Driving classics

[edinmass]

 

For the record……it’s Don Fanucci

[Tph479]

A local trucking company had a truck show/car show yesterday. They served 385 lunches. A lot of antique trucks. Counted 7 Hendrickson’s. Do you guys see those outside the Midwest? Dad and I drove the 900’s, my buddy drove his 626.

[alsancle]

On 7/28/2023 at 10:11 PM, edinmass said:

 

For the record……it’s Don Fanucci

 

 

Ed,  I have the video that goes with this picture if you want me to post it.   😈

[alsancle]

Since Ed took his mom out for a ride I felt obligated to take mine out today.  74 degrees and zero humidity.  Probably the nicest day we have had in 2 months.

 

Mom and I circa 1965 and today in the same car.

 

 

Edited July 30, 2023 by alsancle (see edit history)

[John Bloom]

4 hours ago, alsancle said:

Since Ed took his mom out for a ride I felt obligated to take mine out today.  74 degrees and zero humidity.  Probably the nicest day we have had in 2 months.

 

Mom and I circa 1965 and today in the same car.

 

 

Beautiful, and the car isn't too bad either.  Glad you guys could take your mothers out and spend time with them.  The importance of family grows as i get older.   Thanks for sharing that....to you and Ed both.  My parents are gone but I could really dig a thread of pics of our old cars with Mom's and Dad's in the shot.  

[Matt Harwood]

For the past few weeks, I've been driving my '35 Lincoln almost exclusively just to rack up some miles. I think I've put about 900 miles on it in six weeks. Three weeks ago we drove it to a local cruise night down on the river about 20 miles away. Tonight we went again but took the '41 Buick Limited, which I haven't driven in quite some time. It fired up instantly and idled perfectly, just like it had been driven 10 minutes earlier not 10 months. No fussing, no hassles, just an easy cruise with temps at 170 and 50 PSI of oil pressure. It never makes me sweat.

 

And holy cow I'd forgotten just how great that Buick is to drive. So fast, smooth, quiet, and comfortable. Silent at speed. No bumps. No vibrations. I thought the Lincoln was pretty polished, but now that I've had a hard reset and could drive the Buick with fresh eyes, I'm amazed all over again. What a fantastic car.

 

There is one caveat: I am wholly and completely addicted to the Lincoln's massive low-end torque. The Buick just can't match it and I immediately missed it. The Lincoln will pull cleanly from 4 MPH in high gear so downshifts are all but unnecessary except for a dead stop. Getting it rolling takes no throttle and you can let the clutch out as fast as you want and it'll just go. The Buick can't do that--it's a little softer on torque and often needs a downshift where the Lincoln wouldn't. Of course, the Buick is down 100 cubic inches, so I guess that explains things. The Buick is vastly more polished at every level (which shouldn't be a surprise) but the direct contrast of our drive tonight was really eye-opening. 

 

 

 

Anyway, I remembered why that big Buick is my favorite and will likely remain so.

[Walt G]

Matt, thank you for your comments on how the Lincoln and Buick perform, react etc. All most interesting to read even for someone like me that has had pre war cars for 60 years. ( yeah I am old) It is interesting to get your honest/frank opinion  as you have driven many pre war cars of assorted makes and models/series.  I can also support your enthusiasm for the Buick as I have one a year earlier with the same engine capacity. I think we  indeed are so very  fortunate that we have the opportunity to be able to glide down the road in these fine vehicles that were new before we were born.  Makes one proud to be able to do that.

I believe a significant number of people reading this may not own pre war cars nor have ever had the opportunity to ride much less drive one , so those of us who have should share the joy and some of the idiosyncrasies that are unique to these cars.

Walt

Edited August 1, 2023 by Walt G (see edit history)

[Matt Harwood]

31 minutes ago, Walt G said:

Matt, thank you for your comments on how the Lincoln and Buick perform, react etc. All most interesting to read even for someone like me that has had pre war cars for 60 years. ( yeah I am old) It is interesting to get your honest/frank opinion  as you have driven many pre war cars of assorted makes and models/series.  I can also support your enthusiasm for the Buick as I have one a year earlier with the same engine capacity. I think we are indeed are so very  fortunate that we have the opportunity to be able to glide down the road in these fine vehicles that were new before we were born.  Makes one proud to be able to do that.

I believe a significant number of people reading this may not own pre war cars nor have ever had the opportunity to ride much less drive one , so those of us who have should share the joy and some of the idiosyncrasies that are unique to these cars.

Walt

 

That's exactly why I try to take pre-war cars to most of these casual cruise nights (I think I may take one of the Cords to one tonight). There are so many car guys with exactly zero exposure to pre-war stuff and the impression I get is that they think anything that old must be completely undriveable without disc brakes and power steering. They're always amazed when I tell them how much I drive my pre-war cars and that I put them on the road with modern cars and even that my wife drives them. They figure anything built before about 1955 and the advent of the small block V8 must be like a Model T.

Gotta combat ignorance, wherever it lives. If I can do it by driving a car I love, well, so much the better.

[alsancle]

This is the fourth day in a row we’ve had sunny skies, 75°, and zero humidity. Much  like late September. Honestly, I can’t imagine there isbetter weather anywhere in the  world right now.

 

so, not a classic. But the best I could do today. We just did the brakes. And a minor tuneup. It seems that going from racing gas for the last 20 years to pump gas just once actually stuck the floats. So we fixed that.

 

trying to get 100 miles in.

[Su8overdrive]

Matt & Walt, gentlemen,  n o w   you're talking.   The only way to protect more survivors from being decimated to "retro rods" is to show alleged "car guys" with no experience with anything predating '55 Chevies that prewar cars are eminently drivable.  Many of us have driven vintage cars Auburn through Zephyr.   They are a far remove from the antiques the clueless Camaro crowd imagines.  

 

 From the opening pages of my 1940 Packard's owner's manual:  "Think of driving as a game--such as golf or tennis -- and approach it with the same enthusiasm and expectancy.  The ability to handle a motor car adroitly will give as much pleasure as ability in any other sport....Modern cars perform so smoothly that there is no distinct sensation or impression of speed (sound familiar?).  Even at high speeds, they seem to be 'floating." Glance at --and be guided by -- the speedometer."

 

   It continues reminding owners to merely approach corners at reduced speed, and once into them, slightly increase throttle for a stabilizing effect, instead of braking and ''manhandling" the car through the curve.

 

   The only, and i mean  o n l y  hinderance to enjoying an old car today is overpopulation,  our cars designed and built when national and global population a quarter to less than a third today's 350 million and 8.1 billion.

   Lest some of those here gathered fortunate enough to live in bucolic New England exoburbs whine this is politics,  let them drive anywhere but the hinterlands or backroads.  For many of us,  just getting to a relatively relaxed backroad involves enduring the halting lockstep of concrete conveyor belt.  

 

   This is a forum for what were once termed "fine cars."  College presidents, writers, business owners owned Marmons, Lincolns, Chrysler Imperials,  five of the nine Supreme Court justices in the '30s owned Packards, everyone from Walter Damrosch to J. Robert Oppenheimer, the leading choice of the world's embassies, the Company advertising not just in Fortune, but the National Geographic, Literary Digest, and the New Yorker.   Leaders, decision makers drove fine cars, so we might, at this very late date -- with all internal combustion cars being convenient scapegoats for the "round up the usual suspects" brigade --  park our usual attention to minutiae and take a run at the 800-lb. gorilla:    Germany, birthplace of the automobile, will approve nothing not emission free beginning seven years from now, 2030.  France, the automobile's nursery, beginning 2040.  Iceland, all of Scandinavia 2025-30, the UK and US selling only the emission free a few years later, most nations even banning hybrids.  If the clueless cars and coffees "car guys" Matt and Walt describe don't care about our cars, you know it's only a question of when, not if, the general public allows fees, regulation, special permits for us to continue.

 

    Broaching such reality on oft insular forums be fool's errand, but  liked old cars all my life, and tho' not rebuilding my Packards to drive to Safeway, like many here enjoy taking them out for no good reason now and then, keeping them ready as old firetrucks in back up service.   Like hardcore autoholics Terry Ehrich, the arborist late publisher of Hemmings Motors News, Hemmings Small Boat, and the much missed Special Interest Autos,  Paul Newman, James Garner, am also an ardent environmentalist who walks the talk.

 

   UN and other vetted studies show animals raised for meat and dairy produce more greenhouse gas than all the world's cars, trucks, buses, trains, planes, ships combined.  Meanwhile, our antiquated, agrarian tax codes were enacted when more babies meant more hands to work the family farm, half of all children not surviving beyond age four.   So, we can parse, equivocate, debate, pass the buck, play us/them,  or tackle the 800-lb. gorilla, grab the bull by the horns and lead,  press for tax incentives (again, not mandates) encouraging having only "one or none" and adopting,   enjoy a plant-based, vegan diet, which hasn't slowed the world's leading Formula One driver, Lewis Hamilton.

 

   After suggesting a long established, respected club show real leadership addressing the big picture a month ago, my post was immediately deleted by one of the having it all, head in sand, "I've got mine, Jack, life is good here in Lush Falls, I'll be gone in ten years so what do I care"  silver spooners dismissing anything proactive "politics."   Polls including 2,000 UN scientists in 2013, 11,000 more scientists in the 11/5/19 Bloomberg News, show them agreeing overpopulation our biggest by far problem, their words, "bigger than climate."   Please, i'm not posting this to hear how birthrates declining here and there so la-di-da.   BTW, every nation with declining birthrate enjoys higher per capita GDP, may it provide solace for those whose business model so weak it dependent on evermore consumers and cheap labor.

 

  We don't need the usual escapist/defeatist "well, you should move out here, or to Wagon Wheel, South Dakota."  I lived in greater NYC in the '60s, the greater SF/Oakland, CA Bay Area since '76, and we then thought nothing of driving prewar cars anytime, any day of the week.   Yes, i well knew Ed Jurist's Vintage Car Store in Nyack, all the Names our here. Not here to reminisce, but to ensure our future.  

 

   It's up to us,  if we're really interested in educating an increasingly dismissive public and preserving our cars.   Simple, if not EZ.

Edited August 5, 2023 by Su8overdrive (see edit history)

[Ben Bruce aka First Born]

On 7/31/2023 at 7:25 PM, Matt Harwood said:

For the past few weeks, I've been driving my '35 Lincoln almost exclusively just to rack up some miles. I think I've put about 900 miles on it in six weeks. Three weeks ago we drove it to a local cruise night down on the river about 20 miles away. Tonight we went again but took the '41 Buick Limited, which I haven't driven in quite some time. It fired up instantly and idled perfectly, just like it had been driven 10 minutes earlier not 10 months. No fussing, no hassles, just an easy cruise with temps at 170 and 50 PSI of oil pressure. It never makes me sweat.

 

And holy cow I'd forgotten just how great that Buick is to drive. So fast, smooth, quiet, and comfortable. Silent at speed. No bumps. No vibrations. I thought the Lincoln was pretty polished, but now that I've had a hard reset and could drive the Buick with fresh eyes, I'm amazed all over again. What a fantastic car.

 

There is one caveat: I am wholly and completely addicted to the Lincoln's massive low-end torque. The Buick just can't match it and I immediately missed it. The Lincoln will pull cleanly from 4 MPH in high gear so downshifts are all but unnecessary except for a dead stop. Getting it rolling takes no throttle and you can let the clutch out as fast as you want and it'll just go. The Buick can't do that--it's a little softer on torque and often needs a downshift where the Lincoln wouldn't. Of course, the Buick is down 100 cubic inches, so I guess that explains things. The Buick is vastly more polished at every level (which shouldn't be a surprise) but the direct contrast of our drive tonight was really eye-opening. 

 

 

 

Anyway, I remembered why that big Buick is my favorite and will likely remain so.

 

 Wonder if the differentials are geared the same?

 

  Ben

[Matt Harwood]

2 minutes ago, Ben Bruce aka First Born said:

 

 Wonder if the differentials are geared the same?

 

  Ben

 

Buick: 4.20

Lincoln: 4.58

 

Both wearing 32-inch tires. Close enough.

[Den41Buick]

A great night for a drive after work. Yes, I am still working. There is nothing better when driving than looking down the hood of a Packard. I am smiling every time! 
 

[Steve_Mack_CT]

18 hours ago, Den41Buick said:

A great night for a drive after work. Yes, I am still working. There is nothing better when driving than looking down the hood of a Packard. I am smiling every time! 
 

Agree!!  Never gets old!!

[charlespetty]

On 7/31/2023 at 5:25 PM, Matt Harwood said:

For the past few weeks, I've been driving my '35 Lincoln almost exclusively just to rack up some miles. I think I've put about 900 miles on it in six weeks. Three weeks ago we drove it to a local cruise night down on the river about 20 miles away. Tonight we went again but took the '41 Buick Limited, which I haven't driven in quite some time. It fired up instantly and idled perfectly, just like it had been driven 10 minutes earlier not 10 months. No fussing, no hassles, just an easy cruise with temps at 170 and 50 PSI of oil pressure. It never makes me sweat.

 

And holy cow I'd forgotten just how great that Buick is to drive. So fast, smooth, quiet, and comfortable. Silent at speed. No bumps. No vibrations. I thought the Lincoln was pretty polished, but now that I've had a hard reset and could drive the Buick with fresh eyes, I'm amazed all over again. What a fantastic car.

 

There is one caveat: I am wholly and completely addicted to the Lincoln's massive low-end torque. The Buick just can't match it and I immediately missed it. The Lincoln will pull cleanly from 4 MPH in high gear so downshifts are all but unnecessary except for a dead stop. Getting it rolling takes no throttle and you can let the clutch out as fast as you want and it'll just go. The Buick can't do that--it's a little softer on torque and often needs a downshift where the Lincoln wouldn't. Of course, the Buick is down 100 cubic inches, so I guess that explains things. The Buick is vastly more polished at every level (which shouldn't be a surprise) but the direct contrast of our drive tonight was really eye-opening. 

 

 

 

Anyway, I remembered why that big Buick is my favorite and will likely remain so.

The Lincoln produces maximum torque of 312ftlbs  at 1600 rpm, while the Buick reaches maximum torque of 275ftlbs at 2200 rpm.  My 1937 Lincoln K even on the longer 145inch wheelbase and greater weight than Matt's car is a torque monster.  It will climb any hill without breaking a sweat.  

[alsancle]

On 8/2/2023 at 4:06 PM, Su8overdrive said:

Matt & Walt, gentlemen,  n o w   you're talking.   The only way to protect more survivors from being decimated to "retro rods" is to show alleged "car guys" with no experience with anything predating '55 Chevies that prewar cars are eminently drivable.  Many of us have driven vintage cars Auburn through Zephyr.   They are a far remove from the antiques the clueless Camaro crowd imagines.  

 

 From the opening pages of my 1940 Packard's owner's manual:  "Think of driving as a game--such as golf or tennis -- and approach it with the same enthusiasm and expectancy.  The ability to handle a motor car adroitly will give as much pleasure as ability in any other sport....Modern cars perform so smoothly that there is no distinct sensation or impression of speed (sound familiar?).  Even at high speeds, they seem to be 'floating." Glance at --and be guided by -- the speedometer."

 

   It continues reminding owners to merely approach corners at reduced speed, and once into them, slightly increase throttle for a stabilizing effect, instead of braking and ''manhandling" the car through the curve.

 

   The only, and i mean  o n l y  hinderance to enjoying an old car today is overpopulation,  our cars designed and built when national and global population a quarter to less than a third today's 350 million and 8.1 billion.

Lest some of those here gathered fortunate enough to live in bucolic New England exoburbs whine this is politics,  let them drive anywhere but the hinterlands or backroads.  For many of us,  just getting to a relatively relaxed backroad involves enduring the halting lockstep of concrete conveyor belt.  

 

   This is a forum for what were once termed "fine cars."  College presidents, writers, business owners owned Marmons, Lincolns, Chrysler Imperials,  five of the nine Supreme Court justices in the '30s owned Packards, the Company advertising not just in Fortune, but the National Geographic, Literary Digest, and the New Yorker.   Leaders, decision makers drove fine cars, so we might, at this very late date, with all internal combustion cars being convenient scapegoats for the "round up the usual suspects" mob,  park the attention to minutiae and take a run at the 800-lb. gorilla.  Germany, birthplace of the automobile, will approve nothing not emission free beginning seven years from now, 2030.  France, the automobile's nursery, beginning 2040.  Iceland, all of Scandinavia 2025-30, the UK and US selling only the emission free a few years later, most nations even banning hybrids.  If the clueless cars and coffees "car guys" Matt and Walt describe don't care about our cars, you know it's only a question of when, not if, the general public allows fees, regulation, special permits for us to continue.

 

    Broaching such reality on oft insular forums be fool's errand, but i've liked old cars all my life, and tho' i didn't rebuild my Packards to drive to Safeway, like many here enjoy taking them out for no good reason now and then, keeping them ready as old firetrucks in back up service.   Like hardcore autoholics Terry Ehrich, the arborist late publisher of Hemmings Motors News, Hemmings Small Boat, and the much missed Special Interest Autos,  Paul Newman, James Garner, i am also an ardent environmentalist who walks the talk.

 

   UN and other vetted studies show animals raised for meat and dairy produce more greenhouse gas than all the world's cars, trucks, buses, trains, planes, ships combined.  Meanwhile, our antiquated, agrarian tax codes were enacted when more babies meant more hands to work the family farm, half of all children not surviving beyond age four.   So, we can parse, equivocate, debate, pass the buck, play us/them,  or tackle the 800-lb. gorilla, grab the bull by the horns and lead,  press for tax incentives (again, not mandates) encouraging having only "one or none" and adopting,   enjoy a plant-based, vegan diet, which hasn't slowed the world's leading Formula One driver, Lewis Hamilton.

 

   After suggesting a long established, respected club show real leadership addressing the big picture a month ago, my post was immediately deleted by one of the having it all, head in sand, "I've got mine, Jack, life is good here in Lush Falls, I'll be gone in ten years so what do I care"  silver spooners dismissing anything proactive "politics."   Polls including 2,000 UN scientists in 2013, 11,000 more scientists in the 11/5/19 Bloomberg News, show them agreeing overpopulation our biggest by far problem, their words, "bigger than climate."   Please, i'm not posting this to hear how birthrates declining here and there so la-di-da.   BTW, every nation with declining birthrate enjoys higher per capita GDP, may it provide solace for those whose business model so weak it dependent on evermore consumers and cheap labor.

 

  Neither do we want to hear the usual escapist/defeatist "well, you should move out here, or to Wagon Wheel, South Dakota."  I lived in greater NYC in the '60s, the greater SF/Oakland, CA Bay Area since '76, and we then thought nothing of driving prewar cars anytime, any day of the week.   Yes, i well knew Ed Jurist's Vintage Car Store in Nyack, all the Names our here. Not here to reminisce, but to ensure our future.  

 

   So, it's up to us, especially if we're really interested in educating an increasingly dismissive public and preserving our cars.   Simple, if not EZ.

 

Wow.  I just made the mistake of reading this.   You really want to have a population debate in the "Driving Classics" thread?

Edited August 4, 2023 by alsancle (see edit history)

[jcrow]

I, for one, am happy to open my mind to what others have to say, especially when they

are thinking about ways to save or improve our hobby. I might not always agree with

them and I suppose they might sometimes offer their thoughts in the "wrong" forum,

but I appreciate the efforts.

 

Johnny

[Den41Buick]

If you are in New England today, you should be driving your classic. Absolutely beautiful day. It felt like Fall this morning. I took the 41 Buick for a ride around the reservoir. When I got back home I felt it was too nice to leave the Packard in the garage, so we took a ride to visit the relatives and pick up lunch. 
 

Get out there if you can.

 

 

[Den41Buick]

Out for an after dinner ride around the neighborhood. Perfect weather this weekend. Feeling like Fall. The best time to get out there and drive. 
 

[alsancle]

It was hot here in New England today. We had beautiful 70 something degree no humidity weather for the last few weeks. But this week is a heat wave. I did about 10 miles in my Stearns. Roughly equivalent to 50 miles in the Jag or any post war car.

[alsancle]

Beautiful day here in New England.  I went to pick my mom up for a ride,  car ran great on the way over but after I got her it has zero power.  I'm thinking I lost a bank of cylinders or developed a vacuum leak somewhere.  Oh well.  Limped back to the garage.   It really never ends.

[Matt Harwood]

My favorite T-shirt.

 

[Ben Bruce aka First Born]

Coulda had a BUICK?😁

 

  Ben

[Tph479]

7 hours ago, alsancle said:

Beautiful day here in New England.  I went to pick my mom up for a ride,  car ran great on the way over but after I got her it has zero power.  I'm thinking I lost a bank of cylinders or developed a vacuum leak somewhere.  Oh well.  Limped back to the garage.   It really never ends.

Coil, condenser, loose wire or maybe something got caught in the carb jet. Neat car. Happy that you are driving and enjoying it.

[Steve_Mack_CT]

Agree with tph, AJ, not ideal but an unassisted return trip is a victory of sorts at least.  Hopefully a minor issue, as we roll into the middle of prime New England driving season.

[Packard enthus.]

On 10/2/2023 at 6:44 AM, Steve_Mack_CT said:

Agree with tph, AJ, not ideal but an unassisted return trip is a victory of sorts at least.  Hopefully a minor issue, as we roll into the middle of prime New England driving season.

Just how "good" were the "good old days".....?     Well....I agree about the "victory of sorts".   Underscores the difference between the big "super cars" of the pre-war era (Cad. V-12 &V-16, Pierce Arrow,  Lincolns,  Packard Twelves like mine....etc) and the "ordinary-man" cars of that day. 

 

We have TWO of what matters.....TWO separate fan/water pump drive belts, two separate jets in our carbs., two separate ignition coils, points, condensors.     We get to keep moving when parts start failing!  

 

Ordinary cars of the pre-war era did not have, and had no reason to have cooling systems that were anything more than adequate for their anticipated use (mostly local driving - understandable, given the pre-war road network). 

 

Just look at the difference in the advertising of that era, as to what the anticipated use was (for example...I saw a advertisement for the then new '34 Packard Twelves,  representing how relaxing it was to drive the thing four hundred miles in one day.  On those roads, in that era......not something that would be practical in what the "ordinary mans" car could do!.   I saw lots of water bags on earlier cars when crossing the desert....NEVER saw one on one of the big "super cars". 

[Su8overdrive]

Which, Peter, is one of the reasons, other than wanting to blend in, anonymity,  that adroit hoodlums, bank robbers,  preferred Ford V-8s and '33 Terraplane Eights?  We gather you've retired from the bar, but might your critical thinking serve law students?  Perhaps a retirement gig teaching, or pro bono help for the disadvantaged in order?

 

 Because we might also make an argument that automobiles with fewer cylinders, fewer parts, have less to go wrong, were and are less of a load on their tires, suspensions, brakes than the dreadnaughts you deem superior to all else.  Engineering progresses.  Time moves on, sometimes at a cost to the handwork many admire, bearing in mind machine tools ensure more consistent quality at far more reasonable cost.  Your Twelve was one of the paramount cars of its day, certainly the most refined, modern chassis of the big '30s "fire trucks" as former Packard Club quarterly editor/writer Richard Langworth not disparagingly termed them.  Though its engine no better than an Auburn 12 or Pierce V-12, or do we suffer from one-marque-itis, as Dave Brownell, the knowing editor of the much missed Special Interest Autos termed such?

 

 Monsignor Hartmann, no car has it all; is the last word, beyond reproach.  The Packard Twelve, wonderful as it turned out, was originally a 376-ci V-12  intended for Packard's FWD model meant to compete with Buick's then fastest car in the sub-luxe sector, their ohv 345-ci straight eight Model 90.  It was never intended to replace Packard's topline 385-ci Custom Eight.  But when Cadillac debuted what was essentially a straight eight with firing impulses halved for less crankpin loading, the better able to cope with custom bodies approaching three tons yet use the existing V-8's transmission,  Packard hurriedly dropped a stroked 445-ci version of their new V-12 into the existing Custom 8's chassis.

 

The Packard Twelve, like all senior Packards, owned the fine car market (above $2,000 FOB) through 1936, at which point Packard commanded 42% of that  t i n y, rapidly vanishing element, thanks to a chiseled, apart from the fray styling as much as pervasive engineering refinement and clever tooling overseen since 1910 and 1912 by ex-cash register company and Hudson executives, Taylor time and motion procedures implemented since 1906, if not as grueling as the Fordism later depicted in Charlie Chaplin's Modern Times (1936).  Aside from the ravages of the Depression and 1938 recession, a new breed of "pocket luxury cars" were offering equal or better performance, certainly more nimble, far less expensive to fuel and maintain then and now.

 

   The big Lincolns, Model KB and K, if we're splitting hairs, had the finest craftsmanship of anyone in the heavy iron segment.  For example, while Packard Twelve, Pierce, Cadillac interior fittings were chromed pot metal, Lincoln's were chromed brass.  Yes, we know how rip-roaring your mighty Twelve, but it is not faster than a comparably sized Pierce V-12.  It is not "better."  Differently executed, yes.

 

  Perspective is served by remembering it is vastly harder to produce a fine,  affordable barouche than a cost little object "super car."   Perspective won't diminish your Twelve's value nor net worth.

 

  Something to reflect on: Leaders, the best in any field, do not require continual PR, boosterism, in their day, or 85 years hence.

 

                                                   Respectfully, a fellow lifetime Packard owner, if catholic in his taste.

Edited October 5, 2023 by Su8overdrive (see edit history)

[Packard enthus.]

DRIVING CLASSICS, cont:

I enjoyed Su8overdrive's excellent article, agreeing with some of his points, disagreeing  & finding faults with others....

 

Let's see - his is a long article -but definitely an outstanding one - deserves a fiesty response.

 

First of all, you are mistaken - if you knew how good looking and charming I am, you'd know it wouldn't be fair to male college students to have me back in the class-room (my teaching credential is in History & Military Affairs,  so in my day, not that many cute girls in the classes, but when they did show up...certainly got my respect and attention....).  So teaching is out...too busy with my child-hood hobbies....(which have stayed the same).

 

Secondly, I disagree with SOME of your comments about the Fierce Sparrow.

 

First - about the Sparrow.....true...it had a SLIGHTLY smaller stroke than my Twelve...but whether that means it would hold together under extremes of abuse....not sure.  As you probably know '35 thr '39 Packard Twelves had chrome moly rods, with Federal-Mogul designed "insert" copper-lead rod bearings. 

 

Second point about the Sparrow....by comparison to a Packard Twelve, its V-12 was stone-age in terms of combustion-chamber design.  It was a standard "L" head.   Cylinder head at right angles to the top of the block.  The Packard Twelve could also be called a "L" head, but its cylinder bore was at an ANGLE to the top of the block, giving it a wedge-shaped combustion chamber.  my PREJUDICE  is that much more advanced design (coupled with better "breathing" from both an intake and exhaust development,  made the Packard Twelve more powrful.

 

Was a Pierce Twelve faster than a Packard Twelve?    Sure, but only because it could be ordered with an overdrive.  Assuming the exact same final drive ratios....hmmmm.....probably a tie. Yes, I know what Jenkins did.  but that car was "tricked".

 

Interior fittings?   C'mon...man...you've been to too many car shows where folks turned once magnificent motor cars into costume jewelry without regard to historical accuracy.     Chrome was considered vulgar - the interior fittings were nickle plated (as, incidentally, were the engine fittings...!

 

Now I REALLY take offense.....you say Packard Twelve engines "no better than a Auburn".......how dare you!     They were neither designed, engineered, nor qualifiedly set up to compete in the Packard Twelve price class...nearly ONE HUNDRED CUB INCH less motor!    (Seriously, no question that with a "Colombia" rear end...bone-stock to bone stock...they were faster...MUCH faster.  Side note....my own Twelve has a 3.23 gear set hidden away in its authentic rear axle assembly.....I suspect you'd agree that "flat out"....no matter what you did to a KB, a 452, or a Series 90....would have a chance....

 

Yes - one thing we agree on...is the march of technology/progress that exploded in the 30's.   That made the "heavy-weights" obsolete before they rolled out of the factory door - as was most certainly the case with my Packard Twelve!

 

What better example of how right your comment is, is about the "new breed" being so superior to dinosaurs like mine!   Some years ago, when I was on the Boards of both the Nat. CCCA and my then Region, I joined many of our "Old Guard" in opposing the admission to the Club of the Cadillac 60 Special. Our reasoning - way too modern,.   But to be honest,  let's say it is a hot, muggy summer day,  and you want to get across townh thru traffic, or cross the desert in a hurry.   Which would you rather choose (assuming both were properly maintained....a 1931 Cadillac V-16...or  a '41 Sixty Special.  That '41 could be ordered with factory air!.  It had a pressurized cooling system,  fully automatic transmission with a "high-speed" gear ratio enabling it to cruise effortlessly at speeds that would destroy the '31 V-16....down-draft carbs. with pressure fuel pump in place of those vacuum tanks...etc...etc.

 

Bottom line....looks like we agree more than we disagree.....

 

 

[Su8overdrive]

 Peter,  we know the Lycoming Auburn V-12 displaced 391-ci, the Packard 445, 473, but hewing to brevity avoided rehash.   My point stands:  The Lycoming Auburn 12 engine is easily the equal in quality to the Packard Twelve's engine. The Auburn 12 shares the Packard Twelve's (and 1930-31 Oldsmobile, '32 Pontiac, '36-37 Cord's) canted valves, and was husky enough for American-LaFrance to use it bored/stroked to 526-ci, compression boosted from the automotive 5.7 to 7.2:1 in 500-, 750-, 1,000-gpm firetrucks through 1962.  The Aub 12's valve ports open into a rectangular extension of the combustion chamber at right angle to the valves, so valve jobs could be done without removing the heads.  The Aub 12 was one of the first, if not first, production auto engine to come with a full-flow oil filter, and also free of the complex hydraulic valve silencers, the type of hydraulic lash adjusters used in the Cadillac V-16, licensed by GM, for which Packard paid royalties.

 

 The Auburn 12's engine was easily the equal of the Packard Twelve, if not a trace better.  That the Auburn 12 was one of the best bargains in automotive history should not diminish its engine.

 

 Unlike Packard's V-12, Pierce-Arrow's was designed from the outset as power for massive all-out luxury automobiles, as seven main bearings and an industrial mien attest.  The Pierce V-12 like their concurrent 385-ci inline eight, used modern, simpler hydraulic valve lifters from 1933 models on, a Pierce-Arrow innovation.  The stock displacement Pierce straight eight was used in Seagraves fire apparatus through 1958, the 462-ci Pierce V-12, enlarged to 530-ci, in Seagraves fire trucks through 1970. The Aub/Pierce fire fighting engines had twin ignition simply as such mandatory in emergency equipment.

 

  Peter, we lose credibility if we try to argue that every facet of our car better than everything else produced at the time.  I wrote that the Packard Twelve chassis was the most refined and modern;  only that the Pierce engines, both eight and V-12, might get the nod if we're splitting hairs.  Unfortunately, too many buffs suffering one-marque-itis read such as their car being a weak sister.  Horse races won by a nose, automobile races by hundredths of a second.  Those placing second in such contests are not sent to the rendering plant or scrapheap.    Relax.    If we view your Packard Twelve as an Olympic decathlon contender in its class, the complete car is hard to best.

 

    Bowing to the knowledge and mechanical sophistication of most here gathered, figured curb weight to curb weight, equal gearing a given.

 

    In the '30s, such fittings as mentioned were chromed.

Edited October 6, 2023 by Su8overdrive (see edit history)

[alsancle]

From a few years ago but with the Duesenberg tour coming later this fall never bad to watch again.  That is an eight lane highway.

 

 

[Su8overdrive]

  Duesenberg Js certainly impressive, and in their day and some years after, on a long, straight road, unpassable.  But for their ridiculous original prices--a marketing ploy to generate additional buzz-- should've been, perhaps tripled as gyrocopter and submersible.  Obsolete two years after their debut, it took nine years and several iterations to dispatch 480 Js to Hollywooders and the children of industrial wealth. As Richard Hough observed in his wonderful 1961 compendium w/ forewords by W. O. Bentley and S. C. H. Davis, A History of the World's Sports Cars, Js were prone to "....front end vibration periods, which cursed all ultra long wheelbase cars when cart springing about at the end of its tether -- including Bentley and Rolls-Royce....and the lack of refinement at high revs, caused most probably by the enormously long camshaft chains, which were inclined to stretch, upsetting valve timing."

 

 An old friend's on his third J, but then he uses a butter knife as screwdriver and likes to talk about them, quoting from the usual tomes; J.L. Elbert's 1975 Duesenberg, the Mightiest American Motor Car, and      Duesenberg: The Pursuit of Perfection, Jim Roe, 1986. 

 

 Just about every article since repeats the usual mantra: 265 hp, and the J's 116 mph top speed, although this pace with the 5.75 optional not standard 5.2:1 compression, and the special tuning buyers paid still more for.  Maurice Hendry, an engineer as well as historian, told me most Js in road trim topped out at about 105 mph;  of the 3.8, 4, 4.1, 4.3:1 axles, the middle two most common.

 

 Fred Duesenberg wanted to build something the size of his earlier Models A and X,  about that of the Stutz SV16, later DV32, a well appointed example of the latter costing under a third less than a J. Former car salesman, 10th grade drop out, stock market marauder E. L. Cord knew what he was doing when he advertised 265 hp to eclipse the claimed 250 of a limited-production Mercedes, itself inflated.  Preston Tucker did the same when he advertised 166 hp for his namesake, intended to debut for 1947, in order to beat Packard's inflated 165 hp (dynamometer tests at GM's Proving Grounds by Buick in 1940 of all remotely competitive cars showed every last one of them optimistic by 8.46 to 22.10%).

 

  Again, as the above videos show, certainly a heady thrill driving such a bruiser on open bucolic roads, but some top-line farm tractors also had enameled and polished engine bits as manufacturers pulled out all stops to lure what Depression money remained.  Other than twin cams, the cuckoo box of gears flashing oil change, battery water, and that the Bijur chassis lube pump shared with dozens of other premium cars was working, doubt a J six times better than a 1931-33 Chrysler Imperial, tho' i've never driven nor ridden in one of those huge Mopars.  A late friend said his wife could parallel park his Marmon 16 club sedan (a third the price new of a J & its crankshaft not needing counterweights), every one of which lapped the nearby Indy 500 track at 105 mph before delivery, and would out accelerate a J to 70, after which the J dohc's better breathing helped.

 

  Once again, no one denies a Model J not impressive, but having dallied with these and higher end automobiles as long as some here gathered have been alive, can't help remarking that two (2) things have second-tiered most in the old car hobby: Duesenberg as some stand alone chariot of the gods, and the replacement of genuine concours d'elegance with recent decades' domestic janitorial d'elegance.

 

   This only as we like some perspective. But as with someone's Packard Twelve, why do so many J owners need to remind us what a cut above they are?  If true, shouldn't that be self-evident?

I had much the same enjoyment as posted above when we took Reid Railton's son's '37 Railton 8 tourer out for a back road romp; the wonderful sound from that stock Hudson flathead inline engine,  the charming whine of the less than stout 35-lb. Hudson gearbox, which unlike every Model J, was at least synchronized.  In 1940, Augie Duesenberg was selling a marine version of this 254-ci engine.  Derby engineers replaced a Phantom III's troublesome 447-ci V-12 w/ such engine and gave R-R's mgmt. a ride around the grounds, the unknowing brass raving over its silky power.   (For 1950-56's Phantom IV, sold only to royalty and heads of state, R-R produced a 346-ci inline eight version of their B60, the B80, also used in Dennis fire trucks and airport tugs.)

 

   As today, anyone can build a cost little object super or "hyper" car.  But it takes enormous ability to produce a fine car those lacking silver spoons might enjoy. 

 

  Please pardon the ramble, but some of us are under house arrest thanks to the overpopulation we're apparently not to address,  despite every poll of scientists agreeing it by far our biggest problem, their words: "bigger than climate"  (UN 2013, Bloomberg News 11/5/19, NY Times last year, 60 Minutes this),  it rendering our old i.c. cars convenient whipping boys.   But thanks for posting and enjoy the ride.

Edited October 21, 2023 by Su8overdrive (see edit history)

[alsancle]

[Matt Harwood]

I don't care if Duesenbergs drive like they have square wheels, I want one.

 

I am confident I am not alone, not today and not in the 1930s.

[West Peterson]

On 10/7/2023 at 2:26 PM, Su8overdrive said:

  the replacement of genuine concours d'elegance with recent decades' domestic janitorial d'elegance.

^^^^^

This !!

[charlespetty]

On 10/6/2023 at 3:08 PM, Su8overdrive said:

 Peter,  we know the Lycoming Auburn V-12 displaced 391-ci, the Packard 445, 473, but hewing to brevity avoided rehash.   My point stands:  The Lycoming Auburn 12 engine is easily the equal in quality to the Packard Twelve's engine. The Auburn 12 shares the Packard Twelve's (and 1930-31 Oldsmobile, '32 Pontiac, '36-37 Cord's) canted valves, and was husky enough for American-LaFrance to use it bored/stroked to 526-ci, compression boosted from the automotive 5.7 to 7.2:1 in 500-, 750-, 1,000-gpm firetrucks through 1962.  The Aub 12's valve ports open into a rectangular extension of the combustion chamber at right angle to the valves, so valve jobs could be done without removing the heads.  The Aub 12 was one of the first, if not first, production auto engine to come with a full-flow oil filter, and also free of the complex hydraulic valve silencers, the type of hydraulic lash adjusters used in the Cadillac V-16, licensed by GM, for which Packard paid royalties.

 

 The Auburn 12's engine was easily the equal of the Packard Twelve, if not a trace better.  That the Auburn 12 was one of the best bargains in automotive history should not diminish its engine.

 

 Unlike Packard's V-12, Pierce-Arrow's was designed from the outset as power for massive all-out luxury automobiles, as seven main bearings and an industrial mien attest.  The Pierce V-12 like their concurrent 385-ci inline eight, used modern, simpler hydraulic valve lifters from 1933 models on, a Pierce-Arrow innovation.  The stock displacement Pierce straight eight was used in Seagraves fire apparatus through 1958, the 462-ci Pierce V-12, enlarged to 530-ci, in Seagraves fire trucks through 1970. The Aub/Pierce fire fighting engines had twin ignition simply as such mandatory in emergency equipment.

 

  Peter, we lose credibility if we try to argue that every facet of our car better than everything else produced at the time.  I wrote that the Packard Twelve chassis was the most refined and modern;  only that the Pierce engines, both eight and V-12, might get the nod if we're splitting hairs.  Unfortunately, too many buffs suffering one-marque-itis read such as their car being a weak sister.  Horse races won by a nose, automobile races by hundredths of a second.  Those placing second in such contests are not sent to the rendering plant or scrapheap.    Relax.    If we view your Packard Twelve as an Olympic decathlon contender in its class, the complete car is hard to best.

 

    Bowing to the knowledge and mechanical sophistication of most here gathered, figured curb weight to curb weight, equal gearing a given.

 

    In the '30s, such fittings as mentioned were chromed.

 " In the '30s, such fittings as mentioned were chromed"

 

Lincoln K interior fittings were nickel plated right up until the end in 1939.  

[Su8overdrive]

Thank you, Chief Petty Officer Charles.  Live and learn.  But the bigger point is that the big Lincolns' fittings were brass, not pot metal--excuse me, "German silver" -- as in the big Cads, Packards, Pierces, et al.  You must've known Jack Passey?

Ah, Eureka. Now there's a right bucolic realm where one might still drive relaxedly an ancient car with stick and no synchro on first.

[charlespetty]

"Now there's a right bucolic realm where one might still drive relaxedly an ancient car with stick and no synchro on first."

 

Hey, I resemble that remark!  Here I am driving in all of our bucolic splendor.  
 

 

Edited October 18, 2023 by charlespetty (see edit history)

[Shootey]

Whenever I have nothing to read as I get into bed, I grab an issue of Automobile Quarterly off the shelf. In volume 22 no.1 there is an article about Fageol. It is fascinating. The Fageol 100 in 1917 compared favorably to the finest cars around the world. It didn’t last but it was an impressive concept. The engine was a Hall-Scott. 

A few weeks ago I went to a bus and streetcar festival here in San Francisco. A very interesting bus was a Fageol. Build around 1947, it had two six cylinder gasoline engines and was intended to replace the cable cars. Each engine was located on the side midway back and laid flat to fit under the floorboard and provide optimal balance. Each engine had its own driveshaft. They had problems synchronizing the engines. I chatted with the fairly young city mechanic who was involved in the Fageol’s restoration. He was really into old school wrenching, a nice thing to see. 

Last Fageol story. The Fageols constructed in the early 1950’s a twin engine Porsche. The car participated on one or more of the road races held in Pebble Beach. Another fascinating piece of history. 

[Su8overdrive]

Charles, yours above worthy of a high end calendar.  Shootey, right, the Fageol story is another of those all but forgotten as a lavish, overblown, born out of their age few are celebrated beyond all rational measure.

Had forgotten San Francisco's shortsighted  Mayor Roger Lapham had in 1947 tried to remove the City's charming cable cars, prevented by the union of 27 women's civic groups,   as Jackie Kennedy Onassis among those saving that cathedral to transportation, Grand Central Station, 30 years later.    This aside to remind us to work to save not just our cars and covered bridges, but other architecture and civil engineering of note, lest we wind up driving our 80-, 90-, century-old survivors through interchangeable 'burbs, scenery of tire shops, fast food dives, mall 'n' sprawl.    Which brings us back to my original post on this scenic thread, the dire need for us -- assuming we want a future in which our old i.c. cars not scapegoats, whipping boys -- to revise our antiquated, agrarian tax code from when more babies meant more hands to work the family farm, half of all children not surviving beyond age four, to instead encourage (not mandate) having "one or none," and adopting.  Every poll of scientists has them in agreement overpopulation by far our biggest problem, their words "bigger than climate."    

 

 Extra credit: If we really want to keep the heat off our old cars, and ourselves, follow the world's leading Formula One driver, Lewis Hamilton, and adopt a plant-based, vegan diet, considering the UN and other vetted studies show animals raised for meat and dairy produce more greenhouse gas than all the world's cars, trucks, buses, trains, planes, ships combined, and such a repast is the single best move to prevent heart disease, cardiovascular ills, inflammation, hypertension, high blood pressure, diabetes, cancer, macular degeneration, dementia (now termed type 3 diabetes), Alzheimer's.

 

Fageol Supersonic harks to the 23-year-old ketchup heir Rust Heinz's Cord-based Phantom Corsair of 11 years earlier:

 

 

We now return to nest feathering, already in progress.

Edited October 19, 2023 by Su8overdrive (see edit history)

[alsancle]