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

With all those benefits it is worth losing the whistle feature.

With all those benefits it is worth losing the whistle feature

If your car is not a first few months production car you may not even have the whistle in your 51 -- just the round housing where it was located.

It seems a lot of people had issues with the whistle when the automatic shutoff handles started to appear in gas stations. Modern handles can have problems but back then apparently the tanks with whistles didn't vent fast enough for some of those handles either.

Packard discontinued the whistle a few months after 51 introduction and issued a bulletin to that effect in December 1950. They also told the dealers how to eliminate the whistle in previous cars where owners were having the problem with automatic handles and issued another bulletin a few months later elaborating on a more complete removal process.

Just to give the dead horse an extra kick, the Henney-Packards kept the whistle at least through 1952 but, of course, they also used a different tank. Back in the day I loved watching the station attendant (when they had full service in CA) stop and start the pump trying to figure out where the sound was coming from.

I don't understand people's reluctance to do it, but there is always the telephone, call the supplier. Probably a lot faster and more reliable than posting a question and wading thru responses over the next few days, some of which may be correct and some anecdotal.

Some of us, such as myself, are deaf so picking up the phone to call is not an option.

One more kick to the unfortunate horse, today I was trying to figure out the difference between the passenger car tank and the Henney tank but see none. Of course, the 1951 Henney tank is still installed in the car but climbing under and taking rough measurements, it looks identical down to the size, fuel line connection and filler/vent tubes. I guess I'll need to remove it to see for sure if anything is different in the sender.

Quote:

However, it is not even close to square. I didn't note on paper the dimensions today but both the 300 1951 tank and the 1951 Henney tank are about 3' wide to about 25" the other way, measuring very roughly by eye. Here are several photos of the 300 tank and a photo of the installed Henney tank.

Attach file:

---

  (192.53 KB)


  (188.31 KB)


  (182.05 KB)


  (122.58 KB)


  (301.95 KB)

I have a Kanter repop tank workers great ,but be careful not to mess up the BUNG ,the little threaded thing that attaches to the tank where the drain bolt is ,they'll spin in hiker hole when working with the drIn bolt then start to leak and are a pain to fix as nothing will stick to the tank with all of this alkyhol gas

Yes, the tanks used in the Henney vehicles are indeed different. They are narrower than a stock tank, and as mentioned, have the whistle. The sending unit has screws to retain it to the top of the tank as well. In the case of my hearse, (51 model) the narrower tank is needed to accommodate the compartment used for storing the "church truck", or casket dolly. I currently have my tank removed and will be happy to post measurements to illustrate the difference.

I've owned many Henney-Packards but never compared the tanks before now. I suspect you're right in the width but the 1951 that I used for comparison does not have the storage compartment and the tank measured the same as the '51 300 tank so now I'm wondering if there are exceptions.

Quote:
To quote myself above, the tank I have is definitely from a 1951 300 as I removed it myself but now, a couple weeks back home from my Oregon workshop and not giving it any thought, it suddenly struck me that the car the tank was from did not have a spare wheel well in the trunk. Not sure why as it also never had any indication of ever having a continental kit but it was some kind of a race or endurance car so perhaps a larger Henney tank was added for some reason which may explain why it looks the same as the tank in my 1951 Henney.