"Versatile" Packard V-8 ???

VPSkelly wrote: "The guy that runs the Golden Hawk Register own one of each, both factory built. As to Packard engines in other Studebaker models, I've never seen one, but Studebaker would do just about anything, if you were willing to pay for it."

Well, it is GOOD to know about the std. trans. GH, but -- obviously -- it would have been GREAT if a few more had been built. I WONDER IF THOSE WERE STUDE OR PACKARD TRANNYS.

As for Stude putting a Packard in a Stude to seal a sale, it doesn't SOUND far-fetched at ALL! Recently, GotGas and I kicked this around with regard to WHETHER MID'50s DeSOTOS COULD BE HAD WITH STD. TRANNYS. In that case, we came to the conclusion, some dealers would work magic with the factory (or in the service dept.!) in order to secure a sale! More than one way to skin a cat, eh?
<!-- / message -->

 

Jimi's Hemi291:

Rich Fox pretty much answered your question...Ardun stood for ARkus DUNtov, hemi cylinder heads designed by Zora Arkus Duntov and his brother Yuri...I ran a set in the early '60s, on a 296" flathead block, thus the handle...some debate about whether or not Chrysler copied the Ardun design for their own hemis (which I presume you have).

 

They weren't a Studebaker or a Packard tranny. They was a Borg Warner and they were in lots of stuff back then. Ford/Mercury's and in T-89 form in trucks. I'm not sure the bolt pattern wasn't the same on a Studebaker as it was on a Ford. The later model T-89's had two bolt patterns on the face one for narrow older bellhousings and one for later wide bellhousings.

 

The pre '64 Ford transmissions bolt in to Packard bellhousings and I guess Studebaker bellhousings also. Post '64 Ford toploaders have the twin bolt pattern and the smaller is the same so they still bolt to Packard bellhousings. The bearing retainer was made .100 larger on these transmissions. So you could find a pre '64 bearing retainer or more simply turn your newer retainer down .100 as I did with my Packard. I also used a Ford pilot bushing in an aluminum bushing I made to fit the bore in the Packard crank and pressed it in .500 less than the stock Packard bushing which made it the proper depth for my toploaders input shaft.

 

I went to my Chilton's Auto Repair Manual 1954 - 1963 to do a little more digging and from what I read there the 352 V8 was only in the Golden Hawk with the 289 V8 offered in the '56 President. Sooooo!
I STAND CORRECTED!

 

Silhouettes, so we have that (352) nailed down, bro.

Does the manual say anything about standard trannys in the '56 Golden Hawk? If so, any indication as to whether the standard may have been Stude OR Packard???

 

jimi-read post #63 again. They were not Studebaker or Packard. By that time neither Stude or Packard made standard transmissions. They bought them from Borge-Wariner. The same transmission that you could also get in other cars that used BW transmission. And I am here to bet you $100 against your $10 that there were standard shift Golden Hawks. Check a Golden Hawk web site. Thats what i did when I wanted a stick shift Packard bellhousing. Going rate seems to be $500 for the flywheel, clutch, bellhousing and T85.

 

Yup, Rich, not to make excuses, but sevral posts came in a short time, and I thought I'd already read CustomVicky's #63. It's ALL there! TheB/W is what was in my '62 Hawk T/T, too.

 

And if you can get all of that for $500 that's a hell of a deal. The asking price of a T-85 alone can be $450 with a more reasonable price being around $250 or so.

 

THANKS, dudes!

 

55 Nash Ambassador/Hudson Hornet used a 320 Packard V-8 w/Ultramatic (no manual).
56 Nash Ambassador/Hudson Hornet used a 352 Packard V-8 w/Ultramatic (no manual).
The AMC V-8 came out in 56 as a 250 and was only used in the Ambassador and Hornet Specials, which were the slightly lighter, shorter wheelbase Nash Statesman/Hornet Wasp bodies with Ambassador/Hornet trim -- two doors only, manual trans only.

The AMC 327 didn't appear until 1957, though it's possible it was used in late production 56 models in place of the Packard 352. The 327 introduction was in the Rambler Rebel, only 1500 made, all silver with gold anodized "spear" on the side. Whupped butt at Daytona Speed Week in 57 -- only a Corvette w/Rochester fuel injection was faster from 0-60. So yeah, it could be fast with a biggish engine!

The deal between AMC (Nash and Hudson "merged", forming AMC in May 1954) and Packard was supposed to be mutual. AMC would buy some things from Packard, and Packard would in turn buy some parts from AMC. Well, Packard felt they were doing AMC a favor by selling them V-8s. They sent AMC some bids on parts, but rejected all of them as too high. I've got no idea how much the V-8s cost AMC, but I bet they were a pretty penny! George Mason, head of AMC, felt like he was getting taken advantage of by Packard. Mason wasn't anyone's Patsy, when he reached a gentleman's agreement with someone he kept his end and meant for the other party to do the same! Apparently there were some phone calls/meetings between Mason and James Nance (head of Packard) and Mason ended up madder than hell! He instructed his engineering department to get a V-8 in production ASAP! The department head hired a guy from Kaiser who had worked with Continental on a V-8 design that was never produced (Kaiser owned Continental engines, or at least a controlling stake in it) for Kaiser cars. That was the quickest way to get one on the line! 18 months later the AMC 250 was introduced. It's hard to go from paper to production in 18 months today with computers -- all that was done with a slide rule and drawing board! That's one reason why the engine is a bit heavier than it could have been though -- make it strong enough so you KNOW it works instead of testing to find out the best compromise between strength, cost, and durability. It wasn't state of the art, just a good run-of-the-mill V-8. That's why the design only lasted 10 years, and was pretty dated when it was dropped after 66.

 

Hi, Frank, and thanks for the very detailed and thoughtful post! I'm busy getting ready to trailer my '38 PlymoUth, so I cannot respond in full, at least right NOW.

HOWEVER, I am glad somebody remembers the old Graham-Paige engineer who'd designed a (THEN) state-of-the-art V-8. Frazer, of course, knew the design was "on the shelf," so to speak. And, SO, Henry K. would have been informed. When Kaiser wasted his money and human resources so many ways, he couldn't cast the V-8 WHEN it might have saved his auto make.

And so, the G-P engineer wound up at AMC, which was glad to have a decent V-8 design. Rest history, as they say.

My only regret is that I cannot remember the engineer's name.

 

Frank, I do want to add that I really believe their were corporate cultural differences among the independents that helped to slow down the ultimate merger george Mason (Earl Muntz, and OTHERS) had hoped for. Packard "snootiness" was surely a factor (though snootiness doesn't explain why they allowed themselves to merge with cash-poor Studebaker! (And that comes from a big Stude fan, too!)

 

I didn't find anything indicating whether it was a Packard or Studebaker. You could get a 3 speed stick (with or without OD) or automatic in 1956 and that is a quote from the Chilton's Manual.

 

okay, i am gonna bite. what did happen to the tooling? i have read the whole thred to find out

 

That is because the tooling was sent to Russia by Roosevelt as part of the Lend-Lease, or so was the rumour for years. There is reputedly no evidence of such a transfer in the Packard archives, however no written proof does not preclude such an occurrence. Simply looking at the ZIS 110 and the Packard 180 would seem to indicate that the Packard tooling was indeed used for the ZIS.

My own opinion would be that a simple copy of an existing car would have resulted in some obvious differences, whereas the actual cars look quite identical, even down to trim.

Also, this would be a definitive reason for the company to have only the junior series available for the sellers' market that existed for the postwar period. Having a senior line to sell would have put much more money in the company coffers at a time when it would have done most good - paying off war debts.

Cosmo

 

Jimi -- I think the problem between AMC and Packard was more a personality than culture clash. Mason and Nance both wanted to be in charge of any merged company, and that killed a chance of merger as long as both companies were reasonably healthy.

It's ironic -- the best chance of a merger succeeding is when both companies are reasonably healthy, but it usually happens only when one is on the brink of collapse (has no choice). That's how the Nash/Hudson "merger" took place -- Nash bought Hudson. I don't think they got a whole lot, would have done just as good or better had they let Hudson go under and just carried on. Same with Packard/Studebaker. Packard was still relatively healthy, but the Stude guys somehow hid the fact that they needed to build 100,000 cars just to break even, and hadn't done that in several years! Packard discovered it shortly after Packard production was moved to South Bend, and Sutde drug Packard under with them. Sad! I don't know how long Packard would have lasted alone, but they probably would have lasted longer than they did!

Oh, that engineer was David V. Potter. He was also the main one responsible for the 64 232 I-6, which was developed into the 4.0L for the Cherokee.

 

Cosmo although we may be getting off topic here a bit, when I was speaking of the senior cars I was referring to the 12s and Super Eights of the thirties up to 1939 (the custom bodied cars, the semi customs and the catalog customs) that attracted the higher end clientele. When the high end buyers saw the 120 come on the scene in 1935 they may have figured why pay big money for their senior "custom" when joe six pack can buy a similar looking car for less in the way of the 120. When the 115C six cylinder came on the scene it may have gone from bad to worse for the high end guys. I have worked on the seniors of the thirties and the 120s and 115Cs and there is no comparison. They may have looked the same but that is it.

The 180 cars I still liked although not as well as the senior cars mentioned above. It was these dies that I believe went to Russia. I am quite sure these dies were collecting dust and there were no further plans to use them after they decided to place their senior future on the Clipper line (although I have not researched this extensively). The Junior series I believe carried from 1935 until 1941. The Clipper was the new model for the senior line in 1941 and they carried on with this model after the war (1946 and 1947) until 1948 when they introduced the bathtub. Although I did not personally like the Clipper all that well, I cannot find anything I like about the bathtub (and I am sure some of the bathtub guys would think my cars are not worth a hoot as well-different strokes for you know what).

There were some senior and somewhat stylish and "expensive" Clippers but all in all they were a far cry from the Dietrich cars or even the catalog customs. Packard turned from high end cars to just a bit better than Ford , GM and Chrysler and a couple of other manufacturers, but their true claim to luxury cars was behind them. Those that were well heeled were not fooled by just the name Packard.

But then we could go on and on about this for hours and my opinion is worth no more than the next guy. No definitive answere on the demise of Packard, just theories. They were not the only great car to end up on the scrap heap of history. Sad nevertheless-Jim

 

Only Studebakers that ever were factory equipped with the Packard V-8 were the 56 Golden Hawks. Got the numbers written down somewhere, but going by memory, production total was around 4,000, of which about 900 were 3-speed manual with overdrive. Only available transmissions were the manual overdrive or the 2-speed Ultramatic. The manual O/D was a Borg-Warner T-85. Only factory available engine was the Packard 352 with a single 4-barrel and 275 horsepower. Factory planned a kit with dual quads and an Isky cam that would have bumped the hp to 330, but lack of funds or courage kept that from happening.

My parents owned a 56 GH with manual O/D back in the day, and I have one now. I also have a spare 56 GH engine which has been bored 1/8" to 374 (Packard V-8's have very thick cylinder walls and some have been successfully bored a full 1/4 inch).

 

There has been some WONDERFUL input on this thread, guys!!!!!!!!!

But, I just moved my '38 today and I am beat. I have to another one tomorow, SO it may a day or two before I can respond to these GREAT posts! THANK YOU guys! Please bear with me.

 

I had a '56 GH but I think the Ultramatic was a 3 speed. I know it was a POS and nobody could work on them. Another guy in my town had one with the T-85 in it. I wish it was in mine. I know it was a goin' SOB and was the fastest thing in town. From a dead stop it would lay rubber for a solid block and I can't imagine a 2 speed doing that .. Some '56 Packard Caribbeans had 374 cu.in. with 2 4bbs and had 310 hp.

 

I just checked my 1955 Hudson transmission manual. It covers the GM "Dual-Range Hydramatic" (used behind sixes) and the Packard "Twin Ultramatic" transmissions. In essence the Ultramatic is a two speed transmission, at least as far as gear drive is concerned. There were two "Drive" positions on the gear selector quadrant. From left to right (driver's perspective) it read P N · D L R (Park - Neutral - "Dot" - Drive - Low - Reverse). In Drive the trans started with the low planetary gearset engaged for better acceleration. In the "dot" position it started without the low gearset engaged, and might be considered a little sluggish or unresponsive, almost like starting in second gear. This was used for smoothness and comfort, not acceleration. If you wanted to jump from a start, put it in the "dot" position.

The torque converter was rather sophisticated, especially for the time. It was basically a two speed converter with a lock-up clutch. All the vanes in the converter were in a fixed position, unlike the Buick (or was it Olds?) "switch pitch" two speed converter. That's why it feels like a gear shift when transitioning from one speed to the other. Then it would finally lock up once cruising speed was attained.

Most people didn't read the manual or understand the two drive positions, or maybe I should say most people NOW don't understand it, and not speak for original owners. I see the same thing with the pre 66 Rambler autos (Borg-Warner autos) that have a D1 and D2 position. Most don't understand the drive positions and assume they are two speed autos because they stick it in the third forward gear position (D2), which starts in second gear instead of first (D1 position, which is the second forward gear position). Both trannys get low marks for performance, but it's more a lack of understanding how to drive them. Almost all trannys started in second gear through the 50s and into the very early 60s, but there was a shift in design/driving philosophy in the mid 60s. You can't drive most late 50s/early 60s cars like cars of today due to the shift in driving philosophy. This was brought on by two things -- better engineering of the vehicles, (especially engines and transmissions), and better roads (mostly the U.S. Interstate system, started in 1956).

 

I really don't remember mine having a "park" either. Most automatics back in those days didn't have "park" ...

 

What year was yours? The 55 Hudson/Nash manual clearly shows a Park location. Earlier models may not have had it. I just looked through the manual to see how Park was made into the trans. It's just inside the rear housing in front of the governor, so it probably was an addition to the earlier design with no Park. I'm sure it wasn't done just for Nash/Hudson, so all 55+ models probably have Park.

 

Some sideline trivia.
We built a 392 Packard engine for a Ted Jones designed
and built 7 liter hydro around the late 50's.
It was fast enough to step up and try to qualify in the unlimited class
for the Gold Cup one year. Minimum qualifying speed was 96 that year.
The Packard turned around 94. With another day or so of qualifying time it
might have made the show.

 

Here's my hot rod being punished
http://s173.photobucket.com/albums/w76/greyone66/?action=view&current=20091025111508.flv

 

Mine was a '56 Golden Hawk with the Ultramatic .. I'm not sayin' it didn't have a Park I just don't remember it having one. Seemed like I always used the emergency brake to keep it from rollin' off. That's only been 52 years ago.

 

Nads,

Nice run, looks like the JB Weld is still holding.

Peter

 

CustomlineVicky, Packard didn't make many big mistakes. But from all I have read over the years, it surely sounds as though they were too hard-headed for too long in insisting on their own trannys. Since they OBVIOUSLY didn't want to buy Hydramatics from GM, maybe the Borg-Warner auto would have been a good choice. It was the only automatic similar to the Ultramatic. My two cents.

 

Nads, you SAID you were gonna whip that puppy & you DID! She held up okay, eh?