Looking at 1950 Ultramatic

[Guest sherlok]

Hi,

I'm looking at possibly buying a 1950 Custom with Ultramatic. How prone to problems are these transmissions? What should I look for when checking the car out?

Realistically, I'll only put about 250 mile per year on it. But I'm leaning toward a straight shift. At least I can probably deal with it if I have a problem.

Your thoughts please.

Thanks for your help.

Regards,

Sherlok

[Owen_Dyneto]

If you like the car otherwise, there is no reason to be apprehensive about an Ultramatic behind the straight eight engine, they were rugged and reliable (not necessarily the case when installed behind the V8s). Rebuild kits with many needed parts are available as fresh stock, and most other parts can be found as NOS. There are also several folks who can rebuild these if you needed that and didn't want to tackle it yourself. Use Type F or Type FA fluid.

[Packard8]

I agree with Owen...the original Turtlematics are pretty bulletproof and have direct drive above 30 MPH. Just don't plan on drag racing anyone (unless they have a Buick Dynaflo or Mopar Fluid drive....lol) <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

[Guest Randy Berger]

Don't laugh too much. I whipped the H*LL out of a 53 Oldsmobile Holiday with hydramatic driving our 1952 Mayfair. As a matter of fact the Olds didn't believe it and raced me back down the same stretch of road. At the bottom of the road where I pulled into the hotdog stand where we hung out, the Olds kept going and we didn't see him for more than a week. Summer of 58, McKeesport Pa. <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

[Guest BJM]

Hey I resemble that remark. Actually the direct drive is a great seperator from the Dynaflow. At least a person should get slightly better gas mileage with an Ultramatic, and better use of highway power opportunities.

[Packard8]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hey I resemble that remark. Actually the direct drive is a great seperator from the Dynaflow. At least a person should get slightly better gas mileage with an Ultramatic, and better use of highway power opportunities. </div></div>

LOL...I had a '57 RM Riv with DynaBloat back in the day (wish I still did), and I think it burned about 2 gallons from a standing start to 30 MPH.

The Packard lock-up TC was way ahead of its time...didn't reappear until when...the late 1980's?

<img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

[Packard8]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Don't laugh too much. I whipped the H*LL out of a 53 Oldsmobile Holiday with hydramatic driving our 1952 Mayfair. As a matter of fact the Olds didn't believe it and raced me back down the same stretch of road. At the bottom of the road where I pulled into the hotdog stand where we hung out, the Olds kept going and we didn't see him for more than a week. Summer of 58, McKeesport Pa. <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> </div></div>

Hey Randy...how many plug wires did you cross on the Olds while the guy wasn't looking? <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" />

Prolly a pretty close match re power to weight ratio...just have to start the Mayfair in "L" and let off and lock up around 28 MPH, hold that 'till about 50, shift to "D" "passing gear" and then to "D" direct and ya got him....maybe...LOL

[Guest Randy Berger]

No maybe's about it. He didn't show up at the hotdog stand for a while and when he did he kept his mouth shut. His Olds was in decent shape. It was the first time I tried to drag with the Mayfair and fully expected to be beaten. I did wind it up in neutral and then slammed it in Lo and shifted to Hi at about 30 mph. I think I was as surprised as the Olds owner. <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> Just glad I didn't have to hear his BS any more. <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

[Packard enthus.]

When you fellows make posts that a early 50's Packard/Ultramatic would offer performance in the same league as a GM V8 with Hydramatic, dosn't it ever occur to you that some people reading these posts actually KNOW these cars & have worked on and driven them? Aren't you just a LITTLE bit embarssed to post such nonsence ?

For those of you who are interested in what these cars were REALLY like, look up their ACTUAL performance in old road-test magazines.

The sad fact is Packard went from its tradition of being one of the fastest cars in its price range, to, when equipped with Ultramatic, just about the SLOWEST car of ANY price range.

If someone will tell me how to do it, I will set up a "post" here so you can read some road test reports from that era -I have one that confirms the awful truth that about the only car one of the major test groups tested, that was slower than a '53 Packard with Ultramatic, was the 1949 Chevrolet Powerglide. Declining "build quality" and performance were a major factor in the public rejecting Packard products; the dismal failure-rate of the Ultramatic certainly helped making Packard the laughing-stock of the industry.

[Packard8]

Hey Randy, wanna start an ?office pool? on how long before the Village Troll gets the Bum?s Rush again?

I thought he was gone after that insulting post to the new guy with the 1940 Darrin, but apparently not.

PS the winner of the pool gets a used Oldsmobile rearend to cobble-up your Packard with?..LOL.

<img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

[Packard enthus.]

I most certainly did NOT insult the guy with the Chrysler. (yes, he did mis-lead me by saying he had a Packard Darrin, but he is a young person, and I do not fault them for their lack of precision of speech..it is the way they are raised).

For those of you who are wondering what the comment about me "insulting a guy with a '40 Darrin" is about, let me explain. A well meaning young person had INHERITED a hot rod - apparently, much of the car was the remains of a 1940 packard, but it had been "gutted", the apparently long-deceased relative who had given it to him threw away the Packard "guts" and installed a modern Chrysler V-8 drive line. While I personally would not do that to a Packard myself, I certainly would not critisize what OTHER people do to THEIR property, if that is what is necessary to meet their needs.

What apparently happened, was the guy had kept the "positive ground" electrical system and that confused the young person who inherited the car. From my own experience, I explained to him that ALL Packards were POSITIVE GROUND until the late V-8's, and he could have damaged the voltage regulator if he hooked it up NEGATIVE ground.

Had he explained to us that he had a MODERN car drive-line, around which were the PARTS of a real Packard, I would have not have commented, because without seeing what KIND of electrical equipment he was talking about, I would have been incompetent to comment - I would have no way of knowing what the guy did when he converted the car over to modern Chrysler components.

Of course we are all terribly sorry that the car buying public rejected Packard more and more in the mid 1950's, finally causing it to go out of business for lack of sales. I am willing to take a lie detector test if that is what it will take to prove to the hard-heads in here...I DIDNT DO IT. IT IS NOT MY FAULT THAT PACKARD WENT OUT OF BUSINESS !

When the issue of what was wrong with those 1950's Packards comes up, will SOME of you PLEASE stop trying to avoid an honest discussion of the truth ?

[Guest sherlok]

Well Guys,

Did not mean to start a flare-up over the Ultramatic. I appreciate and respect all comments. But, I think I might heed my instincts and pursue a straight shift.

Thanks again,

Sherlok

By the way, how trouble-prone are the overdrives?

[Packard enthus.]

If you are lucky enough to find a decent "356" (that was the "big" Packard engine avail thru the end of 1950 production) with a manual transmission and overdrive, you will have one of the fastest, if not THE absolute fastest production car of that era. The only problem is the column shift mechanism - loose bushings in the arms and levers can cause a "lock up", so that the car will not move until you get out, open the hood, and manually un-jam the column shift gear selector levers. Fairly easty to fix.

Those Borg-Warner overdrive units are pretty reliable. Over the years, the internal wiring, points, etc, in the selenoids and related systems can make them cranky. When working properly, they are a delight.

Remember, the better the shape the car is in, obviously, the more you will pay for it. As noted elsewhere thru-out these threads, there is general agreement that it is always MUCH less expensive to just go out and buy a decent car, rather than to try and re-surrect a badly abused problem car.

Over the years I owned a number of "356" ( again, referring to the displacement of the "big" or "Senior" Packards of the 1940-1950 production run) found them a VERY satisfying, reliable, and FAST piece of transportation !

GOOD HUNTING !

[Packard8]

Don?t let self proclaimed internet pontificators sway you unduly. If you believe some of the tripe proffered here you would scrap every postwar Packard ever made as junk. Listen to the people who actually own them now?. not in their foggy memories.

The generally acknowledged Ultramatic Guru is Peter Fitch at Ultramaticdynamics.com. You can contact him and get the real scoop from the horse?s mouth. Last time I checked an updated rebuilt trans & TC with all the modern upgrades in materials and mods runs around $2000 and should provide all the trouble free miles you or I would ever put on a collector car.

That being said, if I were offered identical cars with either an Ultra or 3 speed OD I?d probably opt for the stick shift. However, be aware that any 57+ year old driveline is prone to needing repair & maintenance (clutch, pressure plate, OD solenoid, gearbox etc).

[Guest BJM]

Look all, all automatically shifted cars are slower then manual jobs but the buying public wanted them, and now, to not have to shift. It was considered THE luxury item of the day and came with faults - even Hydramatics and the slosh box Dynaflow in my 49 Roadmaster. So really the argument is moot - they are slow. S-L-O-W. How else do you want me to spell it? But the fellow wondering about reliability I too would have no issue buying one and probably will soon (next 3 years) because it was a Col. Vincent development if I am not mistaken. Old school Packard development of what amounted to the most important post war Packard engineered mechanical piece on the cars. V8 did not come along until close to the end, so Ultramatic had a much larger fingerprint on all post war production. I do find it interesting that there are several early Caribbeans with manual shifting.

So to the point ONLY regarding reliability, I think these were good transmissions and there are still shops that can restore them/rebuild them so why have that sway you in a non purchase?

[Packard8]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Look all, all automatically shifted cars are slower then manual jobs but the buying public wanted them, and now, to not have to shift. It was considered THE luxury item of the day and came with faults - even Hydramatics and the slosh box Dynaflow in my 49 Roadmaster. So really the argument is moot - they are slow. S-L-O-W. How else do you want me to spell it? But the fellow wondering about reliability I too would have no issue buying one and probably will soon (next 3 years) because it was a Col. Vincent development if I am not mistaken. Old school Packard development of what amounted to the most important post war Packard engineered mechanical piece on the cars. V8 did not come along until close to the end, so Ultramatic had a much larger fingerprint on all post war production. I do find it interesting that there are several early Caribbeans with manual shifting.

So to the point ONLY regarding reliability, I think these were good transmissions and there are still shops that can restore them/rebuild them so why have that sway you in a non purchase? </div></div>

3Jakes,

Very good points! The early Ultramatics are practically bulletproof and have the edge over other contemporary automatics in that they were the only one with a direct drive lockup converter?..no slippage at highway speeds.

Sherlok

Are you looking at a particular car? If you have found one you like, don?t let an Ultramatic dissuade you. If it is good shape now chances are it will continue on for years. IF it does need work, it may be as simple as an adjustment, if not see the link I posted above. For a reasonable price they can be rebuilt BETTER than new.

Best,

John

[Clipper47]

My first car was a 1952 Chrysler Windsor with 6 cylinder motor and Fluid Drive transmission. It was slow as molasses in January off the line but on the highway it would cruise at the speed limit for hours on end with no difficulty. I wouldn't let the fact that a Packard has an automatic dissuade you in the least.

[Packard8]

Good point Dave. I don't think any of us here plan on taking our collector cars to the drags on Sunday..... <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" />

Even in their day, big cars like Packards, Caddies, Chryslers, Lincolns & such were driven mostly by "mature" owners who were more interested in floating along at 75 MPH on the highway, not racing stoplight to stoplight down the main drag on Saturday night. That function was left to young punks like me driving 1953 Studebaker Lowey Coupes with Corvette motors and Packard OD trannies.... <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Truth be known, a 2008 Civic right out of the showroom will outrun, out-stop and out-corner just about anything from the 1950's, (and get 50 MPG doing it) But it's still just a Civic......

[Twitch]

Here we have a guy who admittedly will probably drive only 250 miles a year. If an Ultramatic car is functioning reasonably well it shouldn't matter how fast his car is. I'm certain he won't be challenging any blown Willys gassers at the local strip. He's going to be motoring sedately some 250 miles a year. My car puts in about 500.

A stick is no guarantee of durability either. Synchros could be worn. It could jump out of gear or fail to engage properly. It could shift sticky or loose. How about overdrive. If you find a car with it working that's great. If not how much will it cost to repair?

An automatic of any brand is no guarantee of longevity any more than a stick is.

[Packard enthus.]

for Twitch and Pack8

I dont agree with a couple of your points. I think the introduction of the Ultramatic, and the thinking behind it, was a significant part of why the public rejected Packard products to the point they had to go out of business for lack of sales. here's my thinking:

I think you are wrong in your assumption that the typical hi-end buyer wasnt all that interested in performance. I beg to differ. Let take the '50 - '54 era for example. Yes, the "356" engine was still available to the end of 1950 production, and with a "stick and overdrive" combo, sure, one F-A-S-T car, at least as fast as a Cad. or Lincoln Hydramatic. The problem is, 1) as noted, I disagree with your assumption, again, that a hi end buyer wasnt interested in performance. Given the culture of the day, such people might CLAIM they werent interested in performance, but the fact is, these buyers voted with their feet, which carried them AWAY from the Packard dealerships and into Lincoln, Cadillac, and Chrysler dealerships. 2) when these people ordered an "automatic", as other posters in here have noted, they wanted an AUTOMATIC ! Let's review what a Ultamatic REALLy was as a mechanical device, compared to the Hydramatic of that day, and see why it was a miserable failure.

First and foremost, the Hydramatic was a FOUR speed transmission. That made it possible to have a "high" final drive ratio (low numerically, typically, around 3.23) and still have real gut-wrenching accelleration when you "put your foot" into it, at ANY gear at ANY speed.

Do you guys know how many "speeds" the Ultramatic had in HIGH..? NONE...it was a NO speed transmission. All it had was a torque convertor to get it moving, then, depending on throttle position, the convertor would "lock out" and you'd be in direct drive. Want to pass ? On the Hydramatic-equipped cars, it would AUTOMATICALLY shift to the best gear ratio for the speed you were at, at that moment, and you WOULD accellerate. FAST. With the Ultramatic, it had NO gear speed to down-shift to. THERE WAS NO OTHER 'GEAR'. All that the pathetic thing could do, if you "floored" it, was to dis-engage the clutch, and you'd be back with the slushy convertor, but still in direct drive.

Considering the way I personally abused our Ultramatic-equipped Packards, me and my family actually had pretty good luck with them. But the sad fact, on an industry-wide basis, their reliability record was poor.

Yes, you could move the column selector to the "low" range, which would bring in a reduction gear. A "partial" cure if you want to keep your Ultramatic-equipped pre '55 Packard from getting run over by garbage trucks, school busses, and farmers hauling produce to market, is the following:

DISCONNECT the long rod that connects the throttle linkage to the transmission governer control. Wire the governor control lever on the side of the transmission, to the position it would have been, at "closed throttle". Now you can start out in "convertor reduction gear", and about 22 mph, the convertor will lock out. Now you will be in "locked convertor reduction" which will give you ROUGHLY the same ratio as the average car in 2nd gear. Then you can shift into H when you so desire. Of course the kind of full-bore start that it will take, to keep up with the garbage trucks, etc, will shorten the already miserable life of those direct-drive clutches, but the alternative is to get rear ended by that garbage truck...!

So - that's the bottom line, folks..the sad fact is, there is a REASON why so many Packard owners who like their Packards for what they are, convert the transmissions over to the three speed Chrysler (one of the Packard clubs sells a "kit" to do this.

So - I repeat my recommendation to the guy who is looking for a "bath-tub" Packard ! First and foremost, make sure you get the "356" engine. With that engine, and a three-speed with over-drive, you will not be in the way of anyone, on or off the Interstate ! If you find a really nice one WITH the Ultramatic ( my recollection is only the 1950 had that "curse"...!) enjoy it for what it is, which is a good lesson in why Packard isnt around any more ! When you get tired of its disgraceful performance...KEEP THE CAR...THEY ARE GREAT CARS !

Just convert it over to a LEGITIMATE automatic transmission that actually has "speeds"...!

[Packard8]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">for Twitch and Pack8

I dont agree with a couple of your points. I think the introduction of the Ultramatic, and the thinking behind it, was a significant part of why the public rejected Packard products to the point they had to go out of business for lack of sales. here's my thinking:<<<<<SNIP>>>> </div></div>

Without thinking too hard I can shoot three gaping holes in your specious theory:

1. Buick Dynaflow

2. Chrysler Fluid Drive and

3. Chevrolet PowerGlide.

The Dynaflow was even more of a monument to inefficiency than the Ultramatic as it had no TC lockup and also only ?one speed??.yet it did not deter millions of customers from purchasing them from 1948 thru the early 1960?s.

Mopar sold tons of ?Fluid Drive? equipped cars from the late ?30s up until the intro of the TorqueFlyte in the mid ?50?s. Ever drive a 6 cylinder Plymouth with Fluid Drive?...I have and they make a Packard with Ultramatic seem like a neck-snapping muscle car dragster?yet ppl bought them by the boatload.

Highest volume example would have to be the Chevy PowerGlide?millions & millions of happy customers inefficiently crawling from 0 to 60 in about an hour, but hey?.no clutch pedal so it was a ?modern automatic? (and very reliable, tho highly inefficient). As I recall it was also introduced in 1950 and lasted until 1964 or 65?

[Guest BJM]

As stated 6686L, it was a luxury item and an opportunity to partake of what the Cadillac/Buick/Imperial crowd had - that Chevy, Ford and eventually Mopar offered an automatic. Yes, I agree the public was looking to speed as well and Packard and others paid for it by slow development of the modern high compression V8 motor.

Before you ask, I'm only 43 so no I didn't live through that era BUT my parents and relatives did, and I read on average 7 hours per week of old car history and can pull those road tests down from my book cabinet you refer to. So I agree MCCahill was a critic and others - that the Ultramatic was slow but millions of cars were sold that were slower then Packards.

[Clipper47]

I recall in the early 50's my older brother bringing home a 49 Olds with Hyrdamatic and it would burn the tires from a dead stop. Boy was I impressed! One of his buddies had a 50 Packard Eight with the 288 engine and Ultramatic and it was a dog on the getaway but could still beat my 52 Chrysler with fluid drive or my aunts '52 Chev with Powerglide. My 47 Super with the 356" engine with manual shift and overdrive is a hot rod by comparison with the later two and on top end I think would beat the Olds but I haven't ever tried burning rubber of the line. <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

[Packard enthus.]

For Packard8

I dont think the three illustrations you gave (Buick, Chrysler, and Chevrolet) prove what you want to prove. Here in Prescott, Arizona, there IS a Buick dealer..there IS a Chrysler dealer, and there IS a Chevrolet dealer. Yes, the Chevrolet "1st series" Powerglide was the only car tested by Clymer that showed accelleration times even worse than a "1st series" Packard with Ultramatic. The reason that isnt a good example is in earlier days, people accepted the fact that the lower-priced cars were not supposed to be as fast as the expensive ones. By the mid 1950's, - yes, you are right, the Powerglide had developed a reputation for reliability. Sadly, the Ultramatic did not.

I think, (but am not sure, because my old road test articles are packed away) that you are wrong about the comparitave accelleration rates, IF we are talking about cars in the same price range. Of course I remember how sluggish Dynaflows were, at least when in a Special or Super, which had dinky little motors in the 230 cu in range. A Buick Roadmaster with the 320 in. overhead valve straight eight, or the '53 with the first "nail head" V-8? My recollection is that while they would not snap your neck on accelleration, they would cream a Packard Ultramatic of the same year.

The "de-rating" of Packard's reputation for performance, while the rest of the industry was going for more peppy cars, in my view, was one of the many factors in killing Packard.

As I have noted earlier, I believe much can be learned about the public's perception, and the potential "saleability" of the Packard name, even as late as the fall of 1954. Being a Packard "buff" even then, I distinctly recall the pride we Packard nuts felt when we saw that advertisment campaign for the new 1955 Packards, that "Packard Was Back", highlighted by the famous high speed tests and roadability demonstrations. My recollection is that a "bone stock" Packard 400/Patrician was able to run 25,000 mi. at WELL over 100 mph, breaking several records up to that date. And then there were those ads showing what a torsion-bar equipped Packard could do to ANY other big car of that era, going over rough roads (who remembers that really funny movie showing how a '55 Patrican went over a raised rail-road crossing in perfect control, whereas the other big luxury cars shown, bounced all over the place.

The idea in the buying public's mind that it was true, that "Packard Was Back" resulted in exploding sales - my recollection is that they went over 50,000 units in the first few months of the 1955 sales year. I will always be convinced that if the Packard product of 1955 had been assembled properly, and met customers expectations, Packard would survived. Sad fact is so many of them were so badly assembled, the public perception was that they were bad cars. My fellow Packard car buffs in this chat room, dont mind getting their hands dirty "tinkering" with things to make them right. But the new car buyer dosnt want that, and will not accept that. Look what Honda and Toyota are doing to the rest of the industry based on the well-founded belief they are put together right, and stay together.

I remain unclear what the thought-process was, that released for production, a "NO speed" transmission! GM "got it right" with the four speed Hydramatic, a transmission so rugged it served well in our light tanks of World War Two.

So, at the risk of repeating myself - to the guy who is thinking of buying a "bath-tub" Packard (meaning, the 1948-1950 "re-style" of the '41 - '47 Clipper" - GO FOR IT - THEY ARE GREAT CARS.

[Packard8]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">For Packard8

I dont think the three illustrations you gave (Buick, Chrysler, and Chevrolet) prove what you want to prove. Here in Prescott, Arizona, there IS a Buick dealer..there IS a Chrysler dealer, and there IS a Chevrolet dealer. >>>>>>>>>>snip<<<<<<<<<<<<< </div></div>

Exactly, and thank you for making my point and debunking your earlier statements. If indeed a snail slow single or two speed automatic transmission affected sales to the point of the demise of an automaker, there would NOT be a Chevy, Buick or Chrysler dealer in Prescott today.............

[Guest sherlok]

Well thank you all for the many responses to my question. You guys are obviously very serious about your hobby which is a good thing.

I own two rather nice Model A Fords and a 47 Buick Roadmaster so I'm not too new to antiques. And there is space for one more car in my building. I feel the late 40's sedans are genrally overlooked and undervalued today which suits me fine. I tire of seeing all the Ford Coupes and Muscle Cars that abound at car shows. I've always admired a Packard as our wealthy next door neighbors owned several of them when I was growing up.

I'm taking my time as I look. The right car will turn up. Your diverse comments have helped.

Thanks again,

Sherlok

[Twitch]

I am not talking about 1950 I'm talking about NOW. It doesn't matter whether the Ultramatic has less performance than a 3-speed does today. None of us including the original poster in this topic are talking about doing anything more than sedately motoring around town to shows and cruise-ins. There is no reason why he simply HAS to buy a car with a 356. Driving at even 70-75 in any stock 1950 era car on the freeway is still frought with the danger of a-holes zig-zagging around you in their Japanese tin at 85-90. And you cannot stop or maneuver as well as a 1995 Nissan economy model at any speed.

My friend's 1951 Ultramatic functions acceptably and gets him to cruise-ins and shows. Why should he bear the expense of tearing in out and putting a modern tranny in when it performs in his usage?

[Packard8]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">My friend's 1951 Ultramatic functions acceptably and gets him to cruise-ins and shows. Why should he bear the expense of tearing in out and putting a modern tranny in when it performs in his usage? </div></div>

In my opinion it would devalue your friend's car if he swapped in a newer transmission. To me part of the charm of old cars is the period correct engineering and mechanicals, warts and all. I do accept that safety upgrades like dual master cyls and seatbelts make sense for cars that do get driven, but I see no logic in trying to "modernize" the driveline.

If you follow that line of thinking, anyone with a Packard V12 should remove that inefficient and underpowered lump of iron under the hood and replace it with a brand new 400HP GM LT4 V8 crate motor coupled to a modern 4L65E computerized overdrive tranny. We could also correct the horrible handling and braking by installing a Camaro front clip with disc IFS and a Jag or Lincoln disc brake IRS in the back. Drivability, performance, safety and economy would be improved 1000% <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Oh?almost forgot. Now that you have some real HP and handling capabilities in that old Packard, those stoopid skinny tires & wheels have to go. Some 22X12? Boyds wrapped with some 30 series Nitto meats would be da bomb??..

[Packard enthus.]

RE - ENCOURAGING A FELLOW PACKARD BUFF TO BUY A "BATH-TUB"* PACKARD !

For Pack8 & Twitch - regarding your above "posts"

We are pretty much in agreement on some things. On others, I disagree.

First and foremost - yes, while I personally prefer the superior performance OF THE "356" motor, no question, ANY Packard when given half-way decent maintainence, is a joy to the owner.

As I noted in the other "thread" about "driving in today's traffic" I no longer feel all that comfortable, either on the big city freeway OR out on the Interstate, and in my own case, my '38 Packard V-12 certainly WILL keep up with the best of em !

I also agree keeping our cars "factory original" is the best choice. Yeah..I know..I know..I did figure out a gear ratio change for my Twelve, to lower the engine rpm for sustained extreme speed driving (but I do have a stock 4:41 ratio rear end ready for when I am done with the car).

And I am not so sure you are right about "loss of value"..that putting one of the Packard club's "kit" Chrysler 3 speed 737 tranny in, would necessarily depreciate the saleability of a Ultramatic-equipped Packard. Yeah..might for some, others might pay extra for that !

I have to admit to a special personal hatred for the Ultramatic transmission. You see..guys..I was a "Packard Lover" back when the things were NEW ! I have a special fond-ness for our '47 Super Clipper. With the "356" engine, and over-drive, I loved to raise hell on the streets and highways of So. Calif in the early 50's. About the only cars that could "take it" were the Olds and Cad V-8, and, of course, those hemi Chryslers. So you can imagine my disgust when I was unable to talk my dad out of ordering his new '53 Packard with...damn...ULTRAMATIC.

C'mon..guys...the Ultramatic didn't make a Packard "sub-standard" by TODAY's standards..it made them SUB STANDARD WHEN THEY WERE NEW ! In a "post" above, I explained how you can get a BIT better performance out of an Ultramatic by "mickey mousing" the linkage, so you wont get rear-ended by garbage trucks. But they were still "slugs" BY THE STANDARDS OF THAT DAY ! People who bought Powerglide equipped Chevies accepted the fact that a cheapo car might not keep up...but people who bought Packards...had a RIGHT to expect the best in their respective price ranges. In earlier years..Packard DELIVERED.

Let's encourage this guy to get his "bath-tub" *. I am sure he will enjoy it if he gets a good one. But..no question..and stop being silly...that he most certainly WILL enjoy one with the "356" motor and 3 speed/overdrive...just a bit more !

[Clipper47]

Our goal as Packard owners should be to restore and preserve the cars as they came from the factory notwithstanding the addition of safety features such as seat belts. The Ultramatic may not have been Packards greatest engineering achievement but it was the ONLY automatic transmission produced by an independent car maker and that fact alone makes them significant and worth preserving. If it can't get out of the way of a garbage truck then lets hope that the truck has brakes and a patient driver. I drove my Super Clipper today with the Electromatic clutch mechanism engaged. I suppose was not one of the makers best ideas either but I maintain this Rube Goldberg invention as it came from the factory and occasionally use for posterity.

[Packard8]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Our goal as Packard owners should be to restore and preserve the cars as they came from the factory notwithstanding the addition of safety features such as seat belts. The Ultramatic may not have been Packards greatest engineering achievement but it was the ONLY automatic transmission produced by an independent car maker and that fact alone makes them significant and worth preserving. If it can't get out of the way of a garbage truck then lets hope that the truck has brakes and a patient driver. I drove my Super Clipper today with the Electromatic clutch mechanism engaged. I suppose was not one of the makers best ideas either but I maintain this Rube Goldberg invention as it came from the factory and occasionally use for posterity. </div></div>

Amen.

These cars are a piece of history, warts and all.

PS I think even Rube Goldberg would have been baffled by the Packard Electromatic clutch gizmo <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

[Guest BigKev]

I take pride in telling people that my '54 Clipper left the factory with what I refer to as a proto-type transmission. The Gear-Start, which was only put in cars for a few weeks at the end of the production run in '54. In that, it makes the car unique. If I tore that tranny out and replaced it with some modern replacement, then the car would lose that interesting piece of it's history.

[Guest BJM]

You won't get a lot of agreement to put modern driveline "stuff" in period correct cars. I kind of draw the line at what can be seen. 6686L, I see no problem in installing numerically lower rear axle gears for modern requirements, all is not seen but I'm not a hot rodder so anything visible is "modification".

[Twitch]

As Packard8 and Clipper47 mention modifications for the sake of them detract from the overall interest of a particular car for some people. Changing gear ratios wouldn't be a negatively big deal. If I found an otherwise superb Packard with a completely ruined Ultramatic I'd not hesitate to install a modern replacement. Of course it would have to be a car from the regular production run. A rare car would have its esoteric value detracted from.

I may be less brave than most but "keeping up" today means 75-85MPH on Southern California freeways when they're not bumper to bumper and I wouldn't risk a 1938 V-12 with the likes of the Grand Theft Auto game wannabes when I couldn't stop or maneuver in the modern context. What's more, if my 1938 V-12 was destroyed in a crash due to some lane cutting kamikaze BMW bent on getting to the office 5 minutes early it would be relatively irreplaceable in comparison.

[HH56]

I'm still trying to find some of whatever additive is used down there that enables almost any car (not just BMWs) to get from a stop, across 2-3 lanes and reach the 75-85 in the tenth of a mile stretches between the bumper to bumper. If you'd export that maybe those with original Ultras would benefit.

[Packard enthus.]

Hey Twitch - Do I understand correctly from the caption on your "posts" you live in So. Calif..?

where you going to be this Sunday ? You within driving distance of the Lakewood Country Club in the Carson area ? You can google it to get exact directions. Sunday 10:00 am to, oh..I guess it will start breaking up by 2:30 - 3:00 pm - we will leave the cars on the lawn out front, and go into our buffet lunch at around noon.

C'mon over, and I will get you straightened out on how a big Packard with the Saf-T-Flex IFS and stock rear sway AND separate anti roll bar can manuver. And I will have with my the DATA BOOK which will bring you up to speed on brakes...!

Serious - do show up - I will get there by around 8:30. Again...SUNDAY 20th - Lakewood Country Club's front lawn. Classic Car Club Of America, So. Calif. Region meet. I should be pretty easy to spot - while our typical turn-out has at least 60% Packards, mine will probably be the only dark blue '38 V-12 Formal Sedan with ARIZONA license plates...!

Be there or be square !

P.S. - you are right - I do NOT look foward to Los Angeles freeway driving. I will leave my rig at my business at Whiteman Airport up in the north Valley, and drive down Sunday morning. And I am not TOO worried about what would happen if I were hit by modern rice or sauerkraut.....(ever looked under and seen what a Packard V-12 frame is like..? hint...a Packard V-12 rolling chassis, coming down the assembly line, BEFORE the body drop, weighed in at around 4,300 lbs...or a couple of hundred pounds MORE than a complete post-war Packard..!

[DutchDarrin]

Complete with coach work constructed with sheet metal over wood framing. Real safe indeed.

THE GREAT GRAND WIZARD

[Packard enthus.]

Hey Grand ! Are you ever RIGHT about how unsafe the old "composite" bodies are. Especially now that the wood is all dried out, and in some cases, some places, starting to rot !

But here's something you guys may NOT know. And explains why, if you "bump" the tire pressure up, and keep the hydraulic oil level up in those monster shock absorbers, they give INCREDIBLE handling for their size and weight.

A big-engined senior series pre-war Packard has a MUCH lower "center of gravity" then you might think, low or LOWER (yeah...you are going to have a hard time accepting this) then the typical modern car. Here's why. Think of where the greatest "mass" of the car is, in relationship to the wheels. On my Packard V-12, for example, the body only, coming down the assembly line to the "body drop" all trimmed out, but just before mounting on the chassis, weighs about 1,300 lbs. The complete car itself, with gas, oil, tools and my incredibly charming self aboard, comes in at just a hair under 6,000 lbs. Think about where the "mass" of a modern car is. With MUCH lighter, efficient engines, transmissions, suspensions, and unitized body construction, their "center of mass" is considerably higher than the "big" pre-war Packards.

You are so right...if someone ever did "roll" one of those, no question it would dis-integrate, whereas if you rolled my Toyota RAV and were properly strapped in, you would probably walk away.

But...at least it dosnt have ULTRAMATIC....!

[Twitch]

Didn't get back here till Monday but Lakewood is close to me. Went to a cruise in at Fuddruckers Lakewood Saturday. Sorry I missed the Counrty Club thing.

And it's not those smaller imports you have to worry about it'sthe SUVs and semis that can squash you on the freeway. They also drive wrecklessly. Notice how the big trucks ride 8 feet behind other cars?<img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" />

[PeterPackard]

Hi all, what a fascinating post, talk about stepping into the deep end of the pool for the poor guy asking about a 1950 Ultramatic. We all have different experiences with the Ultramatic, some of which made us wish that we had picked another Make, engine etc, whatever!. In my humble opinion the 1950 Ultramatic was a very good no-shift transmission but had become very obsolete by 1951. My first Ultramatic was a 1952- 200 which I purchased in 1966 and it had been upgraded to a 327. It went great with 327 cubes compared to the local Australian Holden product of 138 cubes. But it was not the reason for buying the car. My first Packard was a 1937 six in 1966 and it was an amazing car on our (Australian) crappy roads. I thought I was upgrading when I got the 52 but soon found out about the start in low( it would do 55mph) then smack it into high, all without lifting the throttle from the floor. I rounded up a lot of more favoured vehicles but it was on highway cruising that the car went went well. After blowing up the Ultramatic twice I fitted an R11 overdrive to the car in 1969 and S##t!, didn't that deliver what the doctor ordered. It really motored, off the line and everywhere else. I broke a rear axle in 1969 against a Pontiac GTO owned by a friend and he was amazed at how well that old straight eight went. I now have a 38 120 with a '54 327 and R6 o'd fitted and it has sooooo much mumbo even the local modern BMW's can't cut me off. All that I need is some front discs to pull the old lady up and she's sweet. I still have a low mileage 53 Clipper Deluxe with the Ultramatic, and a 54 Caribbean, which I am converting to a Twin-Ultra, also a 56 Patrician which after 5 transmission removals I am now happy with. Basically, we are into Packards so just enjoy them and accept that there is no such thing as the best car in the world. I enjoyed the threads immensley and they certainly get you thinking about what finally killed Packard off. Best regards from Down Under. Peter Toet