Packard Forum Index » Modification Discussion

In the coming months, I'll be revealing some interesting and hopefully educational projects here on this Forum.

Here's a list of a few things that will be showing up soon:
#1, A twin turbo Packard straight eight.
#2, Detailed explanations on the ever-elusive floor shift conversion for pre-'55 Packard manual transmissions
#3, Full HEI explanation for straight eights
#4, A Full-Flow oil filter conversion for straight eights
#5, And in conclusion, some tricks to get more power out of your straight eight, no matter what the year.

I have several more items to be added, but these are being done in secret to avoid the thievery that's rampant these days with some of the more "unscrupulous" individuals that frequent this Forum and others like it. Rest assured, it's going to be an exciting year here on Packard Info!

i'm excited!

it sounds as though you are going to enlighten us on how to get more power from a straight 8. Great! How about you tell us where to get a new camshaft not some re-underground pile of crap from Kanters or any where else. So my ? is how do you make power from straight 8 when there are zero cams available except 50 year old worn out units. The cam shaft is the brain. Also a 359 is suppose to have high compression and with todays gas it pings all over the place. So you can add an extra gasket to an aluminum head and bring the high compression ratio down from the 9:1 or so and take timing out to avoid spark knock. My 428 CJ lives at 11.5:1. The real problem is not high compression but piss poor flame travel in the combustion chamber. There is nothing high performance about these motors and should be left alone to go 0 - 60 in 20 seconds or so. Any one out there have a NOS Cam for sale? My next ? would be if you could make more power from straight 8 could you notice it through the high performing Ultra-Matic trans. Maybe you could tell us how to install a shift kit or upgrade the torque convertor for higher stall speed. Give me a break!

If knock in your high compression eight is a problem, install a water injector. The ones available 50 years ago are still on eBay. The new ones are expensive, the old one are not.

Bernardi

First off, with turbocharging, you don't need a radical cam, as the stock cam will be more than sufficient. As for the Ultramatic, I'm not even considering it, as the car I'm working on will be a manual, so you're on your own there. As for heads, with forced induction, you don't want a high compression ratio, so the stock head will suffice, along with a nice porting/smoothing job to the head and intake/exhaust ports.

As for the "There is nothing high performance about these motors and should be left alone to go 0 - 60 in 20 seconds or so.", wait and see. I'm not talking about a 1000 HP engine, 400 will be "sufficient".

I suggest you re-read my first post where I stated: "I have several more items to be added, but these are being done in secret to avoid the thievery that's rampant these days with some of the more "unscrupulous" individuals that frequent this Forum and others like it."

Packardprince: The 359 Packard engine has a compression ratio of 8:7 to 1, not 9 to 1 as you have stated. My 66 Chevelle 230 six cylinder engine has a compression ratio of 8:5 to 1 and has no ping in the engine when running 89 octane gas. I doubt very much a 359 would ping on high octane gas ie 93 octane. If you are getting any ping in the 359 engine in that 54 Derham you should get a good mechanic to do a through tune-up for the owners of the Derham.

Turbopackman isn't taking the easy way when hot rodding his Packard. The easy way of doing things is to install a Chevy V8 in Packard like you did with Greaselightin or what ever you call the 53 Clipper you brag about.

John F. Shireman

John, What makes you think putting in a 2005 400hp LS-2 with 4L60-e was easy? Have you ever converted a junk yard car over to 2007 standards with all the computer works and take first place at all car shows entered and is driven daily and gets 23 mpg? By the way our company did this as a service to a guy who was sick of straight 8's and paid a lot of money. Can you blame him. I am so sorry I was vague about the compression ratio of 359. You are the so called expert. May be the guy building the 400 hp 359 would want a stainless steel fuel tank I make. Probably not as it would not be original as a 400 hp 359 with turbo charging. John, were you the one who wanted a quote for a steel unit? That made a lot of sense. Using a manual tranny is the only way to go with a project like what you want. Throw some Nitros Oxide to it. With 9 main bearings that thing would handle it.
John why don't you send me pic's of all the Packards you worked on and let me see how cherry they are. I proud to display the ones we did for our customers. You can get off my ass about them, or are you jealous? See ya Later Packard pro........................Al

What is wrong with 0-60 in 20 seconds anyway. Packards were made for people who wanted a solid elegant quiet car not some kids muscle car. My 47 Super Clipper may not be able to beat many cars from the stoplight but it will cruise effortlessly and silently at any legal speed in North America.After 60 years it's still a fine example of "the quiet boss of the road". If it takes a few more seconds to reach that cruising speed so what? Had Packard been around in the 60's and had wanted to build muscle cars for the teenie bopper set I'm sure that they would have done a better job of it than the big three with those tinny Hemi Cuda, Mustang 428 and Chevelle 427 scrap . Packards are about refined taste, quiet elegance and superb engineering using only the finest materials available, the conveyence of choice of royalty, US presidents, ambassadors, and old money.

Amen Dave, spoken like a true Packard owner. While these guys can beat me in a 1/4 mile it makes no difference as I usually travel further than that. Travel 300 or so miles non-stop and then brag to a Packard owner. I can beat on foot any muscle car made. Did I mention the race is five foot long?

Quote:

Tell that to this guy: <object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/opJilgQDZyo&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/opJilgQDZyo&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

And besides, my engine is not a 359, but a 9 main 327.