Packard Forum Index » Modification Discussion

Hi

Here's the formula for Cubic Inch Displacement:

Bore (squared) X Stroke X 0.7854 X Number of Cylinders = Cubic Inch Displacement.

I have it written down on a reminder card in my calculator, just to "run the numbers" when I get curious whether a larger engine was possible from a given maker.

Listen to Jack carefully on Packard V-8 engines, he has the experience and knowledge we all thought was lost when the last generation of Packard Engine Engineers passed on.

Many interesting larger Packard engine are possible, it just comes down to how many bucks you can spend to get what you want.

Steve

Yes, Jack is a fount of information, not only on Packard, but many classic engines of yore. I would like to hear from him and others on just the point that you make:
Quote:

It'd be great to get some info together here on the many larger Packard engines that are a reality. I'm sure there are stories aplenty right on this forum.

Thanks for the forumla. It looks familiar. I think you might have posted it before. I'll make a special document and squirrel it away in my Cars folder!

(BTW, the Packard engines wouldnt't be limited to V8s. I know many successful mods were done on the straight 8s, including those done by Packard on the Daytona.)

Although my main interest remains the V8s, mostly I guess because there are so many performance American V8s that need to be taken on and shown a thing or two!

Steve, you are too kind, sir. I've still got a lot of questions to answer. The latest is investigating the possibility the center main bearing wear is caused by crankshaft harmonics and not oiling problems.

Packard was a leader in engine balancing, but they were still in the beta test phase when production ceased. Maybe they miscalculated somewhere. I'm getting an expert to look at the crankshaft balance weights.

Building a 427" Packard V8 is very possible. All it takes is a $2500 stroker crank and an $800 set of pistons, plus about another $4,000 for the machine work and miscellaneous parts. I've got a $1500 set of Oliver billet rods and a $2,000 roller cam kit if the engine is to be supercharged or use nitrous. Figure at least $10,000 to do it really correctly.

I'll have at least that in my Latham supercharged engine for my Studebaker Hawk. It keeps getting pushed back by the Studebaker pickup/Packard V8 and various Studebaker and Packard V8 builds for others.

jack vines

Jack, reminds me of a saying the NASCAR boys have "speed costs money, how fast do you want to go"?

JV.
Do u have any V8's that do NOT have the centre main bearing wear????

IF so use the crankshaft from that engine as a control specimen for other engines to check with.

Most likely the centre wear is due to a poorly made crank that is out of alignment.

I would doubt that the main bearing bores are out of alignment any but could be.

FWIW, the Chevy V8s never had main bearing or crankshaft problems until they went to overdrive automatics and lockup torque converters. This increased engine loading at lower RPMs caused heretofore unseen wear. The Ultramatic was probably the second automatic transmission with a lockup clutch. Given the weight of Packards and the generally high gearing, it is possible the same thing is occurring.

There are so few standard shift Packard V8s, it is difficult to use them as a control group.

My first investigation is to have an expert in balance and harmonic dynamics look at the crankshaft and put one on a balance dynomometer.

jack vines

I fully agree with the theory about the convertor lockup contributing to early bearing failure. In stock trim a 56 will lock up long before I would consider putting a stick shift into high--as low as 25, and that with a 3.07 rear. That would be about 950 rpm.

Food for thought; I'll pass along what a couple of oldtimers told me: 320 owners didn't know what bearing trouble was. Whether that was reduced loading, or another harmonic, can't say.

I'm way too cheap to build up an engine as described and took another route: the Stripper Clipper 55 Deluxe I just got was probably one of the fastest cars delivered by the factory that year--lightest weight, stick shift, and 3.9 rear. She's a lot of fun.

Has the crank shaft been accurately checked to determine if it is streight????? THat is, are all of the main journals concentric with each other?????

I would be more concerned about the weakness of the crankshaft in terms of how much it will twist from end-to-end (and then snap back) compared to other mfg'ers crankshafts such as the Chevy.

have u discovered any engines with broken cranks and where do they break???

As Ross points out, apparently the 320's didn't give any bearing trouble. I don't know. Based on that evidence and it seems to me that hte Packard V8 has rather small diameter crank and rod jounals compared to other engines i would be more likely to consider crank weakness or journals out of line with each other than anything else. Maybe the Crank is jUst fine for a 320 but not any larger or more powerful application.

If lugging the engine at low speed is any kind of excessive load problem then it ought to show up in excessive rod bearing wear too.