Packard straight 8s, perf mods, let's talk about it

Gee guys, I said "helps", not "Adds".

Panic is right;
"Why were they used? Because it allows a hotter cam to be used, where the lobe would catch the edge of the small lifter - but it's the cam that's different, the tappet width is just safety. Rough calculation: the maximum velocity of a flat tappet cam = (tappet diameter - .040”)/114.6"

I'd say being able to run a more radical profile with a smidge more ramp velocity qualifies as "help".

One of the cams were running is so edgy, the velocity isn't safe on a Hudson tappet - just fine on the Mopar. I had them compared at a shop on an Audie CamPro. Good lesson for me, that's where I learned the difference.

Hud

 

If you look athe lifter at the far right in the first picture I posted, you will see the dia is turned down. This is cause Isky ground out of the base circle of the cam so the larger tappet would not fit the base circle cut.

 

Anybody know if ther was ever a dual exhaust manifold offered for the packard 8? Also, any speed parts for the chrysler and hudson flat 8 such as dual manifolds of an aluminum head? I'm thinking I saw a dual intake manifold for the hudson 8 several years ago.

 

Did anyone in the old days make a dual exhaust conversion for the Packard eight? I once saw a aluminum head and dual intake in a 1952 Mechanics Illustrated.

 

I saw a packard 8 with an aluminum head and dual carbs in a 1952 Mechanics Illustraded years ago. Did anyone make a dual exhaust manifold or a conversion for the packard. Also how about the Chrysler straight 8, anything at all for that engine?

 

I once saw a packarg 8 with dual carbs an alominum head in a Mechanics Illistrated circa 1952. Did anyone make a dual exhaust manifold or a conversion unit for these engines? Also, how about speed parts for Chrysler, Pontiac, and Hudson 8,s?

 

I apoligize for all th repetition above. I'm new at this posting business. I'm just an information hound for old engines especially straight eights. Couldn't wait to see them go in the early 50's, now I wish they were back.

 

i got to ride in a 28 packard roadster with a straighe 8 i could not beleave the tork it had at low rpm,

 

Edmunds made dual intakes and heads for both engines you mention, but good luck finding them, and if you do, even better luck paying for them. I once had a Edmunds head for a Hudson inline eight, and it surprised me how many guys ended up fighting over it.

 

hey plym49 when you stop by my house one of these days you can see my packard i have parked for inspiration to your project
i love these photos wow i can't wait to start the work on my packard 8

 

If anyone's interested,I have a complete 49 Packard 288 engine with stick bell housing,it ran when pulled,still turns free.Would prefer to sell it whole,otherwise will part out&scrap the block.Will the lifters fit the larger 356? Dont want much for it,Email me at Rich53Merc@aol.

 

I'm working on a 327 Packard Eight right now. Here's a link to some pics: http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/album.php?albumid=14145

 

As a Packard Guy I have a few comments on the Packard motors. The Super 8 1940-7 is a great motor quiet smooth and powerful. The restrictions are the weights of the mechanics. The crank shaft is 105 pounds and the flywheel is 50 pounds. This motor was using the 9 main bearings and the crankshaft has bolted on counter weights that have to be removed when you grind the shaft. The motor when right purrs like a kitten. Cut the flywheel on the back side to relieve the weight and that helps with the rivs. The motors had 160 horse power in 1940 and went to 165 in 1942. With the 392 rear gears it has long legs on the road and even though Packard has good brakes they are still 1940's. In 1948 they introduced the 288/327 motors and the 327 had 135 horse power (5 main bearings)but was a couple hundred pounds lighter and a nice 327 super 8 was very spunky. The differance between the 288 and the 327 was the throw on the crank so you could put the 327 crank in a 288 motor and get the 327 motor. The 160 motor had hydrolic valve lifters and the 1948 288/327 had mechanical lifters so they had to be adjusted. In 1951 Packard broucht out the new 327 motor with 9 main bearings (only in the senior cars) and kept the 288/327 5 main for the other cars. By 1953 they ahd a 4 barrow manifold and carburator that they added to the 327 to add more power and the final modification packard had was an alunimun head and increased the bore from 3 1/2 to 3 9/16 which gave it 359 cubic inches.

The 1954 359 was a good engine and packard was trying to get as much milage as they could out of the straight eight as they were bringing the new V-8 out in 1955.

All of the motors suffered from neglect over the years from not keepin gthe coolent clean to not changing the oil so rust in the block is a problem and finding a solid block that is not cracked is important. The head studs are a weak point as they tend to pull out when you put 62 pounds on torque on the studs so any upgrades will have to include larger studs (1/2 over 7/16) improved head gasket technology.

Well they are just some things to ponder from a Packard Guy, I have graviteted to the 1941s with a convertible and a wagon. Great fun to drive.

 

Would this not be a candidate for turbo charging to artificially increase the CR without any need for internal maching. Seems that even a small amouth of boost 6 to 8 lbs would be beneficial. Small turbos that spin up quickly like SAAB or Volvo or Mitsubishi might just be the trick. Suck the charge through a 2 inch SU carb. And with the turbo you would not need a muffler and wuld get a unique sounding engine.

Yea I know Turbos aint traditional and the plumbing is mostly ugly, but if the lowly Corvair could pick up 70 hp using one (110 to 180HP) it would seem your Packard would be near the 200 HP level with out a lot expensive macine shop work and new internals.

 

Well, I just bought this 1946 Packard engine, so I need some ideas to make it bad-assed and different!

http://bakersfield.craigslist.org/pts/2150697372.html

What should I do to it?

 

Mushroom tappet cam? Every so often I run across a thread on HAMB that really grabs me. Subscribed.

 

$300??!! Thats PEANUTS!

 

A) Put it in a rod with an exposed engine

B) Smooth the castings.

C) Mount as few accessories and brackets as possible. Example: no throttle linkage rods going across the top of the motor. Keep it clean and uncluttered.

D) Block off the fuel pump and use an electric one under the car. Again, keeps it clean.

E) Consider mounting the generator somewhere else, like under the exhaust side of the motor, again to keep things clean. (Not sure that this would fit, though.)

F) Dual carbs, of course. Maybe sidedraft or updraft.

G) Very little if any chrome.

H) Detail with paint - subtly contrasting colors and textures.

I) Remote mount the bypass oil filter under the floorboards. Again, you just want to see block and head.

K) Hide a good PCV valve setup - sh1tcan the road draft system. This will also allow you to come up with a vintage yet not too large oil filler tube.

J) Two blade fan.

L) Period hose and clamps.

M) Nice polished period brass fittings and copper lines but don't over do it or use modern fittings. Check out how it was done on an early Bentley.

N) Non-stainless hardware from Gardner-Westcott. Maybe some Allen.

O...Gee, you are my hero!!!! This is a great score. I've always wanted to build a rod with that motor, per the above. Congratulations!!!!!

 

Thanks guys, and I didn't pay the asking price! As soon as the FlatCad is done, this is next.

plym49, I like most of your ideas! I"m thinking the dual carbs will have to have hats-

so I can put 2 Paxton or Mccullough superchargers on it.

In addition to your list;

Big cam

wet sump oil pump

There is probably some more, but I really needto talk to HotRodPackard, and see what he thinks, based on his experience.

 

I am sure you will make it nice!!! I did not address performance at all, just appearance.

Curious - can those blowers push through updraft carbs? Just a thought.

If you supercharge it see if you can keep the plumbing discrete so you see the motor. To me, that huge cast iron rectangle is the visual focal point. But that's me; again, I know you will do just fine.

 

DAMN! Maybe I should be watching for something like this.

 

See if you can talk to Bruce Crower. He was building a twin cam head for his.

 

Rich, how do I get in touch with him?

 

Hey guys, for the record I haven't done fuckall with mine. Got a 29 roadster, a 34 3W that I put a deposit on, still whackin away on the 61, still gathering stuff for the truck. Add to that work issues, woodgraining that just doesn't go away (no complaints there), recent major truck n trailer score, I mean really, WTF is wrong with me? Nuthin at all

 

Slackard!

 

I just saw the Youtube video of your car driving. HOLY CRAP does that sound COOL!

 

Actually, I'm thinking multi blow through down draft carbs, fed by dual piggy backed supercharges, and dual plugs and dizzies.

Probably have the same gut grind the cam that is doing the one for the Flatcad, on a Joe Paneck billet blank.

Think ultra cool race engine- right after the FlatCad engine is done!

 

Hey, I like that! I gotta admit that this post wants to distract me toward my 160. I'm not ready to start that one yet but it's coming soon. I may not keep the 47. Been evaluating a lot lately. The plans for the 41 haven't changed though. It's a keeper. Took too long to find one at all let alone an afforable one for me. I've asked around and looked up registers, so far I've found 1 other. All the rest are "Club Coupe" versions.

 

! If you decide to let one of the 356 mills go, please let me know!

Here's some pics of my new find, a pretty clean 282, and tranny. Not perfect, but pretty nice!

Anyone know if a 327 crank will fit in this block?

 

The 327 crank is supposed to fit the 288, don't know about the 282. You may want to think about a bigger bore. 288 is 3 1/2, 282 is 3 1/4 but a 3 7/8 stroke(!) where the 327 is a 3 3/4 stroke. As it stands the 282 would be smooth low RPM TQ.