Packard Forum Index » Post-War (1946-54)

The 5/16 shaft came out of the 'pot metal' handle.

I have reviewed the Technical Bulletin with respect to the length of the smaller key lock shaft on some 22 series cars. That was not the issue.

I have yet to determine exactly what locks the square shaft into the handle. I do know there are two saw cuts in the shaft that appear to be intentional (produced during manufacture w/horizontal miller), and have something to do with 'locking' the handle to the shaft. There are also two 'crimp' marks in what I call the 'thimble'. The saw cuts and crimp marks could easily be aligned, but the shaft fell out so that evidence was not preserved.

Let me jump the gun and attach a file detailing a modification I plan on applying to the '48.

dp

Attach file:

---

Size: 165.82 KB; Hits: 69

Collar is a good idea and easy to do. Certainly a lot easier than pulling the thimble off and inserting a pin.

Not sure the thimble does anything but hold the spring and bezel to the handle. The way the shaft actually connects to handle, not sure if 48 differs but 47 doesn't seem to have any thing fixing the shaft in place. I thought the shaft might have been in the mold and pot metal was cast in place around it or maybe shaft was a press fit. Doesn't appear to be cast in place so maybe when they crimp the thimble on, the pressure is enough to compress the pot metal around the shaft. At any rate, after 70 years I guess we can't be too upset when things get a bit tired and let go. At least you have come up with an easy fix.

Attach file:

---

  (43.77 KB)

The 'saw cuts' in the 5/16 square shaft could very easily be aligned with the crimp deformations in the 'thimble'. Those were the only features in the portion of the shaft that spigots into the handle. I doubt if the shaft was in-place during the casting (injection molding) process . . . otherwise there would more features to entrap the shaft, and some evidence of chrome plating should also be evident.
Plus I could use the same handle casting with any other length shaft. I believe the retention was via pins under the thimble or just pot metal pushed into those saw cuts.

HH56, is that a picture of a handle with the 'thimble' removed? If so is there any evidence of 'pins' that would be pushed in when the thimble is crimped? Until I find a handle with the escutcheon missing I'm reluctant to attempt a disassembly.

There is a short section in the write-up I'm working on that discusses the two load paths from the handle to the trunk lid. One path is through the thimble (via the crimped area) to the escutcheon, and then to the outer skin of the trunk via the machine screw and lock cylinder. The second path is into the square shaft (via the unknown retention scheme), through the acorn nut and latch housing, and finally to the inner skin of the trunk stiffening structure. At least for the last few years that I have owned it my car it did not have an acorn nut installed, so the first load path was the only possibility in that set-up. The 'final straw' of failure in my car occurred without an obvious pull-out force being applied. Perhaps bouncing around in sunny Arizona was just too much for it.

Aggressive torqueing of the acorn nut is a definite hazard to the means that retains the shaft to handle. I bet with a steel nut and a few washers I could pull the shaft right out of the handle. Upon reassembly I will be quite mindful of this. I think the designers are trying to tell us something with the use of a tab washer, versus a split or star lock washer.

Note the technical bulletin has both the tab washer and the crimp marks in the thimble. Clearly artwork from the assembly 'blue-prints'. To bad we didn't get the drawing notes.

If I was to cross drill and install a pin I would drill the thimble, handle, and shaft as one unit and use a roll pin dressed to the diameter of the thimble, but I think the hole in the trunk lid is large enough that the pin can stand proud of the thimble. I stocked-up on a handful of 1/16 inch roll pins just in-case.

dp

The door handles for the 47 have a mild steel pin thru the shaft and handle. Once the end of pin is bent up to clear the handle end it pulls out and shaft comes out without too much difficulty. I had expected the same on this 47 trunk handle but didn't find anything else holding the shaft under the thimble. Because I could not pull this shaft out when taking it apart to have the handle chromed is why I speculated as to the various means of attachment.

The thimble was not easy to remove -- at least I had quite a time doing it on this handle. Maybe I was being too cautious but I posted the method I used for a poster on the PAC forum. He was prepared for adventure and his apparently came off the handle quite easily. I forget if he said whether the shaft came off too but with his thimble coming off easy wonder if his was taken apart before or is getting close to the loose condition yours is in..

I have several used 1948-50 trunk lid handles and none of them show any sign of coming apart. It looks like they are very similar to the 21st series handles with a spring washer between the thimble and the escutcheon plate and the shaft secured to the handle by the heavy crimp in the thimble that extends through to the pot metal handle as evident in the photo of the handle posted by HH.

Here are some photos of a 1948-50 handle.

Assembled distance from the end of the square shaft to the pot metal handle is 2-11/16 inches.

Attach file:

---

  (75.58 KB)


  (70.46 KB)

Here is the first of two files documenting the difficultly I had with the trunk handle on my '48 Deluxe Eight. I hit the file size limit when I tried to send the entire file.

dp

Attach file:

---

Size: 488.17 KB; Hits: 49

Here is part two of two.

I would like to thank all of the contributors that helped me figure this out. What an adventure!

dp

Attach file:

---

Size: 590.27 KB; Hits: 62

Very nicely written article. Hope Kev sees it and recombines for inclusion in the HowTo section. With BDeB also mentioning the handles he has doesn't appear to come apart it would be interesting to know why yours did.