SafeTFlex

Albert is correct...do NOT "chase" the threads in the engine block - they were "cut" to an "interference" fit so that they would seal. If some have un-screwed, then and only then monkey with them. My suggestion is that you use a teflon sealing tape, which will provide some "interference" as you tighten them in. Packard head studs from that era are NOT under significant tension to the point where you need worry about "stretch". You can use them over and over again. Just remember to "torque" the cyl head. down about 20 ft lbs at a time, following the torque sequence in your engine manual - do not exceed 65 ft lbs. Be sure you check both the head....AND the engine block to make sure it is reasonably flat. The PROPER head - gasket is a "sandwich" which will conform to some irregularities; you are wise to start out with a freshly level or "milled" head. I recommend you coat each stud with grease, so you can get it off next time...if there is a "next time" ( with old cars...there may well be ! ) I do not recommend gasket sealer. It will either seal properly..or it wont...compression from even a relatively low compression engine will "blow out" sealer after a while...better find out right away if there are leakage issues. Just coat each side of the head gasket with a heavy oil, such as rear axle gear oil..and it will help the gasket slip and conform as you tighten it..

For SPEEDSTER - At the moment I can't recall when the generators on the "Senior" eights STOPPED being "chain driven" (the Twelves were all BELT driven thru out 1932-1939 production). I know for certain the '34 Eights were CHAIN driven, but cant at the moment recall when or if the so called "Senior" eights later ever had belts.

for 55Pack guy The power assist for the big Packards (both clutch and brake on the 12's, brake on the big eights was, if I recall correctly, identical from 1932 to 1939 when the "Senior Division" factory was gutted so that Packard could concentrate on lighter cars. I am unclear where Kimes got the idea the power brake system was "re-designed" and became "modern" with the introduction of "juice" brakes on the "Senior Divison" cars for 1937. I dont have her book handy - is it possible that when she said "re-designed" she was referring not to the power assist system ( which was unchanged) , but to the introduction of hydraulics to operate the brake shoes, instead of levers (the brakes themselves, except for the changes to the backing plates to accomodate hydraulic operating cylinders, remained pretty much the same). Nothing in the "power brake" or "power assist" was changed - the only parts that I am aware of, that were changed with the introduction of hydraulic brakes, were the operating rods that connect the vacuum assist cylinders to the brake mechanism. Obviously, the levers that connect the vacuum cylinder to the mechanical brakes are different than the ones that connect to the hydraulic brakes. But they are very definitely "power" brakes, and worked superbly. Ms Kimes, as I have noted before, is a lovely individual, whose splendid talents as an Editor have given us some excellent publications. However, she does NOT represent herself as a "hands on" Packard mechanic, and thus, on occasion, comes up with some "whoppers" thru no fault of her own. One of my "favorites" in her Packard book is that nonsence that in 1938-39, the Packard Twelves had the same chassis as the "Super Eights"....! ( obviously, the much faster, heavier, and more powerful car would have to have MUCH more competent EVERYTHING in the way of running gear and chassis, including, but not limited to thicker frame, bigger brakes, heavier chassis components, etc. When properly adjusted, there is no difference that I can feel in braking action between the pre-1937 "mechanical" brake and 1937-39 hydraulic brake Senior Packards. (this does NOT apply - remember, to the 1939 Super Eight - that was simply a "Standard Eight" motor mounted in a "120" chassis, so this MUCH lighter car didn't really need and thus did not have the power assist ). Frankly, I wish my '38 Twelve had the earlier mechanical brakes - MUCH safer - there is only ONE hydraulic circuit on American cars up thru (someone help me out here..when did DUAL master cylinders come in ). In American cars with hydraulic brakes up thru (what - the 1960's)...you lose hydraulics, and you HAVE no brakes other than the hand brake ! I wish there was a way to adopt a "two cylinder" master cylinder to mine. In any event, I do not think power brakes were something unique to or a "first" by Packard. I see similar systems on other cars and trucks of that era - my '36 American La France fire engine (weighs 16,000 lbs - 800 cu. in. overhead CAM motor - probably by far the fastest pre-war heavy truck in the world) stops with feather touch on the brakes, UNLESS the engine stalls AND you have pumped the brakes enough to run the emergency vacuum tank out of vacuum. Then, it takes BOTH feet AND yanking on the hand brake to stop the damn thing..!

For SPEEDSTER - Horse feathers ! I dont understand where you are coming from - what in my "post" would bother a lEGIT Packard buff ? B.H. and his buddies have the right idea - they SHOULD put people on IGNORE who disagree with them. They have made it quite clear they know what they do want to hear, and what they dont. That is their right. Let me explain why I am not overly concerned about those guys getting, as you say "pissed off". As I noted above, for reasons that are beyond my understanding, some of these "post-war" types go absolutely bananas at references to factual data either from technical sources and/or regarding what Packard was before the war. One guy gets incensed if I mention technical articles from the SAE Journal ! Others get quite offended if I compare actual Packard factory literature/tech. info., with what they want to believe. Again, that is their privilege, and we have to respect their right to be left alone with what they think are beliefs that are right for them. Let me give you typical example of why we should be more concerned with the legit car buffs, and less concerned with those who just want to make trouble and/or grouse about info. that clashes with what they want to believe. There are a couple of "posters" who have some kind of a "thing" against discussions of the technical superiority (and the grief that can be saved by using them) of the modern "insert" type connecting rod bearing that Packard introduced thru-out its product line for 1935. I and RESPONSIBLE engine rebuilders advocate that as a standard shop procedure on ANY old engine. But these guys go bananas over that - insisting that poured babbit, as used by so called "restorers" today, is an acceptable shop practice! It isnt. One guy even "forbid" me to respond to his "post" saying he was right and I was wrong (as if I was personally responsible for inventing the damn things! And, more important, that only HIS opinion should be heard - disagreement should be silenced ! As between helping out legit Packard buffs, so as to keep them from incurring discouraging problems, and irritating the "hard cases" who just like to gripe, I think we have a responsibility to try and help the legit. car buffs. Let me do a little bragging. Thru just plain random chance and luck, I happened to have come of age at a time when Packard was still doing business, Packard were still on the road as new and used cars, and worked in garages specializing in Packards, where Packard customers took their cars for service (ever heard of E.C. Last ?). Is that an UNfair advantage over these younger people they should resent me for ? If so, well.......! Hopefully, my "hands on" knowlededge can benefit the legit Packard owner-operator. Why a guy who CLAIMS to like Packards would want to stop others from helping out with info. beats me. I am not going to lose any sleep if, as you say, my contributions "[censored] them off". If they are telling the truth that they have me on "IGNORE", then there is no problem anyway ! May I respectfully suggest that when you decide you want to disagree with me, go ahead and do so, but PLEASE DO NOT, IN YOUR POST, QUOTE ME ! If you QOUTE me, these poor souls will then be forced to see what I typed, that you are responding to. Let em live in peace !

I am concerned about your earlier comment that even before you put the car away, it was a hard starter and a slow turner. Please be assured, Packards cranked fast and started fast IF properly set up. Be ASSURED that when they were in service, they gave good service ! I strongly recommend you read over the "posts" in this thread - many good ideas to get you on the right track. Your car was once and can be again ABSOLUTELY RELIABLE - will spin fast and "light off" IMMEDIATELY hot or cold - again, IF properly "set up" the way it was when in service. Going to 12 volts is a "band-aid" for problems you have not yet solved. One of my sadistic "stunts" I like to pull, when people see how fast my Packard cranks over, is to tell them I have a FOUR volt battery - I explain to them that modern 6 volts is too "hot" for these old cars, and a FOUR volt conversion is the way to get em to start fast....! Seriously, amongst the things that I did, was make sure I had a GOOD battery (lots of cheap junk 6 volt batteries on the market ) piston clearances are correct, so you dont get excess "piston drag", timing is correct, coil and condensors are NEW (old stuff breaks down electrically) and ALL BATTERY AND WIRING CONNECTIONS ARE FRESH, CLEANED, AND OILED ( oil on the bolts and wires prevents oxidation from coming back). Again, read your fellow "chatters" posts - the answers are here. Go for it - guaranteed WHEN you get it right, that thing will start RIGHT NOW hot or cold. Take it from one who has owned and/or worked on more Packards than the rest of these guys combined, in their wildest fantasies...!

RE "POWER" brakes - Rolls in both the English and American versions, went a different route than most American manufacturers. In this country, our manufacturers used engine vacuum to provide assist for the brakes - cant say for sure when this went into mass production, but I know it was already standard in Packards in the early thirties, and stayed until the end of "Senior" production with the destruction of the so called "Senior" plant in June 1939. Packard didn't go back to vacuum assist power brakes until late '52. With either the mechanical brakes of the early - mid thirties, or the hydraulic brakes on the later Twelves, this system is superb, providing precise excellent "feel", and reduced driver input effort. Interestingly, while my '38 Packard Twelve had this feature, my Cadillac V-16 did not, so that some increase in pedal pressure (not that much, but some) was required to produce the same stopping power. As for the Rolls, they used engine mechanical effort to assist the brakes - a quite complex mechanism at the back of the transmission, using out-put shaft energy to assist. The Rolls system provides absolutely incredible braking - not sure when Rolls went to four wheel brakes, but i can tell you that our Springfield, which was delivered in 1928, has stopping power with practically no effort at all, that I would match against just about any modern car. Two entirely different concepts - with the same result - a "feel" and safe braking unknown to the ordinary cars of that era.

I am confused about the representation that "Packard had a "first" with power brakes in 1936 and radiator shutters in '33". What am I missing here? Who would make a representations that daffy ? One of the Packard Clubs ? Or one of our "posters" ? Or the old guy in one of the recent Packard publicatons who claimed Packard had no factory options - they were all installed by this guy at a dealership, or that a "Packard Twelve wheel wighed 150 lbs..." ? Obviously, anyone who has actual experience with such matters knows Packard and many other luxury car manufacturers had these features LONG before the above silliness. I just balanced the wheels on my own Packard Twelve, and I assure you the damn things FEEL like they are getting heavier every year - probably way over 50,000 lbs each now........! (about 75 lbs, actually,..!) Where DOES all this funny stuff get started ? Say, Brad - did the American Ghosts have a lever to control the Winterfronts on the dash, like our American Phantoms do ?

For Peter - regarding possible new law requiring "front" license plates in Arizona Funny coincidence ! Did you see the ARiZONA REPUBLIC yesterday ? Our suspicions are CORRECT. That is EXACTLY what is behind the new proposal !

For Packard8 The problem with "period correct mechanicals" is that we dont have "period correct" driving conditions. Some of us actually LIKE our hobby cars, and want to get them out on the road. Problem with that - poking along at 40 45 mph is a safety hazzard - I dont want to be rear ended by a city bus or garbage truck ! I dont see how you can take the position that a over-drive installed between an authentic engine and rear end is in any way hurting our enjoyment of the hobby.

You are 110% correct ! Even the optional 4.06 gear set available then as an option, is still WAY too "low" for even CITY driving these days! As you may know, you can buy a 3.54 gear set today thru one of the fellows who advertises in Hemmings. My understanding is that it is a MAJOR machining problem. Given the difficulty of correctly setting up a new hypoid gear set, I think your idea to use one of the many over-drives, is the better way to go. The "trick" is, build yourself a full rubber-mounted carrier for the over-drive unit - that will isolate the "gear rumble" so many people who have bought these "add on" overdrives complain about. I am jealous - wish they had those over-drives when I re-geared my Packard Twelve. I had the advantage of a later model Packard than yours ("modern" style insert rod bearings, but even with the driving conditions of the late 1950's when I did that, I couldnt stand the screaming rpms at normal road speeds that keep getting faster every day. The obvious advantage of going to an overdrive, is that you still have that absurdly low gear ratio for crawling around car shows and parades, great high hear response at low speeds, but then, on the open road, you will be able to enjoy the car without being a hazzard from going too slow. LET'S SEE THE PICTURES. I loved my '34 Super Eight !

I dont know what a "re-build" is, when that term is represented by a sellor... Sadly, there is a lot of incompetence amongst so called "classic rebuilders". In many cases, it is just "good business" NOT to waste money making a collector car road-worthy, because the shop knows the owner only wants it to show off at car shows, and the most severe driving the car will see is across the grass up into the trailer. Add to this the fact that younger people today have no conception, no reference points, for imagining how different the design requirements, engineering, and thus limitations of cars of that era are. End result: the buyer, after paying a LOT of money for a pretty-LOOKING car, often winding up at the side of the road waiting for the flat-bed. First and foremost - the "rear end" gearing of your car when new (and if still "bone stock") was so "low", that at 50 mph you are spinning that motor faster than may modern cars would be 90 mph or more. Secondly, your engine has a 5" stroke, meaning that if your motor was spinning at the SAME speed as a modern motor, the "loads" on the crank-pins would be MANY times higher. You combine that long stroke, with much higher rpms than a modern car, and you are imposing forces on the reciprocating parts geometrically many times harder. Thirdly, your connecting rod bearings, when the car was new, were simple "poured babbit". That worked out at a time when the cars were rarely driven more than 40 mph AND then only for a few minutes. Many early 30's Packards were overhauled during the 1950's and 60's, when used parts for these cars were cheap, and thus were re-fitten with 1935-1939 connnecting rods - these have modern "insert" rod bearings, which make those engines just about indestructible. (someone in here may be able to give you the reference for looking up the late 1934 Packard factory demonstration "run" of 25,000 mi. in a then new Packard Eight at 90 mph, celebrating the introduction of "insert" type rod bearings, ending the "rod bearing failure" issue). Today, when overhauling an engine of your era that was not already converted to "insert" type connecting rod bearings, responsible machine shops will machine out the "big end" of the connecting rod to take an "insert" connecting rod bearing, accomplishing the same thing the auto industry changed over to in the mid-1930's. Again, if your car still has "poured babbit" rod bearings, and has not been "re-geared" for today's roads, you would be well-advised not to drive it at anything over 42-45 mph EVER. If you have an over-drive and/or a "high speed" rear axle AND "insert rod" bearings, the superb brakes, great cooling system, and handling of that era Packards will give you a reliable safe driving experience no matter how fast you want to go ! Just remember about a phenomena called "brake fade". You get ONE good extreme speed stop, then those huge drum brakes will start to expand. The next extreme speed stop attempt will find the pedal nearly to the floor, and the third one, (or trying to stay with a modern "disc brake" car down a steep descent, and you will have practically NO brakes! Do fit it with seat-belts tho - as we say "crap happens".

C'mon Rick..be serious. How many labor hours is it acceptable in the auto industry to assemble an auto, and how many labor hours are involved in aircraft work. i've done both - believe me - aircraft construction is a bit more labor-intensive than what they do in auto production.

PLEASE - listen up ! FIRST thing you should do, is "drop" the oil pan and clean it out. Unless the engine has been freshly overhauled, you will be SCARED at the muck and sludge you see on the flat surfaces of the bottom of the oil pan. VERY easy job on those years Super Eights. SECOND thing before driving it - "pull" the rear brake drums ( no fun, and you'll need an industrial grade wheel puller for this ) and see if you can see fresh grease on those monster double roller bearings. If you can't, unbolt the backing plates (only way to get at the bearings) and grease em up with a modern EP grade grease. I am sorry to tell you I have little confidence in the way so many people these days maintain their cars ( or have their cars maintained by others ). You HAVE to practice "defense maintainence" with new aquisitions. If you have any questions, please feel free to e mail me and ask me for my telephone number. THERE ARE NO STUPID QUESTIONS ! As many of us have noted before, the only thing that is REALLY stupid, is risking damaging fine vehicles by NOT asking those who have "been there".

Re: Dave's comment about funding (perhas LOTS of funding could get the Packard name going again.... ? ) I noted earlier the problem of "economy of scale". Up thru the first ten years of the last century, Packard was able to make money on just a few thousand cars a year. Simple cars - simple production problems and costs. Technology exploded, and with it, the cost of producing that first car. I forget how many Packard 120's were sold during its heyday, taking a guess, it was around 60,000 in the best years of the late 1930's,; they made good money off that volume. By the 1950's, I believe ( read it somewhere...cant recall where ) a manufacturer would have to sell 100,000 vehicles a year for several years just to cover the tooling and development costs, never mind making a profit and paying stockhlders something on their investment. Assuming all that is reasonably accurate, I dont see the point in wanting to get into the auto manufacturing business these days. In the early teens, if you had a Packard 5-48 or Twin Six, you had something MUCH faster and MUCH more reliable than most other cars in its price range - in that era of much simplier technology, piling a lot of money on a car could produce great differences for the rich. Tremendous improvements in engine mount systems, higher compression engines, better bearing materials, made the differences in ordinary cars and the big Packards less and less dramatic as the years went on. Let's be honest - is that rolling locomotive of a museum that my '38 Packard Twelve was when new, SEVEN TIMES better ( it cost about seven times as much) in terms of driver comfort and performance than a new Chevrolet or Plymouth of the same year ? Hardly. And look where we are now ? If you were blind-folded and put in the back of our Toyota RAV 4 "mini SUV", could you really tell the difference under the same situation in a car costing many times more ? I dont think so. As another "poster" said earlier in this "thread" - "let it die in peace"....! The advances in technology make better cars every year no matter what the price range or physical exterior dimensions. Time marches on. The anology I would make, would be the bitter joke we have about the aviation business - perhaps some of you have heard it... " HOW DO YOU MAKE A SMALL FORTUNE IN THE AIRCRAFT BUSINESS..?" " SIMPLE.....START WITH A VERY LARGE FORTUNE...AND GET OUT FAST BEFORE IT IS ALL GONE..."

RE: question about proposed requirement in Arizona to have both back AND front license plates... Up here in northern arizona we are about three centuries behind you low-landers, so I know nothing about this ( yet ). BUT - Frankly, Peter, I was surprised, when we re-located here from California, that they dont have front plates. As far as I know, most states do have that requirement in my new home state. Those that do not have this requirement, probably will all start requiring this - and I have a nasty suspicion as to why. Collecting traffic fines on mickey mouse tickets is a great business for revenue starved govt's. ( have you ever met a govt. that did NOT claim it wanted more money...!). Arizona is going nuts installing these snooper cameras al over the place ( we even have them up here in Prescott ! ) (which reminds me, when you come up here to vist, dont go ONE MILE over the speed limit - local and county law enforcement WILL write a ticket for a mile or two over the speed limit !). Anyway, the new "speed cameras" that are appearing all over the country, photograph the FRONT of the car. So, if my "hunch" and anti-govt. prejudices are correct, THAT is what is behind the movement to require both rear and FRONT plates. ( just pure greed !)