Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

60 Excellent

About SaddleRider

  • Rank
    100+ Posts
  • Birthday 03/27/1940

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Oh yeah......try that "best performance" of a pre-war Ford on a hot day......! Say on the Cajon Pass....or that grade between Needles & Kingman. Is my above "smart-alec" comment unfair to pre-war Ford people.....? Well......I have hanging on my wall in my hobby-room an interesting artifact well-known to those pre-war Ford owners who DO have to drive their cars in summer, AND who hate walking.....! The artifact...? the " DESERT WATER BAG" (made by "Canvas Specialty" of Los Angeles) - used to find their display in just about every gas station &am
  2. You are partially correct. I have never even been near, much less driven a 1934 Brewster. My suspicion is a 1934 Brewster is actually a 1934 Ford with a custom - built body. If that suspicion is correct, I have, over the years, driven a number of them. I am disappointed to learn you are bored discussing old cars. Sorry to hear that. As far as discussing the differences, say, between a 1956 Cadillac and a 1958 Cadillac, I am not clear how that would be of much interest to the majority of the readers. It would not be entirely accurate to say that underneath
  3. Sorry you think we are insulting you by trying to get you competent info. Given your belief that your particular car isn't capable of giving satisfactory performance with an over-drive, you are most certainly headed for another unsatisfactory driving experience if you go to the expense and trouble of a much higher final drive ratio by modifying your rear axle.. True, the Packard " Standard Eight" ( let me use that as a "generic" term to cover all the 320 cu. in Packard eights ) is hardly in the same league from a power standpint, as the much more powerful "Super"
  4. You are mistaken. Your phantom is an extremely "long-stroke" motor - made necessary from a design standpoint by the fuels available of the era in which it was engineered. Beyond a certain rpm, it LOOSES power. Yes - you are correct to this extent....an overdrive (typically around 70%) would lower the engine revs. But at ANY speed ! By reducing the final drive out-put shaft's rpm, you would effectively get MORE power at higher speeds, since you'd be getting the engine's rpm down to its best power-producing level. A typically over-drive-equipped long stroke
  5. I cant help you on a recommendation to get your Packard and Auburn into acceptable shape. I am near the west coast, where there are still a couple of shops capable of returning cars of the 1930's to an acceptable condition. May not be cost effective for you to ship your Aburn and Packard out here, where I most certainly could give you recommendations for quality and competent people ( they aint cheap...they don't have charity licenses with COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES DEPT. OF SOCIAL SERVICES.....! ) Again, if your cars are such that a 1935 Ford gives you a more pleasurable drivin
  6. Bill - may I suggest you get hold of a competent mechanic familiar with the unique workings of Auburn and "senior" Packard autos from the mid 1930's ? Some of us in here know how a Ford of that era runs....and have also driven Auburns and Packards. Yes...no question about it....a combination of abuse, passage of time, and lack of competent maintainence...no question...a Aburn or big Packard from that era most certainly can be reduced to the point it will not give you the driving pleasure or performance of an old Ford. You are missing so much - hope you will get yo
  7. Please let me quarrel with your above post just a wee bit. 1st question. Where you been for the past 20+ years ? Most EVERYTHING that one has, and once to sell, including used Chryslers, is now called a "classic". Including the Chrysler Airflow _ see Pp. 16 of the current CLASSIC CAR CLUB OF AMERICA Directory. I just came back from the SEMA exhibition in Las Vegas. Quite an experience to see what is offered in the "repro" market for improving cars, mostly from the 50's and later. (the general public cant get in - pretty tight security...the THOUSA
  8. What a party - pooper - not giving us a clue as to what in blue thunder the vehicle is.....is part of the fun !
  9. I am disappointed to see the above posts in which the writers discuss how bad their brakes are. I have owned a number of "drum" brake vehicles of all sizes, years & weights down thru the years.....; some folks say I am quite a "squirrel" with my vehicles, meaning I drive the heck out of them. It is true that the first "internal expanding" type brakes, which were "mechanical" up to the early-mid 1930's, could "pull" to one side or another if not properly adjusted. If we were discussing mechanical drum brakes, that's a whole separate issue. But here, these fol
  10. Nope...but that is because I drive a "Senior Series" Packard to meets.....! Old saying is..."you get what you pay for"......buy a "ordinary man's car" and things like that happen.....Be very surprised if it was a large General Motors Product. Be very NOT surprised if it was a Chrysler Corp. or FoMoCo product.....(each to his own...!)
  11. Yes, Rusty...I agree completely - I should have qualified my suggestion to stick with pre '68 General Motors products...
  12. I disagree - your post is worth a LOT more to this guy...IF he will listen to you...!
  13. Good point - you are so right.....that is why I recommend an Olds 98 or Cad....a low mileage well-maintained GM car of that era would be as reliable and as low-maintainence as any auto ever placed on Planet Earth. So yes..of course I recommend he stay away from Ford or Chrysler Corp products of that era. One look at a CONSUMER REPORTS magazine of that era says it all ! (I.e...how right we BOTH are....!)
  14. Ah...I see...you are a FORD owner.! Here's an idea...go to an auto show in a Cadillac, Rolls, or Packard. Mine have run perfectly for 17 years....heck..even 18 years...come to think of it...sixty one years....!
  15. I am puzzled...what some of you guys are thinking of...what could possibly be your priorities....this guy asked a legit question about what early-to-mid 1960's cars would give him the most pleasure. And some of you guys are recommending "poor man's" ordinary cars like Fords, Plymoths...Chevies... ? Is it possible those are the only cars some of you guys have ridden in...? Is it possible you have no clue how much nicer, faster, more comfortable a Olds 98 or Cad. would be ? I just don't "get it"
  • Create New...