Merry Christmas 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
53 user(s) are online (45 user(s) are browsing Forums)

Members: 5
Guests: 48

BigKev, bkazmer, Pgh Ultramatic, Joe Santana, HH56, 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



« 1 (2) 3 4 5 ... 8 »

Re: Considering Packard v. Hudson
#11
Home away from home
Home away from home

Eric Boyle
See User information
Thanks Kev. The body off the frame issue is one I take importance to. If you're buying a Stepdown Hudson, you HAVE to make sure that the chassis is not rotted out. If it is, you're looking at a ton of money to get it sorted. A Packard's chassis doesn't rust as easily, and if the floors are rusted, it's a simple fix compared to a Hudson.

Simply put, if I had to choose between the two cars, and I did exactly that earlier this year, I would buy the Packard. (which I did) My choices were my '48 Packard two door and a '51 Hudson Commodore 6 four door. Both were the same price, and it was a tough decision, but the two door won over the 4 door. If the Hudson had been a coupe, I would have went with it, as it had a rebuilt engine and trans. All other things considered, the two door will win over the four door every time for me.

Hindsight always being 20/20, I probably should have bought the Hudson, as it needed a HECK of a lot less work than my '48 does, but in the end, which one will be worth more?

Posted on: 2009/12/29 21:09
 Top  Print   
 


Re: Considering Packard v. Hudson
#12
Forum Ambassador
Forum Ambassador

Mr.Pushbutton
See User information
I really, really like step-down Hudsons. Like any other brand, I think you would do well to save your scheckels and buy the best condition example you could, especially in light of what Eric brngs up re: unit body integrity.
My former employer has a 1951 Hornet convertible, twin H power and all, I loved driving that car.

Posted on: 2009/12/29 22:18
 Top  Print   
 


Re: Considering Packard v. Hudson
#13
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away

RussBees
See User information
I know the Customs are more desireable, generally. I'm interested in a '48 Deluxe in number 3 condition. Every thing appears nice but the motor may need overhauled. NADA and THE OLD CAR PRICE GUIDE don't always agree on values. Any suggestions or views here? And, what does a flat head eight cost to totally rebuild? Russ

Posted on: 2009/12/30 16:45
 Top  Print   
 


Re: Considering Packard v. Hudson
#14
Forum Ambassador
Forum Ambassador

Ozstatman
See User information
Quote:
RussBees wrote:....I'm interested in a '48 Deluxe in number 3 condition......but the motor may need overhauled.......what does a flat head eight cost to totally rebuild? Russ
G'day Russ,
to PackardInfo. Don't know yet what it would cost to overhaul but in about a month or so I will when my '41 120 is rebuilt. And don't forget to include your Packard in the Packard Owner's Registry, together with a pic, any known history and how you acquired, that is once you do acquire it!

Posted on: 2009/12/30 16:53
Mal
/o[]o\
====

Bowral, Southern Highlands of NSW, Australia
"Out of chaos comes order" - Nietzsche.

1938 Eight Touring Sedan - SOLD

1941 One-Twenty Club Coupe - SOLD

1948 Super Eight Limo, chassis RHD - SOLD

1950 Eight Touring Sedan - SOLD

What's this?
Put your Packard in the Packard Vehicle Registry!
Here's how!
Any questions - PM or email me at ozstatman@gmail.com
 Top  Print   
 


Re: Considering Packard v. Hudson
#15
Forum Ambassador
Forum Ambassador

Owen_Dyneto
See User information
And, what does a flat head eight cost to totally rebuild? Russ

Two recent prices from the New Jersey area for Packard 356 engines. First one was a very reputable engine rebuilder with lots of Packard experience. The motor was pulled and delivered to him, and picked up when finished. A very comprehensive rebuild cost about $6000. Clutch and water pump also replaced, engine block painted. Cost does not include car storage for 3 months or so. Price did not include any accessory rebuilding. Included engine balancing. Cost does not include pulling and reinstalling the engine.

The second was done at a restoration shop with lots of Pebble Beach winners as credentials. He took the total car, took care of the engine removal and reinstallation, stored the car, did the engine and all accessories, generator, starter, carburetor rebuild, water pump, radiator recore, clutch, engine balancing, etc. + a very detailed engine cosmetic job. Cost about $20,000.

If you're clever and handy mechanically and can do everything except the block boiling and magnafluxing and machining, you can probably do a very credible job for about $1500-$2000 in parts and machine shop work.

Posted on: 2009/12/30 18:21
 Top  Print   
 


Re: Considering Packard v. Hudson
#16
Home away from home
Home away from home

Eric Boyle
See User information
Quote:
Two recent prices from the New Jersey area for Packard 356 engines. First one was a very reputable engine rebuilder with lots of Packard experience. The motor was pulled and delivered to him, and picked up when finished. A very comprehensive rebuild cost about $6000. Clutch and water pump also replaced, engine block painted. Cost does not include car storage for 3 months or so. Price did not include any accessory rebuilding. Included engine balancing. Cost does not include pulling and reinstalling the engine.

The second was done at a restoration shop with lots of Pebble Beach winners as credentials. He took the total car, took care of the engine removal and reinstallation, stored the car, did the engine and all accessories, generator, starter, carburetor rebuild, water pump, radiator recore, clutch, engine balancing, etc. + a very detailed engine cosmetic job. Cost about $20,000.


Wow, that makes me so glad that I do all this myself, minus the machine work.

Quote:
If you're clever and handy mechanically and can do everything except the block boiling and magnafluxing and machining, you can probably do a very credible job for about $1500-$2000 in parts and machine shop work.


This is more in line with what I would be spending to rebuild a 356, sounds about right for a DIY'er.

Posted on: 2009/12/30 18:31
 Top  Print   
 


Re: Considering Packard v. Hudson
#17
Forum Ambassador
Forum Ambassador

Owen_Dyneto
See User information
Probably should have mentioned that when grinding the crank on a 356 you have the additional (and not trivial) expense of removing the counterweights in order to grind the rod throws. This involves milling out the old bolt heads, and making or buying new replacement bolts to refasten them after grinding. I dont believe that's a requirement on any of the other postwar straight eights.

Posted on: 2009/12/30 19:49
 Top  Print   
 


Re: Considering Packard v. Hudson
#18
Home away from home
Home away from home

Eric Boyle
See User information
There's no way to just un-bolt them and re-use the old bolts?
And no, the 288/327/359 engines don't need that done.

Posted on: 2009/12/30 19:54
 Top  Print   
 


Re: Considering Packard v. Hudson
#19
Forum Ambassador
Forum Ambassador

Dave Kenney
See User information
Quote:

Owen_Dyneto wrote:
Probably should have mentioned that when grinding the crank on a 356 you have the additional (and not trivial) expense of removing the counterweights in order to grind the rod throws. This involves milling out the old bolt heads, and making or buying new replacement bolts to refasten them after grinding. I dont believe that's a requirement on any of the other postwar straight eights.


Dave, I have been considering a complete rebuild of my 356 engine and was wondering about the crank throws. Why is it that they must be removed in the 356 to grind the rod throws. Don't most car engines have counterweights bolted or forged into the crankshaft?

Posted on: 2009/12/30 20:08
______________________________________________
Dave
 Top  Print   
 


Re: Considering Packard v. Hudson
#20
Forum Ambassador
Forum Ambassador

Owen_Dyneto
See User information
No Eric. And the 320 and 385 cranks are essentially similar in that the counterweight slightly overlaps the rod journal so to grind full-width, the weights must come off. Essentially, the bolts have very long extended heads.
After the weights are installed and the bolts tightened, the shanks are cut off flush with the counterweight and then brazed or welded to the crank, thus to remove them you have to mill down thru the weld or braze and thru the head of the bolt. Ive never actually done this myself so maybe I've got the details not quite right, but if so I'm sure someone who has actually done it will chime in.

Posted on: 2009/12/30 20:13
 Top  Print   
 




« 1 (2) 3 4 5 ... 8 »





- The following Google Ad-Sense Advert helps fund the cost of providing this free resource -
- Logged in users will not see these. Please Join and Donate to help support the website -
Search
Recent Photos
Photo of the Day
Recent Registry
Upcoming Events
Website Comments or Questions?? Click Here Copyright 2006-2024, PackardInfo.com All Rights Reserved