Packard Forum Index » Pre-War (1899-1942)

A short but worthwhile article on this car in the Spring 2014 issue of CCCA's The Classic Car. Short on technical details but those can be found elsewhere (e.g. the Kimes book, VanRanst's patents, etc.), but some nice photos and a bit of discussion on the ownership history of the car. Those who were at the 1999 Centennial will surely remember seeing it on the showfield - at that point in time I don't think it was widely known that it even still existed (photo by this writer).

Attach file:

---

  (135.01 KB)

Thanks Dave for posting a picture of this rare auto.

I was fortunate to have seen the car at the 2008 Pebble Beach. It is in remarkable condition and most interesting non-Packard looking Packard. Here are a few of my photos.

(o{}o)

Attach file:

---

  (102.72 KB)


  (117.69 KB)


  (119.95 KB)


  (140.26 KB)


  (116.77 KB)


  (107.27 KB)


  (98.00 KB)


  (102.80 KB)

JW, thanks for those pictures. Though I've seen the car in person a few times, I never really took note of the degree of the changes, in addition to the displacement change from 376 to 445 cubic inches, that took place before the Twin Six engine was introduced. To name just a few that I see:

Oil filler/breather relocated to driver's side.
Spark plug position changed.
Generator drive moved to driver's side timing chain case.
Fan drive changed.
Dual rear distributor/coils replaced with a single distributor and dual coils at the front of the motor.
Starter motor relocated from front to rear.
Fuel pump relocated to old starter motor location.
Air silencer reversed.
Looks like cylinder head bolts with unique heads rather than studs and nuts.

And so many more.

As Owen Dyneto said MAJOR changes in the engine, is it
even a 67 degree V? The crankshaft pulley seems to indicate
a "flatter" V. ON second though never mind that's not the
crankshaft pulley probably geared to the crank.

Sharp thinking, I wouldn't have seen that and reached that conclusion though I now see why you say that; both engines have the same included angle between the cylinders. The pulley you're seeing is actually attached to the end of the camshaft - this is FWD so the crankshaft is going directly into the transaxle. Just like the Cord, the transmission was the weak link in this particular drive system.

I was editing my earlier post as you were answering, that pulley doesn'T look twice as large as the later engines so the fan
etc must have rotated slower.

That shift linkage must have been a nightmare also.

Thanks JW for the additional photos - it is appreciated.

See:

packardinfo.com/xoops/html/modules/newbb ... m=15&post_id=106096#forumpost106096

For addition pics of the car.