Packard Forum Index » General

Quote:
Petey,

Pretty straight forward in adding your V12 to the Registry. Select "Packard Owner Registry" from the main menu, then complete the various blank fields some of which have drop-down lists. Be sure to include a pic, note size limitations apply, and under "Other information" in the "VEHICLE HISTORY/PROJECT STATUS:" field be sure to tell us all about the car's history and how you acquired it. Then click on the "Add to Registry" button and VOILA! there it is!

The Packard Photo Archive is not a Registry it is for Packard pictures in general. Regarding the pic of your Packard mis-identified as a '36, place a comment against it and BigKev or a Forum Ambassador can then identify the pic and move it to the correct category.

Unclear as to where you got your "logic" from.

Lets review some REAL world FACTS. In late 1934, to show-case the introduction of the copper-lead connecting rod "insert" bearing (developed primarily by Federal Mogul), Packard took an "off-the-shelf" STANDARD eight, and ran it wide open for 25,000 mi.

The AVERAGE speed recorded for the entire run, including fuel stops and tire changes (at that speed you go thru tires pretty fast !) was NINETY THREE MILES AN HOUR !

In the words of the Packard engineers who completely tore the engine down the engine incurred so little wear "it could have been re-assembled and run the test again". Obviously, the much more powerful Super Eights and Twelves could have done the same thing at higher speeds.

Now, in fairness, that wasn't always the case. In a General Motors test, they claimed that a pre "insert" bearing (meaning 1934 or earlier production) Packard wouldn't make 2,000 mi. at extreme speeds without "pounding out" a rod bearing.

That is consistant with what we found in the 1950's, when, by having local babbit shops re-doing our "poured babbit" rods. We simply duplicated Packard's failed attempts in the early 1930's to make poured babbit rod bearings work. Same problem Packard had. With higher road speeds, poured babbit in powerful high-revving long-stroke motors will quickly fail. And fail dramatically. Lots of pre 1935 Packard Eights and Super Eights wound up with 'patches' on the side of their crank-cases where a rod went thru. And often that meant the crank-shaft got nicked or worse. Not funny.

I do agree with you that, at least in theory, the modern short stroke engines should have a substantially greater reliability in terms of service life than the old "long stroke rod pounders" of the pre-war era.

Yes, I remember, as a Packard nut even in those days, the pride Packard buffs felt at that late 1954 announcement that the then new '55 Packard V-8 ran wide open and set that 100 mph plus speed record. With regular oil changes, I would agree - no reason why it wouldnt run 100,000 mi. or even twice that.

The sad fact is, theory was one thing, and sloppy Packard factory work was quite another - the '55's had such a terrible "build quality" record that they became an industry joke for poor reliability in service.
The sales figures as the months went by, tell the sad story VERY clearly.

But that was then. Today's Packard car buffs who like the Packard V-8 have all kinds of "fixes" that, in my opinion, would make a PROPERLY PREPARED Packard V-8 my choice for the "most reliable". If for no other reason, the long-stroke flat-heads were MUCH tougher on their valves than the 'modern' overhead valve design of the Packard V-8. Thanks to the goofy tortured flow of exhaust gas in the "flat-head" concept, those engines typically required much more frequent valve grinds than an over-head valve engine would incur under the same operating conditions.

thanks for the help - will try your suggestions to "Register" mine.

I just checked - cant find the photo now, that mis-identified my car's year. Dosnt matter to me as long as we are all having fun and exchanging ideas learning something.

LATER TODAY - TRIED, DIDNT WORK. NOT SURE WHAT I DID WRONG.

= = =

STILL later. O.K...now the TEXT shows up, but the picture I TRIED to get to show up - dosnt. Also screwed up by making a "double entry". Hopefully, our Editor will check both of them, pick the best one, and delete the other.

Quote:
Petey,
for the Owner Registry entries! When I saw two there I thought you were making up for lost time until I saw your post on the subject. Both entries work for me, both have a picture and both appear to be the same, so Kev deleting either one will be fine.

What I didn't expect to see was your modification........"In 1962, cut the rear axle just out-board of the "pumpkin" (center section), welded in its place a late 1950's Olds station wagon 3.23 differential. Re-splined the Packard axles (which were easily twice the diameter of the Olds) to fit the Old. gear-set.".......Maybe we should be calling you "Hot Rod Hartmann"

naw - I did NOT 'hot rod" my Twelve ! It is "bone stock".

The reason for the final drive gear ratio change is simple. You have to remember the "mind set" of a new car buyer in the 30's. They were typically very rich older people who came to maturity prior to the automotive era.

The idea was to show off how powerful your car was, by not having to shift gears. Of course we who are "car buffs" know you could move a Greyhound bus with a lawn-mower engine in high gear from a dead stop...if you geared it low enough.

As "slick" as those Packard transmissions were to shift, fact is, Packard knew what it had to do to sell cars, thus the absurdly low, even for that day, final drive ratios.

By the time I started driving (early-mid 1950's) inter-city road speeds were way above 60 mph. At say 70 mph, the long-stroke engines had piston speeds and "shock loads" on the "big ends" of the connecting rods FAR FAR more severe than a modern car at 120 !

By the 1930's, the big Packards had superior brakes and handling, so they are perfectly pleasant at higher speeds, BUT FOR the "screaming" of the motor owing to the stock extra low gear ratio. I dont think you could get a DUMP TRUCK today with a gear ratio as low as what was common in passenger cars prior to World War Two.

The present axle ratio, as you saw from my notes, is 3.23. Even that isn't as high as I'd like these days, what with Interstate speeds even higher !

In case you are wondering why I didn't just leave the rear axle alone, and go to an over-drive, well..I would have sure have preferred that. But the neato "separate case" overdrives I WOULD have loved to have used, didn't show up until the late 1960's or early 1970's.

Again, not have been possible in the early 1960's. The Borg Warner style wasnt made for a transmission like the pre war "big" Packards, and anyway, I rather doubt it would survive under the brutal torque put out by the V-12.

In any event, with the huge massive "X" frame right behind the transmission, no way to stuff an over-drive in there. Just no room to do it that way.

These days, there are several "dedicated" or "separate case" overdrives you can "hang" between the center of the X frame, and the rear end, any of which should handle the torque of just about ANY automotive application.

I strongly recommend ANYONE who loves their pre war Packard enough to keep it in driveable condition, to drive the hell out of it...AFTER fitting it with an over-drive !

I have in storage an entire unmolested Twelve rear axle assembly. With a typical over-drive hung BEHIND the X, well, that would be even better - giving me both the nice extra low of the stock rear end for stop light showing off, AND a 3.08 for extreme speed cruising. Just might do that some day - with the 3.23 rear end, given the stock transmission gearing, it is a bit "limp" off the line. HATE that when ordinary cars of the 1930's can stay with me up to about 40 mph, when I start to pull away...!

Quote:Ya Just trying to add a little humor to the thread. Life is to short not to smile

By the way nice photo from that perspective.

It's too bad there isn't one more option of "Most reliable Packard engine", I think the category of "Any Packard engine NOT touched by Hot Rod Hartmann" would be my first choice.

Tom (Packin31) wrote: Quote:

I thought all of Asparagus' posting in this thread were comedy. They aren't? Oops

Guscha, I think the entertainment value of this engine poll has far exceeded anything I expected. I enjoy posting these generally stated topics and watching the replies roll in. Some people actually take this stuff seriously. Now, where is my rake and hoe?

Gerd, please be forewarned about picking on Mr. PFHartmann, he has fans and you may end up with a private message like this one I received some time ago when PFHartmann was previously up to his same old antics:

Quote:

If my postings are UN-enjoyable, then don't f'king read them! You know where the door is!