55PackardGuy

Craig, Awhile back I ran across this on the Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forum, where they were debating "over-engineered" engines: "Midnite Cruiser,thanks for the show of support.The Lincln Y-block is indeed overengineered,and thats what I love about it.<span style="font-weight: bold">The king of overengineered engines has to be the '55-'56 Packard</span> 320-352-374 V8.The Packard V8 has a 5.125 bore spacing - the Caddy 472-500 is 5.00 , the Ford 401-477-534 Super Duty is 5.25.I figure the Packard V8 can take up to a 4.875 bore with a custom cast block,I dont know the max stroke." Notice the bore spacing is given as 5.125 which would put it ahead of the CN and Cadillac blocks listed!

I still have a couple of questions on the 455 vs the 430: 1. Was the 455 bored out or stroked to achieve the extra 25 cid? 2. What compression ratio was base in the 455/was there an optional higher compression with the "Stage" heads? I thought the 455 was a "compromise" engine to meet the epa standards, but apparently Buick did a better job of this than some manufacturers, since many have high regard the 455. The 430 seems to me to have an inherently more efficient design, with 10.25:1 compression ratio. (My source on "Carnut" for engine data only goes up to 1969, so I don't have numbers on the 455.) My experience with it in a 1969 Electra was that it delivered excellent economy--over 20 mpg highway mileage.

Found this thread searching for any info on the aluminum 215 engine, which has always been interesting to me. How rare are these? I've heard that a version with Lucas injection was used on Land Rovers! Any confirmation of that? Was it only available as a 215, or were there other displacements? I just think it would be a great engine to "build a car around." Light, powerful, and different. As far as other "best" Buick engines, I've always leaned toward the 430 rather than the 455, mainly because I had great experience with a '69 Electra that had the 430. Extremely econmomical and good power, too. Any thoughts on advantages to the 455? Was it "stroked" or bored out? If stroked, I would say that is a disadvantage because of higher piston speed and consequent sacrifice in top RPM.

Brian, I've become interested in the Exec,too, which was apparently produced just because the Packard marketing folks thought there was a niche they were missing. Personally, I think they had bigger things to worry about then. But, luckily, it produced a pretty neat car with distinctive trim and the senior front/junior back, which has some appeal. The link I posted to the "flamed" flat black car goes to the Carnut site, and it IS listed there as a '56 Executive. Who knows, it may be part Clipper, part Exec and part Houndog. But the dashboard, I think, is a senior style like the Exec, because it displays the Packard script. I'm more familiar with the '55 dashboards, and I know that the senior had the Packard name (and a "V" symbol) and the Clipper did not. That's why I'm guessing the flat black flamer is actually an Exec. I can see where someone would want to hot-rod that model, because it's lighter and shorter than a senior, a 2-door, and has the '56 Clipper tail-lights that were so popular on rods--already attached! I'd like to find out if the car in question still has Packard power or if they stuck some small-block abomination in there.<img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" /> Probably never know...

Brian, Thanks for your considered and, as always, well-written reply. Yeah, maybe we're not the "old guys" but we're gettin there... Just one note: The Carnut site lists the car as an "Executive" rather than a Clipper. I know the front fenders have a Clipper look, but they might have been replaced/altered. Also, wouldn't a Clipper have the Clipper dash emblem on the passenger side, rather than the Packard script? Just getting back to more historical, "car-spotter" stuff here y'all <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />.

Shoot, I'm older'n you (by 3 years) but I was referring to the entire tail light assembly, which was grafted whole onto customs in large quantities. I've seen up to SIX of these used on one car. I'm guessing most of them were scavenged off of junk, or not so junk, Packards. I'd keep mine in the back of a closet, too. A locked closet. There's no need to defend Craig's Panther to me... I love the idea. It was his site that led me to this forum (for better or worse) and I've been tugging his sleeve about it ever since. It sounds like Craig found out for sure that the Exec on Carnut started out as a good (worth restoring) car? Is this established fact? I agree that the body, especially the sides, looks like it needs more work. But the line of the roof, especially the back, is well done (at least in concept if not execution) and looks quite "period." I just don't think the car deserves to be dismissed out-of-hand. The dash work and interior look excellent. That's where I'd spend some money, too, because you spend so much of your time looking at the inside of your car. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> I'd like to read what the owner has to say about it. Could be very interesting. Hope he isn't scared away. But I won't mention it again, unless there is a call for more dialog. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

And you guys jumped on the poor fella that lowered and chopped that '56 Exec I posted. We have no idea, he might've started with junk. In a way, it's a nice homage to a make to make a kustom out of it. I think that car's worst point was bad paint. It might not have even been finished. But since Craig and "G" (by the way G, you mind if i use your real first name? <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />) were talking about gauges to fit the stock openings on the Packard dash, here is the interior of that car from Carnut. I think it's a nice job on the gauges, and it looks like he found some that fit the holes, too. I don't know anything about aftermarket gauges, but maybe you folks can identify these and use the info: http://autohobbypage.com/cgi-bin/03/_image.pl?/show/03/skat/kat015.jpg Notice the bezels are all there. There is a black surround to make the speedo fill the hole.<img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" /> It's nice to hear you talking about the Panther again, Craig. You have a lot of neat stuff in mind for it. By the way, I vote NO on sectioning. Not because of the work, but because I think the car will look great without it. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> Here's the back of that car, which I didn't post before. Another chance to be outraged, or impressed... http://autohobbypage.com/cgi-bin/03/_image.pl?/show/03/skat/kat016.jpg

The prototype, a 1951 Packard known as A-1, used bars made by Maremont. Whether they got the business for the subsequent production bars, I don't know.

Well, I just got done eating a bowl of burned clam chowder because I got so engrossed in reading these replies to my innocent little post... that's probably my punishment. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" /> But, now I feel cranky and want to keep it going. Here is an "in-process" sectioning from a link posted on Craig's Panther Project site. It's NOT his car, but an example from Custom Rodder. http://www.1956packardpanther.com/CustomRodder1.jpg Craig, you also confessed to thinking about this for the Panther car, and I was wondering if you still are? NOTE: you guys know, of course, that the Panther project started with two very rough cars, so don't jump on Craig, OK? The article also offers a rear view of the same car, in case you're not mad enough already: http://www.1956packardpanther.com/CustomRodder2.jpg Speaking of the odd market effects of customizing, I bet it's hard to find tail-lights for '56 Clippers and Executives, given their popularity for grafting onto custom jobs. Do you owners take extra precautions to avoid pilferage from your vehicles? By the way, I don't think it's a matter of "should" or "shouldn't" when it comes to customizing. It just seemed to be a terse way of presenting the issue... Myself, I lean toward keeping 'em stock, except for fairly easy-to-reverse mods. "G", I would encourage you to reserve judgment on the ride height of the Constellation until you get the leveling system working properly, possibly with a manual switch. You can "customize" the stance of the car with the flip of a switch, and wow them at the car shows, too. Especially when you tell them the car came with that system from the factory. I really liked Craig's idea on wheels, too. That way you can use lower profile tires and still fill up the wheel wells. As you can tell by the Packard trim and paint, there are a lot of styling tricks to make a car look lower. Think horizontal lines. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Here's a pic of a lowered and chopped '56. Can be done. Should it be done? <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" /> http://autohobbypage.com/cgi-bin/03/_image.pl?/show/03/skat/kat014.jpg

I'm going to have the shop take the cover off my Dakota limited slip and check for damage. I HOPE it's just "too slippery." I'm going to change back to conventional in any case. Will post developments. By the way, what does it sound like when the bonding material in the clutch pack and seals disolves? When one wheel spins, I hear a grinding noise like gears that are not quite engaged, but it seems to come from the FRONT, even though I'm in two-wheel-drive. Could the noise be traveling along the driveline from the diff?

Randall, This is the first look I've had at the completed model. The picture on the box looks a lot better. At least it looks interesting, and has many more details. Not quite as plug-ugly. Also, I think the guy that started a "new" Packard company and has been showing around a prototype car (with V-12) did a pretty nice styling job. Once again, this is posted elsewhere. I'll look for some links. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3163176929&category=2581 http://www.packardmotorcar.com/

Yes, painters can have a remarkable "emotional investment" in their work! Especially good ones! I checked your photo pages, but found no exterior shots of this car. Please post, if you have them! <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Well, anyone send a letter to one of the presidents of the Big 3 about this proposal yet? What's that guy's name at G.M? Lutz? Oh, he'd probably just want to stick the name on an SUV. Anybody see the latest BUICK SUV? I still think they're putting all the weight and horsepower into truck-type vehicles because they aren't technically "automobiles" and don't count the same under CAFE regulations. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" /> Seriously, if anyone has news on the rumored sale of the latest incarnation of the Packard Motor Car Company and its name, please let us know.

How come? That area was painted on some models, wasn't it? Or was that just in 1956? The interior colors are striking. What's the headliner going to be? Black? Were the footrests in the back available as options? I've never seen them before. The dash looks beautiful. I think this is one of the nicest layouts ever in any car. So clean and symmetrical. P.S. I think charcoal gray is OK in a black car, but it's better with some red! <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

Thanks. I should've looked that up. <img src="http://www.aaca.org/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />

This is a magazine article on achieving a land speed record (over 570 mph) "The Hard Way." Note the cash outlay for the car: $10,000. (Firestone donated the tires, though). http://www.americanjetcars.com/arfons/art/art20.htm

BqUICK, Thanks for the link. Remember Art Arfons' car, the Green Monster?? I saw a T.V. show on it when I was a kid. What a monster it was. I still remember the photo of his back yard where he ran the jet engine tied to two trees, with the exhaust pointing into a swamp. Dried up the swamp. What a wild man! As I recall, he broke 600 MPH with the thing, running nothing but military surplus gear, except for the tires. I do have one thing against the jet cars though. They are not "wheel driven" but basically a rolling platform holding an engine. That means, in essence, they are more like taxiing airplanes than true automobiles. Airplanes that never get off the ground, so to speak. Impressive, but not as impressive to me as cars that go really fast by putting power to the wheels. That's why I like the idea of a turbine or piston powered drivetrain--like Faithful Pursuit! You could call Art Arfons a childhood hero of mine, though. The Green Monster was just so mean. I remember the Bluebird, too, but Sir Malcom Campbell is a new name for me. Thanks!

The switch for manual overrride was added to our '55 Clipper. It was a metal toggle and had a center return, so it could not be left "on" in either up or down mode. As I recall, pulling the switch toward you raised the back and lowered the front, pushing away was, of course, opposite. It was put in because the automatic switch in the leveling unit would get stuck, usually raising the back all the way up and leaving it there. I'm not sure if the switch was part of a kit, or a home design, but it worked very well. Highly recommended, as you are not dependent on the proper operation of the automatic switch... "G" take note! This is the high-percentage solution to your body "stance" situation.

This agrees with the Kimes quote that "the system was later made available on Clipper Supers." (in 1955). I'm still interested in how the Constellation fit in here.

Just a heads-up which may not apply to Jolly John, but a driveline shop once told me that synthetic raises havoc with limited-slip differential. That was after I put it in my Dakota's rear, and I have noticed that it does not seem to work as well as it used to.

BqUICK, I've been "pursuing" the Faithful Pursuit story for some weeks now, and got your posting over on my "430 Gas Mileage" thread. Just wanted to let you know what a kick I get out of your using Allison transmission modifications and a WWII theme. I have long had daydreams (fantasies?) of mating a vintage Packard aircraft V12 (such as used in the P-51 Mustang!) to an Allison truck transmission (Allison also made WWII aircraft engines, including those for the P-38, so the theme is consistent) and putting them all in a torsion-level '55 or '56 Packard suspension/frame--of course, with massive modifications. It would also have to have a classy Packard-themed body. This would definitely be a straight-line car for the salt flats... I can dream, can't I?

Yeah, Reatta 1, I used to refer to that '69 Electra as the world's biggest economy car! A good 500-mile cruising range on trips, too. BqUICK noted the terrific power-to-weight ratio of these engines, which some people still insist on calling "boat anchors." You want a "boat anchor" look at the power-to-weight ratio of a 350 sbc! My dad got so sick of the periodic breakage of the 454 big-block on our '74 3/4-ton pickup that he swapped in a 430. The front end road so high we had to hang the spare tire up there to level out the truck... better economy and no sacrifice in power! I wonder why GM doesn't take these engine-building techniques into the 21st century where they belong? They were truly designs ahead of their time. BqUICK, thanks for the pictures of the '69... it's still my favorite body style. Ours did not have dual exhaust. I thought it was one of the pretties paint schemes of all--light yellow with a WHITE vinyl top. I have yet to see one exactly like it. All seem to have the black top with the yellow body. Tan leather-like vinyl inside that never showed the least bit of wear. Good luck on Faithful Pursuit, it's a great idea. The Electra is probably the only big car that handled well enough to pull this off. By the way, at first I thought "screw the back seat," but then I reconsidered. Basically, you can give three people amusement-park quality thrill rides for the cost of the gas! Probably as safe as most of those rides, too.

Thanks for the figures! Here's the rather anecdotal breakdown that the Kimes book gives for the 1955 introduction: "Torsion-Level was offered in different ways because Packard was not convinced the market would swallow it whole. It was standard on the Caribbean, a required option on the Patrician and Four Hundred, optional at $150 on Clipper Customs... [William D. Allison, the inventor, said]: 'It was brand-new, a big gamble and they decided to hedge their bets. First they weren't going to put it on the Clipper at all, then they decided to offer it on the Custom at additional cost. The decision was made to build 25 percent of the Clippers with torsion bars [but] three months later the dealers were ording Torsion-Level on 75 percent of their cars.' Thus the system was later made available on Clipper Supers." Then, in 1956: "Initially [in 1956] Torsion-Level suspension was available on the [Clipper] Deluxe and a mandatory option on the Custom, but on May 1st it was made standard on all Packards and Clippers." Quotes from: "Packard, a History of the Motor Car and the Company" Edited by Berverly Rae Kimes, published 1978 by Automobile Quarterly. We all know that there are 1955 Constellations out there with TL too, so I don't know how they fit in the mix. Were they considered 2-door bretheren of the Custom or the Super, and thus qualified for the option in '55?