Packard Forum Index » General

I don't think we've discussed this one before (I could not find it):

I have wondered many times about the orientation of the shield of the front bearing of the 39 and later column shift manual transmissions (I call this the front bearing, although technically it is the "clutch shaft rear bearing" 3.2091, pg 46, as the clutch shaft has another bearing: the pilot bearing, at the front of the shaft).

My observation is that the bearing shield is on the inside of the transmission, clearly shown on page 46 of the 35-41 Parts Master List. I would have thought the shield would be on the outside such that the rolling balls would be directly exposed to great oil flow. However, the design of the bearing cover, includes a flow path that aligns with a hole in the transmission, which I expect would facilitate flow in either direction. Supporting the literature is the fact that every one of the 4-5 transmissions I have worked on over the years have had the bearing arrangement as documented.

A few years ago, I read an article in the PAC Cormorant in which the author states the opposite is correct and warns of the danger of putting the shield on the inside resulting in bearing starvation, failure and massive damage.

My engineering background would agree with that author and therefore disagree with the design, but my observations of multiple transmissions, each of which had no bearing damage, seems to confirm it. I have always replaced/repaired by installing per the book. Apparently, the oil flow is sufficient.

Has anyone else made this observation? Has anyone had a failure? Has anyone else swapped the shield to the outside?

Certainly the engineers at East Grand Boulevard did not descend from on high and certainly over the 57 years of Packard production some design errors were made. However Packard standard transmissions 35-54 were considered soem of teh strongest ever made for perforamnce use and were behing many high horsepower V8s in the 50's, one was a local 57 Olds 88 withthe 3 carb J2 engine.

To think that Packard was wrong and did not ever discover it from '35b to 60?? when the Service Counselors stopped is riduculous to say the least.

The author of the backwards bearing theory was also the founder of the Flat Earth Society. He can be reached at landing pad #77 Roswell New Mexico

The function of the shield most likely to is to keep debris from entering into the bearing. It has an UN-synchronized first gear??? Such a shield would be most appropriate for full crash boxes.

Yes, it has an unsyncronized first gear as do all Packards up to 58. How did you determine that such a bearing would be most appropriate for full crash boxes (no synchronized gears -29 and earlier)??

To the best of my memory the '29 and earlier bearing at the front of the trans case is unshielded. If you put a shielded one in it would not receive proper lubrication.

The key here is that the bearing has a shield and not a seal. A small amount a oil will seep thru the shield, enough to lubricate the bearing.

John

But that somewhat begs the question:
So what if it gets alot of oil????? Is alot of oil going to cause problems as opposed to just a little oil????

On the statement that a small amount of oil will seep by a shielded bearing and supply proper lubrication. This is stated as fact, where can you refer me to in a respedcted engineering manual etc that will support that. I am familiar with much machinery that has such bearings running in a bath of oil spash to provide lubrication.

The "shielded" type of bearing allows very little oil through, there is a reason that Packard engineers designed transmissions as they did, have bearing design/function parameters changed since then??

Bottom line, my OPINION is that I disagree. Carefuly note that this is my OPINION I did not state it as a fact.


On begging the question, I think the question has gone begging

Alright.... come down off the pulpit, no prize for being the loudest.

I am not the loudest,with only 400+ popsts I'm a lightweight compared to some with 4000+ posts. It seems that some are intimidated by my 51 years of experience and engineering background. I apologize for thinking that sharing my thoughts would be of any assistance and I apologize profusely for being right most of the time and when I'm wrong for correcting and apologizing in the forums as gentleman should. I also apologize for closely following the forum and when I see a suggestion which might result in danger, death or damage to a vehicle trying my best to convey the readers so they don;t suffer an ill fate, and doing so proportionallly to the danger to life and limb. Perhaps what is considered proper these days is to remain silent and have no responsibility of the interests of others. In Packard's heyday society was much different, that's why I appreciate the times, the vehicles and the practices of the company that produced them.

On a personal note BigKev, I have sent you PM's asking advice on how best to convey my experience to fellow Packard enthusists. You have not replied, so if there's a shortcoming, the buck stops with you. I have received many personal and forum thanks for my efforts.

I call 'em as I see 'em

It's your website, do as your conscience commands.

Fred Kanter

Sometimes I print off these strings for future reference, such as in this case the bearing in question is most often available off the shelf with shields on both sides (MRC 209SFFG = 304123), for the installer to remove shields if/when required. Accordingly...just what is the proper orientation of the shield(s)?