, powered by a momentary switch, and plumbed without a by-pass circuit. Instruction that come with the E-pump suggest the pump be mounted 'nose high', by just a little bit, to purge air out of the body of the pump.

dp

Posted on: 2020/1/13 16:11
 Top 


Re: Gummed up carb never rebuilt a carb
Home away from home
Home away from home

DavidPackard
No.

The Daytona kit is OK. The narrative was to advise you of the two designs, and what to look out for in the flat disk design, versus the cone shape.

The installed height of the 'flat disk' is less than the 'needle and seat' historic design, therefore if the unit is not shimmed the float tang must be bent to make up of the reduced height. That amount of tang bending places the valve/float tang contact point off center and that puts a side load of the valve. At some point the valve is 'rocked' of the seat and flooding is likely.

The instructions are quite clear on the shimming procedure. Once the contact point is centered the 'flat disk' design has some advantages . . . at least that's what the pamphlet says.

DP

Posted on: 2020/1/4 16:28
 Top 


Re: Gummed up carb never rebuilt a carb
Home away from home
Home away from home

DavidPackard
Johntrhodes81
I also vote with Jim/KB1MCV, 'jump right in to the deep end'. I started working on WCFBs, two at a time, some 50 years ago when I had a set on a '55 Chevy, and then fast forward to the single set-up on my '54 Cavalier. I would like to provide some suggestions based on my experiences.

Let's start by assuming there was nothing really 'wrong' with the carburetor when the car slipped into hibernation, and the task is to renew parts that do not hibernate well like rubber and leather parts. Plus there's the goal of cleaning the unit both inside and out.

I suggest/recommend:

1. Resist the urge to remove the throttle plates. Unless the throttle shaft has been abused or requires bushings there is more risk than reward in removing throttle plates.

2. As BigKev suggested disassemble the carburetor in a clean pan. I use a transmission oil pan, but only because I have one. A turkey pan from the grocery store will work just fine, or as suggested a cookie sheet, but later on when you're in the cleaning stage a pan with some depth will be an advantage.

3. Place the parts as you remove them into individual containers. I use tuna fish cans for the small screws and clips, and larger ones for the other 'stuff'. Watch those little hair clips they have been known to take flight during installation. Use a hemostat or needle nose pliers to hold-on to those clips.

4. Make sure you keep the primary and secondary parts in separate containers. The jets are different, so don't mingle them.

5. Do NOT invert the carburetor until the all of the springs and check balls are accounted for. There should be two check devices in the accelerator pump system. A ball and the bottom of the well, and a needle under the discharge nozzle. There a springs at the 'vacuumeter' and accelerator pump. The first time the carburetor body is inverted it should be done over a clean pan.

6. Lacquer thinner is a fairly good solvent for carburetor cleaning, and it's available at relatively low cost. I use a 'tinners brush' to wash the parts with solvent, and change the solvent when it gets real dirty.

7. Fuel 'shut-off' valves are currently available in two design configurations. The 'Daytona' kits will likely come with the 'flat disk' design valve. With this design the float level adjustment is via 'extra' sealing washers between the valve and carburetor housing (described in the instructions). The other valve design ( historically correct for a WCFB ) features a conic 'needle', as in needle and seat, and the float level adjustment is via bending the tang that closes the needle. The 'flat disk' design is not robust to side forces and therefore the tang on the floats should 'push' dead center on the valve. That's why the seats are shimmed with sealing washers. Again all of this is covered in the instructions if your kit has 'flat disk' valves.

8. I use a piece of cardboard holding a jet or air bleed in-place. I then hold the whole mess up to the sun or bright light bulb (cardboard shielding my eyes) and look up the bore of the jet/air bleed. You will be amazed on what you can see with only the small 'pin prick' of light shining through the orifice. If you can't see light, or the light is fussy, then the 'thing' must be cleaned.

9. Knowing from the specification sheets what the 'correct' diameter of the orifice is, I will use a number drill SMALLER than the specification diameter to clean-out the 'gunk'. Don't use a drill that is larger than the specified diameter. For about $10 you can buy a set of drills, numbers 61 to 80, on the internet. That size range will suit your needs.

10. Compressed air can be used to verify that large drilled passages are clear. You may not need to remove any of the aluminum plugs that seal the cross drilled passages. If the passages are sealed with threaded plugs feel free to remove them.

11. The carburetor kits that were available back in the '50 -'60s came with float level gauges . . . not so much today. I use a drill of the correct diameter to verify the float level adjustment.

12. Re-installing the metering rods can be a bit finicky in that the spring tends to push the rods out of alignment with the jet bores Take your time they do fit.

Other than 'take a lot of photos', that all I've got.

DP

Posted on: 2020/1/4 13:58
 Top 


Re: Door Handle Retainer
Home away from home
Home away from home

DavidPackard
So I guess we're waiting for Dan W to report back whether the handle/shaft has pulled out of the escutcheon, or the whole kit and caboodle has come out as a result of the screw falling out.

Merry Christmas to all.

Posted on: 2019/12/24 18:05
 Top 


Re: Door Handle Retainer
Home away from home
Home away from home

DavidPackard
If the '41 door handle is similar to the '48 trunk handle (apparently many others) then the handle assembly is comprised of a handle, escutcheon, square shaft, and a locking collar. It is the locking collar that simultaneously attaches the square shaft to the outside handle, and keeps the handle from pulling out of the escutcheon. It is the escutcheon that is affixed to the door skin with machine screws.

Now the question is whether the '41 door handle is similar to the '48 trunk handle in design, and if it is the technique I used to fix my '48 trunk handle/latch perhaps could be used to repair the '41 handle.

Dan W. here's a link to the fix for the '48 trunk handle/latch. If it looks like a viable fix please let us know for future reference. Post #12 from HH56 may depict what has happened (again assumes the designs are similar). Post #15 from BDeB shows the assembly and the escutcheon and 'thimble' ('41 versus '48 disclaimer).

http://packardinfo.com/xoops/html/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=17428&viewmode=flat&order=ASC&type=&mode=0&start=0

dp

Posted on: 2019/12/24 16:50
 Top 


Re: Airplanes - Engines - Aircraft Testing Field
Home away from home
Home away from home

DavidPackard
Chris.
The primary use of the Liberty was in aircraft.
? American-built versions of the Airco DH.4
? Airco DH.9A
? Airco DH.10
? Breguet 14 B2 L
? Caproni Ca.60
? Curtiss H-16
? Curtiss HS
? Curtiss NC
? Curtiss Carrier Pigeon
? Douglas C-1
? Douglas DT
? Douglas O-2
? Felixstowe F5L
? Fokker T.II
? Handley Page H.P.20
? Witteman-Lewis XNBL
The engine was also used in the RN-1 (Zodiac) blimp.

With more rugged barrels the Liberty V-12 was slated for track vehicle (tank) use. Only 100 of these tanks were manufactured, but too late for WWI.

According to Wikipedia 20,748 units were built. Manufactures included Lincoln, Ford, Packard, Marmon, and Buick. During WWII, Neffield, a UK car manufacture produced Liberty engines under license, for various UK tanks. It was not at all uncommon for aircraft engines to be pressed into service powering track vehicles. Many M-2, M-3 Lee, M-4 Sherman, and M7 Priest's were powered by Continental produced Wright R975s . . . along with hosts of low production, or field modified chassis.

dp

Posted on: 2019/11/30 18:23
 Top 


Re: Coil wiring question
Home away from home
Home away from home

DavidPackard
Just a few more points on this 6 volt positive ground Pertronix stuff:

If the subject car is equipped with an overdrive (not the case in this thread) there will likely be two wires attached to the positive coil binding post. One wire goes to the ignition point set, while the other goes to the overdrive kick-down switch. When I contacted Pertronix about how the kick-down functionality could be retained they provided the attached schematic . . . essentially a 7 ohm, 5 watt resistor in series with the kick-down circuit.

If the car is currently AutoLite equipped, and a Pertronix coil is used, then the installer must provide a coil hold-down strap. Seems the Delco equipped cars used a 'bare' coil, just like the Pertronix replacement items, while the AutoLite coil had an integral coil clamp. See group 4.12033 in the parts book, and note the strap is only used on Delco equipped vehicles. Not a big deal to make one out of sheet stock, just be aware that 'some assembly is required' on AutoLite equipped cars.

dp

Attach file:


pdf Size: 157.61 KB; Hits: 55

Posted on: 2019/11/19 21:01
 Top 



TopTop
« 1 ... 34 35 36 (37) 38 39 40 ... 52 »



Search
Recent Photos
Photo of the Day
Recent Registry
Website Comments or Questions?? Click Here Copyright 2006-2024, PackardInfo.com All Rights Reserved