My 1955 Packard & Nash

If you're starting a project, large or small, please share your progress with us in pictures and words.
Dave Czirr
Moderator
Posts: 4961
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2009 5:30 am
Location: New Jersey

Re: My 1955 Packard & Nash

Post by Dave Czirr » Fri Jun 17, 2016 12:37 pm

Closest to Type A is Type F, very commonly available and used by many (most ?) Ultramatic owners.

thielbar1
Posts: 29
Joined: Mon Nov 04, 2013 8:59 am

Re: My 1955 Packard & Nash

Post by thielbar1 » Fri Jun 17, 2016 9:26 pm

I would use dextron before I used type F, I have found type F to caulse rough shifting. In my current Ultra I have been using Dextron II, its basically a modern type A with sovents included. I did some reading on this new Type A, and its alot like Dextron II with no solvents which makes it ideal for older transmissions. I find it strange that 'wale oil', which was the base of the original Type A, is outlawed in all but CTV transmission fluid.

There seems to be no other transmission options for my Nash, so I have desided to just rebuild the current unit, or swap it out with one I have on hand depending on the conditions of the internals.

Adam
Posts: 1058
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:15 am
Location: lincolnshire, uk

Re: My 1955 Packard & Nash

Post by Adam » Mon Jun 20, 2016 12:16 am

But your Ultramatic does not shift! (unless it is the gearstart type). However, I am sure that Dextron will be just fine.

Not sure what 'wale oil' is. Surely it does not come from a whale??? I don`t understand why it should be outlawed, but permitted in a CVT.

Adam..
"Do not underestimate the English cousin.....they are not as stupid as they look!" - Signor Altabani in The Italian Job.

Dave Czirr
Moderator
Posts: 4961
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2009 5:30 am
Location: New Jersey

Re: My 1955 Packard & Nash

Post by Dave Czirr » Mon Jun 20, 2016 4:54 am

The first few generations of automatic transmission fluids were indeed based on whale oil.

If your Ultramatic is nice and tight with good hydraulic pressures and modern friction materials then Dextron should be OK and many folks do indeed report satisfactory performance with it. But with anything less that ideal conditions the friction slip agents added to Dextron and other such fluids can promote slow engagement (slip) of the direct drive clutch, giving rise to the "moan" or "groan" of the direct drive clutch which is often reported as these units reach old age. In such cases some folks actually go the other way and get fluids like "B&M Trick Shift" which has "sticky" agents added to help firm clutch engagements.

thielbar1
Posts: 29
Joined: Mon Nov 04, 2013 8:59 am

Re: My 1955 Packard & Nash

Post by thielbar1 » Fri Jul 22, 2016 8:50 pm

Well got the Nash home from South Carolina to South Dakota, noticed some interesting things going on in the engine bay. The vacuum pump is ran off the fuel pump, it has a 2bbl carb and that leads me to a highly debated question. Did the Amc 320 have 352 heads, or was it just the 2bbl that brought the power down to 200hp? Im still debating whether to put my 374 in it or keep it original...
Another thing, how do ya'll think a electric overdrive would play with the twin ultramatic? I am not serious or anything but I saw a torque tube mountable Borg Warner overdrive awhile back and it made me wonder..

Will have engine bay pictures tommarow!

Dave Czirr
Moderator
Posts: 4961
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2009 5:30 am
Location: New Jersey

Re: My 1955 Packard & Nash

Post by Dave Czirr » Sat Jul 23, 2016 5:33 am

Only information I can give is that the 320 engine as used in the bottom-of-the-line 55 Clipper had 8.5/1 compression and rated at 225 h.p. with a WCFB 2232-S. Just a guess but logic says the lesser h.p. of the Nash/Hudson version is due to carburetion. And yes, Hudson/Nash used a dual action fuel pump to provide vacuum boost whereas Packard used a single action fuel pump and a vacuum boost pump mounted in the oil pan and driven by the oil pump, just as Cadillac and I believe Buick did during the same years.

Howard56
Posts: 1117
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2012 11:35 am

Re: My 1955 Packard & Nash

Post by Howard56 » Sat Jul 23, 2016 9:42 am

As far as using an OD with the Ultra I do not think they would play well together but it is an interesting idea. I vaguely recall in the 60s and maybe 70s some aftermarket company was offering OD units that would go behind an automatic. This was in the days before all the modern multi speed trans and OD combinations came about. Those units were available for some Ford and GM units. With the Ultra it would need some expertise to rebalance the pressures controlling shift points for the lower engine and output shaft speeds. Without some really good testing or knowhow it could get interesting without any factory support available.

Packard had issues along the same lines with shift points occurring at inopportune times when they coupled a low rear end ratio on some 56 Clippers with the standard Ultra. There was at least one bulletin advising dealers to add shims behind springs to sort of get things back in a useful range but advised that even doing that simple change there was tradeoffs which might also be objectionable. To completely solve the issue would have probably taken a redesign of the valve body.

thielbar1
Posts: 29
Joined: Mon Nov 04, 2013 8:59 am

Re: My 1955 Packard & Nash

Post by thielbar1 » Sun Aug 07, 2016 8:48 pm

Update on the Nash: I haven't posted in awhile, but I got the Nash home and cleaned it out. The engine is stuck as I was told, so I took the valve covers off and found one broken rocker arm, one bent pushrood, and one pushrood with the top ball broke off. One thing I noticed was the head bolts I took out were coated in Grey oil, unlike the crank case oil that is just black. I believe that this car was badly overheated causing these problems but will not know until I have the engine fully apart.

The heads are marked with a 3, and the date of manufacturing, 5-31-55. So that might shed some light on the engine combination.

Update on the Packard: Stuck lifter :( likely from deposites in the oil. Bought some JB oil solution to clean it. It needs an oil change anyways, but before I do so, I thought I would ask around for a better solution.

Adam
Posts: 1058
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:15 am
Location: lincolnshire, uk

Re: My 1955 Packard & Nash

Post by Adam » Mon Aug 08, 2016 6:45 am

The only real solution is a comprehensive strip down and clean and inspection of the parts. Anything else will only risk further damage.

It will be well worth it in the end!

Adam..
"Do not underestimate the English cousin.....they are not as stupid as they look!" - Signor Altabani in The Italian Job.

Howard56
Posts: 1117
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2012 11:35 am

Re: My 1955 Packard & Nash

Post by Howard56 » Mon Aug 08, 2016 7:21 am

With bent pushrods and broken levers I'd wager you have some seriously rusted valve stems and guides. I'd at least remove the remaining pushrods and maybe even pull the heads before trying to free the engine further.

I don't remember the date changes were implemented in 55 -- probably earlier but could be near that general time frame there was a change in heads. Early ones had machined domes and later had cast domes. In addition there were several changes to the rocker arms and their support for oiling issues. If you don't have them you might go to www.packardinfo.com and download the 55 service counselors and maybe some of the 55 bulletins pertaining to the engine to get sone idea of the early changes. Some were fixes and some involved new parts so you might want to verify if any were done and/or put it back together to incorporate the changes. There was also a late 55 early 56 addition of a baffle to direct oil away from the stems to lessen consumption.

Post Reply