Packard Twelve vs. Pierce-Arrow 12

[Su8overdrive]

Some of us have wondered which engine had the edge in absolute quality, or were they so close as to be neglible. We know Packard had the more modern chassis, esp. from 1937-on. Yet 1936-38 Pierce-Arrows came standard with overdrive.

But what we'd like to know is which ENGINE had the edge. Do any SAE papers compairing/contrasting the two V-12s survive? Were any written?

We shouldn't read too much into Ab Jenkins' Bonneville Salt Flat endurance runs in Pierce 12s. In subsequent runs the engine was seriously tweaked and loaded with multiple carburetors. A stock Packard Twelve did well racing a golf ball about this time. Packard was probably secure enough in their market share not to feel the need for a Bonneville or similar campaign, tho' surely their Twelve in similar trim and gearing to Ab Jenkins' car(s) could've turned in similar results.

Neither should we read too much into Seagraves buying the tooling for the defunct Pierce 12 for their fire trucks. This was a shrewd buying opportunity pennies on the dollar at a distress sale.

Packard's Twelve was 11 cubic inches larger than the final generation Pierce 12 and placed in a fire truck would surely have handled the job.

What we want to know, if possible, is which V-12 had the edge, Packard's 473-ci or Pierce-Arrow's 462-ci. Not chassis, just engine. Did the Pierce 12 have a slightly hotter cam? What were the real differences engine to engine?

Was one engine "best?" Not car, just the engine, please.

Many thanks.

[Owen_Dyneto]

I wouldn't be suprised that Seagrave had to cast new heads, because by 1951 the engine had been bored to 3-3/4 (stroke unchanged at 4") for 530 cubic inches. Seagrave rated it at 251 hp with a compression ratio of 7.8 to 1. As late as 1963 that engine was being built for Seagrave by FWD and only had those evolutionary changes.

Of course none of that has anything to do with whether it was the "better" engine.

This information from Automobile Quarterly, Winter 1968 (the Pierce Arrow issue).

[trimacar]

The main reason for new heads for the Seagraves "Pierce" engine was to add a second spark plug hole. All emergency equipment has to be equipped with dual ignition, so a Seagraves engine has two plugs per cylinder, along with the associated distributor etc.

One advantage that the Pierce engine had over the Packard engine was hydraulic valve lifters. The Packard still had a mechanical linkage from cam to valve.

[trimacar]

OK, some raw data.

Pierce Arrow, 80 degree V12

L-head, 5.1:1 to 6.4:1 compression ratios

1932: 398 CI, 140 HP, bore/stroke 3.25x4; 429 CI, 150 HP, 3.375x4, twin Stromberg carbs

1933: 429 CI, 160 HP, 3.375x4, dual downdraft carb

1933-1935:462 CI, 175 HP, 3.5x4

1936-1938: 462 CI, 185 HP, 3.5x4

Packard, 67 degree V12:

L-head, 6.0:1 compression ration, downdraft EE3 carb

1932: 445 CI 160 HP @3200 rpm, 3.43x4

1937: 473 CI 175 HP @3200 rpm, 3.44x4.25

Just for information. David Coco Winchester Va.

[Rusty_OToole]

Best for what?

The most impressive thing about the Pierce record is not the sheer speed, although that is astonishing for a basically stock 1932 chassis and engine, mildly modified.

What impressed me was that it was TOTALLY reliable with NO breakdowns or involuntary stops, in 3 24 hour speed record runs totalling 10,000 miles of driving at over 100 MPH.

To put this in perspective, both Mercedes and Rolls Royce warned their customers not to run their cars wide open for even 5 minutes lest they blow the engine.

Neither car would do much over 90.

You might also look at some threads on this board, in which Buick and Packard eight owners are nervously discussing the possibility of driving their early thirties models over 50 and wondering if they can get away with it.

A supercharged Duesenberg took away the Pierce record so it would be safe to say the Duesy was in a class with Pierce as a speed car, not that this should surprise anyone. What surprised me was that the Pierce was in the Duesenberg class for speed and stamina.

From a design standpoint the Packard had a more sophisticated valve and head design but I don't know that they ever went racing.

Although they did set some records with the earlier V12 in the early 20s.

Of the people who bought them new, I doubt either the Pierce 12 or Packard 12 buyers felt underprivileged.

Edited December 22, 2009 by Rusty_OToole (see edit history)