Packard Forum Index » V-8 (1955-56)

Quote:
I was there in the day. My family bought a new '56 Hudson Hornet. Oil consumption was nil.

I've built V8 from the 1950s for fifty years. Literally every new engine design has modifications as it is run in the real world. The Packard STBs, changes to the oiling system are entirely typical of what GM went through with the 1955 Chevrolet V8; what Studebaker went through with the '51 V8.

My point was Packard is just another first-generation Kettering OHV8, no better or worse than the Cadillac, Oldsmobile or Studebaker V8. They all have files of STB and production changes.

Bottom line - the Packard V8 had no worse oil consumption problems than any other OHV8 of its' era.

jack vines

I have had Packard V-8s since 1974 and NEVER had one use oil. Basically when an oil change occured, the amount of oil drained out equalled what I put in new.

Nothing like personal experience vs rumors and innuendo, is there? Thanks for the informed input.

Now, anyone having current oil consumption problems? Apparently, you no longer need to suffer.

i lucked out and got some of those baffles late last year on ebay. i plain to use them too.

Quote:

With all due respect PV8, the STB's and SC's regarding oil consumption are self-explanatory. They regard mods that, as was noted earlier, many new engines encounter in their early years of production. Also note, that some of them are based on only occasional complaints--what engine ever built has not had occasional complaints about something from customers? Packard was just doing a good job taking these to heart and recommending some changes--perhaps some of which were only necessary in exceptional cases.

Is it all just imaginary? I'd say, it partly is imaginary. And what wasn't imaginary was fixed pretty handily it seems.

Congrats on scoring those baffles Henry, and by all means use them!

Has anyone noticed that, even today, most auto manufacturers stand solidly (stolidly?) behind a "normal oil consumption" standard of a QUART every 500 miles! Why? I suspect it's because they want to explain away the 100s or maybe 1000s of engines they know will reach the field with manufacturing defects, or even design defects, that they don't want to cover under warrantee.

Yeah ok. So then why is everyone suddenly singing and dancing the tunes of positive valve seals and scoring spring baffles on ebay ?????

I can guess that the positive valve seals are due to unavailability of the OEM vulcanized seal on the valve spring collar and to avoid adding any weight to the valve spring or stem.

But we have somewhat of a contradiction here. If the positive valve seals are used then why would the spring baffles be needed?????

Quote:
Uh, money?

Quote:
Perhaps, once again, money?

Money ????? I don't quite understand.
Let me rephrase the question:

If one has positive valve seals ALREADY installed, then why would one spend any money or expend any other resources to obtain and install the spring baffles????

On the flip side:

If one already has spring baffles, THEN modifies to positive valve seals then why reuse the spring baffles????

OR to put it a third way:

Why have positive valve seals AND spring baffels BOTH installed in the SAME engine???

Or a 4th way:

Positive valve seals should eleminate the need for the spring baffles. No???

Remember that we are dealing with an OHV engine not an OHC engine. OHC engines often use both baffles (of some sort) AND positive valve seals.

How about a 5th way:

IF positive valves seals are controling the oil to at least a satisfactory or optimal level then why use the spring baffles WITH positive valve seals in the SAME engine???

I agree that all V8s of the period had some teething problems, some were better than others, the wedge B block Mopar being an exception as it had literally almost zero issues when introduced in 1958 (350/361 cu in) and continued on for decades as virtually bulletproof.