WCraigH

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Excellent tech tip!</div></div> More to follow in PS rear (see following post). <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> The more frequent problem I've run into in the Packards with <span style="font-style: italic">electric window lifts</span>, however, is windows that go all the way down, but then won't go back up at all (and vice-versa).</div></div> Yup, I also had this problem (stuck in down position) on my Pat DS front window just recently. I took it apart, tested it on the bench where it worked fine. Finding nothing wrong, I then reassembled. It now works fine. Go figure... <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" /> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> BTW, Craig, what did grease did you use for that gear? As I recall the original stuff was a grayish color, but without the typical odor of chassis grease - making me think that graphite was the active ingredient. The only thing I've been able to find with graphite in it is a disc brake lube from CRC., but it seems a bit thick for this purpose </div></div> I used wheel bearing grease both six years ago and now. Whether it is "right" or not, the grease is/was not the problem.

Hi all! I'd like to share my recent experience repairing the power windows in my 55 Pat for others benefit. Also see my post 243298 for history. The other day, I decided to repair the PS front power window which I had never disassembled since purchase. This window had the annoying behavior of going part way up and then "stalling" and requiring manual help (pulling on it) to get it beyond about the 2/3 up position. I had guessed the problem was the same as the other windows (when I purchased my Pat) which was that the grease had hardened to the point where there was too much friction in the various pivots and slides for the supposedly original weakened motor to overcome. Ah, but not so. After disassembly and reassembly with all moving parts greased, the behavior was the same. So out the motor and lift came once again. This time, I took the motor gear drive apart and discovered that the "copper" (bronze?) central gear was worn away at one spot on about 1/2 of its outer edge. So, I disassembled this mechanism (required pounding it apart with a drift/hammer), flipped the gear over to align the non-worn half with the worm-drive and reassembled. Now the power window works like new! Taking this stuff apart is not very difficult [color:"red"] IF you've done it before or know what you are doing. I'm pretty good at it by now. Beware that the service manual is only marginally helpful. Anyone who wants to tackle this job may want to email me for detailed instructions. BTW, the PS rear door has similar behavior to its companion front door, just not as bad. I plan on repairing it tomorrow morning. Then, I should have all four window power lifts working like new! <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

On my 55 Pat I mounted an auxilliary inline pulse-type electric fuel pump and preceeding inline filter on the outside of the frame rail below the driver's door. This was simplest because that's where the stock fuel line runs. Since the pump is that low, it is approximately at the same level as the bottom of the fuel tank. It's been working fine for me even in 115F stop/go driving. If the aux elect fuel pump is turned off, the car will quit due to vapor lock under those hot conditions. I'd opine that having the elect fuel pump back by the fuel tank is only necessary in hard leaving drag cars. The pulse type elect pump will suck fuel from anywhere in the line whereas a rotary vane type won't and the latter requires some gravity feed in dry pump conditions, so it's more important to use the former.

FYI, if you can't find the J-6065 or repo tool, then you can use chains & nuts/bolts to accomplish the torque arm retention. See my website for illustration.

I'll post pictures of it when the Carib interior is completed. As far as earlier pictures, the only one he has (exterior front) was scanned by me and posted on my website.

Today I again visited my friend Paul and his 1956 Exec project (documented on my website) to see what was happening. He's waiting for the Caribbean interior upholstery to be completed which will reside in his Exec. This uncovered another little or maybe even unknown difference between the 1955 & 1956 Packards and their varients. It turns out the Caribbean seat frame is 4-in narrower than all other 1955-56 Packards! Back in the 1970s Paul had installed the interior seats from a 400 (Senior body) in his 1956 Exec (Junior body). All internal dimensions were identical including the distance from the firewall to back seat. The 5-in difference in wheelbase between Sr & Jr is between the rear window and trunk lid. [color:"red"]BUT, when Paul tried to install the 1956 Caribbean seat frame in his 1956 Exec, the width was 4-in narrower! He does not know of any reason why, but there it is. All other seat frame widths are the same (Pat, Clipper, 400, etc). Another noteworthy item that was explained to me for the first time is Paul's fail-safe design for the pneumatic operation and electromatic pushbutton control of the shifting of the Borg-Warner T-10. [color:"red"]IF the compressor fails or if a line springs a leak, all pneumatic positions return to [color:"blue"]neutral position. This is good enough to "fail safe". If the line pressure drops below 60psi (120psi normal), then both a buzzer and a red light are actuated as a warning. This is also good, but [color:"red"]then an auxillary electrical pneumatic pump is actuated thru a one-way valve which will pump up the holding tank to it's requisite 120 psi, albeit after several seconds. This allows one to not only pull off the road (warning light/buzzer) but to "limp home" in the case of otherwise catestrophic failure. The backup system also applies to the clutch actuation, which is also pneumatic. This is an A+ design and implementation. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <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">Agreed Brian, when the ?phartmann virus? is purged from the board the discussions quickly revert back to what they should be??..Packard topics?technical, historical, hands-on practical, parts interchange, etc, etc. Sad that one individual has made a hobby of disrupting a valuable resource for the rest of us. </div></div> Packard8: great phrase coinage: "PHartmann virus". I had been using the ignore feature, but when the PHartmann virus started to multiply, that simple remedy didn't work anymore. Apparently, the regular posters on this "backwater DF" (to borrow a phrase from BH) are sufficiently viable antibodies to this virus. And I thank you all.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm out of reach of my references, but thought the Four Hundred (and Caribbean) had a higher stall speed converter. Could you provide a similar set of simulation results for the 400 hardtop? </div></div> Way ahead of you Brian. I did the simulations, but didn't include them in the above. [color:"red"]IF the Carib/400 converter has an 1800 stall converter instead of the 1650 of the Pat, then: 18.42sec at 75mph (stock 55 Pat) 18.11sec at 75mph (stock 55 400) [color:"red"]IF one "tunes" the 55 Pat for drag racing, i.e., mod the converter for 2000rpm stall, change rear gear to 3.90:1 (instead of 3.54:1), change rear tires to "High performance Street", change driver style to "agressive" (full throttle against the brakes) and runs it at Pomona, CA (sea-level excellent weather), the simulation produces: 16.33sec at 82mph [color:"red"]IF one then swaps a 1956 Caribbean 374 for the 1955 352 (50hp more), the simulation produces: 15.57sec at 87mph. As a point of reference, this is approaching off-the-showroom floor muscle car performance. Simulations sure are fun...and cheap! <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

What if you could choose "whatever" transmission you wanted for your Packard V-8? What would be the performance difference compared to the stock Twin-Ultramatic. I decided to test this idea using "DeskTop Drag Strip" simulation software. As a realistic baseline I used the 1/4-mile drag strip road test results on a 1955 Patrician from a contemporary car magazine. Then I entered the relevent data into the simulation and got nearly identical results: 18.6sec at 76mph (road test) 18.4sec at 75mph (simulation) Then I changed just the transmission with a stock stall-speed (1200 rpm) torque converter (non lockup, i.e., 2.40:1 multiplication, 3% slip). Here are the results (best to worst): 18.15sec at 76mph (GM 700R4) 18.27sec at 75mph (Mopar 727) 18.45sec at 76mph (GM TH400) 20.09sec at 74mph (GM PowerGlide) By comparison with a manual transmission: 17.77sec at 78mph (B-W T-10 manual) So, there's really not much difference! For grins, I then changed the torque converter to a steet performance varient (1800 stall, 2.35:1 multiplication, 4% slip): 17.59sec at 76mph (GM 700R4) 17.59sec at 76mph (Mopar 727) 17.64sec at 76mph (GM TH400) 18.57sec at 75mph (GM PowerGlide) It should be noted that the specs (according to the road test article) for the Packard torque converter are 1650 stall, 2.90:1 max multiplication, 0% slip (lock up). I set the simulation for stock tires, average weather and conservative driver.

Well, there's always a disc brake conversion. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

In his thread, Eric wondered if the Hash oil pump would fit in the Packard oil pan. For fitment purposes, the Packard oil pump "forward" dimension is 8-3/4" as measured from the plane of the rear main cap vertical surface. I.e., this distance above the desk top in the picture.

The Packard V-8 and Hudson/Nash (Hash) varient oil pumps are a apparently alot different! In his thread "I hate Mickey Mouse, And why.", Eric (turboPackman) posted a telling picture of his 320 Hash oil pump bolted to his 374 block. I thought that it looked a lot different than the standard Packard oil pump, the most obvious being the clocking. So, I took a picture of my Panther pump (left) in the same orientation (but on a desk) and pasted Eric's Hash pump (right) in the same picture for side-by-side comparison:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I tryed the Photo-Post (never tryed it before) and I think I uploaded a picture (not too hard to do) but That was about 30 min. ago and it's still not showing up? Do pictures have to be approved by someone, before they post them? (snip)</div></div> As I've offered before, if you email the pic(s) to me, I'll upload them to my Panther website and send you back the URL link. [color:"red"] BUT, I'm not always at my computer (gotta work on cars occasionally <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />), so the turn around might be a few hours. This "service" is for those pics which require extra size/detail and the "normal" sources are insufficient. There's no extra cost incurred to me, so don't worry about that aspect.

I've been to this swap meet before, although some years ago, and it was pretty good as far as content was concerned. I won't be able to go this year however, so BigKev have at all the goodies!

[color:"red"] OUCH! So, was the diff making any noise? I had a noisy diff on my 55 Pat when I first bought it and it was very low on lube, but no long term damage seemed to entail.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Champion plugs at one time were a good plug, but from what I understand the company went thru a period of bad management , and was bought and sold and this resulted in a bad plug in the market place, this happened about mid 1970's. </div></div> When Packard used them, they were good enough for this: Never So Far So Fast advert Bottom half of ad From May 1955 Life magazine.

Very <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" /> juxtaposition of Packards! And there were two in attendance; more than one can say about most car shows. Particularly from the front, your Clipper looks very futuristic compared to the 1940(41?).

The compensator switch is under the car next to the compensator gear box and motor. It's #8 in this diagram from my website: Torsion-Level Ride diagram It's easy to R&R once you have the car jacked up for access. I'd agree that the switch is the first thing to change out if operation is intermittent.

Well, for those who believe that the facts that the History Channel presents are reliable, on the show "Modern Marvels: Fire & Ice" wrt to Packard first #20: "Auto manufacturers raced to see who could be the first air conditioned car. The winner could reap millions in sales. On November 14, 1939 at the Chicago Auto Show, Packard Motor Company [sic] surprised the industry by exhibiting the first air conditioned car. The A/C unit used freon as a refrigerant, which worked much the same way as home units..." [cool snip of a lovely young women in blue with a wide brim hat sensually running her hand over the grille of a 1940 Packard] <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" /> P.S. I got the quotes verbatim thanks to TiVo.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Gawd, I hate those street rods with painted bumpers. A pox on the cheap-ass stude-rodder who invented that. Chrome "grounds" a car"s appearance. </div></div> <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" /> I think a regular poster on this DF has a painted front bumper on his 1951-54 (don't remember the year). Actually, I thought it looked pretty good and was way cheaper than rechrome, which was the major consideration, as I recall. Sometimes ya do what ya gotta do. <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">Sparse showing of cars today at a Tennessee show, but the Clipper Custom wasn't afraid of the rain. </div></div> RO, I hope that by "Sparse" you don't mean "almost none"! Per the 1st pic, it looks like your Clipper and maybe two others, <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" /> With that turnout, at least you should have won "Best of Show"! <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

To add an example, this situation of outrageous shipping & handling charges also applies to computer hardware. Recently I bought 1 modem for $20.00 (weighs a few OZ), but the shipping & handling was $11.00 ($31.00 total and it was the cheapest, slowest shipping method)! <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" /> Later, I bought 5 at one time from the same outfit and the total shipping & handling was $17.00 or $3.40 per unit avg, all shipped in one box, of course. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

Rick L.: Hot rodders are already restoring junkers! A local friend of mine was looking in Hemmings and Old Car Trader for a steel bodied 1934 Ford 3 Window to rod and pointed out to worse than junkers (missing lots) are going for $10K-$15K. He's going with a glass kit car instead. Maybe one day this will apply to "junker" V-8 Packards when they all but disappear.

Hey, I just noticed that the above thread-starting post was my 1,000th! When I purchased my 1955 Packard Patrician, later started my Panther Project and eventually found my way (along with the early others) to this forum, I'd have never guessed there'd be this much to discuss and how much the audience (lurkers and posters) have expanded. Many thanks to everyone who participates for making this Forum the world's virtual meeting place for Packard hard core facts, opinion and arcana. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Also, anyone notice the email at the bottom from somebody who thinks this is a 1956 Patrician? Obviously its a 400. I agree that it would make a superior parts car, especially for that price. Too far from southern NV though.