Very interesting, John - thank you for your informative "post". Hopefully, I will see that book someday.

I dont know all that much about Russian manufacturing. The article you refer to is only partially correct.

ZIS was "Stalin's Pet", so obviously, anything is possible given his well known brutal temper. Given the chaos and urgency of the war years, who knows what source, talking to people many years AFTER the war, looking at documents from communist sources....got ANYTHING right about Stalin's nutty priorities..anything is possible.

The article you refer to, if correct as to ZIS auto production being moved, would account for the lack of battle damage !

Does the article go into any detail as to which manufacturing plants stayed in "European" Russia & thus near combat? Some did. Not all were re-located out of harms way.

For example, there were points in time where Soviet tanks & armored trucks came out of final assembly, gassed up and armed while still on the factory grounds, and driven directly into combat a few miles away from their respective factories.

One thing for sure - thanks to yours and other contributor's posts, this nonsence about a ZIS having ANYTHING to do with Packard, other than the obvious copying of SOME design features, is pretty well put to bed ! Thanks, John !

John:

I am confused. You said you knew the answer before you asked me ? May I inquire ? Your question to me appears to be directed to WHERE I get my info. from. How could you possibly know that ? You been crawling around under my Packard Twelve lately? Or browsing thru my papers & copies of old Packard stuff ?

By the way, who is this "we" that believes I in some way "inflated" Packard Twelve info. What info ? What technical details? PRECISELY are you referring to ?

You have a mouse in your pocket who also is unhappy that Packard had different lines of product, for different price classes, and different performance requirements ? Tell me more about who this "we" is, so we can discuss in further detail specifically WHAT technical details, or where I got them from, remain unclear.

naw...I wouldn't rate that thing as a "Packard 120"...oh..perhaps..I'd give it about a 107.5...?

Johnie ! Voy Govorete poRusskia Yazika ? If not, on what do you base your assumptions about the STALIN MOTOR WORKS?

Yes, of course we know that the Russians moved MANY (but not all) of their production factories so far east that the Germans did not have the range to get at them.

I personally have NO idea where the ZIS was made during the Second World War - perhaps our German friend would know ?

In any event, Gousha's interesting posts explain and answer my question - with Stalin so determined to "put on a good show", it does not surprise me that bomb damage to the STALIN MOTOR WORKS, if any, ( that's ZIS to you guys who cant translate Russian) was quicly repaired, and thus not visible (or cleverly edited out) of post-war photos .

P.S..Johhnie boy - did you see my answer to your questions (and apparentd dis-belief) on why the late Packard Twelves, which shared SHEET METAL BODY parts with the Super Eights, were much more rugged, NOT INTERCHANGEABLE WITH ANY SUPER EIGHT FRAME, RUNNING GEAR, SUSPENSION, ETC ? Did that answer your questions ?

Those photos of the Russian production line for the ZIS are fantastic - never seen them before - fascinating.

Wonder when they were taken? If they were taken while the war was still going on, that makes the whole situation even MORE bizzare - just think - Russia was facing invasion and untold misery, and Stalin wants his people to use up valuable resources making luxury cars ?

I wonder about those photos showing all those brand-spanking new ZIS's, apparently completed. I note there is no evidence of war damage to the building - not even broken windows in the sky-lights. Would love to know more about those photos, and see any others you might have.

I do have a suspicion - what comes to mind, is those photographs of the American aviation hero Lindberg, when he went to Germany and was impressed with German aviation production in '37. He was taken on a tour of assembly lines. To make him THINK the German factory was doing better than it was, they were rolling airplanes around the back and bringing them in again, to make it SEEM like they had more then they could actually build. I wouldnt put it past the Russians to have done a similar "trick".

You werent listening. The young model we used to pose around my Twelve, to promote the "Year Of Manufacture" license plate law, in that edition of our SIDE MOUNT MIRRR ( So. Calif Region CCCA newsletter) was NOT naked. She was wearing a flower in her hair, AND had on a particularly fetching smile...

I should have added, in my comments above (in response to John's curiosity and others commenting about his question about differences between Packard V-12's and Super Eights), that yes, it is correct that the TRANSMISSIONS were the same.

The reason Pacakrd could get away with the same transmission for all of its "big" cars, in spite of the substantial power output differences, is simple.

Of course all other things being equal, the more raw power you put thru a drive train, the heavier the parts need to be.

But they are not equal ! The fact that the more cylinders you have, the SMOOTHER the power output! This, for gear train design, reduces the need for additional strength.

As a side-note, Cadillac engineers, as was the case with Packard, were able to demonstrate it was perfectly safe to use the same transmission in their 1930's era products, in spite of the equally vast power differences between their eights, their twelves, and the Cadillac V-16.

Of interest on the much greater power output of the V-12 - take a look at the "U joint" flanges on the back of a Packard V-12's transmission and drive shaft, and compare these with those of the "Super Eight".

And, yes, I believe the Gemmer steering gear is the same on all "Senior" Packards.

Hi John:

In answer to your question about tech. specs, perhaps you are aware that the Packard Company wanted its salesforce to be well-educated on the product. So each year the factory published a SALESMAN'S DATA BOOK which was pretty inclusive.

In the case of the 1938 model year, these specs. are found in the last chapter ( Chapter Eight ) entitled DETAILED MECHANICAL SPECIFICATIONS. You can also see the extent of the differences in '37-39 Packard Super Eights and Twelves by looking thru the frame, brakes, and suspension components sections of the PACKARD PARTS BOOK for the respective years that eights and twelve cyl. cars were produced.

The laws of physics were taught in engineering schools, even in those days ! The heavier, the more powerful, and the faster car required heavier, more competent suspension and more powerful brakes! It wasn't "rocket science" then, and it isnt today!

I am puzzled about this statement that there was a 750 lb diff. between the weight of a Packard V-12 and a Super Eight motor - my recollection is that is the difference in weight of the assembled car ( ? ? ? - cant recall the details any more). I doubt if in the case of the motor itself, if the difference was half that much.

The "Super Eight" was, except for carb. and induction, pretty much the same engine as introduced in the mid 1920's, so it is much less efficient than the Packard V-12 designed later, with light-years more advances in technology. Thus the Packard V-12 is MUCH lighter in terms of ITS cubic inches, than the eights were.

So, while the frame, brakes, wheels, suspension components, etc., of the Packard V-12 was heavier, this appears to relate more to the much greater power potential, than the weight of the power-plants themselves - for example, the "swept effective brake lining" area of the Twelves was half again larger than the eights ( which is logical and good basic engineering practice...you go faster with a heavier more powerful car, you need much bigger brakes to stop it....!

If you are suggesting that you did in the back seat of YOUR Packard what we did in the back seat of MY Packard, you are a naughty boy. VERY naughty. Shame on you. For shame.

What a naughty...naughty bunch we have in here.....why...I bet this "Eric" character is the kind of guy who would have APPROVED of the SIDE MOUNT MIRROR edition of March-April '83; the one where photographs of a very pretty girl wearing only a smile were used as part of the "pitch" to get the members of the SO. CAL. REGION of the CCCA interested in supporting the "Year Of Manufacture" license plate bill (my doing that, as Editor, got me thrown off the Board....!)

Now - as far as a turbo-prop. type power-plant to give my Lake Amphib. more "punch"....

Eric..you are "ON"...let's DO it! The present motor is a Lycoming I0-360 ("dash six" series) that I have installed a turbo-charger on, but that still isn't enough.

I think your idea of a turbine motor is excellent. When do we start (oh...I forgot - given the expense, you will have to adopt me first...so I can say "daddy...I need a larger allowance".....

First of all, I dont have a mother-in-law. Used to, but she is long gone. Lovely lady. Loved my Packard Twelve. But she never learned to drive ! She was a genteel old southern lady who "knew" that "nice girls dont drive, smoke, or chew tobacco". Fortunately, her daughter, when I married her, while PRETENDING to be a nice girl when she was in hearing range of her parents...well.....but that's another story. Point is, we needed the room of the back seat of the Twelve for...so I dont want the steering wheel moved back there because...oh...forget it...this is getting a bit too kinky and off the subject for a technical chat.......!

Secondly, if you can figure out a way to get more power into my Lake amphib, I will kiss you on both cheeks, even tho " I am not normally "that kind" of guy"....!

Anyway, why in hell would I want RHD in my Packard Twelve? I live in the NORTHERN hemisphere. Not like those crazy Aussies, who live way down there...upside down. Can you imagine how that must hurt after a few years..I mean..walking around upside down...damn..think of the headaches they must get....