WCraigH
-
Posts
1,139 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Content Type
Forums
Gallery
Events
Posts posted by WCraigH
-
-
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> (snip) I was beginning to think it was just me ...(snip) </div></div>
I'm totally with you guys (Packard8, Clipper47, Brian, Randy, Jack, et al). You retorted succinctly to a diatribe. It's indeed time to ignore 55PACKARD. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />
-
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">(snip) ...but I've run out of ideas. </div></div>
Replace the T-V with a modern unit like I, Paul, Keith or Tim did (all different solutions) and be done with it.
-
"The Arrow", is a docu-drama mini-series by the Canadian Broadcast Corporation (CBC) and the Film board of Canada. It stars Dan Ackroyd (in a non-comedic role) and Kate Bosworth.
By 1958, the A.V. Roe (Avro Aircraft) company of Canada built six prototypes of the CF-105 "Arrow", the last of which was capable of mach 2.5 at 85K-ft!!! The story is a sad one, of brilliant technical work overcome by politics, culminating with the cancelling of the project a few weeks before a record-setting flight by #6 and then the firing of all 14,000 employees and the TOTAL destruction of all airframes, blueprints, engineering components, etc. as ordered by the Prime Minister and carried out by the RCAF. It was a situation analagous to Jack Northrop's B-49, Preston Tucker's "Torpedo" and somewhat like John Delorean's car built in N.Ireland.
The "Arrow" is a beautiful delta-wing airplane which looks more like the ill-fated North American F-108 "Rapier" mach 3 escort fighter than the Convair F-102/F-106 and to a lesser degree (no delta wing) North American's A3-J/A5-B Vigilante. Apparently, the "Arrows" air-inlet design was ripped off for use on the McDonnel F4-B "Phantom" and it's area-rule ("coke bottle" shape) fuselage was ripped off to fix the malperformance of the F-102 when it evolved into the F-106. Lots of interesting stuff in this story!
This is a movie well worth seeing, but the current DirecTV listings don't show another showing in the near future. I recorded it on my TiVo and viewed it later because it was on from 4AM-7AM PDT.
-
I just watched "Arrow" on TRUE channel (DirecTV). In the scene near the beginning of the 2nd episode (1.6 of 3 hrs) on the Arrow's maiden flight is a nice nose-on shot of a 1955 Clipper.
For those of you not familar with this aircraft, see:
or do a Google search for it. Pretty amazing.
-
You need to jack the car up on jack stands (wheels clear, T-L [color:"red"] turned off and run it in gear at road speeds to verify where the vibration is.
Unfortunately, the driveshaft design is (pretty much) unique to Packard, so you might have to deal with a custom driveshaft shop, if that is indeed the problem.
-
Kanter has repop'd the 1956 lens ($75 each), so the customizers are in good shape. It's the assembly that nobody makes, but only a restorer would care.
-
Who said the new Packard would have an independent rear suspension? At first blush, typical IRS geometry seems to be counter to T-L main bar "reverse twist" setup. If we used some kind of "trailing arm" arrangement, then the "reverse twist" would be similar to 55-56. Hmmm...have to think about this one some more.
While we're at it, why not use titanium in all the suspension and magnesium wheels to get the lightest unsprung weight possible?
-
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Craig - Sounds good, but I am completely unfamiliar with "real time actively adjustable links." Since the full-length torsion bars connect the front and rear wheels, is it absolutely essential to have these things at both front and rear? </div></div>
What I meant was "active suspension", wherein both the spring rate (torsion bar) and damping rates (shocks) are changed in milliseconds by a computer in response to road conditions, speed, driver input, etc. The front links on the T-L are prime candidates for "active adjustment", i.e., make longer for more preload, make shorter for less preload. Although I wouldn't want to consider exactly how to implement this right now, I think the idea has merit. Shocks that instantly change valving are available and BMW has "Active Roll Stabilization" wherein the sway bar end links cause these bars to be twisted more or less in reaction to driving conditions.
-
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> (snip) Still, CAD, CAM and CNC technologies are affordable technologies that would be of great benefit - to both any manufacturer and its suppliers. (snip) </div></div>
On TLC channel yesterday was a repeat of a "Rides" episode wherein Chip Foose turned a new Cadillac Seville into the full-size Hot Wheels "Deora II". Putting aside the rather bizarre nature of this "conversion" in which only the FWD & engine of the Caddy was retained, the relevent analogy to this thread is using CAD, CAM and a large 5-axis CNC machine to create virtually all the custom pieces. Here's a recap of the project:
Here's some info on the 5-axis CNC big enough to do a car:
-
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The SBC is a great V8 - it doesn't mean that it will make a great V12. Again, consider the stalwart Ford flathead V8 and the horrid Zephyr V12 derived from it(please don't kill me Continental owners). Cylinder bank angle and firing order are the basis of the physics of harmonic vibration. The contribution of sloppiness of fit or deflection mentioned is correct but is more an execution issue, not design. 90 is a balanced set up for a V8, not for a V12. </div></div>
Exactly correct. See for details:
-
Here's some ideas for the 21st century Torsion-Level:
Computer "active suspension" control of the "pre-load" of the leveling system. This would entail real time actively adjustable links at the front and rear to compensate for driving conditions. Basically, increasing the spring rate without changing the ride height, so that if one wanted a "boulevard ride" (soft), back off on the pre-load. If one wanted "sports car-like ride", increase the pre-load.
Increase the anti-sway aspect of the T-L. In the 1955-56 versions, there was one, relatively small anti-sway bar up front and essentially none in the rear since the "S" bar setup only serves to locate the rear axle. In the 21st century version, increase the front diameter to 1-1/4" (like WS6 Trans Am Firebirds) and add maybe a 3/4" bar to the rear in addition to the "S" bar, or add a "track bar" plus the sway bar in the rear.
Eliminate the rear 40" (Senior) leveling bars and associated mechanisms. Instead use computer controlled, electronic "shocks" (not necessarily air -- could be hydraulic)) to handle the ride leveling aspect. IMO, one of the drawbacks of the extra leveling bars in the back is that it changes the effective spring rate as seen by the rear wheels. This cannot help the handling in an "agressive" driving situation (maybe Jack Harlin can pipe in here).
Increase the anti-dive geometry of the front A-arms. This was pretty good in 1955, but given that the Packard was a heavy vehicle with lots of mass (inertia), under agressive stop conditions, the anti-dive was insufficient.
Food for thought! <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
-
<img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />
However, I'd hate to trip and fall against one of the ends: [color:"red"] empalement. That wouldn't be possible with one of today's "jelly bean" car bodies.
-
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">(snip) Pushrods, a cobbled 90 degree V12, and a full frame in a current design sounds to me like a pick-up truck, not a top end car like Packard. </div></div>
Pushrod OHV V-8s are alive and well, ala the LS-1 family (1991+) Gen III Chebby engine family. These produce 400+ HP in 5.7L displacement.
60-deg are definitely required for V-12s.
IF I won the $100M+ lottery and were so inclinded to do such a commercial venture, I'd just use the Gen III V-8 and a BMW V-12 and concentrate on the styling, updated T-L, etc. Most who drive it wouldn't know/care about the drive train part anyhow. <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">BH, I appreciate your first hand insight. Let's build a Packard! But a 2005 one. (snip) </div></div>
There was an interesting documentary on TV the other day about the development and manufacture of the new Porsche Boxter and Carerra (and Mercedes S-Class). Porsche is using computer controlled robotic assembly to manufacture both (quite different) models on the same assembly line, completely intermingled!
Couple that approach with Computer-Numerical-Control (CNC) machining from Computer-Aided-Design (CAD) and Computer-Aided-Manufacture (CAM), and maybe it's feasible to today to produce extremely low volumn cars almost entirely by computer and robots.
Granted, as pointed out above, it would probably make sense to purchase the major subassemblies from 3-rd party suppliers.
It apparently is economically feasible to manufacture low-production special interest vehicles in this day and age, citing the Shelby cars as one example.
-
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Craig,
I've always had a passion for reviving the woefully underutilized full torsion bar suspension of the '55 and '56 model years. Chrysler literally went "halfway" with the front torsion bar suspensions on their cars, and in recent years, Dodge and Chevy (maybe others?) use front torsion bars on trucks. My '96 Dakota has 'em. Real robust pieces. I consider it my homage to my Packard roots. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" /> </div></div>
Another application of the front "halfway" torsion bar is the FWD Caddy Eldorados. I used to own a 1972 coupe and was surprised one day to see torsion bars instead of coil springs up front. Of course, there was no comparison in ride quality or ability to deal with rough roads between the Eldo and my 55 Pat. The Packard is vastly superior, particularly in actual follow-the-leader comparisons.
It would be very interesting to see the blueprints for the 1957 Packard Torsion-Level, which was supposedly different than 1955-56.
-
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">(snip) That may be a good direction for this thread: what makes a Packard a Packard? (snip) </div></div>
Good idea!
Off the top of my head, in no particular order, for the 21st Century Packard:
Retro and Packard styling clues, the "Oxbow" grille motif being mandatory.
Body style that doesn't look like an innocuous "jelly bean".
Advanced suspension; maybe even a 21st century update on the Torsion-Level.
Finest interior materials, not just the ubiquitous leather, real or syn.
A unique engine: V-8 standard, V-12 optional.
Advertising: "Ask the man who owns one." 'nuf said <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">Hi Craig, I tried posting a pic of the carib here for Randall but it didn't stick (too many pixels? <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />) If its okay, I'll email it to your site and maybe you can post it in your '55-'56 "showroom"?
Thanks, John </div></div>
I'll indeed include your 1956 Caribbean convertible in my next website update! In the meantime, here's a link to it:
-
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> (snip)I just noticed something in the user's profile page - a page that anyone can access by clicking on any user's name in the column to the left of the body of text in any of their posts. When logged-in (except when viewing your own profile), a link appears at the bottom of that page to <span style="font-weight: bold">Ignore this user</span>; click on it and every post by that user will be replaced (for your own viewing pleasure) with "<span style="font-weight: bold">*** You are ignoring this user ***</span> - that is, until you go back to their profile and click on the link to now <span style="font-weight: bold">Stop ignoring this user</span>. It might be necessary to use that link to police your posts ocassionally to make sure you haven't been "hijacked." (snip) </div></div>
Brian, thanks for "discovering" this feature. I just tried it on pierce66 (PFH) and it works as advertised. That's good enough for me.
-
Now that this thread is "sort of" back on topic, here's another post-1957 design study I found recently on my hard drive. I don't know the artist, and cannot decipher the scribbled name:
It looks too "resto rod"-ish to be a serious production exercise, but who knows?
-
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Pierce66 (alias Pete Hartmann) -
At the risk of responding to you, if the post that you deleted/edited was anything like your last post, I can see why someone asked for it to be removed.
As started, this thread NEVER asked about Packard's failures, but was merely soliciting more info on post-1957 design studies.
(snip)
However, if you want to continue to rant about Packard's alleged failures, you should start your own separate thread and STOP hijacking others and twisting other people's words, trying to start a fight, before someone files a formal complaint with the site administrators.
</div></div>
Amen. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />
-
In a word, "correct." But of course the devil is in the details.
-
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Craig, that is good info but one vendor says dealer cost is $12.28 and
the other says $66.xx. Something doesn't sound right as they are both Perfect Circle??
YFAM, Randy Berger </div></div>
Unless one PN is cast iron and the other is chromemoly or something else exotic.
-
Nothing magic about Packard-specific rings. Virtually any 4" (352) or 4-1/8" (374) 5/64" top & 2nd, 3/16" oil rings will work.
-
Tim & anyone else interested in an alternate trans swap approch: It won't be a bolt-in, but will require modifying the engine block & crank. So, unless you're willing to do that, go with a bolt-on deal.
Transmission Coolers
in Packard
Posted
The one I fitted on my 55 Pat I bought from AutoZone. It's just a standard, "big car" cooler and it seems to do the job. Probably the bigger the better (within reason). No fan is required, because you mount it vertically in front of the radiator.
I'd recommend replacing the now-defunct tranny cooler with a piece of hose. See my website for recommendations, but "flex" hose will also work.