Packard Forum Index » V-8 (1955-56)

Here's a Stokes conversion, restored and ready for shipment and display at the Proving Grounds or the Warren Museum (forget which, each has some on display). Restoration and contribution to the museum by "Fourpack", an occasional contributer to this forum. He's also restored and contributed IM-268, IM-357, IM-245 and IM-356 engines, perhaps others.

Attach file:

---

  (146.27 KB)

Thanks for the photo O_D. Looks like a BW velvet drive gear with its own oil cooler above the bellhousing. I've seen one other Stokes in person and it didn't have the "Skypower" decals on the VC's. I wonder if SP put them there or perhaps authorized the use of their TM to Stokes?

Glad you enjoyed the photo; I can't comment on the details, I'm quite ignorant when it comes to those conversions.

You seem to have some knowledge of and interest in the marine engines, have you visited the thread on the marine & avaition engines on The Packard Club forum? The gentleman who found and restored and donated those engines is a bit of a regular there and has quite a bit of original factory literature on them at his disposal.

Thanks, I'll check out the PAC forum. Wasn't aware of it.

Attached are photos of a '56 Hudson oil pan and pump. I used this block to replace the damaged one in my '56 GH(Calf. assembled). The casting date was two weeks later. I was going to use this pump but opted for the Olds conversion. I agree with Jack, looks like the marine engines were modified Hudson/Nash.

Attach file:

---

  (33.08 KB)


  (26.78 KB)

Who would have designed the Hudson, Studebaker, oil pumps? Are they the same pump for Hudson & Studebaker?

Would Packard have made the oil pans?

Looking at the picture of the oil pan, would that have set the pump deeper in the oil? Would the relief valve be in or under the oil level?

The oil pump used in the 56J Golden Hawk "Sky Power" V8 is same as used in 55-56 Packards - EXCEPT without vacuum pump. In lieu of the separator plate, as used in the Packard V8 pump, the 56J version had a slightly thicker bottom plate. Studebaker even recommended the use of the sump tube kit in their Service Letter No. 936.

Not sure who "made" the Hudson/Nash version for the Packard V8, but I suspect the idea must have come from within American Motors - if for no other reason, but in conjunction with the different oil pan required for close quarters. It is a completely different casting than the versions used by Packard and Studebaker. The bottom plate is simply a cast block that (like Packard's separator plate) serves as a bearing surface for the gears, but is also drilled to act as pilot for the driving shaft.

Looks to me like the Hash pump body would sit above sump level, just like Packard and 56J, but its relief valve bore is lower.

Anyone out there have any AM engineering papers on their implementation of the Packard V8?

Attach file:

---

  (70.11 KB)

While we're on the subject of oil pump ID, lets recap:

1. First generation Packard - most common
2. Second generation Packard - different bypass design introduced late and least common.
3. Golden Hawk - same as first Packard, but without vacuum pump.
4. Hudson/Nash - unique pump and pan

Question - has anyone seen a GH or Hash pump with the second generation Packard bypass features?

jack vines

Quote:

Hi Jack,

Assuming they are both within wear specs, would you recommend using the Hash oilpump or the Packards International updated 56J unit (I have both).

Thanks

John

Without seeing the PI improved pump, I couldn't render an opinion. In theory, either should be OK.

jack vines