Packard Forum Index » General

Okay, here is my contribution:

I-6 237

I-6 245

I-8 384

I-8 320

I-8 282

I-8 288

I-8 327 (5MB)

I-8 327 (9MB)

I-8 356

I-8 359

V-12 473

Oops, I forgot the V-8s.

V-8 320

V-8 352

V-8 352 (2-4s)

V-8 374

V-8 374 (2-4s)

Then there is the earlier version of the V-12.

My money would be on the 320 cu in, low compression 2 barrel used by Nash and Hudson. The most understressed power plant they made and I would guess the longest lived most trouble free.

For economy I would pick the same engine with high compression.

If the judges disqualify them as not "Packard" enough, then I'll take the same engine in Packard Clipper form.

Incidentally I wonder what kind of mileage you could get out of the same engine in a Clipper with overdrive, with fuel injection and electronic ignition added, and radial tires?

Rusty,

Interesting thoughts on the 320 V8. Anyone with long experience of this engine could possibly testify to its durability.

Theoretically speaking, I suppose the V-8 should last the longest. The earlier cars suffer from rotten (or no) air filters, by-pass (or no) oil filters, and poorly engineered cooling systems due to yet to be published petroleum company research.

I guess this will bring a lot of angry responses, so while I am at it the Straight Eight L-head design suffers from serious theoretical handicaps as well.

Don't get me wrong, when they were new they ran beautifully and drove like a million bucks.

However, only a crackpot would suggest that modern cars aren't as good. This wasn't the case in the 1960's when you really couldn't buy a good car. In those days old Packards drove better than a lot of brand new cars, but almost everybody complained that Packards burned too much gas.

I remember one old lady telling me "Oh yeah, we had a Packard and we were always putting gas in it. You couldn't go around the block without running out of gas."

Theoretically speaking, I suppose the V-8 should last the longest. The earlier cars suffer from rotten (or no) air filters, by-pass (or no) oil filters, and poorly engineered cooling systems due to yet to be published petroleum company research.

Tim, really I have to disagree. IN 1934 the Packard cars all had full-flow oil filters as standard equipment, and oil bath air filters were optional with oiled mesh standard. And cooling systems by most owner's measure were pretty much without peer.

But to banter back and forth over which is the most "reliable", we need a definition of reliable.

reliability is relative. every car that comes off an assembly line is going to be different. take two consecutive cars off a line and give them similar treatment, one is going to go farther with different problems and different characteristics. even great manufacturers will have defective vehicles now and then due to poor metallurgy or any others of a list of items a mile long. some people have different expectations (sometimes unreasonable ones), and all treat vehicles diffeenntly which will greatly affect longevity. I find this alot with MoPars, which is my other brand preferennce along with packards. Theres a lot more ford and chevy guys out there than us dodge guys. All day long i watch people abuse the life out of dodge vehicles, then whine about how it breaks down so much then brag about how their precious babied ford has lasted so much longer. (my personal experiences talking here) but the pricipal point is that really, its all relative.

reliable adj. that can be relied upon; dependable; trustworthy.
SYN -- reliable is applied to a person or thing that can be counted upon to do what is expected or required (his reliable assistant -- or Packard); dependable refers to a person or thing that can be depended on as in a need or emergency and often connotes level-headedness or steadiness (she is a dependable friend because she drives a Packard); trustworthy applies to a person, or, sometimes, a thing, whose trustfulness, integrity, discretion, etc. can be relied on (a Packard is a trustworthy mode of transportation); trusty applies to a person or thing which continued experience has shown to be completely trustworthy or dependable (his 19xx Packard with its trusty [ xxx cu. in. V8, V12, Straight 8, 6 cylinder] could be relied upon for dependable performance).

Derived (with some editorial license) from Webster's New World Dictionary of the American Language, College Edition, Copyright ? 1966, The World Publishing Company, Cleveland and New York.

Poll added to General Forum.

I share your puzzlement at some of the "posts" in here. For example, JW and 39 Pi indicated they agree - think the 245 cu. in. six cyl. Packards are the "most reliable". And JW provided us with a chart showing it as such, and way down at the BOTTOM show the Packard Twelve as the most UNreliable.

Good question as to what we mean by "reliable". Perhaps JW and 39 Pi will help us out with a little more info. as to how they arrived at the conclusion that the Packard V-12 was the most UNreliable ?

For example, for how long did THEY own and operate Packard V-12's, and under what maintainence conditions, road conditions, etc., at the time they were subjecting the Packard six to the same conditions ?

What were those conditions ? Sustained extreme speed driving reliability? That would puzzle me, given the six's dinky little 2 inch crank-pin compared to the Twelve 2 and a half in. crank pin (effectively almost half again as much bearing surface capacity as the six).

In the event of a fan belt failure, the Packard Twelve would still run ( it had dual belts). In the event of ignition failure, the Packard Twelve would run on either set of coils and breakers.

So c'mon guys, tell us more on your background, specifically, WHAT were your reliability critera, and WHAT is your experience level with the various Packard products.

Really looking foward to learning more from you.