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

Interesting that it appears that it has the same "pad" on the side of the block, but there is no boss in it. My return hole had a screw in brass plug with a square head on it.

Here is a side view of a pre-1951 motor, and you can see that it is plumbed for By-Pass filter, and that it does have the return boss in the block for the filter return. The boss on this motor is set further back. I think they moved in forward 1951 when they moved the engine mounts to the side of the motor instead of the front mounted motor in this picture.

Attach file:

---

  (49.71 KB)

I think someone said the 356 came with the filter from factory so obviously they had given it some thought. The other blocks with mechanical lifters are apparently the ones without.

I'm not even sure it would have taken a casting change at this point, just a short stay in the drill and tap machine. Probably didn't want that done in the field because of the expense and aggravation of taking oil pan off to keep the chips out.

I'm still thinking engineers thought filters were unnecessary with those lifters and wouldn't be installed much. Also kinda curious how much actual flow through the filter with that arrangement.

Just after I was so sure I knew this cold, I'm a bit confused after just looking at a 356 motor in a 1941 LeBaron sport brougham on which the filter was standard equipment. But the galley outlet on the block has only the oil pressure gauge sender and a line to the filter. The filter returns to the upper cross galley to the lifters and there is no pigtail from the lower to the upper as Kevin's engine correctly shows for that vintage. Whether this is right or not I don't know, the engine has a 1946 casting date so has obviously been changed (though still a 356) and perhaps the installation is incorrect. But I don't see another place for the filter to return to. Hopefully the filter doesn't have a restrictor because that would mean the hydraulic lifters would only run on the bypassed stream from the filter, and if the filter were to plug.....?

I think this is the first 1938 and newer L8 I've seen without the little pigtail from the lower to upper galley, again as in Kev's picture.

Could Barries motor not having the filter return port on the block have anything to do with his car being an export?

Just throwing that out there.

That's an interesting thought Kevin, export cars were different in many subtle ways, but I don't think I have any information that would shed light on whether the filter was in any way different on them. Perhaps someone else has something more detailed on export cars.....

This thread discussion is very important - thanks for everyone contributing!

I am still uncertain about my setup. Will visit my friend this weekend and look at his 48's and 49's. Try and get some pics. They are also all export right hand drive models.

In the 50's the South African roads were mostly dirt roads with high dust levels - myabe thats why I have a oil filter and heavy duty air filter?

I deduce from our discussion that my engine has a "full flow" setup? Isnt this better for filtration efficiency? But dangerous should the filter become blocked?

This is the way mine is plumbed. It is on a 1949 327 without the drain hole at the bottom of the block. It has been installed for some years with quite a bit of mileage. It matches what Packard illustrated in the service letter. It works fine. I'm sure if you use this configuration you will be fine.

Attach file:

---

  (59.00 KB)

Conceptually it's the same as the 1941 LeBaron I noted above, though the lines are bent and routed quite differently so I'd suspect the filter was added post-delivery. As long as the filter doesn't have a restrictor in it or the lines and it stays clean, I don't see that it wouldn't work just fine. Of course it's still a bypass filter system because some of the pump output is diverted before it reaches the filter. As I said before, the only Packards with full-flow filtration were the 34-39 Eights (320 ci, 385 ci) and the Twelve.

I agree that since Packard condoned the direct hook-up for the non-hydraulic lifter engines at one point in time this is probably ok. As already mentioned I would make sure the filter was changed regularly. I can't help but wonder if there were flow differences between the filter assemblies used for engines with hydraulic lifters as opposed to those with solid lifters. I would not use this plumbing set up on an engine with hydraulic lifters under any circumstances. Anyway that's my .