Packard Forum Index » Modification Discussion

Hi folks:

The 356 motor hydraulic lifters used to interchange to White truck motors which were Packard Six with hydraulic lifters. We were always able to get those, but supplies were limited.

I found an old paper by KD tools about valve noise and it advised against trying to adjust away noise (no suprise)because that will result in burnt valves. The original Packard motors with solid tappets were very impressive, but wear will cause audible noise. Unless you have access to some really good equipment you will not be able to replicate factory performance in a garage. I used some special machining techniques to minimize this problem and they produced acceptable results although not silent as a good low mileage motor. They had some really good mills and grinders at the factory and those motors were very true.
I really do not think there is a motor builder anywhere who can set up the Packard 8 as good as the factory.

My modern car has solid lifters and there is audible valve noise that wasn't there when it was new. However, I don't fret about it because if I can hear them then I know they are closing.

Jim is doing some checking to see if the 356 lifters in question are exactly the same. If so, spare lifters may be as close as your local air strip.

The 356 motor hydraulic lifters used to interchange to White truck motors which were Packard Six with hydraulic lifters. We were always able to get those, but supplies were limited.

Tim, can you advise your source for this information?

I don't know much about the 1T-245 engines sold to White for the 3014 and 3015 series trucks except that about 7500 were provided between 1950 and 1962. The one White ad I do have (excerpt below) says in the specifications that the lifters were "adjustable" which to me means mechanical lifters. I suppose that could have changed over the course of the years and that ad is undated. Thus my interest.

Attach file:

---

  (94.46 KB)

Hi Folks, the fellow that gave us the tip had many odds and ends around his shop. He had Packard pieces and Lycoming engine pieces intermingled among the shop and I believe got a little mixed up about the 356 lifter coming out of a common Lycoming application because they are identical in design and look nearly the same. The lifter we saw there was shouldered and looked exactly like a 356 lifter (with a 356 core block not far away). In researching the Lycoming 0320, 0360, 0540, and 0720 these all appear to use a lifter with no shoulder. Perhaps this lifter could be similar to the lifter used in the latter straight engines, but I have no latter lifter to compare dimensionally so I couldn't say. Interesting to see the very same design lifter in aircraft application.

Quote:
"I don't know much about the 1T-245 engines sold to White for the 3014 and 3015 series trucks except that about 7500 were provided between 1950 and 1962."

I assume that to mean that Packard Motor Car Co. sold the engines to White???? IF so then where were the engines built????? UTica engine plant maybe???? Or maybe they were left over engines from prewar passenger car production???? Such engines manufactured for White by PMCC or maybe SP as LATE as 1962 ??!!!

Quote:
" The lifter we saw there was shouldered and looked exactly like a 356 lifter (with a 356 core block not far away)"

I'm not familiar enuf with the 356 Packard 8 to judge but would the abscence of the shoulder make any difference????

Bottom line: is there something about the lack of a shoulder that would prevent the Lycombing lifter from actualy working just fine???? But then again, the Lycombing lifter mite be even more difficult to source than a Packard lifter.

....mite be even more difficult to source than a Packard lifter.

It's not that the Packard hydraulic lifters are hard to source, it's that they are expensive. As Ross said earlier in this thread he's installed several sets of Kanter lifters with no issues, and I likewise know of several other folks that have installed them with complete satisfaction. Hydraulic lifters have the most precise fit and closest tolerances of any part in a car engine, thus contributing to the cost.

I know this is an old post but I was reading through it. There was a post about using hyd lifters on a solid cam or the other way around. I don't know specific to Packard but most solid cams are harder than a hyd counterpart. In a mechanical cam you have a lot of bouncing around and if solid lifters are used on a hyd cam it will beat it to death very quickly. If you go the opposite hyd lifters on a solid the ramp is different and you would have a chance on collapsing a lifter. if you have a hyd cam use hyd lifters and if you have a solid cam use solid lifters. On a Packard it may work but if it doesn't it would be a very expensive lesson to learn.

Years ago they were stocked by EGGE (I think) and they told us they came from NOS White Truck. Obviously they have all been sold.