Packard Forum Index » General

With my increasingly Swiss-cheese memory, I had completely forgotten that we'd posted regarding this very same Six Cyl Transplant subject back in anno 2010, wherein some very interesting and helpful responses, not to mention some most intriguing speculation (not that that is at all unusual around here!) were to be had. So... the Dream still lives.

https://packardinfo.com/xoops/html/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=6202&viewmode=flat&order=ASC&type=&mode=0&start=0

It would seem, then, that the 1940s era Packard Six would fit length-wise. The differing factor now in 2017 is the absolute necessity of adding a pre-Gear Start UltraMatic, due to advancing age, what with dodgy knees and hips and such. I wonder if a Packard Six has ever been adjoined with ANY automatic?

If someone could confirm if the Packard S-8 Ultra bellhousing would bolt to the six block directly or perhaps by relocating a bolt hole then perhaps the Bendtsen S-8 adapterhttp://www.transmissionadapters.com/Packard%20to%20Chev%20adapter%20kit.htm would bolt on the six too. If so a GM trans could be installed.

I expect the problem with that approach is while S-8 blocks and bellhousings are relatively abundant finding a six to experiment with might be harder. No idea how common they are for use as a conversion either.

If you were thinking of a different mfg transmission for the six then rather than try to find a six and go thru that part of the conversion I think I would keep the V-8 but install the Olds oil pump and a GM trans on that engine. From all accounts from those that have done the 700R4 conversion it has been quite successful. The Olds oil pump seems -- so far -- to have solved the engine problems too.

Howard, that is certainly a possibility. The car we're looking at has slightly over 80k and supposedly ran not too long ago. If it's V8 has made it thus far with no permanent damage I may well opt to keep it, at least for awhile as I try to figure out a 6 conversion, and if so would update to the Olds pump, it seems like the way to go.

As to the Twin UltraMatic, again if it works... I've kind of forgotten what issues they typically had, our Clipper had the 3 spd manual. If this new car is a late production version, wonder if any updates weremade to improve TU's reliability?

I think it is generally accepted the TUs were somewhat delicate and didn't fare very well behind the high horsepower V8 unless they were treated with kid gloves. Unfortunately the period they were introduced into was the start of the V8 horsepower race so many were not treated well and reputation suffered accordingly.

The late 54 gear start and 55 versions, being new and relatively untested, had some teething issues but by 56 the early problems were fairly well eliminated. There were running changes for 55s and the 56 then had some mechanical changes and a redesigned valve body and throttle linkage which changed shift patterns quite a bit to eliminate some of the big issues. Ross has also done a couple of mods which change shifts slightly more and help too. With modern fluids and friction materials the results are even better.

Obviously being a two speed it will never compete with a modern trans but as long as the unit has been treated with some respect or has been gone thru by a competent mechanic and then treated well it should provide relatively trouble free service. With the kind of driving you anticipate doing I doubt you would have any significant issues. Of course a downside is if you do have issues the people that would consider working on them or even understand and could do a competent repair is quite limited. I doubt if there are more than a dozen in the whole country that could be trusted to do a good job. Fortunately you live a couple of states away and on the same side of the country as one of them.

There is a 1940 six engine for sale in Phoenix, AZ. Check out the Arizona PI club.

Thanks for that info Howard and also to Duane for the 6 cyl heads up.

Yes, Ross in Parkton lives about 15 miles from where I was born and grew up, about 4 hrs. south now. He'd be the man for any TU repair for sure. I actually sold him a red & white '56 Exec project that I'd bought from a fellow in RI some years ago and didn't had the ability to restore at the time. I moved away from MD at age 50, before I had bought my 1st Packard. But I had gone to a few Packard meets out in Frederick, also had spoken to George Hamlin and Dwight Heinmuller (sp?) there, both of whom also lived in my general area. IIRC Ross usually goes somewhere to volunteer this time of winter, so may not be "around" at the moment?

You guys are thinking about this the wrong way.

A review of auto test magazines in the early 1950's confirms that Packards of that era, equipped with the absurdly fragile 1st Generation Ultramatics, were the slowest, most sluggish cars of the day - other than a 1949 Chevrolet with PowerGlide (GM did something to the 1950 Chevrolet that made them a little faster, so we should rule that out).

If you are looking to create a real "slug" of a car, even worse than a stock early 50's Packard with Ultramatic , using a pre-war Packard "six" would be a good start, but I have a better idea.

My recommendation would be a Briggs & Stratton 3 h.p. lawn-mower engine, coupled to a 1949-1952 Buick's "Dynaflow".

Those first-generation Buick Dynaflow transmissions were almost as sluggish as the first-generation Ultramatics....but big difference...they had a pretty good service-reliability record - didn't have that fragile "lock-up" clutch to burn out that the Ultramatic had.

... Packards of that era, equipped with the absurdly fragile 1st Generation Ultramatics....

I'll agree with the sluggish, but certainly not the fragile. Those '50-'54 Ultramatics behind the in-line 8 engines were robust and had very good longevity, often equal to the lifespan of the engine and in any case a far longer service life than the next generation, the Twin Ultramatic.

Quote:..

Mr. Dyneto - we are in PARTIAL agreement. I am well aware (painfully aware...but that is too long a story for this forum...!) that the Ultramatic "Twin" (introduced..? Hmm...my recollection ? was around June '54) ( ? ? ) had a very poor reliability record - bad behind the straight eights of '54 - even worse, as you are apparently aware, behind the significantly more powerful V-8's.

May I respectfully suggest that your pointing out that the "Twin" Ultramatic had a worse service record than the late '49 - mid '54 version dosnt say much for the record of the first one !

As Packard fanatics, of course we want to re-invent history to help our "religion". But you need to wait some more years before those of us WHO WERE THERE die off, before you can get away with that !

I once drove my '51 "250" convertible from the New York State side of the George Washington Bridge, to the Barham Blvd. off-ramp of the Hollywood Freeway in two and a half days AND I SLEPT AT NIGHT . BOTH NIGHTS ! And since there were no "Interstates" that meant I was really "cooking" on straight sections of those dangerous two and three-lane highways !

So be assured I know what those cars could do when they were running right ( I wonder what happened to that car - should be easy to spot - after I "blew" its motor I installed a 327 motor I got out of a wrecked '54 Cavalier - that four barrel helped a bit........! )

But you need to wait some more years before those of us WHO WERE THERE die off, before you can get away with that !

Well my friend, I WAS there! I was driving Packards when Studebaker-Packard was still building them. My first Ultramatic was a 1950 Custom 8 bought in 1959 and I drove it to in excess of 100,000 miles; bought my '54 Patrician (w/o Gear-Start) about 1965 and drove it to well over 100,000 miles. I didn't have a lot of $ in those years so I did all the maintenance work myself. So I'm speaking with plenty of experience with these vehicles - those Ultramatics were plenty reliable.

Perhaps Ross Miller with chime in when he returns from Kenya, he rebuilds Ultramatics for a living and from my conversations with him his experiences with them behind the in-line 8s is pretty much in agreement with mine regarding ruggedness and reliability.