Packard Forum Index » V-8 (1955-56)

if it is such a horrible setup, then why did they build them with these things? was this something common on these cars back then, if so why didn't the sales suffer, why wasn't it documented (or was it), were there no recalls on this unit (did recalls exist back then) etc...etc...

i mean what makes it so bad now and just fine back in 55/56? doesn't make sense to me.

Mat,

So sorry to hear about the brake failure on the Carib, but glad you're OK.

I note Keith's other questions Quote:What other damage was caused? With the front wheel now pointing sideways was there other suspension damage? And what about body damage?

On the bright side, with the '34 coming together again, you shouldn't be without Packard transportation for too long!

Quote:
<p>During the 1950s, the BTV was used by all GM, Edsel, Lincoln, Mercury, Hudson, Nash and even Mercedes in addition to Packard. By 1959, EVERY ONE OF THEM (except Packard who was OB by then, of course) had abandoned the BTV and superseded it with something better. What does that tell you?</p>
<p>Craig</p>

...

i wasn't defending it, i was just trying to understand it.

I don't intend to participate in yet another (our thousandth?) rehash of the TreadleVac situation, but I still feel there is some fact that hasn't surfaced. Now no one can argue against the dual master cylinder providing a margin of safety that singles don't have; yet a single master cylinder system was adequate for more than a half-century and considered an improvement over the prior mechanical systems - though the improvement wasn't necessarily reliability, it was cost, equalization and ease of adjustment. We also should remember than in those years your car probably saw a grease rack once-a-month and impending problems were more likely to be spotted.

Yet perhaps 30 or 40 million or more cars used the Bendix TV between 1953 and 1962, and as far as I know they were never subject to service bulletins or similar actions by Packard or anyone else and were the state-of-the art unit. Yet of the cars that used them, Packard, Lincoln, Mercury, Cadillac, Buick, Pontiac, Nash & Hudson (I believe) and Mercedes-Benz, it seems only Packard owners have any passion for the subject and encounter problems. I'd really like to understand why that is so.

Quote:
Agreed. I really wonder if it has something to do with the mounting position or location. The few pictures I have seen of other brands seem to show the thing higher and in a more level position.

Who was the fellow that had been in contact with one of the brake companies who said they could mount a modern unit in the same place? Any further word there?

Thanks Gerd. I guess since nothing new posted in a couple of months no progress or interest.

Quote:
<p>Then maybe it is sedimentation and the angle of the dangle?</p>
<p>Jeez! Looking for the reason why the Anasazi went extinct might be more fruitful.</p>
<p>Replace the damn thing and be done with it.</p>

<p>Craig</p>

...