Packard 352 oil pump?
Nathan J. Nagel
I'm thinking that I should probably invest in the Packards Int'l pump
before driving the '56 any significant distance. Since it's still at
John P's place and I'm sure that he would like to use his garage space
for his shinier, prettier cars I need to keep the car driveable at all
times until I take it home so leaving it with the oil pan off for a week
while they redo the pump is not an option. If anyone has one that will
work and would be willing to sell it to me that would be great. If you
think you'll need it back I can do one of two things: 1) send your pump
off to be rebuilt then send you the one currently on the car when it
comes back or b) pull mine, put yours in, send mine off to be rebuilt,
swap 'em again, send you yours back. It appears that these pumps are
rather hard to find, at least for Packards Int'l, as they don't seem to
offer any option of swapping with a refundable core charge.
thanks much,
nate
--
Opinions expressed in this message are the opinions of the author, which
may or may not coincide with those of Ellenco, Inc.
ANT The Monarch of Menace
http://www.classicar.com/clubs/packintl/clubstore.htm
-ANT
PACKARD V8 ENGINE PROBLEMS
For many years, hydraulic lifter clatter and bearing failure has plagued the
Packard V8 owner. This has been such a common complaint that very, very few V8
owners have not experienced this failure.
After two years research and analysis, we have discovered that these problems
are due to one culprit-an inferior oil pump! The original pump carried superior
pressure and volume; but, since the pump's shaft was not properly designed to
utilize a bearing, the shaft began to wobble thus sucking air into the oil
stream. In addition, under laboratory check, it was discovered that the pot
metal cover plate on the bottom of the oil pump would swell under high speed
operation thus allowing more air to be sucked in. These problems have occurred
as low as 25,000 miles, but usually become very serious at approximately the
75,000 mile range.
The oil system within an engine is similar to the blood in our bodies in that
it cannot dissipate the amount of air being introduced into the oil system
allowing them to collapse causing extreme clatter. Ignoring this problem can
result in severe valve problems with the top of a valve being knocked off and
in turn, will ruin the piston and/or engine block.
Crankshaft bearings, both rod and main, gradually become worn out due to the
volume of air mixed in with the oil. This results in lowered oil pressure which
compounds the problem as well as ruining the crankshaft itself. All of the
above problems are entirely due to the faulty oil pump. Beyond that, there is
absolutely nothing wrong with the Packard V8 engine either in design,
engineering or its ultimate longevity.
Packards International is proud to re-introduce their redesigned oil pump to
their members. These pumps have been produced to eliminate the problems
indefinitely. The pumps are re-designed not rebuilt, we do not replace the
gears. If we find the gears in the pump show any wear or are in bad shape we
will get in touch with you before we do anything to the pump.
We need the pump out of your car, we actually redesign your pump and return it
within 2 days after receipt of same.
CAUTION: Merely changing your oil pump will not necessarily eliminate your
problems. Since your hydraulic lifters, rod/main bearings and, quite likely,
your crankshaft are already in poor condition, just changing your oil pump will
not put your engine in perfect condition! All these items must, in nearly all
cases, be renewed plus the application of the redesigned oil pump in order to
have assurance of possessing a truly fine engine that will yield untold
thousands of miles of driving pleasure.
TO ORDER THE RE-DESIGNED PUMP, SEND YOUR PUMP AND CHECK FOR $130.00 to:
PACKARDS INTERNATIONAL
302 FRENCH ST.
SANTA ANA, CA 92701
This amount includes return UPS charge, if you wish next day air or 2nd day
air, add the appropriate amount.
http://hometown.aol.com/s2dee/FirstAttemptWebsite.html
'61 Cruiser Hot Rod "Aah Ooh Gah!"
'59 Lark Regal 4 door
'60 Lark 2 door
'60 Lark convertible
'64 Daytona 4 door
'64 Cruiser 4 door parts car (parts available)
BondoBill1
>I'm thinking that I should probably invest in the Packards Int'l pump
>before driving the '56 any
I have been hearing about this oil pump problem for years. My 56J has always
maintained 40lbs., there is no valve/lifter noise, and I am not sure that EVERY
352 made; suffered/suffers from this problem. There might have been a mid year
change, as I do not remember any 'pot metal' housing on mine. If your car makes
no valve/lifter noises, and holds good pressure why fix something that is not
broken? When we dismantled the 352 back in '89, the crank and the rods were
just 'worn' and it required a minimum amount of turning. "ANT" can tell you
that there is no valve noise, nor lifter noise. He did say I was driving on too
old a set of wires, but thats it. Don't confuse a clicking sound in a 352 with
something major. Some push rods mated with some rocker assemblies force
pre-mature rod failure in the foward cylinders. For somereason Studebaker or
the Packard engineers found that they needed a different push rod. Pull the
valve cover(s), remove the rocker assembly and look to see if your rods have a
round weld at each end or an oval weld, if you have the 'noise' you will
probably have the round weld ones. Get intouch with Frank Ambrogio and he can
give you the correct part number for the oval weld rods.
Save your money before you start worrying about something that might not affect
you.
Owner of the Hawk from Hell and his all girl pit crew
http://bondobilly.com/aindex.html
or the STORE
http://bondobilly.com/store.html
Nathan J. Nagel
thanks for the reply - my problem is this - I only have one oil pump and
it's in the car right now! That's why I posted... You see, the car
seems to be in OK shape right now and pulls good oil pressure at idle
(according to the gauge) so I assume the bearings are OK - but John
mentioned that the lifters "did make a little noise at high RPM's" and
having the excellent reading skills that I do <g> (didn't hurt that I
spent all last weekend reading everything on the web 56J related that I
could find) I immediately said "uh-oh! Pump cover flex!" I'm hoping
that the previous owner (not John, he apparently didn't drive the car
much) was nice to it and didn't wind it out too much and everything is
copacetic - in any case I can't see how buying the better pump now would
be a bad move. I don't think that the car has the new part - there are
lots of receits for the car but nothing oil pump related. But I need a
core! if you know where I can get one of *those* that's what I'm
looking for right now. John has been nice enough to me so far and I
don't want to try and test his good humor by disassembling the car in
his garage and then leaving it there until the new pump comes. I also
don't like the idea of pushing the car outside and leaving it sit with
the oil pan off :(
later
nate
ANT The Monarch of Menace wrote:
>
> Here's what I found:
> http://www.classicar.com/clubs/packintl/clubstore.htm
> -ANT
<el snippo>
John Wallis
I'm with Bondo on this one. The 56J doesn't have the "dreaded" vacuum
booster on the pump, and depending on your production #, you may have the
cam plate & pick-up tube mods already. I think you have a good idea in
upgrading the pump, but if you have good pressure and no lifter clatter
(believe me, you'd know if you did!) I wouldn't hesitate to drive it
(gingerly) home where you can swap out the pump.
That being said..........."Opinions expressed in this message do not
necessarily reflect those of the Packard Motor Car Company, and no warranty
is expressed or implied that your motor will not grenade itself on the way
home"
Nathan J. Nagel
John Wallis wrote:
>
> Nate,
> I'm with Bondo on this one. The 56J doesn't have the "dreaded" vacuum
> booster on the pump, and depending on your production #, you may have the
> cam plate & pick-up tube mods already. I think you have a good idea in
> upgrading the pump, but if you have good pressure and no lifter clatter
> (believe me, you'd know if you did!) I wouldn't hesitate to drive it
> (gingerly) home where you can swap out the pump.
>
> That being said..........."Opinions expressed in this message do not
> necessarily reflect those of the Packard Motor Car Company, and no warranty
> is expressed or implied that your motor will not grenade itself on the way
> home"
>
<snip quoted schtuff>
Where could I find info on appx. when the cam plate/pick up tube mods
were done? My chassis no. is 6800139 and engine number (according to
build sheet, I didn't know where to look under hood to verify) is S1894
thanks again for all the help (that was a general thank you)
nate
PS - I don't know if driving it home right away is a good idea... I've
been known to have a rather heavy food and that motor sounds GOOD. Plus
I've been driving a 4-cyl. VW (of one flavor or another) for about 3
years now. So I might get a little, erm, enthusiastic with the loud
pedal if you know what I mean ;)
John Wallis
GH when I sold it), but mid to late year production 56 Packards & Clippers had
the upgrades factory installed. Many cars were upgraded at the dealers after
purchase.....I'm not sure if there was a "factory recall" or if it was done only
when a customer complained of lifter noise. If you pull a valve cover and see
sheet metal baffles around the valve springs, this was part of the "fix"...these
were intended to direct the oil from the rockers & valves back to the pan more
quickly. Maybe Bondo would have more info on the 352 in Stude applications....I
would also encourage you to join Frank Ambrogio's 56J group....lots of good info
in their newsletter. Also, if you get into rebuilding or upgrading the motor,
MoPar 383 HiPo valve springs, keepers, retainers & lifters will interchange....I
did this on a 56 374 I built a few years back...runs super strong (never had the
guts to wind it up to valve float limits).
Keep us posted
John Wallis
"I am guestimating that as they went along, every other day they were making
changes"
I don't doubt that Bill. The Packard V8 was sort of "forced" into production to
compete with Cad, Lincoln and Chrysler who already had V8's in 1950-51. This was
also a period when SP was not flush with cash or time for R&D. The motor only lived
for two years. I'm convinced that with a few more years of development and
production it could have dominated the big car class. The robust block design has
the capability to easily go to about 440 cubes.
BondoBill1 wrote:
> >If you pull a valve cover and see
> >sheet metal baffles around the valve springs, this was part of the
> >"fix"...these
> >were intended to direct the oil from
>
> Mine has those baffles, but that also reminded me of something even stranger.
> Maybe Frank A. can shed light on this. There are two different Rocker Arm
> shafts. In the engine that came with the car, there were a set pattern of holes
> nicely spaced and everything looked nice. When we cannabilzed the 352 from A&M
> Garage, I took the Rocker Arm Shafts out of that engine, it had about 3X more
> holes, and their spacing was much more in line with all the parts that needed
> lubrication rather than just the arms. We also noticed that the canabilized
> engine had different rockers. holes were more prolific, and a bit larger. I am
> guestimating that as they went along, every other day they were making changes.
> Which nowadays is not uncomon.
Nathan J. Nagel
mods, the baffles weren't installed on the engine from the factory until
engine no. S-2064. so I need to pull a valve cover and look I guess.
thanks again for all the info
nate
BondoBill1 wrote:
>
> >If you pull a valve cover and see
> >sheet metal baffles around the valve springs, this was part of the
> >"fix"...these
> >were intended to direct the oil from
>
> Mine has those baffles, but that also reminded me of something even stranger.
> Maybe Frank A. can shed light on this. There are two different Rocker Arm
> shafts. In the engine that came with the car, there were a set pattern of holes
> nicely spaced and everything looked nice. When we cannabilzed the 352 from A&M
> Garage, I took the Rocker Arm Shafts out of that engine, it had about 3X more
> holes, and their spacing was much more in line with all the parts that needed
> lubrication rather than just the arms. We also noticed that the canabilized
> engine had different rockers. holes were more prolific, and a bit larger. I am
> guestimating that as they went along, every other day they were making changes.
> Which nowadays is not uncomon.
> Owner of the Hawk from Hell and his all girl pit crew
> http://bondobilly.com/aindex.html
> or the STORE
> http://bondobilly.com/store.html
--
BondoBill1
>mentioned that the lifters "did make a little noise at high RPM's"
Did you read Tom Mc.'s article in Hot Rod, April 1956. He noted that lifter
noise, and attibuted it to lifter float. The 56J's had a cam that forced the
lifters to float at very high rpms, sacrificing speed. In his article he
suggested that a Cadillac cam be installed that had a higher lobe or some such
thing. Plus, at what rpm is this lifter noise presenting itself? Mine, which I
don't think is any differnet than others cruises at 2500/2700 rpm all day. I am
not saying to forgo replacing the pump, but i am saying that as ANT quoted from
the Packard Internationa'sI article, if your car has suffered from this poor
pump, the damage is done, and once you get the car where you live, then you can
tear the entire engine down or just drop the pan. On ther other hand I am a
strong believer that not all 352's suffer from this bad pump problem.
http://pages.prodigy.net/56sghor/liftprob.htm
Interestingly, there are two pumps according to Frank A.'s aricle. Are you sure
you have a Packard Vacum Pump in there.
John Poulos
I would not hesitate to drive it home, I did put a 100 or so careful miles on
it this summer and it was a daily drive out west.
"Nathan J. Nagel" wrote:
> John Wallis wrote:
> >
> > Nate,
> > I'm with Bondo on this one. The 56J doesn't have the "dreaded" vacuum
> > booster on the pump, and depending on your production #, you may have the
> > cam plate & pick-up tube mods already. I think you have a good idea in
> > upgrading the pump, but if you have good pressure and no lifter clatter
> > (believe me, you'd know if you did!) I wouldn't hesitate to drive it
> > (gingerly) home where you can swap out the pump.
> >
> > That being said..........."Opinions expressed in this message do not
> > necessarily reflect those of the Packard Motor Car Company, and no warranty
> > is expressed or implied that your motor will not grenade itself on the way
> > home"
> >
>
> <snip quoted schtuff>
>
> Where could I find info on appx. when the cam plate/pick up tube mods
> were done? My chassis no. is 6800139 and engine number (according to
> build sheet, I didn't know where to look under hood to verify) is S1894
>
> thanks again for all the help (that was a general thank you)
>
> nate
>
> PS - I don't know if driving it home right away is a good idea... I've
> been known to have a rather heavy food and that motor sounds GOOD. Plus
> I've been driving a 4-cyl. VW (of one flavor or another) for about 3
> years now. So I might get a little, erm, enthusiastic with the loud
> pedal if you know what I mean ;)
--
John Poulos
Annapolis Md
http://stude.com
63 & 64 Avanti
56 & 57 Golden Hawk
57 Parkview
52 2R 6 Pickup
BondoBill1
>sheet metal baffles around the valve springs, this was part of the
>"fix"...these
>were intended to direct the oil from
Mine has those baffles, but that also reminded me of something even stranger.
Maybe Frank A. can shed light on this. There are two different Rocker Arm
shafts. In the engine that came with the car, there were a set pattern of holes
nicely spaced and everything looked nice. When we cannabilzed the 352 from A&M
Garage, I took the Rocker Arm Shafts out of that engine, it had about 3X more
holes, and their spacing was much more in line with all the parts that needed
lubrication rather than just the arms. We also noticed that the canabilized
engine had different rockers. holes were more prolific, and a bit larger. I am
guestimating that as they went along, every other day they were making changes.
Which nowadays is not uncomon.
BondoBill1
states.....
Intermittent valve tappet noise can be traced to air in the oil pump
interrupting the oil flow or low oil pressure to the valve tappet. Service
proceedures for correctoin are outlined in Studebaker Passenger Car Service
Letter No. 836, subject: Engine Oil PumpRelief Valve Tube Kit for Correction of
Hydraulkic Valve Tappet Letdown - 56 Golden Hawk
I do not have that particular letter but this bulletin seems to push the blame
over to the pressure relief valve rather than the vacum pump.
BB.its fun to do research
ANT The Monarch of Menace
>production it could have dominated the big car class. The robust block design
>has
>the capability to easily go to about 440 cubes.
Yes, they planned this engine to be able to be expanded. It could easily reach
440 once they siamesed it. They may have been one of the first companies to
figure on this. The engine for '57 was to be 400 CID. This is what was
installed in "Black Bessie", the only running prototype '57 built. -ANT
John Poulos
research. The engine was recently rebuilt (last 50 K miles), car starts on the
first crank, carries great oil pressure, not a hint of smoke and was a daily
driver for it's entire life. Now because of a service bulletin and a few papers
about a possible oil pump problem the poor kid is afraid to drive the thing home.
It may require some attention at some point but why tear apart the one thing
in the car that has been trouble free?
ANT The Monarch of Menace wrote:
--
Robert Kabchef
> The funny thing about this entire thread is the damage done with too much
>research. The engine was recently rebuilt (last 50 K miles), car starts on the
>first crank, carries great oil pressure, not a hint of smoke and was a daily
>driver for it's entire life. Now because of a service bulletin and a few papers
>about a possible oil pump problem the poor kid is afraid to drive the thing home.
> It may require some attention at some point but why tear apart the one thing
>in the car that has been trouble free?
Ya know John (And Nathan too) I was thinking the same thing. I
mean, I realize Nate's apprehensions are in the interest of his new
jewel. But good ol' >COMMON SENSE< should prevail here. Gawd! If I
paid attentiion to all the doom-sayers who are always saying how
incredible it is that I drive my "beautiful Studebakers" for daily
transport, I'd just sell them all and go back to building model
airplanes for my kicks.
It's a viable car (this '56 Hawk), for gods sake. it's made it thru
traffic and supposed mis-engineering since 1956 (44 YEARS). I say,
give it a simple inspection to assure yourself the wheels ain't gonna
fall off and go drive it. Drive it to see what it DOES do, if
conditions permit. Probably the best thing you can do to keep these
things FROM being balky is
D R I V E them.
Nathan, we're glad you joined ranks with us. Let me assure you tho,
these are real and viable autos we're dealing with - not some delicate
piece of ancient pottery. The company that built them didn't go out of
business because their products often scattered themselves all over
the road. They went under because they chose to remain independent and
were therefor too underfinanced to duke it out with the big 3.
End of sermon -------for now :)
StudeBob Kabchef
Studefarmer Extrodinare
and his Five Parrot pit pals
Located: central California
,south of Fresno
60 Lark Conv.
57 Transtar PU
55 Speedster
In work:
51 Champion Biz cpe.
66 Wagonaire
63 Daytona
57 Silver Hawk
49 2R17
BondoBill1
>research.
You could not say it better, there are times where too much information is
dangerous. This is the case. The car should be driven, and driven and driven.
If you/he/us/them, get 40lbs at speed and 30/35 at idle then everything is
doing their jobs.
Folks, go read Frank Ambrogios article on this situation, there were two, I say
TWO oil pumps, one for Packards, and one for Studebakers. If at anytime I felt
that there were a hint of trouble, I would have recommended a new pump. John,
have him drive the sucker. This is getting out of hand.
This falls into the same catagory of ......its too nose heavy, can't be
steered, they plow thru turns............damn't these cars are very road
worthy. No you cannot go into a turn that is banked in the wrong direction at
72mph, but you can manuaever the suckers just about as well as any other car.
John...tak the car for a spin, cruise at 60/65 mph, 2150/2700** rpm, do you
hear noisey valves..no? Then you don't have the problem (** depending on tires,
correct ones, or radials)
Explain to the new owner that he is reading too much. Better yet, I'll tell
him.your reading to much.
I am the first one to bitch about a problem with the Hawk, I find my self
sniffing for smells, listening to every little noise and get concerned over
them....but this oil pump problem is only with cars that theoretically have the
PACKARD pump with the vacum adapter. Nobody has any idea which cars have them
or which cars don't. I would suspect that if anything, early production
vehicles would have them, and I don't think we are talking hundreds, maybe a
few dozen.
This is akin to only flying to places Quantas flies to....since they are
fatality free.
Lets stop scaring this new owner, and let him enjoy a car that you do not see
too often.
Bill
Oldcarfart
>mods, the baffles weren't installed on the engine from the factory until
>
>thanks again for all the info
>
>
You are letting this eat you up, get over it, if the car was gonna
self-distruct it would have done itself in years ago, go drive the crap out of
it and enjoy.
OldCarFart
'42 Champ 2 door sedan
'53 Commander Hardtop
'55 Commander 4 door
'55 Commander Coupe (Old Yeller)
'59 Silver Hawk (Pepto-Hawk)
John Wallis
booster oil pump when they left the factory.
Nathan J. Nagel
John Poulos wrote:
>
> The funny thing about this entire thread is the damage done with too much
> research. The engine was recently rebuilt (last 50 K miles), car starts on the
> first crank, carries great oil pressure, not a hint of smoke and was a daily
> driver for it's entire life. Now because of a service bulletin and a few papers
> about a possible oil pump problem the poor kid is afraid to drive the thing home.
> It may require some attention at some point but why tear apart the one thing
> in the car that has been trouble free?
>
<snip>
John, I sincerely hope you're right. Probably the main reason I'm so
cautious is a) I love Hawks and don't want to see the car die an early
death if I could have prevented it and b) I had a serius problem with a
similar situation on ann old Bimmer I bought a few years ago - lost oil
pressure after a long fast highway run, next morning it threw a rod.
Everyone told me "oh, those Bimmer 3.5's never blow up." Well guess
what. It was the guy's daily driver too. lost about $2K when I finally
unladed that piece of crap. Here's hoping I have better luck this
time...
later
n
PS - don't flame me too hard about the typos, I had to shovel myself
into a parking space (!?!?!) because I got high centered in the middle
of my street - never did make it to the driveway. Plow truck? what
plow truck? argh. so I shoveled my sidewalk too to prove a point. I
think the irony will be lost on the plow guy though if he does manage to
come through before it all melts. grr. anyway my hands are still
thawing. Although Mechanix gloves are great for shoveling snow...
(lasted about 40 min before starting to get cold...)
James LarkVIII/Myersville MD
>
> The funny thing about this entire thread is the damage done with too much
> research. The engine was recently rebuilt (last 50 K miles), car starts on the
> first crank, carries great oil pressure, not a hint of smoke and was a daily
> driver for it's entire life. Now because of a service bulletin and a few papers
> about a possible oil pump problem the poor kid is afraid to drive the thing home.
> It may require some attention at some point but why tear apart the one thing
> in the car that has been trouble free?
> snip
of pressuer above 45mph...and it's gone over the 100k mark...I know a
refresh wouldn't hurt...but that can wait until spring
John Poulos
"Nathan J. Nagel" wrote:
John Poulos wrote:
>
> The funny thing about this entire thread is the damage done with too much
> research. The engine was recently rebuilt (last 50 K miles), car starts on the
> first crank, carries great oil pressure, not a hint of smoke and was a daily
> driver for it's entire life. Now because of a service bulletin and a few papers
> about a possible oil pump problem the poor kid is afraid to drive the thing home.
> It may require some attention at some point but why tear apart the one thing
> in the car that has been trouble free?
>
<snip>
John, I sincerely hope you're right. Probably the main reason I'm so
cautious is a) I love Hawks and don't want to see the car die an early
death if I could have prevented it and b) I had a serius problem with a
similar situation on ann old Bimmer I bought a few years ago - lost oil
pressure after a long fast highway run, next morning it threw a rod.
Everyone told me "oh, those Bimmer 3.5's never blow up." Well guess
what. It was the guy's daily driver too. lost about $2K when I finally
unladed that piece of crap. Here's hoping I have better luck this
time...later
n
PS - don't flame me too hard about the typos, I had to shovel myself
into a parking space (!?!?!) because I got high centered in the middle
of my street - never did make it to the driveway. Plow truck? what
plow truck? argh. so I shoveled my sidewalk too to prove a point. I
think the irony will be lost on the plow guy though if he does manage to
come through before it all melts. grr. anyway my hands are still
thawing. Although Mechanix gloves are great for shoveling snow...
(lasted about 40 min before starting to get cold...)--
Opinions expressed in this message are the opinions of the author, which
may or may not coincide with those of Ellenco, Inc.
--
John Wallis
I can see why....looks like a cross between an Edsel, Rambler & DeSoto!
Steve Miller wrote:
> Here's what were billed in "Collectible Automobile" as the only two
> views of
> the Packard Black Bess "mule." This was a full-size running prototype.
> It was
> destroyed in the autumn of '56, as ordered by management. (See CA, Sept
> '84, pp.
> 20-26.)
>
> ANT The Monarch of Menace wrote:
>
> > >I'm convinced that with a few more years of development and
> > >production it could have dominated the big car class. The robust block design
> > >has
> > >the capability to easily go to about 440 cubes.
> >
> > Yes, they planned this engine to be able to be expanded. It could easily reach
> > 440 once they siamesed it. They may have been one of the first companies to
> > figure on this. The engine for '57 was to be 400 CID. This is what was
> > installed in "Black Bessie", the only running prototype '57 built. -ANT
> >
> > http://hometown.aol.com/s2dee/FirstAttemptWebsite.html
> > '61 Cruiser Hot Rod "Aah Ooh Gah!"
> > '59 Lark Regal 4 door
> > '60 Lark 2 door
> > '60 Lark convertible
> > '64 Daytona 4 door
> > '64 Cruiser 4 door parts car (parts available)
>
> --
> =====================================================
> Steve Miller, Indianapolis
> SDC, Indy Chapter, Studebaker Internet Club
> =====================================================
> 63 Studebaker "BlackHawk" R-1 GT
> =====================================================
> BlackHawk Design -- "a little graphic design company for your big ideas"
> http://netdirect.net/~digiplnt/
> =====================================================
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> [Image]
Darrell Higgins
BondoBill1 <bondo...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000125140134...@ng-cg1.aol.com...
<snip>
> This is akin to only flying to places Quantas flies to....since they are
> fatality free.
>
"U"
Darrell (the pedant from down under) Higgins in Sydney
ric
wrote:
> The funny thing about this entire thread is the damage done with too much
>research. The engine was recently rebuilt (last 50 K miles), car starts on the
>first crank, carries great oil pressure, not a hint of smoke and was a daily
>driver for it's entire life. Now because of a service bulletin and a few papers
>about a possible oil pump problem the poor kid is afraid to drive the thing home.
> It may require some attention at some point but why tear apart the one thing
>in the car that has been trouble free?
in other words IF IT AIN'T BROKE, DON'T FIX IT!
it may be trite, but it's often true, as many can attest that it's a
lesson hard learned by many
--
For e-mail replies, remove
".nospam" from addy
ric
when companies do @$#@#$ like that, we lose an irreplaceable piece of
history... as in forever
i used to be seriously into IH scouts (still wish i had some of the
ones i've owned, but that's another story)... anyway, we had a club
here in ft wayne (that's how i met lee)... we happened across two of
the 1981 prototypes at the old scout building at the IH factory
complex in ft wayne... they crushed one, and were about to crush the
second... we convinced IH to save the only remaining 1981 scout, which
was a completely different (and fiberglass) body style, by donating it
to the auburn-cord-duesenberg museum in auburn, indiana
a much more fitting end, and one that allows future generations to
view (literally) the continuity of the vehicle, and hence, to all
vehicle-dom
i know you were joking, but "anyway"... in other words, near-term
shortsightedness has long term consequences
On Tue, 25 Jan 2000 18:37:59 -0800, John Wallis <pack...@pacbell.net>
wrote:
>"It was destroyed in the autumn of '56, as ordered by management"
>
>I can see why....looks like a cross between an Edsel, Rambler & DeSoto!
>
JETman
>
> Here's what were billed in "Collectible Automobile" as the only two
> views of
> the Packard Black Bess "mule." This was a full-size running prototype.
> destroyed in the autumn of '56, as ordered by management. (See CA, Sept
> '84, pp.
> 20-26.)
>
Hrummmmmmph, now that is UGLY!!! Even Edsel looked better than that. .
.
--
Regards,
JT, Austin, Texas - Home of the Annual Spamarama Festival
(the kind in a can!)
Saturday, May 1, 1999 at Auditorium Shores on Town Lake!
Replace the “*” with an “s“ when replying!
James LarkVIII/Myersville MD
Darrell Higgins wrote:
>
> I get shivers up me spine just thinking of what that "little" hood ornament
> would do to some poor pedestrian comin' over the front.
>
> Half to the left of him, half to the right....
>
> Darrell (especially if you honed it a little) Higgins in Sydney
>
> Steve Miller <digipln...@netdirect.net> wrote in message
> news:388E58C6...@netdirect.net...
> > Here's what were billed in "Collectible Automobile" as the only two
> > views of
> > the Packard Black Bess "mule." This was a full-size running prototype.
> > It was
> > destroyed in the autumn of '56, as ordered by management. (See CA, Sept
> > '84, pp.
> > 20-26.)
> >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----
Jeff Rice
" I swerved five times before I hit him.."
--
Jeff ( just put him in the crosshairs....and FLOOR IT! ) Rice
Deep-N-Hock Acres
ANT The Monarch of Menace
didn't have the money (nor time) to build a full size running car that
accurately resembled the proposed 57's. Too bad, as they were pretty stylish.
There WERE some fullk size mock ups built and they looked like real cars
(outlandish though they may have been). I always thought in many ways they were
dead ringers for those crazy Lincolns with the slanted headlights (of '58 and
up). Funny thing is that Bill Schmidt designed those Lincolns, and had worked
at Packard previous to this. I surmise that some of his sketches were used as
the basis for the '57 Packard. -ANT
(Does anyone know of the technical details of the 57's? I understand that the
chassis and torsion bar suspension was revamped and improved, along with the
trans and engine)
Steve Miller
quoted in the article: "It looked like it had been made with a cold soldering
iron and a ball-peen hammer... the doors opened, but it was a very spartan
mule... there wasn't anything old on it except for the V-8, and that was
modified; the torsion bar suspension was entirely different, although of the
same concept... and the Ultramatic was upgraded. It was ugly, and if we
showed it to Curtiss-Wright, we'd have had to show it to them blindfolded."
JETman wrote:
> Steve Miller wrote:
> >
> > Here's what were billed in "Collectible Automobile" as the only two
> > views of
> > the Packard Black Bess "mule." This was a full-size running prototype.
> > It was
> > destroyed in the autumn of '56, as ordered by management. (See CA, Sept
> > '84, pp.
> > 20-26.)
> >
>
> Hrummmmmmph, now that is UGLY!!! Even Edsel looked better than that. .
> .
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> JT, Austin, Texas - Home of the Annual Spamarama Festival
> (the kind in a can!)
> Saturday, May 1, 1999 at Auditorium Shores on Town Lake!
>
> Replace the “*” with an “s“ when replying!
--
John Wallis
still BUTT UGLY!!
Thanks for posting the pix
Darrell Higgins
would do to some poor pedestrian comin' over the front.
Half to the left of him, half to the right....
Darrell (especially if you honed it a little) Higgins in Sydney
Steve Miller <digipln...@netdirect.net> wrote in message
news:388E58C6...@netdirect.net...
> Here's what were billed in "Collectible Automobile" as the only two
> views of
> the Packard Black Bess "mule." This was a full-size running prototype.
> It was
> destroyed in the autumn of '56, as ordered by management. (See CA, Sept
> '84, pp.
> 20-26.)
>
> ANT The Monarch of Menace wrote:
>
> > >I'm convinced that with a few more years of development and
> > >production it could have dominated the big car class. The robust block
design
> > >has
> > >the capability to easily go to about 440 cubes.
> >
> > Yes, they planned this engine to be able to be expanded. It could easily
reach
> > 440 once they siamesed it. They may have been one of the first companies
to
> > figure on this. The engine for '57 was to be 400 CID. This is what was
> > installed in "Black Bessie", the only running prototype '57 built. -ANT
> >
> > http://hometown.aol.com/s2dee/FirstAttemptWebsite.html
> > '61 Cruiser Hot Rod "Aah Ooh Gah!"
> > '59 Lark Regal 4 door
> > '60 Lark 2 door
> > '60 Lark convertible
> > '64 Daytona 4 door
> > '64 Cruiser 4 door parts car (parts available)
>
> --
> =====================================================
> Steve Miller, Indianapolis
> SDC, Indy Chapter, Studebaker Internet Club
> =====================================================
> 63 Studebaker "BlackHawk" R-1 GT
> =====================================================
> BlackHawk Design -- "a little graphic design company for your big ideas"
> http://netdirect.net/~digiplnt/
> =====================================================
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Dave Lester
> > Black Bess was built as an ENGINEERING MULE to test out the mechanicals.
Other than that Edsel horse collar snout thing, both of these concepts make
me wonder if there was some Chrysler influence in the design studio.
Dave Lester
and the, "Ain't This the Pits," Crew
Home of the Internationally Renowned
STUDEBAKER UNDER CONSTRUCTION
http://www.provalue.net/studes
Meet the guys and gals that make up the alt.autos.studebaker newsgroup!
http://www.provalue.net/studes/newsgroupf.htm
THE GREAT DIVIDE
http://www.thegreatdivide.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Sudeley
when the engine was hot. It was rebuilt about 5k miles ago but I don't think
the pump was fixed. I freaked over the noise then found out from a Pack V8
expert that it was the oil I was using. I switched to straight 30 weight oil
instead of 10-30 and not a peep since. I was told that engine wasn't made for
multi-vis oil. All I know is it worked.
Steve Brown
1955 Packard Panama Clipper