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

The engine number provided by the person Mal posted for in the original post of this thread does not seem to match Big Kev's newly (and very handy) introduced engine number chart. I am really not sure what engine he has, but surely will not know unless he is able to post more info. A very interesting thread non-the-less.

Jim

Perhaps another case of someone confusing a motor number with a casting or part number? I haven't used Kev's new motor number list, but my data shows that as a motor number for a 2nd Series 2-36 or 2-43 (big 8). The correct Packard part number for a 1935 Eight crankcase is 215244 (same as 11th and 14th series small 8) with engine #s running from 385001 thru 390301, according to an old PAC publication.

Kev, I haven't yet checked your list against my several sources but will do so, and congratulations on a noble effort, its an addition to this site that I'm sure will see much use.

the reason the '35 - '39 V-12 rods were a one-piece forging was because of a "clearance" issue.

Here's the problem - look at a cross-section of a Packard V-12. When the stroke was increased from four to four and a quarter inches (for 1935 and later production), there WOULD have been "interference" between the crank-case walls, and a conventional-style connecting-rod.

You are correct that the '35 -'39 V-12 connecting rod was a superior VERY SERIOUS piece of metal ! It was a special chrome-moly, much tougher, more flexible, and durable than anything used anywhere in conventional automotive use.

I have seen LOTS of pre 1940 EIGHT cylinder Packard crank-cases with "patches" where a con. rod went thru the side of the crank-case. I have NEVER heard of a Packard V-12 tossing a con. rod.

Sad to say - the fastest way to RUIN a pre-war Packard engine, is to use poured babbit in the con rods. Even the Twelves have been ruined by that kind of butchery.

True, driven the way MOST people drove in the 1920's, at the speeds most people drove in the 1920's, you didn't see much rod bearing failure ( since most engines had to be overhauled by 30,000 miles anyway) (why ? well..no oil filters, no air/induction filters, primitive oil, etc.).

Trouble was, by the 1930's, cross-country high speed driving was possible, and con-rod bearing failures became epidemic.

Hopefully, this fellow who started this "thread" will get hold of a salvegable "Standard Eight" ( or 1937 - 1939 "Super" Eight) and get it fixed RIGHT (meaning "insert" type con. rod bearings).

One of our fellows here in Arizona made an interesting comment; poor fellow ran across some "experts" who got him into a VERY expensive bearing job. Sounds like it is a good job that should last well. In my view, was doing it the hard way.

I did not know that the "thin-shell" rod bearings designed by Packard and Federal Mogul, introduced in 1935 production, were "probmlamatical with many failures".

Packard didnt know it either (see the famous engineering test eval. after that famous "flat out pedal to the metal" demonstration Packard did with a Standard Eight to show off the then new technology).

I dont think Charle Last (R.I.P.) knew it either, as when I was in his shop, we turned out HUNDREDS of Packard eight and twelve cylinder engines, taking up any worn clearances in those original "problamatical" bearings with a little brass shim stock (that's how I did mine, in '55. )

Oh, by the way, my own Packard V-12 has now 160,000 HARD FAST miles on its original "thin-shell" rod bearings, 20 lbs. hot idle oil pressure with 10W-30 oil (yeah, gets nice and warm after an 80 mph "run" when it is over 100 degrees)...and it dosnt know Packard "thin-shell" rod bearings were "problamatical" either.

Oh - by the way, the only reason those pre war shells were thinner, is they thought that was the way to avoid re-engineering the con.rods, and get better heat transfer.

I have to agree about the thin shell inserts, I've been around the Classic era Eights and Super Eights for too many years to want to count and have never seen evidence of abnormal bearing failure. I'd love to see these bearings remanufactured but perhaps so many engines have had conversions that the demand just isn't there anymore, even 25 years ago they were damn hard to find.

O_D
I have a box full of 320 bearings that suffered from bearing / shell separation. I suppose this could be a strange coincidence, as I am only going on what I have personally experienced, seen, and been lead to believe by some extremely reputable Packard experts pertaining strictly to the late 320 engines. I have no knowledge of 385, 12 (or early babbited 320) bearing life, as they are different engines utilizing different parts and in no way could speak to their life expectancy. It seems odd that there was a running change in bearing material for the 320 bearing. I suppose it could have been coincidence, or maybe it was changed for a reason, for instance issues with longevity. One thing is for sure, Packard utilized bearing (flanged rod bearings) and rod (bolts integral with rod) designs in this period that were never to be used in the auto industry again that I am aware of.

The funny thing is, my long departed good friend that worked for ECA Los Angeles never ever mentioned any such failures occurring in late 320 engines during the time period when he worked for ECA. On the other hand, the founder of Packards International was gracious enough to talk about his experience in the 60's with numerous 320 bearing failures. Again, not 385 or 12, but 320. He had a fix utilizing a modern design easily obtainable bearing.

I do not doubt what your experience, and as stated earlier my late ECA employee friend (more accurately what he didn't say) or others with late 320's having no bearing failures. However, having first hand experience, and than receiving guidance from reputable Packard experts, a box full of failed bearings and most recently another friend with a 38 320 with flaking bearing material, I would be a bit prone to believe there is a perceptible trend of some kind.

Funny thing is, the bearings that are currently in process of being reproduced and made available in limited quantity are a direct result of this type of failure in that '38 320 engine mentioned above. I am confident that the run of reproduced bearings will be available in the near future. These guys are very capable long term Packard enthusiast. They have successfully reproduced and made available other high quality components.

Again, great discussion. At the end of the day, who knows what the real deal is. I am glad to have received the expert guidance I received about using modern proven bearings. I am also equally glad that quality original equipment style bearings will be available soon. I certainly would have liked to have had the choice when hunkering down and making the best of the situation I was in a while back. It is always good to have options.

Since I first went into Charlie Last's shop on Valley Blvd. in 1955, and clowned around with him till his death ( I was the guy who conducted his obit. at his funeral, and my Twelve led the procession to his grave-site,) I think I just might know who "worked for him". Would be curious to know who this "dear departed friend" would be. By chance you referring to Ted B ? (he is still dead..). His grave site is next to his first wife's. Her name was _______

To demonstrate that you DO know what you are talking about, tell us where on the engine block Charlie would "die stamp" his name, and what he'd done on any particular engine...(for some reason I never understood, he insisted on doing that "die stamping" bit himself - he even HID the damn dies!)

P.S. - yes, I have seen "thin shell" (meaning pre-war) Packard rod bearings that "flaked". Not often, but have seen it.

Here's how you do it. You DONT change the engine oil, use only a non approved (meaning non-detergent) engine oil, and let it sit for a while. Then start it and run it for a while, then shut it off for another indeterminte period.

If you do that often enough over years - perhaps even months, - yes, you can get the "thin shell" copper-lead bearings to decay.

Nothing like a litte ignorance and abuse to ruin even a Packard engine.

Quote:

I am not sure if the odd post about the fellows shop on Valley Blvd. was directed to me, but if so, I am afraid you have your wires crossed Pete. I never had the pleasure. My post had nothing to do with the gentleman you mention. I am not sure where that would have been read into it. My late friend's name was Walt Pfifer and he worked for Earle C. Anthony (ECA) Los Angeles as described in my previous post above. Walt worked For ECA from around '24 to '53 - '54 or something like that. Walt had a light grey / dark grey '32 900 roadster. He was a neat guy. I have no recollection of Walt mentioning the fellow you mentioned above, But he might have known him, I couldn't say.

I guess it sounds like you agree there is just the slightest chance that the condition of flaking bearing failure could exist. This condition seems to happen at times for whatever reason. Your hypothesis seems totally plausible. The hypothesis of others that the shells are thin and never maintain good crush leading to poor heat transfer causing flaking and failure could be feasible also. I just don't know. Perhaps this condition is just totally isolated to individuals currently working on late 320's, I don't know, could be I guess. I never worked on or around Packard's 40 or more years ago. All I have to go on is what I have seen in the here and now while actually working on, and engaged with others who are currently dealing with these engines experiencing similar problems. Anyway, I really don't know what else I can say

Are you coming to the Orphan show tomorrow? It would sure be neat to have another pre-war Packard out there. I think one of the Northern guys might bring his Franklins down. If so, see you tomorrow!

Jim

Ted Barton. I can remember, the fellow Charlie used to love to hate!

I happened to have been close to both Ted R.I.P & Charlie R.I.P. Ted "apprenticed" in Charlie's shop before I did. Ted did "drift away" from us owing to his problem with the sauce. But we all still loved him and he loved us. You guys simply do not know what you are talking about as to those relationships.

I apologize - I did not know what I was talking about, because I got confused as to who we were talking about and what facility. As to this "Fred" - never met him as far as I know - never worked for ECA. My mistake. Did hang around 1000 So. Hope street - ECA's personal World War I era Twin Six was still in the basement last time I was in there (probably 50+ years ago ! ). Met the salesman who delivered my own V-12 new!

Thought you were referring to ECL (Charlie Last did not like his first name, and made that known. At moment, cant recall what ECL's first name was, since I knew better than to call him by that ! (think it was "Earl" too. Cant recall).