Packard Forum Index » Post-War (1946-54)

Quote:
The 1955-56 Service Index, Twin Ultramatic section shows an article on "Filler Tube Length" (including dipstick) for the 55th Series, in SC Vol. 29, No. 3, advising it was shortened and that related parts are not interchangeable. The shortened type carried over from '55 to '56.

However, 48-54 parts book shows completely different parts numbers for those parts (Gr. 3.640 & 3.641) for the GS - a third variation/length, perhaps.

Gear start dipsticks are on the left, differently shaped and not sure where it enters the pan. TUs are on the right and with the early and late designs. Don't think they are at all interchangeable. The pan depth I would be concerned about most. If too shallow, won't clear valves. If too deep, then suction screen may not reach all the way down to pick up enough fluid

It is clear that they all are not interchangable or they would all probably havethe same part #. Presuming the 55-6pan clears and has correct depth,that would be easiest, next would be to weld in bung and use 55-6 tub/dipstick. Easy to calibrate by draining and refilling with proper amt, then marking stick.

BUT BUT BUT, as I said, 100,000 early UL-Traumatics were on the road for years with no problems.IF there were big problems we would have seen a fix in the Service Counselors.

As with another problem that's not really a problem, this entire problem can be eliminated by converting to standard shift or making your Packard into a garden planter. I'm sure Ralph Nader has a booklet on that.

fred -

Not so much a problem in the sense that the OE design didn't work as intended, but more one of convenience.

Most of these fellows do their own maintenance, but some may be finding it harder to accomplish - especially with age and whatever afflictions may befall them.

Most "modern" shops wouldn't begin to know where to look, and even if you held their hand to help them find it, most wouldn't remember from one year to the next.

Yet, make it easier to check on these cars, and perhaps more people will check more often.

When Packard designed it, i'm sure they didn't consider that so many would continue to drive them with leaks, old seals, etc so many years later.

Let's say you paid 5,000 for a Packard worth the 5,000 you paid.

The rear seal is leaking and the front seal is leaking and there's some dripping from the cooler lines but all in all, the car uses a quart per driving season. You have considered selling it now and again.

Solutions:

A) Put 2500 into rebuilding the tranny, and sell the car at a 2500 loss.

B) Take less than 5,000 for the car after you explain how to add fluid to the tranny and what a PITA it is. Everyone beats you up on the price because you're an honest seller and tell them it uses a quart a year and they need to check it.

C) Put a 100 dipstick fix on that lets you check and add fluid as needed like almost every automatic transmission on the road build from the 40's up until the 90s. Get your 5k back when you sell because it's not a big deal.

D) Keep the car and keep crawling under like the PITA it is

E) Keep the car, put the 100 dipstick fix on and keep driving it with minimal fuss.

F) Keep the car, and put a 2500 dollar rebuild into a 5000 car, fill it once and be done forever.



Of course we'd all love to do F), but in most situations, fixing small leaks from major sources isn't worth the effort, time, and money, and if you're considering selling the car, usually not worth it at all.


Adding the dipstick is the perfect solution to almost all cars that have any kind of leak that aren't cars worth $10,000+ or aren't driven that often.

Honestly:

WOULDN'T Y0U REALLY RATHER HAVE A BUICK?

Hi Guys:

I'm glad to hear most of you are sympathetic to this. Sure! A few years ago, I might have said, "what's the big deal?". Now at 67 I find it a chore. I still get under there and do my own maintenence. I was just under there today adjusting the emergency brakes. After reading the horror stories about the Treadle Vac.

You can tell Packard never intended for the user to check/add transmission fluid. It was intended to be done on a lift and fluid added with a pump. {A tribute to our ingenuity, for finding a way!!) I'm sure they never thought their cars would be on the road 65 years later either. A real tribute to the company.

Now that transmission that went 100,000 miles without a leak. Is starting to leak a quart a year. Still not a problem if you had a sensible way of checking/filling.

What really bothers me about this whole procedure. You never know what debris is falling into that opening. when you are groping around, removing that filler cap. I wash and blow dry the cap as a precaution. As the cap seal always feels gritty.

Sure, I will eventually replace those seals. But for a car that I drive about 100 miles a year. CORTCOMP's list makes a lot of sense.

Keep the idea's coming Boys! You are a real talented bunch of guys, I've learned a lot!!

Thanks
Warren

Oh P.S.

I intend to research the Flexible Dipstick for pan mount. I'll post the findings.

Thanks

Quote:
I'm sure Packard designed it this way, knowing that the vehicle would likely be on a lift when engine oil was changed in a properly-equipped shop. That way, the Ultramatic fluid could be checked, along with giving the Zerks a shot of grease, while the engine oil was being drained.

However, the article, "Servicing the Ultramatic", published in SC Vol. 23, No. 9, advises:

Quote:
That's as valid an alternative for an owner as any mechanic. So, I not sure I'd agree that the factory never intended for the owner to check/add transmission fluid.

Yet, I'm curious what the owner's manual for your car has to say about maintenance of the Ultramatic - beyond basic interval. While I don't expect it to tell the owner how to drain and refill, I'd like to think that it would cover checking and adding fluid (likely through the floor cover).

Of course, an underhood provision is more convenient and would also eliminate the possibility of spilling fluid on the interior. I'm sure many here will look forward to your findings.

Now, would you believe that any manufacturer would completely eliminate such an underhood dipstick and filler tube in this day and age? Well, GM began doing just that with some of their transaxles within the last decade. Now, THAT sounds like a company that doesn't think much of a vehicle owner.

Yet, I'm curious what the owner's manual for your car has to say about maintenance of the Ultramatic - beyond basic interval. While I don't expect it to tell the owner how to drain and refill, I'd like to think that it would cover checking and adding fluid (likely through the floor cover).



This statement is all Packard had to say about Ultra maintenance from 51-6. In 55 they did change it to say Twin Ultramatic.

Attach file:

---

  (16.20 KB)