Packard Forum Index » General

I know this was discussed and somewhat poo-poo'd last year but it's getting closer. The price has dropped considerably and if you listen to the description of how the ladies head cast was made, it is only a matter of time.

Of course, any real metal items are not in the immediate future but I sure wouldn't say the same for casting patterns which are the big expense to making many of the metal pieces. Leno already makes water pumps with his expensive laser scan setup.

If they can make a 3D image by taking a couple of photos with an iPhone, what is to prevent some smart person writing a software program to import that data into a CNC machine for other harder to make pieces.cnn.com/video/?hpt=hp_t2#/video/tech/2012/03/31/nr-kaye-3d-printer.cnn

I think this is a matter to be considered. First, so many years have passed since Packard plant,closed it doors and also parts production stopped. I think today the main problem with Packard parts is getting right Body panels for pre and after war made cars.
But as they say: its only my 5 cents.

Fine for trim parts. Hold that quality inspection in your hand. For critical mechaincal parts then quality control becomes an issue. The future may change my mind. But for now critical mecanichal components are best reto fitted from well know production parts. It's all in the TESTING!!!

Even with trim parts there is a potential problem. Consider the 55-56 ign sw bezel and the trunck latch mechanism. NEW from the factory in 55/56 those items were strictly flimsy junk. Who would want a repop of those???? Well maybe if cheap enuf sure. Or if re-popped out of steel. Expensive part of bezel is the chrome. I'd be willing to paint a repop if were steel.

OR. If we can a flop a part onto a Xerox machine to have the part repopped then why not have the TOOLING made to produce it instead????? Then instead of depending on someones granny over in the next village half way around the world to melt down her skillet for raw materials the tooling owner can regulate the ingredients/process.

Quote:
Seems to me that the problem with the 55-56 ignition bezel only reared its ugly head within the last decade or so. Yet, after 75K miles, my dad's Exec still has the original bezel in place and unbroken. I'm not sure what you mean about about the trunk latch, but I've seen failures with pot-metal release mechanism parts on other brands. I'd bet the life of those parts exceeded expectations of any engineer - let alone an overwhelming majority original owners. The fact is that no vehicle or part is designed to last forever; that would be self-defeating to the industry.

Regardless, don't throw the baby out with the bath water. The problem may simply be a matter of different material or some other small improvement that's needed (thanks to years of hindsight). For example, did you ever notice how many '57 Chevies there used to be with the plastic grille emblem missing? About 20 years ago, a savvy vendor looked into the problem and had new tooling made for the grille bar - but with a subtle improvement to keep the plastic from falling out.

Whether you use new technologies to produce a part directly or tooling to make that part is of no difference to me - as long the resulting part meets or exceeds OE quality. However, I will give preference to quality parts made in America by Americans - provide the price is reasonable.

Meanwhile, the art/science of the photogrammetry process actually dates back to 19th Century, but things really took off with the advent of digital imaging and rendering. About 15 years ago, I read an article, in Cars & Parts, about use of photogrammetry software for desktop computers to take make bucks (if only as checking fixtures) to hammer out new panels for pre-war vehicles.

Heck, I had a broken molar repaired a few years ago with the CEREC process which uses a single, IR digital photo to custom mill a piece of ceramic material, on-the-spot, to perfectly replace the missing portion. I'll take that any day over a porcelain crown - though cost is slightly higher. However, even that space-age material is only guaranteed ten years.

I fully expect these technoliges to continue to evovle at an accelerating rate. However, the primary limiting factor is one of demand/volume - if the market is too small to provide sufficient profit, no vendor will ever make an attempt.

Didn't say it would work today. A year ago they generally had a process that would build up layer by layer in a bed of material. Used a laser to either melt the materials or a glue to adhere the powder one layer to the next. Input was by 3D laser scans or direct CAD/CAM programs. The setup is fairly large and expensive.

The machine in that video looks to be working like an ink jet printer with a liquid casting material and appears considerably faster. Much less expensive at, I believe he said, around $1300. Supposedly available next month. He said the input for a couple of the items shown was via a program utilizing ordinary photos. I'm just saying that at that rate of advancement, it won't be that long before something is available for our needs.

As to quality, a good point and probably still a while off. They are making durable stainless and bronze small run "castings" for high detail or "artistic" type cabinet knobs using the first machine method. Those "plastic" machine copy items are placed in a bed of special refactory powder. Under heat, the plastic disappears and is replaced in a perfect reproduction by metal powder which was melted with the heat and absorbed in the empty space as the plastic vaporizes--sort of like the lost wax process used in conventional casting. Difference is instead of a sculptor or pattern maker having to do a master for making individual molds, and then making the molds and melting and pouring the metal, the computer does the heavy lifting with half the processes. Might work for the ign bezel as it is now, but not sure I'd want it on any critical items.

One day in the future one of our younger owners will experience what has been written about here today. 10 years ago I wouldn't have believed I'd be typing this response from a droid telephone either. Thank heavens for man's ingenuity.

Quote:
" However, the primary limiting factor is one of demand/volume - if the market is too small to provide sufficient profit, no vendor will ever make an attempt."

Well i'm not sure about that. apparently a dentist made the attempt. How great of a demand/volumn is there for a BH molar????? Now that's a one-of-kind isn't it??? So if that can be done for a one-off production then why not car parts too????

Quote:
Actually, I've had a second molar repaired like that. Though each piece is unique to the situation, the "flexible tooling" provided by a desktop computer, IR camera, CAD software with specialized UI, and the comparatively small "milling machine" is what makes it possible to produce a custom "part" in about 20 minutes (with total time in-chair of about an hour).

My dentist offers this CEREC process as an alternative for any dental restoration (except front teeth), where the tooth wouldn't hold a conventional filling. In my case, these were teeth that were filled back when I was in college, and drilled and refilled at least once more in more recent years - not much left to work with, now.

However, cost IS a limiting factor. The repair to these molars cost me $700-800 each - again, slightly more than a conventional porcelain crown. Though not as smooth as a crown, they look and feel better than a big old amalgam filling, but the high cost of CEREC restoration can't compete when a smaller, traditional fillings will do.

Getting back to Packard, I'm sure that something along these lines CAN be done for Packard parts, but what vendor would step up to the plate, especially in this economy? What owner would pay $700-800 for an ignition bezel (even if "new and improved"), when Howard's repair is available?