- Home
- About Us
- Join/Renew
- Member Benefits
- Member Pages
- Log In
- Help
- Museum Store
The flakes used in the 30’s metallics were extremely fine and provided a much more subtle opalescent quality than modern paints with big flakes. The metallic colors were usually quite conservative and when done well (hate to use the work proper)are hard to tell at first they are actually metallic. Hardly “circus wagons”. You can probably tell I am thinking of using metallic on my ’35, the starting point being the 2 tone factory “Alpha Blue” and “Patricia Blue”. I have mixed around 6 sample colors now, starting with “standard” paint supplier color mixes and substituting only the fine grade flakes for the courser. Substituting the fine flakes does significantly shift the colors so it takes several tries and painting swaths on the car to fuss over what looks good (to me and my wife). Not quite there yet. So far the non-metallics just don’t quite look right. Many of the 2 tones in the ’30’s were very subtle, barely able to tell in some light, but the Alpha/Patricia combination did have more contrast than some. The Packard in the foreground departure point was a non-metallic Packard color “Dawn Gray”, but is a 1980 non-metallic Lincoln color.
Being in the camp of doing colors that look best on the car versus absolutely original I cling to the usual argument that virtually the whole spectrum of colors could be custom ordered from the factory- including metallic. 1/2 of factory color options for Packard in 1936 were metalics (but metallics back then generally used only the finest size flakes, not bigger ones common now). A friend knowledgeable about paint history pointed out to me that most of the candy colors like vibrant purples popular in the ’60’s weren’t achievable in the ’30’s. Don’t know about Pierce, but years ago in the Packard Club there was a dispute that although technically you could order any color, it was rarely done and shouldn’t be condoned by the club. One of the guys who worked in Packard’s design group in the ’50’s responded by recounting the big wall of index files full of custom color and interior orders dating to the the ’20’s. To try and justify my stance I also use the technical argument that you can never know exactly what the color was when it was delivered. The color chips fade, they weren’t necessarily spot on in the first place and they weren’t always consistent. Bits of paint protected from the elements are pretty close – but still age to some degree. Years ago there was a paint shop that still carried original Ditzler pigments and could mix ’30’s colors to the original formulas in lacquer. I had several mixed when choosing colors, but even there, how much have the pigments shifted with age sitting in the can for a few decades? In the end one get pretty darn close but there is no such thing as an “exact”” match. My personal choice is to drive a truck through that argument and modify the colors to get something that looks good to me and still is in the “”spirit”” of the original colors – but I also never have my cars judged.”
My 845 is stepped like this, it has never been bored. I wondered if it was supposed to let the ring compressor slip into the bore on assembly to reduce the tendency of the rings – particularly the cast iron oil rings – from catching and breaking when being tapped in. Haven’t actually gotten to the point of trying it. Another theory: the step corresponds to the top of the ring travel and avoids having a ridge from wear that catches on the rings when trying to pull the pistons.
Jim
If as Rick notes you have threads on the end of the drum, that could make for another variation on the pipe flange idea that would not require pulling on the studs. An unthreaded pipe flange could be machined and threaded to screw directly onto the drum hub center thread, then another matching flange cap placed on the axle+axle nut and four bolts put through the four holes in the flanges. Actually less machining, except for the inside thread part that is beyond my (low) skill level. Keeping the axle nut on means everything is trapped and nothing will come flying off. Didn’t know anyone was in the business of building new pullers, sounds like a good place to start.
Jim
Craig, one can imagine the rear drums were modified to incorporate the 4 ears because the repair shops were having the same problem pulling drums way back when. Like others have reported, when my drums came off the tapers looked as clean as the day they were assembled, corrosion wasn’t the issue keeping them stuck on. At any rate, it seems like if you don’t have the option of the 4 ears, the next best alternative is pull the drums from the wheel studs, and the best hope of doing that without pranging the drum is pull on all five studs evenly and progressively. A thought for doing it with the same idea of the pipe flange caps is machine a larger flange cap with five slots to match the 5 wheel studs, see attached drawing. The flange cap comes with 4 pre-drilled holes but of course 4 holes don’t line up with 5 wheel studs. Then get 5 coupling nuts and bolts. the coupling nuts would screw onto the wheel studs. I believe 1/2-20 fine thread is what my ’35’s are, and I confirmed 1/2-20 coupling nuts are available from McMaster Carr. I think such a puller would have very good stability and not come flying off as long as the axle nut is on the axle flush with the end of the shaft (leaves ~1/4″ movement for the drum when it pops off the taper).
One of the worries is that this arrangement is probably a lot stronger than the drum itself and capable of breaking the studs or drum long before the puller fails.
I only know my ’35’s dimensions, other models likely have different wheel studs and dimensions, so don’t take my little sketch verbatim.
Jim
When I put the Packard (in the background) body back on 30 years ago it was a club event.
PS, Newcomen and Watt started the industrial revolution using English units, you drive on the wrong side of the road, and WWII was won by SAE and Whitworth threads against the evil metric system. Aren’t you a little ashamed to use those silly Frog units?
Jim
My four post lift is free-standing and with no special concrete reinforcement and no problem to date. Until I re-started my Pierce restoration it usually had one of my two 4500 lb Chryslers sitting on it 6ft up. The BYB is not attached to the floor, it would cause problems if it was. It just plugs into a 115V 20 amp plug with no special wiring and no problems to date. It has an option for big castors so that you can roll the complete lift with a car on it (in lowered position) to another area of the shop. I bought the option but haven’t used it so far but I might if I get another lift and it ends up being a forest of poles in my garage.
The idea for posts sunk in the concrete you can attach a winch to haul cars into the shop is something I had wished I had done. In my pics in the previous messages you can see I attached a winch to the front of the lift, but a purpose built winch attachment would have been better. Getting even a stripped down Pierce up the ramps isn’t trivial.
Jim
Sure you will gets lots of conflicting opinions on this! As you can see from my post a couple messages down I have a Backyard Buddy. It is the extra height, extra length version so that I can put the 70″ high Packard above the 70″ high Pierce-Arrow. I am pretty happy with it, but it isn’t foolproof. When I first started shopping I looked at some of the cheap imports and they were reasonably frightening. I tried to imagine being under the lift when an earthquake hits – not paranoid or anything! Are you thinking 4-post or 2 post? My 4 post sometimes is inconvenient for working on stuff, the ramps do get in the way at times, but I need it for storing an additional car as well. No matter, it is a huge help and beats by a long ways crawling around under jack stands. As you can see from my post, the lift has some definite advantages over a pit for things like pulling bodies off frames.
There are two basic philosophies, the solidly enclosed square tube around a totally enclosed tube column like Backyard Buddy, or the open channel. Open channel bugged me because if things get to rocking the channel can flex and open a bit and the locking ratchets can slip. This is what can happen on the cheap and flimsy ones. If I were to design and build a lift I would use the enclosed column concept from a basic structural integrity standpoint. What I also liked about the BYB was when the locks are in place they are totally trapped in a hole like an overbuilt jackstand.
Having said that probably the best is Bend Pak. It may have the open channel design but it is totally certified for commercial use, and hard to argue with thousands in everyday use in shops. They get by with the open channel design by making it beefy enough to allay any problems from channel flexing. If I remember right, the lift cables are totally enclosed in the tubes rather than exposed as on a BYB, which is a nice feature.
There was one more thing that besides price/quality that led me to BYB, it is built basically across the street from where the first Packards were built in 1899. Maybe that’s a reason for true Pierce buffs to choose something else! Good luck, and enjoy your shop when it is done! Jim
Thanks, not exactly how the factory handled a body. I am getting more conservative in my old age. When I did the same thing to the Packard in the background 30 years ago I used nothing but single 2×4’s, this time 2×6’s and doubled up 2×4’s.
Jim
My question is maybe a bit premature. This restoration is strictly “touring” so originally I was not going to take the body off. Problem with restoring cars of course being where to put stuff after you take it off! However it turns out the most reasonable way to repair some body damage on the back end is to pull it off the frame, which I will be doing soon. Before that decision, I looked at the doors and hinges, they are quite tight and the wood is still good, so I fussed with one of the front doors a bit and after adjusting the hinges to get a good match to the front door post it took some shimming of the pads (and body bolt torque) to get alignment to the center post. At any rate, since rubber creeps over time I was thinking it probably requires something stiffer than reinforced rubber to keep from “settling” too much over time. Actually, the body had settled on its rubber pads over the rear door enough that the wood cross-member was sitting on the frame rails. Thanks for the suggestions, I’ll do some searching.
Jim
Thanks! Jim
If the ’32 has the “kick shackle” on the left front spring hanger, then first I would double check that the front hanger bearings are free, the two kick shackle coil springs are not broken and the bolt through the small spring compresses the springs – but not too much. Through the 20’s, cars were prone to shimmy. It was found that engineering some carefully controlled give in the steering side fixed shackle greatly reduced shimmy on solid axle cars. Since it is there to control shimmy, I would first check on that. A few months back I asked on this sight whether anyone had the specs for tightening the bolt on the small spring. I got no answers so I assume no one knows exactly what the proper setting is. By the way, my smaller spring inside the frame was broken and had to buy 10 to get one, so I have an extra if you find yours broken.
Jim Chase
Greg, one of the things I think about as I lay awake at night these days is how that goofy thing works, and whether putting a screen around it will keep it from working. I think I have it figured out and it is definitely non-intuitive. One of the PASB’s had a decent cutaway and description. It is a monometer, but a bit like a diving bell it relies on the air trapped in the little canister at the bottom to provide the air pressure to move the column of fluid in gauge. If as things slosh around the canister loses its air charge (trying to imagine again how that happens) it won’t read properly. The little tubes recharge the air supply. Basically as the fuel is burned the average fuel level drops below the level of the little tray on the sending unit and the fuel in the little tube coming up through the tray drops below the tray as well. When the car moves and the fuel sloshes around it refills the tray with fuel and traps a little air bubble in the tube. as it does that it keeps slowly transporting little air bubbles down the tube and they emerge at the bottom where the air is trapped in the upside down cup shape below the canister. The bottom of the canister has a little tiny hole that lets the air trapped underneath bubble into the canister and replace the air trapped in the canister. So basically if I understand it, when the fuel level is in the vicinity of the trays it is continuously pushing air bubbles and fuel down the tubes as the fuel surges up and down with the motion of the car. I don’t think it is from splashing into the trays as much as surging like a tide into the trays, so I have convinced myself that a screen surrounding it shouldn’t keep it from working.
The odds are that none of the pieces left in the tank would ever plug the tubes, but hard to say. The bottoms of the tubes and the vent hole in the bottom of the canister were plugged by goo, so my first concern was getting the goo out as it can get past a strainer. A couple years ago one of my ’66 Chrysler’s strainers was pretty restricted from 40 years of service and I back flushed it to clear it. The tank itself was amazingly clean without particulates. In the first instance I am concerned about keeping the fuel pickup tube clear to not starve the engine, but while I’m at it may as well put a fine enough mesh to protect the KS “burp”” tubes. It doesn’t appear there was any kind of screen or strainer on my ’35 originally.
Jim”
Don’t want to be disagreeable, but I think I have what’s left in the tank down to a manageable level if I protect the sending unit/intake pipe with a strainer. The black goo is out thanks to the lacquer thinner and what is left are particulates that a strainer screen will keep out. No matter what I do it will never be completely free of bits that could clog the King-Seeley burp tubes, so I am building the strainer regardless. Deconstructing a sound tank, cutting holes in the baffles and re-soldering seems to me like a lot of cost and work with the likely reward of creating worse problems than it solves. I had fuel tank sealer originally in my ’36 Packard decades ago and had to drop it and clean it out when the sealer failed. The “solution”” became the problem. I have been operating it sealant free for about fifteen years now.”
Greg, that’s what I did, put the blobs in shot glasses, lacquer thinner the obvious winner. Based on that I’ve already done a round of cleaning the tank with lacquer thinner, it seemed to do the trick as far as the blob goes (grounded it with a pipe and copper wire – paranoid about sparks and explosions!). The black tar had plugged the tiny holes of the King-Sealy sending unit riser tubes, the vinegar actually worked fairly well on that combined with blowing them out with compressed air and more lacquer thinner.
Now I am done to rust and sand particles, vacuumed most of them out. As I mentioned a few months ago, I’d never get rid of all of them and worry about blocking those tiny ~.030 riser holes, so today I designed an over-elaborate brass screen strainer to envelope the whole KS sender/pickup tube assembly. It will be a few weeks before I can get to it.
Mike, I had the same question a few months ago – there should be a thread still on the site – and there were plenty of suggestions for vendors for leather but no metal. Don’t know if you still have useable originals but Ed suggested that the originals could be unbent and removed and replaced. He was right, they are very soft steel and survived being unbent and bent back when re-installed. I cleaned the old ones up, painted them individually first, then repainted them once installed as they scratch as you slide them back and forth into position. They don’t look perfect, but they weren’t perfect when new either. I don’t think they would be terribly difficult to make, mainly take a fair amount of time and patience fabricating a series of dies out of hardwood to put in the bends. Personally I would not put any graphite lubricant in the springs, graphite (carbon) induces corrosion in steel and aluminum with the slightest moisture.
A quick google search indicates the material -including the light cotton like material – is Kapoc. It is water resistant but highly flammable, so presumably Seapak (correct spelling) may have treated it with some sort of flame retardant for aircraft 9and P-A firewall) use.
Roger, I removed the same batt from my ’35, packed behind the upper firewall a few months ago, and just removed the front firewall and packed fiber type insulation sandwiched between the front and rear firewalls. I knew I had seen a reference to it somewhere in the literature and finally did in Arrow 95 Model 2 (1995)in the re-printed dealer data book for 1935.
“Costly all-fibre Seapac insulation from the Javanese Ceiba tree seals the dash from motor compartment. Waterproof and fire proof, this latest insulation is the result of airliner soundproofing and heat insulation developments”.
Must have been the stuff used for cutting the cabin noise down on DC-3’s!
Mine looks like yours, and it did indeed survive water without rotting, but unfortunately wicked water to the firewall and created lots of rust on the firewall and the free-wheeling control lever.
At any rate, there isn’t a lot of difference in heat transfer coefficients for packed insulation material, but the sound deadening role probably favors a relatively dense packing of fiber materials. Probably some sort of dense packed fiberglass product, or take fiberglas batts and compress them down. There are probably products out there but haven’t looked for a while. Maybe this post will bring some more responses.
I also have the looser low density cotton like material packed in the corners of both sides as you describe, so seems with two votes it likely is original. It does resemble a short fiber fiberglass, maybe rock wool? I will probably use fiberglass batting for that. Other brands besides Owens_Corning that aren’t pink!
Another bit of trivia – as Greg says, the stretch of the bolt is actually the preferred measure of torqueing for extremely critical bolts, a torque wrench ft-lbs value having a fair amount of inconsistency depending on lubrication, surface finish etc. The WWII Rolls Royce Merlin head/cylinders were done by “feel” by craftsmen with years of experience. When Packard took on the task of building them they tried to adopt US auto practice of setting definite torque values but had lots of failures with such a high performance engine designed at the margins for minimum weight. They had to measure strain to get a consistent enough build to stop the failures. Fortunately, our old auto engines aren’t that finicky! Jim
Peter, its not that the tension disappears, it just goes to a constant value once fully compressed, and just becomes equivalent to a flat washer. If you put a coil spring on a bolt, the spring will provide increasing tension as the nut is tightened until you reach the point where the spring is fully compressed. Then it becomes a solid thick washer, and further turning of the nut will increase the tension on the bolt and the spring will act as a solid washer, without any difference in the stress level than if it were a solid washer. One of the odd calculations your son may have done in machine design is that the tension on an adequately torqued preloaded bolt such as a connecting rod is nearly constant despite extreme variations in load on the rod, its the reason such a highly stressed bolt being pushed and pulled with such heavy loads can be torqued up to ~75% of its ultimate stress and not fail from fatigue. Another Mr. Know-it-All! I have actually done a little bit of bolt stress analysis on aircraft structures but we never use splits in aircraft, so never dealt with them beyond throwing them in on car and home projects. I had vaguely understood split washers weren’t supposed to be re-used, they clearly provide a resistance to backing out once they are loosened, but I had always had my doubts about their effectiveness in the first place when fully torqued. I didn’t go looking it up until this thread. Jim
