Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Rusty_1999

  1. I did forget to mention, although some may advise me otherwise, but i have found that a throttle body EFI system like that of Holley Sniper will work with little adaptation on the manifold. Some may ask why i would rather use the EFI system vs the very reliable carburetor and that is because i will be driving across country from the lows in Florida to the mountain highs in Colorado, and i can just see a new EFI system keeping up with altitude changes and help with keeping better fuel mileage over time as well.
  2. Hey! As an update to everyone i have moved my post to the Packard Info forums, and wow, i have received some awesome information, from a rebuilt 327 5 main, a disc brake kit from willwood, advice on converting the generator to an alternator, and even a transmission adapter kit to adapt to a gm small block transmission(allowing for overdrive too!!!!! I really appreciate it, and all of the private messages back and forth with people to find lots of great aftermarket solutions! Heck! Someone even pointed me towards a set of 6/12volt petronix points that would interchange in the stock distributor
  3. Ok, thank you, i was just not sure if i should delete this thread or not because i would be moving my discussion to another forum, thank you once again.
  4. Hey i would like to thank everyone for their replies, i will be taking the advice of many and moving this post over to the Packard forums, Is there any way to delete my forum post here so it doesn't just lay around as a junk file on the server?
  5. On the contrary, although it may seem otherwise, i do agree a lot with what you said. My clarifications are because i have a rather difficult time putting my thoughts into words clearly, in fact this sentence is taking a few minutes to write too, to make sure it comes across clearly. I really love the whole car to be honest, its very regal and graceful in its appearance, and i owe it to the engineers of Packard for designing such a great car! It is not too big, i love big cars, the bigger the better, so much so that i have a 74 Imperial in my collection too, and that thing is a 2
  6. I feel i should clarify my intentions a little more. I believe, although i may be wrong here, that cars are meant to be driven. I am not one of those guys who is like "OH ITS MY CAR AND I WILL DO WHAT I WANT" if i was i wouldn't have posted anywhere. I will do what is right by the car. But i wish to see others ideas and opinions. I want to make the best decision to meet my ends, but also think of what is right by the car. My ultimate goal is to try to change as little as possible but change what i must to make it haul and keep up in modern traffic. Sure a car like mine
  7. I would like to thank each and everyone for their input, i really appreciate it. On the note that if i did engine swap it. After pulling out the engine and trans i would be left with a 3100lb car and then putting back in only 350-400lbs of modern engine and trans in it I'm fairly confident that the car would scoot and get around 35mpg easy if not the 26 mpg the 3.7 is known for in fords pickups(highway that is) which weigh about 4500lbs. And considering the aerodynamics of these cars i think she'd do just fine. The 3.7 makes the same torque and doesn't have to rev high to make any
  8. Oh, i also forgot to note, whether it matters or not, The steering wheel says Raineer on it if that matters any at all?
  9. Firstly, THANK YOU SO MUCH to those that have helped me come this far. I think i have a good idea of what this car is now or at least possibly. I do in fact believe this car was on the road for at least some time, it just screams to me that it was for at least a year or two. Here's how i think its story went. The body, meaning mostly the front(hood, and what was the grille and the wheels all of the way around) resemble a Standard Eight way to closely. So I now believe that (especially looking at the body lines on my car where the fenders are missing and looking at
  10. To TTR, no i assure this whole car is solid metal. And maybe it is home built, but it being what it is it doesn't come across being as such, but if i am wrong regardless its super cool! To Asancle and dustycrusty-- Holy crap!!! I haven't even gotten that far in the 2 years Ive had it, that's an exact match!!!!! But it still begs the question of what is it? Austin wheels and a Cord dash? This thing is getting weird! Aren't Cords super rare? maybe not but who just has a cord dash laying around? Or maybe in my case with this car, who had? What do you guys think, a Renault/Austin/Cord
  11. Renault??? I didn't even think of that. Any idea what model might have been similar?
  12. This is the final photo set for now, all replies are welcome, and once again, if this is not the proper place to post this i will remove my posts. Thank You!
  13. note the size of the car as compared to the 20s Buick beside it.
  14. Ok, since i seemed to have stirred a bit of a hornets nest this morning since joining the forums, i think ill do it once more. This time though, i need help identifying a car i own. and i will provide what few photos of it my computer has and what information i do know about it. Firstly the story of how i acquired said car. I found it on an add near my family's cabin in Heber Springs Arkansas. I contacted the individual who at the time owned a shop and had several other antique cars like the 20's model Buick pictured near in the background of one of the photos i will post. He
  15. I appreciate that on the rear axle. I believe it was in an old service book i have for the car. Or maybe it was some where else. Thank you for that. ill do some more research and that may just change my mind on a few things!
  16. Yes! i couldn't believe it either when i first got the car. I've looked at the engine code stamped on the side of the rear block. They built the 9 main in 53 as a last resort because they didn't have an OHV V8 engine to compete and in 54 as a last ditch they punched it out to a larger 359. Now they may have had the 327 9 main in 51-52 but i do not believe those in 51/52 had the hydraulic valve train and canted valves like the 53 and 54 did. And yes, my car does has a 4 barrel manifold. It was equipped on all patricians with the 9 main. My post about the manifold was because it has several shar
  17. I should clarify. It is my fault for not being clearer. I have posted here because i am looking at NOT engine swapping my car. While i do have the opportunity to do so, i would like to see what could be done to MODERNIZE the ORIGINAL engine and drive train overall. Packard did very well when engineering their automobiles. BUT, unfortunately time and progress march on. I think modernizing the original drive train and NOT engine swapping would be a spectacular route. My main goal is to be able to daily drive my car across country like it wasn't a day old. And
  18. Yes my apologies. I do not take offense Matt, in fact i appreciate it! I do admit that thought came across my mind before posting, but in the long run i figured input from the OE community would give me better insight. I might end up doing a complete factory restoration too. I think my only real issue is the transmission and read end.
  19. I am the owner of a 1953 Packard Patrician. This post will be mostly for those fellow Packard owners. From the factory my '53 came out with the rare 327 nine main Flathead straight eight (for non Packard guys it SERIOUSLY has NINE main bearings). It has the Ultramatic 2-speed transmission, and what i believe to be a 4.55 geared rear end. The engine needs significant machining work due to the head being left off for years, and missing all of the valve train but it is very savable, just very expensive...... What i would like to do will be one of two things: Ei
  • Create New...