WCraigH
-
Posts
1,139 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Content Type
Forums
Gallery
Events
Posts posted by WCraigH
-
-
Rick L: Good design. But, I don't think the 30A relay is absolutely necessary since you can get 30A DPDT. In either case, it satisfies the "idiot proof" criteria of forgetting to turn off the auto system whilst activating the manual system.
Where are you going to mount the relay? 1956 would be easier since the wiring from the relay to the solenoids would be very short. For 1955, I wouldn't mount a relay under the car by the solenoids.
One other thing: "off" is not truly [color:"red"] OFF with your design since the T-L could still "accidently" be activated during service by inadvertently hitting the manual switch. Maybe you need a "master" off?
-
For anyone with an extra $70K to spend. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />
Warning, the thumbnail linked JPGs are about 0.5MB each, so you need a broadband connection. The linked pics are 2048x1356 full color and are really nice to see, which is why I posted this link:
-
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I made a post on this forum about using a lead additive and from my personal experince, and a lot of others which I respect their opinions, you don't need to use it and no harm will result. </div></div>
Yes, I would agree, [color:"red"] IF you don't drive fast (over 60mph) for extended periods (hours).
-
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Believe it or not the only thing that doesn't work is the left [rear] blinker. (snip)</div></div>
Try checking for a poor ground on the blinker light socket. This was the problem on my 55 Pat front blinkers. I ran an extra ground wire for each and that solved it.
-
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">(snip) you could also try Hollander of that era(56) there might be and interchange (snip) </div></div>
According to my Hollander, there is [color:"red"] NOT a complete assembly interchange to any non-Packard V-8 (Hudson, Nash, Stude are included). That is probably due to the way the starter bolts to the engine/bell housing.
However, the 1955-56 Delco (Senior) starter armature #1926626 and drive #1931585 interchanges with lots of Chevy passenger and lt truck applications in the 55-62 time frame, according to my Hollander.
Your "friendly" parts store <span style="font-style: italic">SHOULD</span> be able to help you out with the details. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />
-
Packards Intl has some apparel like that. I bought a couple of nice "Packard" script golf-style shirts a while back, but I don't remember what all they have. Here's their website, but you probably should just call and ask.
-
Packard53:
You make some good points. However, I prefer to make a different distinction between the "common" (not specialty or exotic) cars made in the last 25 years or so and our beloved collector cars, especially Packard, to wit:
Today's common cars are essentially an expensive appliance. Collector cars are automobiles.
You're right that no collector in his/her right mind would put hundreds of thousands of miles in any kind of weather or driving conditions on their collector car. But the [color:"red"] expense of buying and dealer maintaining one of these modern appliances that you can do that too makes no economic sense to me, particularly since I don't have to abuse one like that anymore.
The biggest gripe I had with my BMW M6 was the "Bring Money With" to the dealer for service part of the deal. A friend of mine with a 500SL Mercedes just spent over $5,000 getting it fixed and serviced (it was running rough due to a problem with the FI). <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" />
-
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">(snip) Rather than use an antenna switch, it seems that whoever did the work on Craig's car specifically chose a toggle switch with a built-in center return, but it looks like all three "impementations" serve the same basic purpose - manually energizing the up or down solenoids. (snip)</div></div>
This part of the thread is turning into an implementation sophistication discussion (which is not a bad thing).
For the record, the person who "did the work on Craig's car" was me (Craig). One thing about the technology of the period was what we now call the "man in the loop".
Sophisticated "interlocks" to make a system idiot proof were not that common at that time. An example would be the possibility of the driver inadvertently placing the Ultramatic transmission in reverse instead of low; that would be a "fun ride" under certain circumstances. Likewise, requiring the driver to follow certain a procedure (1.turn off the "auto" switch; 2. manually activate the up/down switch...) was acceptable for the period, given information availability (owner's manual, etc). On the other hand, wiring the system so as to avoid calamities is a good thing.
-
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It's here - HID lights with directional movement are in production- modern Pilot Rays! (snip)</div></div>
Cool. Gotta link to an example?
-
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">(snip) So, the Manual Override when activated either up or down raises/lowers the rear end of the car to the MAX. (snip) </div></div>
Uhh, I don't think so....<img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" /> The example situtation I read somewhere on the "functional requirement" for the Manual Override switch was to temporarily raise the rear end to avoid scraping the rear bumper when entering an upward steep driveway from a flat road. Practically, this situation requires that the auto-level on/off switch be in the OFF position until the challenging terrain is navigated, however long that may take.
Keith, I have a similar Billy-Bob & Cooter implementation on my 55 Pat, which bypasses the limit override when in manual mode. I used a Radio Shack-type double pole, center (spring loaded) off "bat wing" switch mounted under the dash next to the factory on/off switch. I'm just careful when using it. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />
-
WRT "documenting the way it was," other posters (and I) have used a digital camera rather than a video camera. It's lot easier to randomly access a particular part or system with JPGs rather than searching sequentially thru a VHS tape. Also, keep small parts in marked plastic bags or other suitable container separated by section or function.
I would recommand tackling the dash 1st and the radio since you're under there. I'd do the rubber replacement AFTER the body & paint. If you can afford it, get the chrome redone at the same time as the body work & paint. The chrome has to come off anyway.
Anyway you do it, it will be fun and rewarding. keep us posted. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
-
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ha, I had a set of aircraft landing lights in the high beams of a 65 corvette many years ago and man they were bright. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> </div></div>
Yeah, me too on a 1965 GTO. I got mine from JCWhitney, I believe. In the middle of Kansas or New Mexico in the middle of the night they were terrific. But, one had to replace the relay/circuit breaker (whatever it was) in order for the extra amperage to keep the lights on for more than about 5 minutes! <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
It seems to my old eyes that some of the halogen lights on those big a$$ SUVs and p/u trucks today are worse than the old aircraft lights. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />
With as many "small but bright" lights as there are on modern cars and concept cars, I don't know why there aren't "intelligent" lights. Sort of a combo of the old Caddy "auto dimmer" system, the "aircraft landing lights" brightness with computer-controlled directional steering of the lights. Hmmm... <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
-
When stopped at a fast food pickup window, most people think that my 55 Pat is a 55 Chebby. But that's somehwhat understandable since the wrap around front windshield is similar.
But when I tell them it's a 1955 Packard and the first Packard was made in 1899, usually I get a look from him/her that says "...isn't that around the time the dinosaurs went extinct???" <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
-
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">(snip) With a single stage blower the [Griffon] Mk 58 developed 2,455 hp at low level (snip) </div></div>
OK, so now all "we" have to do is stuff a V-12 Giffon into a pre-1957 (pick your poison) Packard and go kick that aussie Hadfield's 55 Chebby's butt! <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
Special thanks to Twitch and everybody else who posted for the most interesting (slightly) off-topic thread in months!
-
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">(snip) So if the motor works then we can level the car but if it don't work I wanted to be able to take the motor off and send it out to have it rebuilt. But if that requires specific knowledge or tools and equipment then I will tell him to leave it alone and we can bring it to Don Taccone in Birmingham who can fix it. </div></div>
The T-L motor is nothing but a starter motor with two fields (so it will reverse). Anybody who can fix starter motors can fix a T-L motor.
-
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> since I will having my car idle during the winter months is there any good preventative maintence to do for the TL ? </div></div>
Assuming your Packard is stored indoors, hence protecting the electrical "stuff" from inclement weather, all I would recommend is lubricating all the pivoting points (zerk fittings).
-
Rick,
Always good to know about fixes that work! Also, the 1956 is a little easier to repair since those solenoids are inside the fender instead of under the car!
I have another one to add for the T-L. A few months ago, my 55 Pat was consistently too low in the rear when "level". This happened sort of all of a sudden. Although I suspected the load compensator control box had fritzed, first I tried adjusting the compensator control turnbuckle. It apparently had never been adjusted since day one (I had never needed to either) because it was covered with the same dealer applied undercoat that was all over the whole bottom of the car. So, I took it completely off (easy to do), cleaned up all the threads and re-installed. Then I adjusted the length until my Pat was once again level. No more "not level" problem since then. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
For those not familiar with these T-L details, see this (items 8 & 9):
-
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As far as leaks go; I can hear the vacuum leak when I push on the brakes, it has hissing noise. The noise sounds like a modern power steering pump at the turn limit. However, the brakes are not applied when at idle, does this make sense or should a get out my carb cleaner and spray around under the dash as well?
As I mentioned in an earlier string, the vacuum advance is caked with JB weld or some type of epoxy.
BTW, some older gentleman had me take off the vacuum line to the reservoir inside the fender and she had very little vacuum. The gentleman said it should be very strong and it wasn't...</div></div>
When you o'haul the carb, remove and plug the distributor vacuum line [color:"red"] AND the brake check valve (at the back of the throttle plate) with solid pipe thread plugs. This will totally eliminate any vacuum leaks in those two systems when you run the engine. Later, when the engine is idling and responding to throttle movements properly, reinstall the distributor line and the brake line one at a time to isolate the problem.
You may also have a problem with worn (loose) linkage between the throttle lever and accelerator pump. I had this problem on my 55 Pat. When you move the throttle, the accelerator pump lever should move in sync. If you can move the throttle lever off idle somewhat and the accel pump lever does [color:"red"] NOT move, then this will cause a big hesitation in engine acceleration. The fix is to fill the worn (oversize) hole(s) with JBWeld and redrill.
Good luck and keep us informed!
-
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have seen pictures of engine overhauls being done during the '30s and they were doing all the work with it still in car, with fenders, grille and radiator removed. Guess most poeple didn't have a way to lift the monsters out. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> And the pictures were made to show how it 'Should' be done. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" /> </div></div>
That's the way the DIY "Classic Car Restoration" (10 part shows) is doing it. Hmmm, easier to remove the "dog house" than it is to remove the engine?
-
I watched the first episode of restoring a 1938 Packard 120 Club Coupe on DIY. It's pretty darn good and would probably be of interest to most of us on this DF. The host Mark Lambert and restorer owns six Packards. He didn't say which ones, except for showing his 1936 Convertible at one point.
There will be 10 episodes (about 3 hrs of content), so I'll save them all on my DVR/TiVo until the series is complete in the first week of December. Anyone who wants a VHS copy, email me.
To see the details, bring up:
Type in "1938 Packard" in the search box and click GO.
-
Keith: Nope, never tried Ferodo products. Here's their website:
The problem is that no one has ever found a generic replacement to the front (12x2) brake shoes on the Senior cars. Plus, I don't know if an English company is going to produce generics for the other equivalents since the models are quite old.
The pads on the disc brake converted cars are a different story. Maybe when the pads on my 55 Pat need replacing, I'll try Fedoro.
-
As an example of dropping a brand X body onto a 1955-56 T-L rolling chassis, look at this:
1970 Pontiac Bonneville Convertible front view
One could easily envision modifying the grille top into a Packard "Oxbow" treatment. This would be reminiscent of the 1955 Packard "Request", albeit shorter vertically. Here are the other views:
1970 Pontiac Bonneville Convertible rear view
1970 Pontiac Bonneville Convertible front quarter view
The Bonneville model is 125" wheelbase, but all the other Pontiac B-bodies models are 122" wheelbase, exactly the same as the 1955-56 Junior T-L cars. The Pontiac treadwidth is 62" and the Packard is 60", but this is nothing that an offset wheel wouldn't line up. I haven't looked at any other alignment issues since I'm just brainstorming this right now.
Wasn't there a late-60s or early 1970s Pontiac Grand Prix (118" wheelbase) that was modified to look like a Packard? I vaguely recall such a thing, but I don't have any files on it. Maybe somebody else has a link or a JPG?
-
Jack,
Do you have any info on whatever happened to that '54 Carib on the '55 400 Chassis?
-
In the "1956 Packard XP-1..." thread, we've come to the conclusion that this car is zero % Packard under the skin, the whole drivetrain and chassis being something else. Also in that thread, Mr.Pushbutton noted that he knows where there is a complete Caribbean chassis. I also know where there are a few 1955-56 T-L chassis, both Senior and Junior.
This got me to thinking: [color:"red"] IF one were to "drop" another body onto a 1955-56 rolling chassis, preferably with Packard V-8 drivetrain, then [color:"red"] WHAT body would it be?
It could be a 1951-54 Packard Convertible (non-Caribbean). Didn't Jack Harlin mention doing something like this one time back in the day?
It could be brand-X of virtually any year "just for fun" and to screw around with the heads of the "experts". Especially if one liked that body style.
It could even be a pick-up truck. Imagine the T-L compensator leveling the Pick Up truck when loaded or unloaded!
Any ideas? <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />
Manual T-L Switch
in Packard
Posted
Rick L: got it, thanks for the clarification. As I posted before, good design. I'll consider changing over to this on my Panther project.