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

1941-47 Clipper Master Parts Book lists "Hood pads group 0.0015. Part number front 372165 Rear 373956." Which is it? Confusing, because my car, as it left Detroit, has but one (1) almost halfway down the hood from the front of the car atop each front fender. Steele does not supply. A couple Packardites have suggested Steele's 30-0092-42 for the '48-'50 tubs. But from what I can see online, they lack the original Clipper pad's roll at the outward edge which helps stabilize the hood when locked closed, prevents the long, heavy hood from shifting even incrementally. Packard included that roll for a reason.

However, i do not understand the tubs having six (6) similar pads. There is only one (1) on each side of my car as below. There is nothing else remotely like the below. Just one nearly halfway down the hood's length atop each front fender.

This is for my '47 Super Clipper. Can anyone with a 1946-47 senior Clipper who has replaced this please tell me exactly what you used? But please, no "you getcha a" projects. Thought i'd make my own out of some neoprene sheeting i have, but obviously needs the metal core to hold the recessed screws securely, that roll is there for a reason, and don't want any projects regardless how paltry.

Profound thanks.

Attach file:

---

  hood pad.jpg (79.68 KB)

Did you check with Max Merritt to see if perhaps they have some NOS?

Steele has reproduced them in the passed and still should have them, however I have found that the quality is poor as some were made with the metal exposed (the metal will take the paint off the edge of your hood). Call and request that they be inspected to insure that no metal can be seen or felt under the rubber edge before shipping and inspect before use.

Quote:

I am guessing the reason for 3 vs 1 per side is because of the shape of the pad and the size of the hood. Because the Clipper pad has the sharp step and the rounded part as a definite catch for the side load or motion perhaps they felt one would do. Based on how those on our cars have worn, maybe it did not do as well as they expected. With what I think is a larger hood on the tubs they decided to spread the load a bit better. Decided on 3 to more evenly take the weight and side thrust but because there was more than one pad they felt they didn't need the round profile and could get away with the gentle ramp on all of them which was probably easier and cheaper to make. Anyway, my

HH56, as always, a well-reasoned surmise.
The hideous tubs were heavy as they looked, 200 lbs. more than Clippers, which themselves were nearly 200 lbs. heavier than the lightest Packards ever--and best road cars -- the 1940 models, which unfortunately suffered a Detroit bucket mill mien abetted by those chintzy tin hood louvers aping the '38 Buick that ended Packard's three-year win of the Gallop Poll's Most Beautiful Car. Much as i otherwise liked my '40 120.

The tubs' tires were dangerously overloaded with four slim adults even without luggage, and this was long before a third of Americans were clinically morbidly obese.

To some of us, 1935-37 seniors, with their painted grille shells and painted headlight pods were jewels of understatement, made a Rolls-Royce look vulgar. Werner Gubitz with help from outsiders Alexis de Sakhnoffsky and Ray Dietrich created a chiseled, apart from the crowd distinction, the '30s senior Packards making Cadillacs, Lincolns, Pierce-Arrows look inept. Another reason, other than Packard's refinement, smoothness, dependability they were by far the leading choice of the world's embassies and five of the Supreme Court justices. Anyone know what Benjamin Nathan Cardozo, Louis Brandeis, and Harlan Stone drove?

Thank you, sir. Now all I need is to hear from any senior Clipper owner who has replaced those two hood pads, with what, and are they happy.

Dell, as mentioned, Steele does not have the pair for Clippers, but thanks for the warning. PackardDon, Merritt doesn't have any N.O.S. but even if they did, don't see the merit in replacing 76-year-old rubber with more of the same.

So, can any senior Clipper owners who've replaced theirs answer my pair of questions?

Good grief. The silence suggests i'm posing a question about biochemistry or deconstructing great literature. Or is everyone else with a senior Clipper soldiering on with their originals?

Quote:

I wouldn't use NOS tires or brake lines but I've never had any trouble with old NOS parts rubber that have been stored well. NOS potmetal parts are another story as they will pit even with proper storage. Sometimes it shows on the surface and sometimes it does not but it's there!

NOS rubber loses its flexibility so for something like a windshield install it will be impossible.

But obviously for something like a bumper it will make little difference. The old rubber will just wear out faster per impact.

We make the 371264 hood bumper/pivot, fresh stock $18 each. We make many items that others don't have, please check with us on any of your needs. 2 used per car on 41-47 Clippers

Thanks
James From
Kanter Auto Products

Just left you a voice mail. Would like to order a pair of 371264 hood bumper/pivots of fresh rubber for $18 each. What Clipper owner wouldn't? Noticed you list
"Hood bumper rubber set of 18 pieces for front and sides 1941-47 Clipper, $38."

Does the latter include a pair of 371264?

Wat wouldn't (yet), but he's from the wrong side of the tracks.


Glad you found a solution.


Hope this de-squeaks things.