Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About SaddleRider

  • Birthday 03/27/1940

Recent Profile Visitors

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

SaddleRider's Achievements

1,000+ Points

1,000+ Points (3/7)

  • Collaborator

Recent Badges



  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 & auto parts store on what was U.S. Highway 66.........(some people erroroneusly have taken to call that U.S. Highway "Route" 66....but that's another story for another fun "thread"........! ) Side-note....that artifact has never been used...it is in "mint" condition...bought it just for the sadistic fun of needling my Ford buddies.....why hasn't it ever been used by me....? I don't own a pre-war Ford.........even when I "pull" the Needles-To-Kingman grade in the summer........well....friends and neighbors...I drive a PACKARD !
  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 the sheet-metal, they are quite similar (at least as far as the engine, transmission and drive-line are concerned.) If you are seriously interested in the technical details, rather than take up time here, may I suggest an outstanding book on the subject: CADILLAC 1950 - 1959 by Roy Schneider - published by his AUTOMOTIVE HERITAGE PUBLISHING COMPANY, ISBN # 0-917104-02-1
  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" eights (the 384. cu. in. version, and of course both pale in comparison to the brutal torque and power available from a Packard V-12. Or to put it another way...the Packard Motor Car Company did not get its reputation in those years by cheating its customers. You got what you paid for. In your case, the original buyer got a car that was superb, equal to anything IN ITS PRICE CLASS. But so what....IF PROPERLY MAINTAINED a "standard eight" "stock" geared as low as yours.... works very well with an overdrive. From your description, you need competent tech. to bring the performance of that "standard eight" motor up to spec. Do that, and as others have pointed out, you will have a truly enjoyable driving experience, especially when you get a modern overdrive installed.
  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 car such as your Phantom would be at LEAST 20 mph faster "flat out" than a "stock-geared" one.
  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 driving experience than an Auburn or Packard - well...you have my sympathy - you are missing so much.! You are in error if you think a modern high tech shop would find a large, powerful luxury car of the 1930's "low tech". For example...there is no "OBD II" computer port to tell the "replace the parts types " what was wrong. Perhaps the brake linings are of the wrong "co-efficient of friction". How many "hi tech" modern shops have techs. who understand the workings of the power brake system of a big "super-luxury car of the 1930's? Or know how to set up the brake shoe clearances? Or even know there is such a thing ? Good luck on your quest to learn more about the differences in driving pleasure between a 1935 Ford and your other cars, once they are properly restored mechanically.
  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 your cars "up to snuff" so you can have the enjoyment built into them.
  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 THOUSANDS of people there were, presumably, better informed than the general public about automotive matters). Of the HUNDREDS of spectacular cars on display, showing off the various products/parts available.....my recollection is about a dosnt were NOT promoted with the word "classic". Did it make sense to call the Airflow...an incredibly well-engineered and quality vehicle a "classic" in view of the Club's ( apparently now obsolete understanding ) of the word..? Many of you may not know that the word "classic" when applied to automobiles, not only meant "unique, of first rank, representing the highest standard of excellence". It also meant a car whose design represented the "classical" school of design - meaning "form follows function". Meaning cars in which the shape of the fenders, the hood, the radiator grill, the running board, the headlight shell, each was a separate fixture...set apart on the vehicle, defined by its function. Obviously, the streamlined "art deco" Chrysler Airflow, as superior as it is, is the very antithesis of the "classical" concept. But that was then. Its long since been a "done deal" as far as the CCCA is concerned....! Why...for many many years, has the streamlined Chrysler Airflow been acceptable to the CCCA as a "classic" car. How did that come to pass...? We know why...someone had one they wanted to sell, had friends who had "pull" in Club management......in the days when identifying something as a "classic" meant something...! I may have misunderstood another portion of your post. You are also in error if it is your belief that classic cars are by definition "custom". A production off-the-shelf Cad V-16, Pierce, Packard or Lincoln V-12 is most certainly considered a ( " REAL " ) classic car even tho it may not have been special ordered - just built on a assembly line (although certainly with more detail than an ordinary car of the same era. About the only thing I can agree on with your above post...is that as the thirties drew to a close, tremendous advantages in technology, in what the ordinary car was and could do in those later years. meant the big ( REAL ) classics were becoming obsolete even as they rolled out the factory doors !
  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 folks are talking about later hydraulic brake equipped vehicles. Yes - it is POSSIBLE to get a modern ( meaning post mid 1930's hydraulic-equipped ) drum-brake vehicle to pull sharply one way or the other. Requires a combination of really poor maintainance and lack of a basic understanding of how brakes work. Yes, I "get it"...these days it is getting harder and harder to find a mechanic who has a clue how to actually fix things. I do sympathize for those who cannot do their own brake-work with some degree of competence, AND are unable to find a shop where the mechanics go beyond plugging in an OBD II "reader". Be assured that all American cars ( at least the ones I've worked on & driven....I've probably in my 77 years become aquainted with most every make & model) built since the introduction of four wheel brakes will make at least one extreme speed stop in a straight line. Again, that is assuming the vehicle has been properly maintained. Those of you who have suffered incompetent maintainence are in error in assuming that is the way your used car was when in service.
  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...