What is your Packard doing this summer?

[Guest]

I thought I would start a new thread. What are you doing with your Packard this summer? I hope to do some paint touch up, some wiring (like getting the turn signals working.) I hope to take her on the VMCCA tour in NM the last week of the summer. Of course there are the cruise nights, and a few shows in the area.

[Guest]

The "DUKE" will be in semi-retirement for the summer and probably until next year. Chris' as yet un-named 55, goes into the shop for its work over and I decided that I would not show mine until hers was finished. That will give us some time to spend with our Mopars.

[Guest]

The 36', this summer, will get her stock air filter rebuilt. Also, I'm recovering the bottom of the door panels and fixing the holes where the moths stop to eat lunch. Other then going to some local shows and running around town, she's sitting in the garage under the house, till I finish her new summer home.

[John N. Packard]

The '54 Patrician is having the drivetrain and rear suspension restored. While it is all removed some attention will be given to rust on the frame, new brake lines and gas line. Does it ever end? Then there is the proper LR door to paint and install and eventually a total repaint.<BR>The '47 Custom Clipper needs manifold gaskets, detailing of the engine compartment and reupholstering of the front seat.<BR>The '40 110 Club Coupe needs the body installed on the frame following touch up of some of the imperfections on the frame. Then sheet metal repair around the trunk and painting.<BR>The '37 Super 8 limousine needs the motor overhauled and reinstalled.<BR>The '28 Six sedan needs top bows bent, installed and the top replaced. The starter needs repair completed and reinstalled.<BR>Unfortunately this only scratches the surface of what could be done! <BR>I had hoped to drive the '54 on the Founders Tour; but that looks uncertain at this point.<BR>jnp

[Guest Kevin AZ]

'Grace' the 1955 Four-Hundred is begging for attention. She is half-naked in the garage. Dog-house off and she is up on front end stands. Intenton is to remove the engine and then entirely paint and replace/recondition everyting in reach. Think about doing the ebay thing with the '55 Patrician parts car. New digital camera will be in hand this week to further that endeavor.

[Guest]

The '53 Clipper will see bi-weekly drives to work and will be the car I take to our local AACA club show on May 18. The '55 Clipper Super just saw a 240-miler to a Packard and Imperial meet and will also see frequent drives this summer. And finally the Patrician will see at least biweekly trips to work and back. No planned work on the three other than routine maintenance. Got the oil and filters all changed and brake fluid topped off last month.

[Guest]

It is already "summer" here in Arizona (even up here in the high country of NORTHERN Arizona, which is a whole different world than "down off the hill" in southern Arizona).<P>Next weekend, there is an event celebrating the "mother road" (U.S. Highway 66), with the cars meeting in Seligman, AZ. and driving that portion of U.S. 66 that is still in service, to Kingman. Of course my '38 Packard Twelve will be there..and of course will be subject to the usual questions..."did you buy it new"..."is it a plastic reproduction"...." I hear those twelves had dinky little small cylinders and over-heat..etc...etc".<P>I am enjoying the new wide whitewall RADIAL tires on the Twelve...they are nominally only 7:50 x 16, but physically are EXACTLY the same size as the ORIGINAL 8:25 x 16 that 1937-1939 Packard Twelves had when new ( I sitll have one as a sample).<P>Which reminds me..I STRONGLY recommend radial tires for ANY old car. We have to admire and thank those people who are reproducing "bias" tires for old cars. But there is something TERRIBLY wrong with them -NONE of them I have had experience with, comes CLOSE to the "feel" of the ORIGINAL tires available during the classic era. Everyone I know who actually DRIVES their old cars, has the same complaint..hard steering, "road wander", lousy stopping action. I KNOW how old cars should drive !<P>With these new radials, my own car has its "classic feel" back. No longer wants to skid off the road every time it hits a tar strip....and I can "corner" again...just like I did in the 1950's with tires of that era. <P>Which reminds me...I hope REAL auto buffs know there was NO SUCH THING as "Route 66"...that came out of a silly song in the 1940's...they picked the term "Route" 66 so nobody could say they were describing the REAL U.S. Highway 66...let me explain..pursuant to the 1928 "Compact Of State Highway Commissionrs," with the adoption of the Federal highway system, STATE highways would henceforth be "sign routes", with their own numbering system and unique signs, and the Federal road system would be called "U.S. Highway" by a numbering system that NO STATE would be allowed to approximate (to avoid confusion between "routes" (again..STATE roads)...and HIGHWAYS...such as U.S. Highway 66.<P>So - there was NEVER a state route with ANY number that could be confused with a FEDERAL U.S. Highway number, and, until that silly song, if you would have said " I am taking Route 66"....you would have been met with a blank stare...<P>Now...where was I..oh...yes...this summer will be spent with my Packard Twelve, just as I have spent the last 48 summers with it...DRIVING THE HELL OUT OF IT...! I have the stone chips and "bug burns" to prove...few things are more fun than tearing up the Interstate in a half-way decently maintained big old "super car" from the 1930's. Well...tearing up badly rutted back roads, watching some dumb kid in a modern car trying to keep up with me...!(dont try to follow me with your daddy's Oldsmobile..!)<P>Summers past..... my mom "blew" the engine in our '51 "250" convertible...I found a wrecked '54 ambulence with the 359 4 barrel in it...swapped engines....with a little transmission and suspension work...I drove the '51 from the George Wash. bridge in New York City, to the Barham Blvd, off-ramp of the Hollywood Freeway in Los Angeles, in 2.5 days...AND TOOK TIME OFF TO SLEEP AT NIGHT ! And that was BEFORE the Interstate Highway system - mostly two and those horribly dangerous three lane roads...!) Pull out to pass at the wrong time...and SPLAT !<P>Now...where was I....hmmmm....time to get back to my Britney Spears Dance Video collection....<P>Pete Hartmann<BR>Big Springs, AZ

[Guest]

I am probably going to regret this to some degree, but I have to dis-agree on the tires discussion. I had a 1969 Plymouth Fury III and my sister-in-laws husband talked me into a set of radials, he being a distributor of sorts. Worst mistake I ever made. The car felt like a fish tail swimming thru jello. Worst ride I have ever experienced. I talked to a factory rep and he told me why. There is a reason why the suspension systems are called "radial-tuned". It is because they were built with radial tires in mind. Old cars were designed with bias-belted tires in mind. I'm sure you are all dead set convinced in your beliefs and I would not try to change your mind in any way, but for me, I would not put radial tires on an old car on a bet.<BR>I don't know what I will do if Coker ever goes out of business, probably cave in like everyone else, but i will do it kicking and screaming all the way.

[Guest Kevin AZ]

Pete.....2 1/2 days? Did your Packard have wings? Would you be pulling our legs now about that? BTW, congratulations on owning for 48 years. I don't know anyone that has owned anything that long except for maybe teeth! You may be setting a record there!

[Guest]

Affirmatron Al, I have Cokers on ....well I lost count....a buncha cars and about Septemeber plan on an additonal set.

[Guest]

For Kevin:<P>Nope...Kevin...not pulling your leg. The year was 1959..the car...a '51 "250" convert. Pulled the engine from a wrecked '54 ambulence. <P>I have some notes still unpacked about that trip..but I really did cross the north american continent in 2 1/2 days...and really did catch a little sleep at night.<P>Here's the "trick". In '59...a '51 Packard was just another old car. What I would do...is pull up behind some young buck in some sort of fancy car, and honk at him and yell at him to "get that piece of (you know what) out of my way...you old slow-poke..."! Worked every time. The guy would take off, and I would follow him about 1/4 mile behind. That way...he'd trigger the speed trap cops, and...when I would loose him, I'd just find another sucker. Much of my cruising was over 70 mph...do the math...it's only 2,800 miles...!<P>Pete Hartmann

[Guest]

Fpr Al K...regarding the "radial -vs- bias" issue.<P>It is VERY confusing...EVERY situation in which I have seen a legit. comparison, has people who have changed over to modern radials which LOOK like older tires, it is a DRAMATIC improvement over the "repro" bias ones. I cant tell you what a surprising pleasure it was to drive my Packard Twelve with the new (but correct looking) wide whitewall radials.<P>BUT.....and I have no explanation for this...I have Coker 750:24's bias repros. on my fire engine, a 14,000 lb. giant...800 cu. in. V-12 over-head cam monster. Drove it to New York and back. NO tire problems, and drove like a wild man. Handles good. Dosn't "hunt"..... ? ? ?<P>Pete Hartmann

[Guest]

Yeah Pete, your're rite about those tires. The re-pops are garbage. I'm using the modern 235-75R15 on my '56 tho they r a smaller rolling radius. They're great tires and were el-cheapo. <BR>U.S. Hwy 70 run passes my up-town house by about 200 feet away. Many people around here do NOT realize it is a FEDERAL hwy and not state.

[Guest]

the 56 executive is ready to rock'n'roll for the summer. i've had it out for 3 or 4 test runs on the I'state with the hood removed and believe i have the hi-speed faint ticking sound cured. IF not, i'll put the hood on it anyway and drive it for the summer. The masters power brake set up from the Honda works just fine but not as sensitive as the tradle vac. About the only thing remaining is to install the drivers side shoulder harness and seat belt. I hope to get ALOT of miles on this car this year. Its been a big struggle. Lets see how well it holds up.

[John N. Packard]

I put Coker bias ply tires of the right size on my 1954 Patrician after rebuilding the front suspension. It handles beautifully! Perhaps radial tires are more "forgiving" for worn suspension?<P>jnp

[Guest]

For John Packard - regarding "worn suspensions".<P>Again, I have NO explanation why so many of us have found that the various "repro" tires of so called "conventional" or "bias" carcass design, cause the cars to behave so miserably. Some of us are still around who remember how these cars handled with the bias tires of earlier eras...they handled just fine. They most certainly did NOT "hunt" or steer funny, anywhere NEAR as bad as the "repros".<P>As for worn suspensions - you could be onto something...at least in some cases. In my own case, and that of several of my friends, this is most certainly NOT the case. Permit me to brag a bit..I am one of the few people left who knows how to "dis-arm" the massively powerful coil springs of the '37 - '39 Packard "Saf-T-Flex" suspension without risking getting your head or arms torn off...out of frustration, knowing my own suspension is in A-1 shape, I still pulled it down to re-check everything several times before giving up.<P>Until I got a set of radial white walls, that LOOK like tires of the classic era. What a difference - I had my Packard back...!<P>And, as I noted in a "post" to Al K...I also cannot explain why my big American La France V-12...with its 800 cu. in. MONSTER motor, and 14,000 lbs. of fire engine, handles so well on the bias "repro" 7:50 x 24" tires I got from Coker. What makes this even more wierd...is the 7:50 x 24 is a MUCH narrower tread than modern tire practice...so one would THINK it should be a bit squirrely. It isn't - handles GREAT ! Go figure !<P>Pete Hartmann

[John N. Packard]

Peter,<BR> You raise an interesting point. The 8.00x15 tires from Coker that I mounted on my '54 Patrician also have a smaller (narrower) footprint than the tires they replaced (8.20x15). The change in handling the car is remarkedly better. I attributed it to the rebuild of the suspension.<BR> I removed and replaced the front springs on my '37 Super 8 limousine. I wasn't aware that it was any more hazardous than doing this on any car. Regretably, it was so many years ago that I don't remember how I did it. The Super 8 takes the 7.50x16 tires. I need a set of six for this car!<P>jnp

[Guest]

For John Packard - about the '37 Super EIght.<P>John - in case you hadn't noticed, the '37 Packard Super Eight...was not a '37 Packard Twelve. If you check your Packard Service Stores Book for 1937..("parts book") you will find the '37 Super Eight was a MUCH lighter car than a Twelve, with MUCH lighter suspension parts, meaning MUCH lighter spring rates.<P>Which brings us to an interesting point...what on EARTH was Packard THINKING of....calling its traditional "Standard Eight" line a "Super Eight".....did it REALLY think its customers were that stupid..?<P>Let me give you some back-ground. If you read Packard icon Edwin MacCauley's famous piece on "Reputation", Packard Motor Car Co., at least in its "golden years"... recognized what a "cruel master" an excellent reputation for integrity was. <P>But by the mid-1930's, something began to go terribly wrong at Packard. They lost faith in themselves, and in the American capitalistic system. They felt there would never again be a market for "super luxury" cars, so they would "cash in" on the reputation of the Packard name.<P>Coming out with the "120" was a brilliant idea; who could deny entering the "common man" price class was a great idea to get some cash coming in. Who could deny the "120" wasn't one hell of a car for the money...<P>But...to tamper with the pride the elite had in their cars..? THAT is what killed Packard, pure and simple. <P>Here's what REALLY happened. Packard, early on, wisely maintained two product lines. It had its large displacement "super cars", and it also had a less expensive, lower performing, but still in the UPPER CLASS cars.<P>Around 1924, for their less expensive but still within the UPPER class line, a little SIX cyl. car, which sold well, but just didn't "cut it" in terms of the kind of performance of a UPPER class car.<P>So, they came out with the larger Packard STANDARD eight (of approx. 320 cu. in.) to replace it.<P>Improvements in fuels as the 1920's became the 1930's brought more power for a given engine displacement, so both Packard's LOWER END standard eight and the UPPER end Super Eight/Delux Eight/Custom Eight series gained performance.<P>"There aint no substitue for cubic inches"...resulted in all of the "super car" manufacturers producing ever larger and more powerful cars. Thus, 1932 found Packard with THREE levels of products within the luxury class. AND its first attempt to drop down into the middle class..."The Light Eight" ( a cheapened Standard Eight).<P>1932-1936 saw the continuation of the splendid Packard Super Eight of 384 cu. in, and, by virtue of both its much larger displacement, and its "hot rod" tricks of a wedge shape combustion chamber and better breathing, the even better performing Twelve.<P>Better highways required more extreme speed stability. The laws of physics dictated moving the mass of the car foward relative to the front wheels. Not having the volume to justify a major change in its "high end" product line, Packard did the next best thing...simply pulled the center of the front wheel back in relation to the firewall. Saved money - kept the same body and frame layout - just shortened the "front clip".<P>While the more modern and compact Twelve would fit into these shortened front ends, The big 384 cu. in. Super Eight engine block was way was too long. And, of course, both the Standard Eight and Super Eight were, by that time, an obsolete design.<P>The little 320 cu. in Standard Eight, however, would fit.<P>So they dropped the entire Super Eight product line. And they called the existing Standard Eight (known as the "Eight") the "Super Eight". Was it a great car for the money ? Of course. Could it possibly perform like the much more powerful Super Eight. Of course NOT ! <P>And they called the 282 cu. in. Packard "120" series...the "Packard Eight". <P>Was this a cheap trick and "con" on the buyer of the traditional Super Eight...and Eight series? Who knows how many Packard buyers recognized this as a "cheapening" of the entire Packard mystique..?<P>As a side-note, Packard made this "de-rating" of their product line even worse in 1939, when they stuck the "standard eight" into a "120" body, and called THAT a "super eight" It LOOKED...like what it was !<P>Bottom line. Cadillac had more respect for the intelligence of its buyers. It called its "common man" entry the La Salle. And towards the end of La Salle production...it didn't cheapen them and reduce their performance....La Salle was IMPROVED !<P>Both Packard and Cadillac brought in badly needed cash by entering the middle-class level. BUT...Cadillac kept its faith in the American upper class, and its focus on providing "the best ..for the best". It paid off in rich dividends, with Cadillac's "demand" increasing, and Packard's decreasing.<P>Yes, your '37 Packard "Super Eight" had a much lower front spring tension than a Twelve. And what a story...that fact tells..!<P>Pete Hartmann<BR>Big Springs, AZ

[Guest]

So John, buried very near the surface in all that trash is a clear statement that your cherished Super 8 is a piece of mid-priced, flimsy junk. This is raising insult to new lows.

[John N. Packard]

You can read my take on this at <A HREF="http://www.aaca.org/chesapeake/orphan_cars.htm" TARGET=_blank>http://www.aaca.org/chesapeake/orphan_cars.htm</A> This is a summary of my presentation at the AACA Annual Meeting in Philadelphia during the Library and Research Center Seminar on Orphan Cars.<BR>Pete, if you dropped a 359 CID four barrel carb engine into a 250 convertible and roared across the country in 2 and one-half days; then your concept of performance is quite different I suspect from the typical Packard Owner! <BR>jnp

[Guest]

Hey Packard V8, I want to drive up to Dickson and have a look at and maybe a ride in your Executive.

[Guest]

John Packard -<P>I read your article. Damn good. Thanks ! (see...this makes it all worth while..when you get guys who 1) KNOW what they are talking about 2) can present their knowledge in a concise, readable manner. THREE CHEERS FOR JOHN ! )<P>Pete Hartmann

[Guest]

Pete<P>This is not what I think you said, this is what you actually said. <P>"the '37 Packard Super Eight...was not a '37 Packard Twelve".<P>I'll bet John knows that, at least every time he changes plugs. Maybe more often. <P>"what on EARTH was Packard THINKING of... calling its traditional "Standard Eight" line a "Super Eight"... did it really think its customers were that stupid..?".<P>Packard's opinion of the mental capacity of its customers is not available; however, Packard did hold great pride in their customer's ability to discern quality in many things. Of course, by implication, your remark indicts Super Eight buyers as being more simple-minded than others. It also suggests that Packard perpetrated a fraud on this group. Do you have evidence of this?<P>"by the mid-thirties, something began to go terribly wrong at Packard. They lost faith in themselves...".<P>There is no evidence to support this claim. <P>"...The laws of physics dictated moving the mass of the car forward relative to the front wheels.". <P>Perhaps you can explain these laws that governed this change. <P>"Was this a cheap trick and "con" on the buyer..."<P>By speculating that Packard engaged in a confidence game with its dealers and customers, you not only denigrate a fine vehicle but also tarnish the reputations of hundreds of Packard employees. <P>"Cadillac had more respect for the intelligence of its buyers."<P>More of the same. Packard is once more accused of seeing its customers as unknowing dupes. <P>My point is this: You turned a friendly discussion over tires and springs into yet another, totally unrelated opportunity to crow about the vast superiority of one type of car (yours) over another (John's). <P>In anticipation of your canned response about my lack of education regarding the classics, my resentment of the classics, and my general misunderstanding, never mind, I've heard it all before.

[Guest]

Mr. Hatrmann/ Would you like to me tell me how much better the Classic Packard 12's are. Than shall we say the SUPER ELITE CLASSICS that came from Europe. Don't forget over the period of the 30's the Packard 12's were also down sized.

[Guest]

Henry..<P>Do tell...I would very much like to know where you got the idea Packard Twelves were "down-sized"....<P>What MAY be confusing you is Beverly Rae Kimee's excellant book, which correctly points out the wheel-bases of the large Packards, as the 1930's ended, became shorter. <P>But the cars themselves were larger, heavier, more powerful, and FASTER !<P>The movement rear-ward of the front wheel centers was simply to improve high speed stability.<P>Got a hell of an idea for you...Henry 8th..how about you sticking to telling us what you ACTUALLY know something about....!<P>Now...you are durn RIGHT a Packard Twelve is a superior car to a Super Eight ( either the "real" ones or the "phony" ones i.e. the re-badged Standard Eights). And you would be equally correct that the Hisso J-12 in Nethercutt's collection makes my Packard 12 left over dog food by comparison....BY COMPARISON.<P>Fact is, each of the big classics has its strong points, and for that reason...we should love em and be interested in em all.<P>The FACT also is...Packard made a BIG mistake in "re badging" a "120" and trying to pass it off as a Packard Eight (as in Standard Eight...which was of much higher quality...if slightly more obsolete). The FACT is Packard made a BIG mistake in re bading the Standard Eight...trying to pass it off as a Super Eight.<P>And calling that over-blown "120" of 1940-41 a "180"...who was kidding who....it did NOT have five more horsepower than the traditional advertised 175 h.p. of the Twelve.... ( was a damn fine car for the money tho)<P>If anyone has ANY doubt that Cadillac kept better faith with and better met the expectations of its buyers, than Packard did, as the World War years came upon us....well...guys...just LOOK around you...anyone seen a Packard Dealership lately...?<P>Pete Hartmann

[Guest]

Henry 8th<P>There is another error in Beverly Rae Kimes's excellent book on Packards that gets tthose who have not actually had "hands-on" experience with these cars...confused....the nonsence about "for 1938 Packard Twelves and Super Eights used the same chassis.."<P>HORSE FEATHERS....!<P>As was Packard's tradition in its upper class cars, the BODIES were the same. However, the MUCH heavier and more powerful Twelve required MUCH heavier suspension, springs, brakes, frame rails, etc...etc..etc.<P>Now...READ MY LIPS....this did NOT make the "re-badged" Standard Eight a bad car...it was a GREAT car for the money...sad thing was...it was...what it was...a warmed over 1923 drive line. Cadillac, in the mean-time, had dumped its 1920's engine designs in the mid 1930's, and that excellent flat-head V-8 introduced around 1935 would run CIRCLES around a Packard OF THE SAME PRICE CLASS.<P>Did the buyers of upper class cars expect performance ? Again...anyone seen a Packard Dealership recently...?

[Guest]

Henry 8th<P>There is another error in Beverly Rae Kimes's excellent book on Packards that gets tthose who have not actually had "hands-on" experience with these cars...confused....the nonsence about "for 1938 Packard Twelves and Super Eights used the same chassis.."<P>HORSE FEATHERS....!<P>As was Packard's tradition in its upper class cars, the BODIES were the same. However, the MUCH heavier and more powerful Twelve required MUCH heavier suspension, springs, brakes, frame rails, etc...etc..etc.<P>Now...READ MY LIPS....this did NOT make the "re-badged" Standard Eight a bad car...it was a GREAT car for the money...sad thing was...it was...what it was...a warmed over 1923 drive line. Cadillac, in the mean-time, had dumped its 1920's engine designs in the mid 1930's, and that excellent flat-head V-8 introduced around 1935 would run CIRCLES around a Packard OF THE SAME PRICE CLASS.<P>Did the buyers of upper class cars expect performance ? Again...anyone seen a Packard Dealership recently...?

[Guest]

Henry 8th<P>There is another error in Beverly Rae Kimes's excellent book on Packards that gets tthose who have not actually had "hands-on" experience with these cars...confused....the nonsence about "for 1938 Packard Twelves and Super Eights used the same chassis.."<P>HORSE FEATHERS....!<P>As was Packard's tradition in its upper class cars, the BODIES were the same. However, the MUCH heavier and more powerful Twelve required MUCH heavier suspension, springs, brakes, frame rails, etc...etc..etc.<P>Now...READ MY LIPS....this did NOT make the "re-badged" Standard Eight a bad car...it was a GREAT car for the money...sad thing was...it was...what it was...a warmed over 1923 drive line. Cadillac, in the mean-time, had dumped its 1920's engine designs in the mid 1930's, and that excellent flat-head V-8 introduced around 1935 would run CIRCLES around a Packard OF THE SAME PRICE CLASS.<P>Did the buyers of upper class cars expect performance ? Again...anyone seen a Packard Dealership recently...?

[Guest]

sorry for the "double post"...<P>dont know how that happened...?

[Guest]

Well, I can tell you-all something, from looking at the last couple of replies on "What is your Packard doing this summer"?<BR>It's going to be one loooooong summer.

[Guest]

For Unregis. J Smith:<P>I am sorry if I mis-lead anyone in my recent "posts". I thought I made it clear I am a Packard buff. I thought I made it clear I believe my liking all Packards for what they are, is well-founded. Within each respective price range (arent you guys getting tired of hearing me say this..? WAKE UP...SMITH....!) I think Packard's reputation for producing good cars was well-founded.<P>Trouble is...the buyer of a Packard Super Eight...a REAL one (meaning the 384 cu. in. block that was discontinued after 1936) is NOT going to like it when he gets something less...MUCH less. Does that mean the Packard Standard Eight was a bad car...? SMITH....you apparently want very badly to believe something about me that isn't true. Stop twisting what you THINK I said, into something irrelevant and inappropriate to an exchange of information about Packard !<P>The "Saf-T-Flex" front suspension introduced in the "120" series in '35, and in the big cars in '37...was a brilliant design. I continually amaze people how fast I can thrash my Packard Twelve over our miserable excuses for cow paths leading out to our ranch. Packard engineers used good judgment in tailoring each version to the weight of the car - why in hell would you think that scaling down the size and weight of the front end components, to meet the lesser requirements of the much lighter "so called" Super Eight of the 1937-1939 is an insult..?<P>Pete Hartmann<BR>Big Springs, AZ

[Guest]

Ain't it the truth, ain't it the truth!!!!!!!

[Guest]

"The movement rear-ward of the front wheel centers was simply to improve high speed stability."<P>FALSE!!!!!!!!!!

[Guest]

"Got a hell of an idea for you...Henry 8th..how about you sticking to telling us what you actually know something about....!"<P>Thus spake Mr. Hatrmann

[Guest]

For Unregist J SMith:<P>Yeah..you are right...it is unfair..I shouldn't be so rough on Henrty 8th...he has "issues"; he IS bing "politically correct"...it is perfectly understandable. <P>And to make things worse....some old guy like me shows up who actually owned and worked on the things....( those of you who actually KNOW what they are talking about...how did you like that "Packard DOWNsized the Twelve for 1938...!)<P>The resentment against the superiority of the big-engined super luxury cars we call "classics" is an old established tradition amongst automobile enthusiasts. <P>One of the more famous comments, ( and proof of how long this has been going on,) has to do with when Packard's direction (this was in the mid 1930's) was taken over by people who wanted to exploit the Packard name by turning its direction towards the lower-priced segement. As noted above, personally, I think this was an understandable idea, given the times, but it was sure proven wrong by Cadillac, Toyota-Lexus, Damiler Benz-Mercedes, etc.<P>Anyway, the famous "quote" that appears from time to time in various Packard buff technical articles, is what happened when one of the "mass production" guys from the Packard "120" plant was allowed to come into the old Senior Division assembly area, where the "big" Packards were built. After seeing the devotion to detail, the attention spent on quality work, he was furious at what he thought was a waste of resources that could have been (and later were) used to turn out lower priced cars...he cursed, yelling..."that gawd-damned Senior stuff"....<P>Another example....in the early 1950's, when Packard had successfuly destroyed its market thru a combination of poor quality assembly, and back-ward technology, driving it into the open arms of the other luxury car builders, someone in Packard management must have seen the publicity starting to gather around the then-new Classic Car Club Of America meets. The comparison between the aristocratic quality of one of the big Packards from the "olden-years", and the Packards of the later era, was obvious, and odious.<P>The management had the answer...an order was given to terminate practice of "supporting" Packards more than ten years old. The reason that appears in a memo someone found in an old box of documents, and later found its way into one of the Packard club publications....<P> " given the substantial difference in<BR> emphasis between the Packard of old,<BR> and our present policies, the<BR> practice of continuing to support<BR> these relics of another era, is<BR> HARMFUL TO OUR PRESENT SALES EFFORTS..."<P>And now...flash foward to today. How do you think "politically correct" guys like Henry 8th feel...when they come face to face with a bunch of guys who call themselves the Classic Car Club Of America, and blantantly say in the caption of their web site....<P> (qoute from heading of our "site"....)<BR> <BR> " . . these VERY special cars are<BR> distinguished by ...etc...<P> "...we applaud OTHER cars who recognize<BR> non-classics...but they are NOT what<BR> OUR club is about..."<P>Personally, I am for changing the name of the Classic Car Club Of America. I see one or two ways our Club can go in the future...<P>If these damn fool membership drives keep pulling in people who do not appreciate our admitted aristocratic, arrogant, super cars...then why not be honest about where we are going...in that event..I propose for our new name<P> " NICE OLD CAR CLUB OF AMERICA, FOR THE<BR> FELLOW WITH A OLD CAR HE THINKS IS <BR> CUTE...AND WANTS TO SELL "<P>Or...if the Club thinking stays with those mean-spirited old grouches who sincerely believe a Cadillac V-16 is superior to a La Salle......then...why not be honest..and recognize where the REST of the car hobby is going...just LOOK in any automotive book store...EVERY old car someone wants to "unload" or brag about..is a CLASSIC....<P>Our Southern Calif. region was recently denied our traditional meeting place at a lovely golf club...because the new owners thought the use of the word "classic" meant we were a bunch of hot rodders with Meixcan low riders..." (this is no joke..it happened..<P>That being the case...I dont want MY big 1930's era luxury car called a "classic". I propose, given the trend of the times, we change our name to<P> " NON CLASSIC CAR CLUB OF AMERICA"<P><BR>Pete Hartmann<BR>Big Springs, AZ

[Guest]

Well actually, Pete, H8 seems to have a fairly good grip on his topic. I was referring to the the way you advised him to know what he was talking about, while your comments are so liberally sprinkled with falsehoods, an example of which Packardv8 pointed out. Guess I should have been a little more clear.

[Guest]

Hey...Unregis J Smith<P>My apologies if I mis-led you in any of my discussions about automobile technology. Can you tell me where you think I was trying to steer you wrong...? Let's discuss.<P>Pete Hartmann

[Guest]

For Unregis Packard V-8<P>You seem displeased with my explanation of the physics of automobile balance.<P>Perhaps this will help you visualize what I am trying to explain. Have you ever seen an arrow ? Note where the mass of the arrow is..in FRONT. You do NOT see arrows with the mass, towards the REAR. Again, the further foward the mass of the car, in relation to its front wheel centers, the more stable it is at high speeds. The further REAR ward, the better able for the mass to follow the wheel center over dismal roads. This explains why that "classic" look has the radiator way back behind the front half of the springs, and the motor even further behind that. It also explains why the mass of the car has migrated foward over the years, to reflect the better roads and less need for sudden directional changes at low speeds.<P>To see how Packard accomplished this in its "Senior Division" line, think in your <BR>"mind's eye", how, for example a Formal Sedan body evolved from '35 to '39. Well..of course...it did NOT evolve..oh..they put on a "bustle" trunk, and changed the beading on the fenders, but that was about it. Oh, and of course the slight front alteration to take care of the "V" front window for '38 - 39.<P>But we know the wheel-base got ever shorter...coming further and further backwards in relation to the weight of the motor...how did they do that..?<P>The entire "front clip" was shortened (see my comments above on why they had to discontinue the "big" or "real" Super Eight at the end of 1936 ).<P>As the steering apparatus came further backward in 1938-1939, you will notice how the '38 - '39 Twelves had to have "notched" oil pans, to clear the steering center crank-link (otherwise, the position of the engine-transmission in relation to the body, remained the same from '35-39).<P>This is pretty basic stuff...To bring you further up to speed, I recommend back issues from the 1930's...of the SAE Tech. Journal. You should be able to find it in most large public libraries...in there you will find a wealth of info., often in "laymen's terms", that will help you understand the fascinating physics and chemistry issues of the automobile, and how they have evolved.<P>Also of interest, as Packard brought independent front suspension to their "Senior" line, the cars got HEAVIER ! Why..? Because they could now make the frames more rigid. Why...? With the old-style solid front axles last used in 1936, road impacts came thru the suspension ...thus the frame, in effect, was part of the suspension system. Make the frame too rigid..and it will crack ! With the new independant suspensions..the frames could be made much more rigid....and they were!<P>Hope this clears things up for you.<P>Pete Hartmann<BR>Big Springs, AZ

[Guest]

Mr. Hartmann/ Last night I made a simple stat,emt that Packard downsized the V12 line through the 30's. I was simply stating a fact which you even verified. Your ranting raving replies to me where uncalled for. The same goes for your post to John. Starting friday night we are going to find out how much I do know. You proofed to be no match for me in the CCCA chatroom and expect the same here. Give you a hint about fridays topic Duesenberg and Stutz. Have a very nice time till then.

[Guest]

Hello to Everyone: The 53 Packard is nearing the stage of being painted in a couple of weeks. When she comesback from the body shop the trans is going to get pulled. The trans will then go to the shop to have new seals and gskets installed. The Chevelle won't see any road time until July. Installing a new water pump, heater core, power steering unit, powerbrakes, and new coil springs in the back. Still spouting the same old BS Peter. To AL K; I installed new steel belted radials on my Chevelle last year and it was for the better. have you thought about installing new shocks on the Mopar. I cant under why the radials would make it hadle and ride so bad. My packard had Coker white walls on it and I gave them to a freind of mine for his car. I will be running radials on my 53 when it goes on the road some day. I won't have anything to do wih bias ply tires.