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
44 user(s) are online (36 user(s) are browsing Forums)

Members: 2
Guests: 42

Scott, JeromeSolberg, 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 (Fyreline)




Re: A ZIL in Netflix Series
#1
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away

Fyreline
GAZ Chaika (Seagull).

Posted on: 2020/12/28 20:09
 Top 


Re: Creepy wheel covers
#2
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away

Fyreline
Here's one solution from the Classic Car Forum:

I have experienced the problem you're having on numerous restored cars, although I don't believe it was tied to the type of tires, although with radials you'll be stopping a lot quicker, so perhaps it is the root of the problem. It is a good idea however to address this issue, as I have seen hubcaps that actually snapped off the valve stem.

Generally speaking once a car is restored all of the wheels are freshly painted, giving the hub caps little to bite into to prevent them from turning on the wheels during stopping or acceleration. Often simply bending the hubcap tabs out a little to apply more tension to the wheel does the trick. But when that fails to do the job, here is a quick solution I've used on a few cars that had persistent problems over the years.

Remove the hubcaps and thoroughly clean the areas where the hubcap tabs engage the wheel. Mask off the areas where the tabs engage the wheel in two to four locations spaced out around the wheel. Then apply a 1/16-inch thick layer of clear silicone caulk, carefully remove the masking tape before the silicone dries, and allow it to cure overnight. The silicone will have good adhesion to the wheel and gives the tabs something to bite into. I've used this solution on a few different years and makes, including 50's Mopars, and it has worked every time. Don't hesitate to let us know if it works for you

Posted on: 2020/3/31 21:22
 Top 


Re: 1949 Packard Monte Carlo - Hood Ornament Identification
#3
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away

Fyreline
I was in Sarasota, Florida today and actually had my hands on the car. It is in the Sarasota Auto Museum on Tamiami Trail, just kind of stuck in a back room - but it's there, if anyone wants to see it.

Attach file:



jpg  (233.32 KB)
4821_5c804cd579579.jpg 1920X1440 px

Posted on: 2019/3/6 17:42
 Top 


#4
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away

Fyreline
Hi all . . . This is an emblem from a Graham-Paige automobile. It depicts the three Graham brothers. The Graham- Paige was built from 1927 to 1940, and the later cars were simply called Graham's. Lots on the internet about them.

Posted on: 2018/11/19 20:38
 Top 


Re: New "What Ifs?"
#5
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away

Fyreline
I love when people call me stupid.

Let's look at some product numbers for Cadillac.

1966 197,000 Cadillacs (2700 Eldorados)

2013 183,000 Of the Cadillac alphabet soup plus Escalade/Chevy.

I don't like German cars. In fact I don't like any of the cars being built today because they are junk. However, that situation is mostly the result of idiotic government regulations requiring more and more gadgets the effectiveness of such is due to politically based misinformation. For example, rather than encourage people to drive less to reduce pollution and traffic fatalities, the governent mandates tires with puny and unsafe aspect ratios. Now when you hit a pothole on one of Michigan's unsafe motorways your wheel is destroyed and you crash your car. No problem, the airbag dead weight is their to save you - supposedly.

Toyota is the number one car maker. The only thing stopping Chevrolet from becoming number one is lack of investment in the core product - reliable transportation.

Once they do that they can again waste money on Cadillac and that dreadful Corvette (another waste of money).



You're certainly not stupid, Tim.

You're just wrong. When you make statements like " . .I don't like any of the cars being built today because they are junk", you give away any credibility you might have been able to claim. Pretty much any 2014 automobile is superior in every measurable way to "pre-regulation" cars. Today's cars are safer, more reliable, and more economical. Those are not opinions, those are facts. Sure, in the areas that are NOT measurable, such as styling, I too prefer the older cars - but that does not make today's cars "junk". As far as sales, volume, and profitability go you made an egregious error singling out what you call "That dreadful Corvette", which has been profitable for GM and the Chevrolet Motor Division since the 1970s, even when other lines were not, and whose current sales figures for the new C7 are extremely good. So, now that we have factually established that you don't actually know what you're talking about, your comments regarding Cadillac can only be viewed with the greatest of skepticism. Again, opinions are fine - but that's all they are. I don't think you would have too much trouble finding folks who would agree that Cadillac has some identity issues- but the cars themselves are actually quite good, and GM is certainly better off with this division than without it.

Just my opinion, of course.

Posted on: 2014/8/8 20:17
 Top 


Re: New "What Ifs?"
#6
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away

Fyreline
You are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts. It is always amusing to see someone go to such great lengths to explain how their collection of faulty premises led them to such an epically faulty conclusion. Silver medal try, but thanks for playing.

Posted on: 2014/8/8 19:02
 Top 


Re: Packard ?
#7
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away

Fyreline
I have always considered these neo-classics to be in pretty poor taste, with garish styling that is a cartoonish imitation of the great cars of the past. Now, having said that, I find the Bufori covered in the film clip to be a decent-enough looking car that apparently meets a market niche. I agree that it need not have usurped the Packard grille profile, if it had its own distinct "face" it would not offend so much. I would take one of these Buforis over ten Zimmers or the like.

That is, if I were going to take one at all. Which I'm not. I would rather spend the money on a real Packard, suitably restored and maintained . . . But apparently there is a place for the neo-classic car, and as those cars go, this one seems better than most.

Posted on: 2014/7/23 9:54
 Top 


Re: 1956 Executive Discussion / Comments
#8
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away

Fyreline
Is it just me, or does that Saratoga car look like it could be a stand-in for a Russian Chaika in a cold-war movie? Just sayin' . . .

Posted on: 2014/7/19 7:46
 Top 


Re: Don't make 'em like this anymore
#9
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away

Fyreline
I agree that it's surprising how cars that are so much less "substantial" than a Packard can weigh the same - or more. But, as has been correctly pointed out, the added complexity of the 2014 car includes so much electronic, safety and emissions equipment that all account for the weight penalty. I would think that a new Impala with no electronics, emissions or safety equipment and a carbureted Powerglide V6 would be a relative featherweight for a large car, and a similarly-equipped Cobalt or Aveo would probably change lanes in a brisk wind without use of the steering wheel.

Posted on: 2014/6/14 7:08
 Top 


Re: Was the 1957-1958 Packard manufactured ONLY for marketing purposes?
#10
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away

Fyreline
As stated, the book "Champion of the Lark: Harold Churchill and the Presidency of Studebaker-Packard, 1956-1961" by Robert R. Ebert pretty well covers this topic . . . And is a very interesting book in its own right. I downloaded the e-book from Amazon and enjoyed it very much. Ebert also provides some insight into the decision to produce the 1957-1958 "Packardbakers" being proven correct (well, the 1957 anyway) based on a pure business evaluation. That is, S-P made more money with the Packard cars those years than it would have without them. The cost to produce the Packard cars those years was relatively low, and the per-car profit was the highest of any S-P product. The 1957 Packards also helped to lower the break-even point that year . . . And even though S-P still failed to meet that point, the financial picture would have been even more dismal without them.

Yes, there were grumblings from the Packard Dealers. No, they didn't like the 1957 Packard when it was unveiled to them. They asked for (and got) a station wagon version of the sedan, which was the only model initially planned. They also asked for a Packard version of the Hawk to sell, which they got in 1958. That's right, they asked for it. There was a fund set aside for settling litigation with disgruntled dealers - a paltry (even in 1957) $250,000 - and the sum of all claims never exceeded that amount. Many little insights like this appear throughout the book. For Studebaker and Packard aficionados alike, it's worth a read.

Posted on: 2014/5/24 19:47
 Top 



TopTop
(1) 2 3 4 ... 8 »



Search
Recent Photos
20210619_101112.jpg (12/28/2021)
20210619_101112.jpg
executive (12/28/2021)
executive
F6A67A34-B4E9-402E-B250-BDB80... (11/06/2021)
F6A67A34-B4E9-402E-B250-BDB80...
Photo of the Day
1929 Packard coupe, left side view
Recent Registry
Website Comments or Questions?? Click Here Copyright 2006-2021, PackardInfo.com All Rights Reserved