Packard Forum Index » V-8 (1955-56)

Owen: Studebaker produced diesel powered trucks from 1962 through 1964. In those three years 702 diesel trucks were produced. The diesel engines used in the trucks were Detroit Diesel. The engines were the 4-53 four cylinder 212 cid engine horsepower 130, 3-53 three cylinder 159 cid engine horsepower 97. Both engine were two strokers.

John S

Page 6 post # 51 of this thread:
" I have seen bell housings with much later casting dates than 7/30/56. "

Note that it says LATER than 7/30/56. That means AFTER July of 56.

From page 27 of PI Magazine Summer 1996 vol 33, no2. :
"...last THursday that Packard built cars, JUne 21 1956."

IF there are BELLHOUSINGS with casting dates AFTER JUly or even OF JUly then what were they used for?????? Studebakers??? Nashes????? Hudsons??????? My perhaps erroneous belief all along is that Studebakers and nashes and Hudsons with Packard V8's were all AUTOMATICS and NOt sticks.

Quote:
"A Packard V-8 is WAY oversquare ...This is good for a high performance automobile engine, but is backwards for a truck engine ...".

YEs. TRue. But the Chev. 348 engine (probably THE worst engine ever built in history) was even more oversquare than the Packard V8. So what??? The 348 was used in heavy DUmp trucks among other trucks and they broke cranks left and rite.

I suppose my claim for good use of the Packard V8 in trucks is made relative to the time and space of the late 50's and relative to what was available or promoted at that time by other manufatureres.

OR to put it another way: NONE of the gasoline BIG truck engines (such as hiway tractors) offered by any of the manufaturers prior to the early 60's were ever expected to last much longer than a racing engine is expected to last in pro raceing machines.

All during WWII and well into the mid 50's Steel was hauled by the millions of tons by hiway tractors from Pittsburg to Detroit using a slightly hotter version of a 235 chevy 6 cylinder or somekind of flat head ford V8 left over from 1932 designs.

I mean Jesus, ANY mid 50's V8, even the near worthless Chev 348/409 was a godsend for trucks compared to anything available prior to 1955.

Lets keep things in perspective here of the time and space of the mid 50's.

Why were manual shift bellhousings still being cast long after engine production ceased? Most of the '56 Studebaker Golden Hawks were TwinUltramatic equipped and the penchant for problems are well known. Probably more than a few GHs were converted to manual shift because the T-Us kept going TU. Thus, there was a small but steady parts counter demand for the manual shift bellhousing and flywheel.

thnx, jack vines

Yes, but that would have made a demand for transmissions, clutch linkages etc to complete any conversion from T'Ultra to stick.

Just cause they stop making cars, doesnt mean they stop making parts for several months afterward. They would still have had agreements to supply the dealerships with service parts for a couple years.

Studebaker was still servicing and making part changes on these cars into the early 60s. Take a gander at the SSBs (Studebaker Service Bulletins) to get an idea.

I was wondering the same thing as BigKev. Was there an obligation to produce parts for a period of time after Packard production was ceased? The Studebaker Packard Corporation was still limping along.

I have an NOS 56 T-L control unit with a stamped date of "1960" on it. I'm sure several of our members have seen the same.
NOS window motors were supplied with a separate circuit breaker in the 60's not from Delco, but from Leece-Neville.
It's obvious that S-P was still producing parts for Detroit-built Packards.

Quote: Ordering wear parts from vendors for stock, yes. Producing engines and body parts in house, no.

Quote:

Transmissions came from Borg-Warner and GH clutch linkages came from Studebaker. The only Packard V8-specific cast part was the bellhousing and flywheel.

jack vines

I wonder just how long the gov't required Packard to furnish replacement parts? This could well explain the motor casting dates, it seems. When DeSoto went out, Chrysler was required to furnish parts for at least 5 years as per a friend of my father's who was an accountant for a dealership at the time. Certainly, this was easier for Chrysler than for Packard but Uncle Sam is Uncle Sam....