Owen_Dyneto

Here's a Tatra 77A as seen at the Fairfield County (CT) Concours this summer.

My 34 Eight, essentially the same front end as yours, did this badly when I first bought it. It was most severe when crossing RR tracks at a diagonal. Checked all the front end components and found nothing loose. The cure was to have the front wheels, tires, and brake drums balanced as a unit by a truck shop which had the correct rig to fit the 17 inch wheel. Never a shimmy again. Only downside is you've got to mark the tire location on the rim, should you ever have to fix a flat, and also mark the position of the wheel on the drum, usually done with a daub on paint ont he wheel and drum.

I think you'd have to tell us a bit more, because the Eight, Super Eight and Twelve bumpers had different ends, and those with 6-wheel equipment are different at the rear than those with rear-mounted spare tire. You're correct about the cut-out section I believe.

I've been focusing on 33 and 34 Packards for 40+ years and never heard of a factory update other than the Car of the Dome, though many front fender changes occurred in the hands of subsequent owners. I've even seen 2 33 sedans where the front doors were changed to get rid of the damned angel wings. But when in doubt, if you suspect the VN on the patent plate has been changed, check the thief-proof number (embossed on cowl), I've got a fairly good sampling of numbers. ADDED 10/30. The lowest thief-proof number I have for a 1934 is 178237, and the highest for a 1933 is 176677. If your number is in between those 2 I can't help but would like your data to help fill out the database. If your # is above the higher one, it's surely not a 1933, and if it's below the lower one, it's surely not a 1934. Of course motor numbers, frame numbers and steering gear numbers can also provide clues.

I also believe it correct that the only door that had a key lock was the right (passenger) side front.

Glad you got your answer, amazing how many questions can be answered with authority by just looking it up in the parts book.

I believe these, a well as the handles, were among the dozens of such parts reproduced in bronze back in the 60s or 70s for early 30s Packards by Art Brummer. When that enterprise was dissolved, some of the molds went up to Chris Charlton in Maine, others probably went elsewhere or just plain disappeared. You might ask some of the premier restoration shops specializing in this era of Packard about where they source them from. Another option, though less desireable due to shrinkage, is to get them cast in stainless steel by Jerry (or is it Gerry) Verdone. He may even already have them, he always has quite an assortment of finished similar parts at Hershey.

Copper washers under the retainers are certainly correct for 1933 and 1934 and later 320 and 385 ci engines, it's called a annular ring gasket. If in doubt of correctness for your particular engine, just check the parts book, if they were to be used they'd be listed; part number used is 110575 for 33-36 which is very old number indicating that the useage when back a few years.

It's a pain, but we should really all read the policy fine print and ask questions about what would be the result under various scenarios. I insure both my antiques (1934 Eight and 1956 Caribbean convertible) with J.C. Taylor, have so for decades, and insure them for what I estimate it would cost me to replace them with cars of equal condition.

What I've been doing for many years on valve covers with cork gaskets is to glue the gasket to the cover with non-hardening Permatex (No. 2 as I remember), and then use a thin wipe of grease on the gasket side that contacts the block. Never had a leak, and nine times out of ten when I remove the cover for a valve adjustment I don't have to replace the gasket. And you're right about the copper crush rings under the bolts, at least on the Eights and Super Eights 32-39, not sure about the others.

Sorry Ken, they are all spoken for except one for myself as I'm still using the original Dyneto regulator and after 90,000 miles not sure how much longer it will last. They can be rebuilt of course if you have an original.

I've heard it said that CCCA changed their stance on nickel vs chrome recently, and that new restorations as of some recent date will get deductions where chrome has been subsituted. Can't verify this though. Until about 2 years ago NAPA/Echlin had NORS regulators for the early Owen-Dyneto units, and got 4 new ones for my 34 Eight, at about $40 each. Functional and nearly identical in appearance. But alas they are no longer in production.

The rebuild was recent so I'd be confident it was done to be compatible with modern gasoline. As far as the mounting, best to check your parts book for the details, I'm only familiar with the 34 and up mountings but they used fiber sleeves in the bolt holes and in fact Packard used this technique well up into the 50s. Always a great feeling to get that "last" item, isn't it? Plating of the lines should be nickel, not chrome.

If you got that 1932 S-w fuel pump from Bob Stolzfus' spot in the "Packard Row", he was selling it for a friend of mine. It was a rebuild by Daytona Parts down in Florida and appeared to be an excellent and quite rare find.

The correct color is gray. Most of the larger Packard vendors sell an engine enamel in the correct shade.

It's very possible that water jacket side plates were chromed by Packard for exhibition and car show vehicles but were always painted to my knowledge for standard production vehicles. Of course reproduction plates are available in stainless steel, but another course for reconditioning an old plate where the plate itself is sound but the interior baffling is shot is to form new baffles from brass sheet. If you've got a 34 Eight or Super Eight, don't forget the little extra internal baffle that directs the coolant thru the cooler before it continues down the jacket.

Not seen one personally so I can't recognize it from the picture, but if you've checked the parts book you already know the 901-902-903-904 used an oil filter restriction valve, part numbers 194782/194783. Almost all bypass type oil filters have some form of restriction, adoption of the full-flow system in 1934 eliminated the need for the restrictor valve I believe.

Impossible to say from the information given. How about a couple of pictures, and the VN from the patent plate? I've got a 34 Eight sedan (owned for 45 years) so I tend to follow these values.

I've spoken with a number of alleged motor oil experts over the years and they all pretty much agree that SAE10W-40 is the poorest motor oil choice to make due to the very large concentration of viscosity extenders. I'd think in a warm climate with a Packard engine of your vintage that following Packard's recommendation would be a better route, probably straight SAE20 or 30. I use straight SAE 30 in my 34 Eight here in New Jersey, and normally only drive the car in Spring, Summer and Fall. I've given some thought to just adding some ZDDP to the oil in a "might help, can't hurt" vein.

There will never be a more convenient time to do it than now, so go ahead. Follow the service manual carefully for the pinion bearing preload as you will upset it when you replace the pinion seal. Other than that, it's pretty much a no-brainer of a job.

Have you checked the parts books? Not a lot of interchangeability on Pitman arms, as they changed almost with every year and sometimes are different within a year by model. For example: 1931 - all models - 135119 1932 900 series - 197037 1932 8, Su8 and V12 - 191693 1933 8 and Su8 - 215778 1933 V12 - 209504 1934 8 and Su8 - 215405 1934 V12 - 215927 1935 all models - 223417 I can confirm that 1934-36 Eight and Super8 have an offset such as you picture, but can't confirm they would interchange.

Based on the maximum inflation pressure on your tires, it appears they may be based on light truck (LT) tires and not car tires. Lester's 7:50 x 17 x 6 ply rated have a maximum inflation pressure of 36 psi which is much more typical of tires of that era and size. Perhaps you should call Coker and ask what inflation pressure they recommend.

Can I assume the tires are 7:50 x 17 x 6ply-rated? Those would be the correct size for a 35 Twelve. Have you checked your riding height?

Phil's statement is correct, raising the pressure only increases the boiling point of the coolant.

If, after doing an engine rebuild, you do not recore, rod or otherwise restore a radiator to "as new" condition, it's quite normal for an engine to run hot and the explanation is quite obvious. As an older engine accumulates miles, it looses some of it's original friction from tight clearances and thus produces less heat that when new. At the same time the cooling system gradually looses efficiency from scale accumulation in the radiator and other reasons. But when the engine is rebuilt all the new friction is restored but with a less-capable cooling system, thus the tendency to run hotter. I'm not saying your engine is running excessively hot, but it is running hotter than the thermostat setting. If you live/drive in a hot climate, I'd consider replacing the thermostat with the factory-recommended 160 degree unit. If you live/drive in a cooler climate were summertime temperatures are less severe, I'd leave it alone and in time with accumulated mileage, it should run a bit cooler. I don't think that at the 200 degree temperatures you've measured there really is any reason for undue concern unless the car is placed in a stressful situation (parade, traffic jam, etc.) on a blistering hot day.