Packard Forum Index » V-8 (1955-56)

Craig - you miss the point entirely - WHY did it fail? Does no one have the curiousity to find out why?

PS let me try to make the point you miss another way. Oil pumps fail, and some smart cookies analyze the problem and come up with solutions. Twin Ultras fail and some smart folks study them and come up with solutions. Treadlevacs fail and no one has the interest in finding out what the failure mode was?

As to returns to TV sellers and rebuilders, I gathered that data and reported on it some years ago.

I've got no axe to grind here, just an interest in an analysis of a problem in the same professional manner you guys have applied to other problems.

AMEN.

Quote:
<p>No, Owen, you missed the most fundamental point. There is NO SAFE WAY TO PROVE THAT A BTV IS FIXED! It is trial by potential wreck or worse, death.</p>
<p>In the case of an oil pump fix, the oil pressure gauge proves it instantaneously. The elimination of lifter clatter proves it instantaneously. If the fix does NOT work, then it is NOT going to wreck or kill you.</p>
<p>In the case of a T-U, the T-U either works properly or it does not. If it does NOT, then it is NOT going to wreck or kill you.</p>
<p>How many times does one have to lay hands on a red hot burner to learn "DO NOT DO THAT!"? You do not have to know WHY the burner is hot, only that it is.</p>
<p>Craig</p>

how can there be a way to prove its fixed, when no one knows what is wrong!? Does anyone here have solid proof that the unit is inherantly unsafe? Is this failure of modern re-build seal material? faulty unit rebuilds?

I myself am VERY curious as to what the big deal is with the BTV, and someone on a website saying "its deadly remove it!!" in capital letters doesnt mean diddley without some facts.


We have an amazing collection of minds on this site, lets use them! Members here re-engineerd the V8 oil pump and did away with its inherent design flaw, is there something that can be done here?

I have no other option than run the current BTV in my car right now. I (and i suspect some other members are in the same boat) do not have the space, time, or money to spend to try to jury rig in some random GM (or any other) master cylender!

Lets pull together here people!

<p>MikeC</p>Quote:
<p>You make some good points, but consider this:</p>
<p>1) The BTV fails unexpectedly and catastrophically. This is a FACT.</p>
<p>In order to PROVE it is fixed, then one would have to prove it NEVER fails unexpectedly and catastrophically.</p>
<p>The alternative is to replace the BTV with something else that has a proven track record of NEVER failing catastrophically. A dual-master MC NEVER fails catastrophically (unless it has been sabotaged, which is outside the scope of this discussion).</p>
Quote:<p>Then you had better leave it parked.</p>
<p>Craig</p>

1: Ok, but WHY. Like i said, is it material failure? faulty rebuilds? or a design failure? The kid learning not to touch the hot thing is importaint, but it is also importaint to teach him WHY it is hot.

2: A dual master cylender never catistophically?? Bull$hit! It happened to me in my 91 dodge with a dualmaster cyl. I blew a brake line and the pedal went to the floor. It also happened to my friend with his 80s ford.

3: Park my car? that is the stupidest thing i have ever heard. Are you F**king serious? Perhaps you would like to send me a check (cashiers) equal to several weeks of my pay so i can diddle around trying to retrofit something else? get a grip on reality.

Quote:
<p>Go ahead and drive it. It's your risk. Pay no attention to me. Call me later from the hospital.</p>
<p>Craig</p>

ok. the hospitals around here have good food.

to ty and maintain some semblance of order in this thread, do you have any reasonable solutions? ones based in reality?

I think we will have to wait until Matt has a look and hopefully there is something definitive seen. Just by the symptoms, I would bet the compensating valve didn't seal rather than the fluid being entirely sucked out. A floating speck of matter landing in the wrong place and time would do it or, as has been mentioned many times, since the valve spring is not part of any rebuild kit and is held on by a questionable clip, that also is a good possibility.

I notice that ABS power brakes as well as several others are selling dual master cylinder treadle vac replacements for the tri 5 Chevys using a modern dual diaphragm 7 inch booster. They claim it is a direct bolt in. The question is does anyone know if there is an internal size difference between treadlevacs. The pict Eric posted of a Chevy setup some time ago sure looked the same externally, and pictures from parts manual posted on Chevy websites asking for info looked same internally. I would think if internally the same and it works in a Chevy as direct replacement, with some changes to fitment in the Packard such as maybe an angle change to toe board or maybe a slight shift toward engine to clear frame and then add a remote fill setup, it should work in a Packard if there are no other differences.

I do believe if something that would fit with no major changes or relocation that screams out replacement could be found, more would take the plunge just to eliminate the possibility and controversy if nothing else.

I agree HH56. that way, those of us who belive that the T/V should be replaced can, and those of us who do not, can allways in the future if we choose!

And as an added thought, have there been any noted problems with the T/V system on the pre-V8 cars?

I spent 20 years in the garage and auto parts business before coming back to the Army so I feel somewhat qualified to comment on this.
I agree with the points mikec brought up entirely; master cylinders, regardless of single or dual, fail suddenly; I don't have the facilities, time, or money to park my Packard and experiment with a difficult retrofit; and why not let the many years of experience that exist on this site work together to figure out either 1)a good retrofit that doesn't require rebuilding the whole car and 2) what actually fails in the BTV system.
Insulting other members and simply condemning the BTV won't solve anything. There is no point in even discussing it if all we are going to do is suggest people park cars when there is no real solution.