Hello 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
43 user(s) are online (33 user(s) are browsing Forums)

Members: 3
Guests: 40

Sherlock, blue40devil, Ross, 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 (Howard)




Re: RIk's 56 ultramatic
#1
Forum Ambassador
Forum Ambassador

HH56
You are correct. Early 56 still had two switches. I forgot there was a bulletin or article mentioning the changeover and also don't remember if it said when change was made.

Posted on: Today 10:42
Howard
 Top 


Re: RIk
#2
Forum Ambassador
Forum Ambassador

HH56
Tying the wires together will have your front courtesy or dash map light and the door outside courtesy lights go on at the same time. To prevent that was why the senior cars had two separate door switches (one for each light circuit) in 55 and the single switch housing holding two independent switches in 56.

The front map light and outside courtesy lights are supposed to go on when a front door is opened but outside lights are not supposed to light when you manually turn on the front map light by turning the headlight switch knob. Connecting them together will negate that separation but I suppose it is not a huge deal.

Sedan rear reading lamp over the back seat is separate and controlled by the rear door switches or the pillar switch.

Posted on: Yesterday 22:55
Howard
 Top 


Re: Under dash insulation replacement and “while you’re there”
#3
Forum Ambassador
Forum Ambassador

HH56
There is not a lot you can do as far as taking them apart to access the inner surfaces. Scroll up and check out the last paragraph in post #2 in this same thread for a method I have had reasonable success with on dirty or maybe slightly rusted vent control cables. This has also worked on some stuck Overdrive lockout cables. On the OD cables there is the additional issue of a steel shaft sliding inside a steel tube or sleeve at the transmission end.

If the cables have been around enough water to have completely rusted the inner wire and outer housing wire coil surfaces together then there is not much that will be successful other than replacing the cables.

Posted on: Yesterday 10:56
Howard
 Top 


Re: Fuel Tank Interchange - 1947 Packard Custom Super Clipper
#4
Forum Ambassador
Forum Ambassador

HH56
The ohm range for the Stewart-Warner gauge used in the Clippers is the obsolete S-W range of 100 ohms at empty and 0 ohms at full. Unlike the K-S gauges used in later years which are the thermal bimetal type and relatively slow in response, the S-W gauge is magnetic and will instantly respond if the sender signal is erratic. A poor contact at the sender will result in jittering at the gauge so make sure when doing the test that moving the arm results in a smooth change on the meter with no drop outs or large changes in ohms that settle back down as the float continues to move. A tiny jitter at the gauge will go almost unnoticed but any large dropouts will be instantly seen. If your gauge is steady now chances are the sender is in good condition.

One thing to be prepared for when mounting the new tank is getting a good ground again. For whatever reason -- probably paint or a rusted surface somewhere -- when several have replaced tanks a good solid ground was not re-established between the tank and body. In spite of numerous attempts at cleaning or remounting, in some instances a separate ground wire has had to be installed between the tank or sender and body sheetmetal for the gauges to work properly when driving. Just keep the tank ground in mind if you later have intermittent issues with the gauge.

This photo of a Clipper Custom sender is slightly misleading because of camera angle but the ruler end is tight against the hump in the sender directly under the first bend. The arm length between the bend at the resistance unit and the bend at the float is just over 5 3/4". When Wat_Tyler has time to pull a 17 gallon sender we can compare the two lengths and find any differences.

Attach file:



jpeg  IMG_2534.jpeg (133.97 KB)
209_6283b0e31a420.jpeg 1280X846 px

Posted on: Yesterday 9:27
Howard
 Top 


Re: Randy
#5
Forum Ambassador
Forum Ambassador

HH56
On your new sender it could need a combination of both checked because the actual resistance housing, location, and swing arc may be different than the stock sender. Hopefully your vendor had an old sender or tank depth to work with when they built it and everything is already set up.

If you are replacing a sender with the same basic housing shape and the resistance is located in the same plane as the original as is the case with the proper Ford unit, then there is a fixed arc where empty will be at one end stop on the resistance unit and full at the other. The arm length is calculated so when the arm touches the resistance unit end stop at the empty end the float is just above the bottom of the tank and at the other end stop, just below the top of the tank.

The fine height adjustment is typically done by the bend which also accommodates where the arc is positioned if senders are different. Packards sender arc is out to the side with a slight bend but one Ford unit I have is pointing down so the arm has a 90 degree bend to position and extend the float to the side.

The bend can accommodate some difference but not enough if the arm is short and the arc is made and stops are reached before the float does a full travel. If the bend is adjusted say at the empty end so the float is at the botttom and gauge reads empty then If the arm is too short the arm will reach the full end stop too soon -- way before the float is close to the top of the tank so gauge will read full at some lesser amount and stays that way until the tank level drops enough the float can move. Too long an arm, the float will touch the tank top before the resistance arc is complete and end stop is reached so even with a full tank the gauge will read less than full.

Posted on: 5/16 17:40
Howard
 Top 


Re: Randy
#6
Forum Ambassador
Forum Ambassador

HH56
57 Thunderbird should be a direct fit but just in case do compare the arm length of the one you receive with the arm on the stock sender. Here is a thread with several posts on the subject. You might also review the first two posts in the thread where other options are mentioned.

Ford used the same ohm range in their mid to late 50s senders but in different models tank depths and flange mount methods differed. The main difference between a 20 gal sender and a 16 or 17 gallon sender is the length of the arm.

Posted on: 5/16 16:41
Howard
 Top 


Re: Numbers on my 1950 series 23
#7
Forum Ambassador
Forum Ambassador

HH56
Quote:
That's the anti-theft number and is done that way to make it impossible to grind off and re-stamp. However, it has little or no significance for registration purposes.


Owen_Dyneto has been compiling a database of body ID or theft proof numbers for years and I am sure would appreciate your info along with the vehicle number and motor number if you would care to share. You can send him a PM with the info if you would prefer not to post the data. If you are logged in here is a link to his profile where you will find a Send Message button to link with the message page. https://packardinfo.com/xoops/html/mod ... file/userinfo.php?uid=177

Don is correct that there is no practical use for the theft proof number today as it was a number used only by the factory and almost all the records to tie a number to a particular car -- save a few that have surfaced over the years on dealer cards -- has been lost.

While not officially used for registration purposes, since it is the only number on the car that is not on something removable, sometimes an inspector will choose to use it if a car is being registered and is out of the system and old paperwork is lost. Upon inspection by DMV or other officials that non removable number has been declared more than once to be the official number and from then on appears on current registrations. My 47 is such a car that fell into that exact scenario and had the body ID number assigned by the inspector from the California Highway Patrol as the official number.

Posted on: 5/16 10:42
Howard
 Top 


Re: Picture of a 55 or 56 with a manual?
#8
Forum Ambassador
Forum Ambassador

HH56
Photos of a true factory manual seem to be somewhat scarce but the interior steering column and lever looked the same as the Ultramatic models and worked the same as any other H shift pattern. All the mechanical differences were on the inside of the column and in the engine compt.

On manuals, the Ultramatic shift quadrant indicator plate in the dash was replaced by a dark plastic insert which appeared as just a blank spot. I believe but not 100 % sure 55 used the same or at least a very similar in appearance piece as was later used in the 56 models with electric shift. On the 56 pieces it is just a dark piece of plastic but if you look carefully the word BRAKE is very faintly visible if looking straight on and the ambient light is just right. If the optional emergency brake indicator kit was installed, as soon as the emergency brake handle is pulled out far enough to latch a switch closes to light a bulb and the plate brightly illuminates in red. The word BRAKE is very visible to indicate the emergency brake is on.

On the pedals, looking at the parts manual the clutch pedal appears the same as the 51-4 models with the narrow more vertical pad. The brake pedal appearance is kind of a question. Power brakes, I believe, had the same pedal pad, lower positioning, and appearance as was used on any other models with power brakes. The manual brake pedal looks to have had the same higher pedal but with a wider more horizontal appearing pad than the 51-4 cars and was more in line with the 55 power brake pedal size.

Posted on: 5/16 10:09
Howard
 Top 


Re: A Tale of Two Patricians
#9
Forum Ambassador
Forum Ambassador

HH56
I expect the grommet will compress and mold to shape a bit better when the antenna is installed and insulator tightened down.

Posted on: 5/15 11:24
Howard
 Top 


Re: Fuel Tank Interchange - 1947 Packard Custom Super Clipper
#10
Forum Ambassador
Forum Ambassador

HH56
Tank does lood good. Definitely going to need some kind of adapter plate for the stock sender. Without knowing any measurements of the 6 tank holes or those on the adapter plate Classic offers, visually the Classic Instruments SN41 1936-56 Ford Fuel Sender Flange Adapter might work for the Clipper Stewart-Warner sender.

I measure the Clipper sender to be right at 2 inches across opposite hole centers. There is a link to one vendor selling the Ford adapter plate in post #19 but several other vendors also offer the adapter and Classic does make other versions.

Attach file:



jpg  IMG_2531.jpg (224.34 KB)
209_62811113dd29a.jpg 918X815 px

Posted on: 5/15 9:41
Howard
 Top 



TopTop
(1) 2 3 4 ... 1649 »



Search
Recent Photos
1956 Patrician in driveway (05/10/2022)
1956 Patrician in driveway
Pennsylvania Sunset (05/08/2022)
Pennsylvania Sunset
20220427_105704.jpg (04/27/2022)
20220427_105704.jpg
Photo of the Day
1946 Packard Super Clipper, three-quarter left front view
Recent Registry
Website Comments or Questions?? Click Here Copyright 2006-2021, PackardInfo.com All Rights Reserved