Packard Forum Index » General

From post #11 above:

"Craig: I'm curious, do you know the volume of oil discharged by the Olds HV pump per shaft revolution versus the original Packard pump?"

I would think that a simple experiment of dropping an Olds gear in a beaker of oil to measure displacement vs disp of a Packard gear would be more than adequate to answer the question. I have beaker and a Packard gear (idler) that i can measuer in a volum of oil as such if someone has a Olds (idler) to measuer.

Craig -

The negative head pressure argument doesn't hold water in this case. The oil pump as used on Packard straight eights sits even higher than the V8 - in fact, completely outside of the crankcase.

Having owned a Packard V8 for over 25 years (and studying them for ten years before that), I realize that the OE V8 pump can draw air because it is not immersed in oil. However, with plugged or tubed pumps, I now know that only happens when clearances become excessive between the driving shaft and bore.

So, how do you explain the fact that my dad's V8 NEVER had lifter noise in nearly 75K of daily driving with the late design OE pump that still sat above sump level? How do you explain another V8 running around the Penn-Ohio area with a pump that's had bushing installed for over a decade and has no more problem with lifter noise?

Now, it could very well be that that Packard corrected some latent misalignment with the redesigned pump body - and that Aller took that into account when installing a bushing. I had kicked the notion of misalignment around with Keith, but he never found anything conclusive.

If there IS a misalignment issue, we need to know by how much, when bushing the pump, to eliminate a recurrence of the wear. Too bad that, after all these years (and prior to any online discussion, nobody ever published full details about that, but I'll figure it out on my own, someday.

Re: Misallignment.

LATE design Packard oil pump from 5672 A 1834 would NOT bolt to 5672 A 1072. I had to elongate mounting holes.

EDIT: As to whether or not there was a SHAFT alignment problem (PACKARD PUMP) i was never able to determine any misalignment between at least 4 different PACKARD pumps. All i could determine was no alignment problems.

THe OEM flex joint is typical among many manufacturers to allow for some misalignment anyway.

Quote:
PackardInfo has only been around for 5-6 years, and we've been discussing the V8 oiling issues, at more than one prior venue, much longer than that. However, Aller was putting on tech seminars for PAC back in the early 1990s, IIRC.

How long someone has been a member really doesn't have much bearing on the info they bring to the table.

Quote:
Yes, and that's when my concerns about misalignment began. It begs the question: why there is misalignment in swapping the two pumps between engines?

Perhaps something else changed effective with the redesign of the pump body - even the block. Yet, without word from the "horse's mouth", it's all conjecture. Factory blueprints might provide some clues, but I've neither the time nor money to undertake such an odyssey.

When I get to that point with work on my cars, I'll just have to carefully check things out on a case-by-case basis.

At this point i believe the premature wear pumps were due to poorly fitted vacuum pumps. Your fathers Exec probably had vacuum pump properly fitted, therefore no premature wear.

My late design pump 5672 A 1834 had loose vacuum pump screws too aND alot of wear at the shaft but it had 100K miles on it.

Quote:

He used to work in his father's PACKARD dealership.

You know what they say about ASSuming.

I had the LATER pump out of my parts car rebuilt by Terrill machine. I installed that pump in my 400 replacing the earlier style pump with no alignment problems. It is still functioning well after putting some 27,000 miles on the car.

I recently posted a picture of a dealership that was owned by a friend's father and uncle. He worked in and around that dealership for several years. I invited him to log onto this forum. I would be embarrassed if he ventured an opinion or a statement and was told he didn't know what he was talking about because he had just joined this forum.

My 56 Carib is a late car (#254) with an somewhat earlier but original (Utica #137) motor. It has the last generation oil pump and has about 93,000 miles on it. I've known the prior owner since about 1963 and don't believe the engine ever had anything other than routine maintenance. It has excellent oil pressure, plenty of oil splatter with the valve covers off, and has never had as much as a momentary lifter tick. I do have an Aller rebuilt pump plus most other needed parts on the shelf should I ever need to rebuild the engine. I did pull several rod and main bearing caps a year or two ago with no significant wear noticed. It does have the later style cam retainer, and what I believe are the 3rd iteration of the rocker shafts. This is one of the reasons I think the problems that others have encountered may be the result of random stacking of tolerance issues either within the pump assembly or the pump driving system.