Re: 5588 2x4 v.s. 5682
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Forum Ambassador
![]() ![]() ![]() |
It would be no more incorrect than what you had before. As long as it was a quality rebuild you would be that much ahead. Downside would be you have to source carbs and find or build the assorted differences between the single and duals. Depending on how "correct" you want the final appearance to be, finding some of the real pieces could get expensive.
Posted on: 2014/8/16 19:25
|
|||
Howard
|
||||
|
Re: 5588 2x4 v.s. 5682
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
![]() ![]() ![]() |
It was Rebuilt at a custom speed shop in New jersey. I will be calling them Monday to get the spec's on what they did to the engine.
Posted on: 2014/8/16 19:28
|
|||
[url=https://packardinfo.com/xoops/html/modules/
|
||||
|
Re: 5588 2x4 v.s. 5682
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Paint it bronze and drop it in as any dealer would have done if he had it sitting around.
I would sell the 2x4 to the next available schmuck. Its worth good money and in 40 years of screwing around with Packards I have yet to drive one that benefited from the 2x4 setup in normal driving. The majority have been fantastic for the gee whizz factor, but don't seem to add much real performance until much higher than normal speeds. The standard Rochester does quite well. If you want a car that really jumps and feels lively at all times use the hardtop's high stall convertor in your tranny and run a 3.54 rear. That will provide more drama pulling away from a light and smooth flexibility. IMHO
Posted on: 2014/8/16 20:11
|
|||
|