55PackardGuy

I hate to mention a link and then leave ya hangin. The web site I referred to earlier on 1960 Buicks was posted by 70 Electra. This link should take you right to the page on the B-52 styling cue, and also includes a really interesting history and pics on the "original French Connection car" which was a 1960 BUICK! I've always had a high opinion of that movie, but I wish they would have used the correct car... even though it would have been "dated" in relation to other vehicles in the movie. The Continental they used looked mean, but the black Buick looks even meaner. GREAT HISTORY! http://hometown.aol.com/equipoise60/60buickhomepage7.html

None of the newer Buicks excite me much. They are great high-quality American transportation alternatives, but where's the old passion? What would get me back to considering a Buick is something like a 2-door RWD "personal luxury" car like Riviera was in '63-'65. Simple, but elegant with lots of the traditional V8 Buick torque, like you could get from a 3800 stretched by two cylinders, Possibly a Wildcat? It could be based on the new GTO platform... Speaking of the Riviera milestone cars, here's a bit of trivia (maybe it's well-known and I'll look stupid, but I look pretty stupid anyway): Those distinctive front lamps with the horizontal ribs were a styling artifact from the time when they thought they were designing a revived LaSalle! It was a styling cue from the old LaSalle grille. At least that's what an issue of Cars and Parts said years back. Also, the '65 Electra's long ribbed strip along the lower edge... a retrospect to the running board. The problem with just about all of today's styles is, they aren't based on anything tangible or interesting, just aerodynamics and "what everybody else is doing." The "retro" VW Bugs and Thunderbirds are a little better, but instead of making replicas, stylists really need to look at less obvious, more creative cues. Take the '60 Buick site that a member posted on this forum: a headlight treatment inspired by B-52 bomber engine nacelles. Now that's interesting!

So, it was probably those "tall" gears, in addition to the efficiency of the 430. It was a great car for trips: 500 mile cruising distance on a tank (25 gal). I drove it from Minnesota to California and back in 1978--a very nice road trip. My father repeated this trip a couple of years later. Of course, trouble-free both trips, including deserts (I went in July), snow and mountains. BTW, there were still a lot of drive-in movies those days, and this was THE car... the power reclining front bench... oh well, that doesn't have much to do with gas mileage.

Brian, Thanks for posting the link to the Forbes article. Very interesting. It's nice to hear about a possibly serious attempt to put out a Packard worthy of the name. I wonder who the former Packard stylist might be that they claim is involved in the project? Anyone in the Arizona area know where this effort might be happening? Craig? Also, a picture would be nice--and worth the proverbial thousand words.

I received such a nice response on the Packard site from Centurion that I thought I'd make a post here. This regards something that is often looked at with skeptical eyes, because it is the source of lots of hokum and hearsay, but it is a personal experience with a Buick that was in my family for years. It was a 1969 Electra 225 4door hardtop. (Incidentally, a beautiful car to start with and nicely appointed with light yellow exterior, WHITE vinyl top--as opposed to the more common black--tan vinyl seats that were extremely soft and comfortable, even in cold weather and never seemed to wear, power seat, AC, power windows/locks, FM radio, etc. Besides being a heavy, comfortable, stable and surprisingly agile car, it was also unbelievably economical. It had the 430 4bbl setup and consistently got WELL over 20 mpg on the highway, with up to 24 mpg that I measured on straight freeway driving. There were no modifications to this car. It even had bias ply tires. And NO cruise control. Considering the weight and aerodynamic drag of this car, the engine must have run extremely efficiently at road speeds to achieve this kind of gas mileage. (The speedometer was accurate, too.) I remember looking through a Chilton shop manual years ago that covered several late sixties Buick models, and finding that the '69 carb was set to run leaner than previous years or later years. It said that this was an emmissions rather than an economy measure. Is anyone familiar with this difference? I may be recalling incorrectly or have misread it at the time, but I DO know the car got phenomenal mileage. It was a very high compression engine (10.5 or 11 to 1, I believe) and it did "ping" under load as though it was running quite lean. This was on leaded "high octane" gas of the late 70s. The engine never seemed to suffer any ill effects from this lean running condition, giving over 200,000 miles of reliable service. It was still running well and had never been torn down when the car was "retired." (By comparison, I had a '65 Electra with the 401 "445 Wildcat" "nailhead" engine, and it never got over 13 mpg on the road.) Was this '69 a "fluke" or have others had this same experience with that model or other years with the 430? I don't want anyone to think this is one of those speculations about a "super secret carb" or anything, but was there a difference in the '69 model's carb?

PackardV8, Wanted to get one of your favorite threads back at the top. Regarding your shortage of blessings, remember: no good deed goes unpunished. Thanks for your support of my post regarding the Buick lifter response. You're right that no slam was intended, I was TRYING to be FUNNY (and maybe do a good deed?) But, as you suggest, peacemaking can be its own reward. I'm glad it turned out on a positive note.

Well, at least it will be clean... I hope it turns out well. I suppose you can drive it year-round down there, which must be a good motivator. We have about six feet (just kidding) of snow here in MN, so my IROC sleeps in the garage. I haven't seen it mentioned on this forum, but when my dad rebuilt the 352 in our 400, he milled the heads for more compression. It worked. I'm not sure how much was planed off, but I seem to recall 1/8"! I suppose with all that metal in these engines, it was possible. Keep us posted on developments.

This oil pressure/oil pump experience might be worth noting: I had a '73 Opel Manta with the stout little 1900 cc engine. It was a "cam in head" design that compromised between an overhead cam and pushrods, basically eliminating the pushrods by having the cam actuate the lifters directly, and the lifters in turn acuate rocker arms. Neat design, but they had a rep for top end oiling problems that caused lifter clatter. My dad rebuilt the engine, including a new cam. Oil pressure was improved and lifters were quiet--for a few thousand miles. Then, lifter noise again! So one day I'm driving down the freeway and start laying down an oil slick. On inspection, oil was leaking from a tiny hole in the oil pump face plate, which was externally mounted on the front of the engine. I replaced the worn aluminum face plate on the pump--guess what? INSTANT OIL PRESSURE like never before! Was I mad I didn't know this during the re-build. There was obviously some damage done in the top end, and probably premature cam wear, but, like I said, it was a stout little mill and managed to survive without another overhaul. If the face plate hadn't developed the leak, I'd probably still be wondering why I never got enough oil pressure out of it. A ten minute job and a cheap replacement part were all it needed. I think you call this live and learn?

Centurion, Sorry that my posts did not sit well with you, and thanks for replying. My goal was to point out that maybe we could gain something by looking at the matter-of-fact way that the Buick forum answered PacakrdV8's query on lifter noise, and note that the Buick guys weren't too steamed up about looking for problems. I kind of DO expect hobbyists to give their beloved cars the benefit of the doubt and consider it admirable to stick up for your favorites. That's one of the things that keeps us interested in cars! The reason I copied the quotes was that I couldn't figure out how to "carry" them over to this forum with the "Quote" tool. I don't think it works between forums. I thought it would be fun to present them to others who might not take the time to go look at them... and I gave in to the temptation to make some glib comments, but they were not meant to be serious criticisms or call anyone's honesty into question. I also thought it was valuable to emphasize that Marvel Mystery Oil has a good reputation, even with dealerships, and might be worth a try. Your forum gave me an outside source of recommendation. This also gives me an opportunity to spout off about how much I like Buicks. My first car was a '65 Electra 4-door hardtop "with a post" and the 401 "nailhead" and I loved that car--and defended it against any naysayers. My father bought a '69 Electra 4-door hardtop used with 115,000 miles. It was yellow with a white vinyl top and tan interior. It was soooo beautiful and still looked new at 200,000 miles when we (sadly) sold it. The 430 was never torn down, and delivered WELL over 20 mpg on the highway. The car only went out of service because a hailstorm (supposedly) knocked out all the glass. The local man who bought it had run it up to 250,0000 miles with no major overhaul. I look at the Buick discussion forum regularly and, frankly, I haven't joined in because I feel I lack the technical expertise, and don't have the historical knowledge of Buick that I feel helps me contribute to this Packard forum--at least on the '55 and '56 models. Best wishes from a '65BuickGuy...

Tom, I don't have one. But the Carnut.com site lists 35 psi as "normal" pressure for the 320, and actually for all '55s. Starting in '56, it lists 45 psi for all engines. Just another plug for Carnut.

Brian, PackardV8's question on the Buick forum: "what year 50's Buick V8's had lifter noise problems????? Can someone enlighten me (and the rest of the Packard community) on this issue???? What was the fix for the problem??? Thanks, -Keith" received these two answers that I thought were striking: "Working in a Buick dealership in 57 and 58, there was no real problem with lifers AS LONG AS DETERGENT OIL WAS USED, AND AN OCCASIONAL CAN OF CD-2 PUT IN WITH THE FRESH OIL. Marvel Mystery oil was used to clear up sticky lifters, and valves. A pint in a fresh oil change, and 1/2 quart to a full tank of gas." and... "NO problem unless you used poor oil or filter" Two reasons they are interesting to me: 1. Some practical tips. 2. This kind of brand loyalty is inspiring. It's all YOUR fault. The cars are great! Note: Can we lift quotes from other forums, or is that a no-no? Cut and Paste are my middle names.

John, Thanks for the direct quote... I like direct quotes! (See above those from the Kimes book on the '55s.) Also, thanks for the reminder that engineering "advances" usually come with costs. The simplicity and smoothness of the L-Head straight eight is a wonder to behold. I think Packard realized that the marketplace had changed, and that people would regard the straight eight as an "old fashioned" design. However, it powered the record-setting Panther Daytona, proving that it could still run with the best of the day.

Brian, Thanks for your thoughtful reply. I do believe you folks are doing commendable things and I understand the drive to tenaciously track down and treat any imperfection. NOTE: the '55 400 I spoke of had a mechanical oil pressure gauge mounted inside, and we kept an eye on it to avoid such "catastrophic failure" as you mentioned. Although lifter noise can be an indicator of insufficient oil pressure, as many of you know, it isn't always. By the way, like your dad's Exec, we had two '55 Clippers with the 352 and over 70,000 miles, neither of which had lifter noise problems. Two out of three ain't bad! Take a look at the Buick site and note their careful replies to PackardV8 regarding his post about Buick lifter noise. They tend to minimize any problem, thus protecting their brand's reputation. One thing they mention as a fix is Marvel Mystery oil. Although this is often prescribed for "sticky" lifters, as it removes varnish, I wonder if it also helps defeat air or foam in the oil, as it claims to improve oil viscosity. On this same note, some newer engines, (Mercedes is one) have a problem with oil foaming. It might be worth looking into their service bulletins for recommended additives.

PackardV8 Regarding the Buick lifter noise, as I mentioned earier in this forum (not this thread) MANY of the early V8 hydraulic valve trains were noisy--they didn't call it the Oldsmobile RACKET V8 for nothing. That's why I think some of the fretting over oil pumps, pressure relief valves, air bubbles, notches in the lifters etc. is a little bit of overkill. In fact, it might perpetuate the perception that this is THE GREAT BIG PROBLEM with these engines, when, in reality, it is often more of a cosmetic thing. The engines are still torque-monsters, they are almost unbreakable, and they are over-built like crazy! Hence, they are cool, whether they make some extraneous noises or not. In fact, I kind of liked the way our 400 ticked--it sounded meaner that way.

?V8? Folks, In case you need some ready ammunition next time the debate comes up about the importance of the last generation of Packards, here are a few quotes on the new '55s to keep in your wallet: Auto Age: ?the best car of the year?its combination of brakes, steering and far superior suspension not only give it the edge in handling but mark it as THE car for ?55. [Auto experts have] been complaining for years that we didn?t have one really stable American car. Now at last Packard has broken the ice and come up with a new feature that is more than just another sales gimmick.? Floyd Clymer: ??different from any other car?for stability, both front and rear ends have independent stabilizers?You can drive into a corner at high speed with this car and the body remains almost level?It is the most comfortable ride I?ve ever had with a feeling of security at all times.? Car Life: [the suspension is] ?a great contribution to the world?s motor industry?at least one manufacturer realizes that the conventional coil and leaf springs leave much to be desired?Not only is the 1955 Packard safer than many of its contemporaries, but it is much more comfortable.? Motor Trend: Everything else dims by comparison with ride?The test crew couldn?t tell when driver deliberately steered car over projecting manhole covers on road under repair. What a fantastic ride!? (Thanks again to: Packard, a History of the Motor Car and the Company, edited by Beverly Rae Kimes, 1978, Automobile Quarterly.) Press like this leads one to believe that these last Packards are more than worthy to stand alongside earlier models and lay claim to the Packard heritage. Add to the suspension raves an impressively powerful and nearly indestructible new V8 engine, limited slip differential in '56, luxury and style...and some lifter noise under certain conditions seems like a petty gripe. Kudos to those who strive to fix even this, and make great cars that much better.

Brian, The search you suggested turned up another page from the Packard History, "Packard People A-L," but when I clicked on the url for the Packard History Index, it went nowhere. These fragments are enticing, so I did a little more looking... The person who apparently put together this Packard History information has a web page, and I am awaiting his reply to a query I posted there about what his sources are. I think this bone warrants a little more worrying before we give it up as a lost cause. The Internet helps those who help themselves...

Brian, I agree that a free registry that protects confidentiality is the way to go. It's too bad that clubs tend to look at this as a money-making tool. Sometimes you just can't get enough useful information in circulation if you charge people to list it or look at it. I thought the Packard History site at least made a good effort. It's also an interesting read, although some of the author's historical and technical points are arguable. <span style="font-weight: bold">NOTE:</span> Since this thread started with the so-called Starkweather Packard, (I think it should be called the Ainslie/Heflin Packard after the duo who stopped it--but more on that later), I'll try to go back to that topic. I have a few more phone calls to make yet, but there has been SIGNIFICANT PROGRESS in the search for details on the car chase, and, I hope, more info on the '56 Patrician itself. Stay tuned...

PackardV8, Glad you liked it... no magic. It was the same way I found you guys, typed in Packard V8 and cruised through the connections on Google and Yahoo. Here's one with a quick check for engine specifications for Packards from the '30s, '40s and '50s: Carnut Just click on Car Specs and go to Packard. It's free. Also a great site to look at some customized Packards and other interesting stuff. Note: I found one mistake on their Packard specs, listing 1955 cars as negative ground.

Craig, Thanks for the heads-up, but I missed your post by a few hours. Darn! The History Channel site did not post any future showings. I am doing some amateur sleuthing about the Packard and it's whereabouts, if it exists. Speaking of existing Packards, there is a web site called Packard History - 1945 that lists serial numbers of Packards from '45 on that are known to exist. I bet it isn't complete, and it would be worthwhile for owners to check if theirs is listed. The site is at: http://www.gsdi.org:8088/Text/pack-hist-1945.html

G, PackardV8 seems to be referring to the oil and air being mixed together under pressure, thus you might have a good pressure reading but still be getting some air in the lifters. Hmm, an emulsification of oil and air... might one call that foam?

John, It would be interesting to find out exactly when the National Highway Twelve was put on the road, and what kind of numbers were produced. The Twin Six certainly had a lot of promotional boost and was available in big quantities, but that doesn't necessarily make it the first v-12 passenger car on the road. If we take Packard at its word on an introduction date of May 1, 1915, and National claims an introduction in May 1915 (not specifying a date)it sounds like a possible draw, with the benefit of the doubt going to Packard, since National's claim to a May introduction can't be any earlier than the first of the month.

John, According to the Kimes book, the Packard Twin Six was introduced on May 1st, 1915. It created a huge splash, as the car not only had twice the cylinders, it was actually lower priced than the six. The book goes on to say that the press announcement probably preceded actual deliveries to dealers, and that next-year models were introduced up to 9 months early, so the new cars were actually 1916 models. It says that sometimes First Series Twin Sixes have been referred to as 1915 models, but that this is an error. I found nothing in the book that states unequivocally that these 1916 Packard Twin Sixes were the first regular production automobiles to have a v-12 engine configuration, but it is certainly inferred by the amount of public curiosity they evoked. In short, if you can find a production automobile with a standard v-12 engine that was on the road before May 1, 1915, you might have a case for Packard not being the first. I've read suggestions in this forum that v-12 engines have questionable practical application because of excessive weight and size. It's interesting to note that the Packard Twin Six was 400 pounds lighter than the six, and much shorter in length! Jesse Vincent wrote that the reason he supported going from six to twelve cylinders instead of increasing by increments of two was that the six cylinder configuration is "theoretically in absolutely perfect balance... because the vibratory forces due to the rise and fall of one piston are neutralized by equal and opposite forces due to another. The pistons form what mathematicians call a 'system of bodies'..." He felt that increasing size in multiples of six would "...obtain the advantages of the small bore, high efficiency multi-cylinder motor without inheriting any disadvantages." [such as high-speed vibration in an eight-cylinder configuration.] Of course, modern engine designs incorporate balancing systems that make various configurations more viable, but it is interesting that, early on, engines with multiples of six cylinders were found to have some inherent advantages.

Craig, Thanks for keeping us updated on the unusual and the customized in Packards. BTW, if I pester you too much for info on the Panther, just let me know.

JT, Brian, et al, I realize there are lots of good sources out there, but I paid like $75 for the Kimes book (it was a present for my father, who probably read the whole thing) and I just have to be loyal to my investment! Seriously, I've studied the sections on 1955 and 1956 closely, and I'm impressed with their thoroughness. But I'm definitely open to other sources. I'll look for the Ward book, which sounds great. Also, if youse guys want to send me some copies of articles or a list of the issues that the best ones appear in, that would be helpful. (Just send me a private e-mail and I'll send you my address. Or maybe post a list of magazines and issues? Whatever is easiest.) I'm really happy to see that others are as interested in car history, particularly Packard, as I am. And heck, if it comes to some passionate exchanges once in a while, that's okay with me (just nothing personal). I don't even know the name of this fellow who apparently sold off some pipe dreams as fact. I wonder how I could find a way to get paid for the Packard fantasies I've dreamt about over the years?? If you've read some of my other posts, you know I like to think out loud. Feel free to rein me in whenever you deem necessary. Now, how about a Packard v-12 Marine or Merlin engine in a beefed up TL chassis with custom body and a top end around 300 MPH? NOTE: THIS IS JUST A WHAT-IF SPECULATION!!! Besides Craig's Panther Project, is anything going on out there in customizing land that we should know about? I'd love to read about any efforts.

Brian, Your recent post brought this thread to my attention so I read the whole darn thing, as a complement to the "1965 Packard V-12 Prototypes" thread. This stuff is fascinating! Thanks for bringing it back to the top of the list. I can't really comment much on the controversy, except to affirm that one of the key questions in later years at Packard was whether the company would continue in the car business at all. This is mentioned in the Kimes book, and I will continue to stick with my story that there isn't much "history" worth knowing that isn't in there. And possibly the Ward book, which has also been recommended here (but I have yet to get a copy). Let's just make sure that killing bogus rumors is the focus, rather than perpetuating them, as in broader distribution or electronic reproducions of the articles in question.