Questions about Packard/Rolls Royce

I have absolutely no info on the car, but I think it looks pretty sweet. Glad you posted it here. This thread has been a good read.

 

Got all excited, thought you were talking about putting a Rolls Royce Merlin engine in a Packard! Hmmmmm.....might just work!

 

What it looks and sounds like is a 29 Packard Deluxe or Custom 8. The motor# is the 3rd one for 29 as they started at 167001. The WB should measure 140 or 145 inches. That engine was used in both models regardless of chassis/coachwork. It displaces 384ci and was rated at like 105HP. Under your foot it's as snappy as a warmed up 60s small block due to massive TQ.

Regarding the coachwork, I don't see/read anything that would have me raise my right hand as to the car's pedigree. I coulda been a Holbrook bodied Packard on a Deluxe 8 Chassis, later on someone thought it would be kool to shag a Rolls grille and hang it out there. I'd rather see the whole thing than the limited shots you posted. If it's visible, there's a chassis # just ahead of the driver's side cowl on the frame. It would tell a lot. BTW, those are not 29 Packard headlights from any model.

It could also be a much earlier Packard, 25-6-7-8, that a later engine was fitted to. Some stuff looks like my past 29 roadster project, some doesn't.

 

Two things to keep in mind here.

Coachbuilders often adapted their stock lines for several chassis. Case in point, I was recently looking for information on whether a certain Minerva built around 1930 with a Million Guiet 2-door sedan body was still in existence. I didn't find that car, but Bugattis, Rolls-Royces, Panhards, and even a large Renault with similar Million Guiet coachwork.

Also, it was not unusual for these upmarket cars to change over time, to be rebodied or otherwise modified. It is to be expected if one has very-well-made chassis in a very fashion-conscious market. An example is this 1927 3-litre Bentley rebodied by Corsica in 1935:


Here is a Rolls-Royce "Ghost" to which had been fitted an Oldsmobile or Buick body around WWII:


Point is, that might be an awful mish-mash, but that isn't to say that there isn't history there. Personally I don't like the idea of claiming it's a Rolls-Royce when it isn't, especially as Packard is nothing to be ashamed of.

 

As my friend and I joked, I guess they had a Chip Foose of the late 20s do the car.

Again I cannot thank the Hamb faithful for such wonderful information.

I will pass on to the owner about looking for the chassis number, not much was visiable, but then again, I didnt get out the flashlight and coveralls to crawl under it at the time.

 

The chassis # should be right on top of the driver's side frame rail, about an inch or 2 forward of the cowl. If it's a 29 Deluxe or Custom 8 the number will also start at 167XXX, but doesn't have to match. No such thing as a classic era Packard with "matching numbers" as we tend to think of them these days. They can be very close, but seldom ever the same. You can also locate a number on the front right face of the front axle.

 

That is good to know.

 

Coupla more things: I've been told that one of the reasons for the demise of the Sprigfiels plant was snob appeal...the people who bought RR's demanded ENGLISH ones, and simply placed orders for ones built in England.
The adaptations were detail parts...RR sourced USA made small parts that they considered up to snuff, like SW instruments and Trico wipers. Everything big was the same design as English built cars, and of course most bodies for such cars were custom anyway.
Packard built 2 lines of V-12s during WWII...the Merlin for aircraft and a purely Packard designed V-12 based on an earlier aircraft engine of Packard design. Lots of accounts mix these together by false assumption...

 

At least they didnt use a tractor grille.....

 

I know EXACTLY where you are coming from. That's why many of us don't post there anymore. Some day I'd like to start a thread on the HAMB and ask for a show of hands of card carrying members. I think we'd all be surprised.

 

the wheels are 8 bolt thats 6th series
i got the same wire wheels on my
633 roadster
Never heard of rolls with packard
chassie .But Bugatti bought packard
bodies to some of the Royals

 

Re the Packard bodied Bugatti. That was the first Royale made. The Packard touring body was stuck on the chassis so they could road test it. It was a second hand body that did not fit very well but was good enough for thrashing and testing. When the tests were finished, the body was removed, the chassis reconditioned and a brand new custom built body fitted.

 

For a number of years I worked for a shop that specialized in pre-war Rolls-Royce repair and restoration. The Springfield cars were not Packards in any way.

Rolls made the chassis, powertrain, cowl, hood, and radiator shell. The customer would select a body builder to design and produce a body for the chassis. Unlike the British built cars, the Springfield cars could be fitted with one of several bodies built by a division of Rolls that was located in the U.S., but a custom body was also an option.

I believe what you have is, as someone else suggested, something that was cobbled together at some point after the car was originally produced. That happens. Cars with severe damage, or less desirable bodies, are sometimes re-bodied with more desirable ones.

 

In any case, it looks like a pretty cool project that could go in any direction the builder desires. One can almost picture the builder in say, 1932, thinking "Man, this is going to really screw with some heads eighty years from now!"

 

The questionmarks above heads still abounds. Most of the Packard People cannot determine which end is up.. There are a few that wonder if it was a coupe, but based on my visual look at the car, its appeared to be a cabriolet, as it has top irons etc. The body around those areas did not look cut or hacked to give it that shape. The doors have tracks that fold down when the window is down and extend up when the window was raised.

The only tag next to the engine number is one that said BODY 1819

This may be one of those that never gets a full explanation of what it was or represented. Now its just what it is now. I think you have to take this one for its odd nature. I know the Packard Purist would probably want it restored to the correct Packard Model, but if I were going to do it, I would restore it but keep the oddity factor as part of the history of this specific vehicle.

 

I have personally only worked on one Rolls Royce[a 1937 limo]- in my past,and I would like to say that the Rolls was/is, the biggest peice of clusterfuck engineering and worst body construction of any automobile I have ever encountered in 45 years of automotive repair.......
Other than that they were great ,I hear.....

 

I checked this out on AACA. Better shots of it there. One of the replies said it sat on a 136" WB. It should be 140" WB and that's the same engine that was in my roadster, which was 140". I see some of the replies saying it's a cobbler project, mix of parts, not a Packard body originally. I disagree. Lok at the steering column and wheel, the floor, the inner cowl, the gauges and IP. It's pretty fuckin Packard lookin to me. I have to guess the WB was measured wrong or something's awry with the axle/axles for it to come up 6" short. Bottom line, somebody added RR lights, shell and hood to a Packard Custom some time in the past. Why is anyone's guess, but no matter, she defintely appears to be a 29 640 Holbrook Cabriolet. While it's not a Dietrich, LeBaron, Murphy, or other cherished custom bodies, it's still a coachbuilt Packard. To purchase/restore this car is purely a matter of taste and desire (funds are a forgone conclusion!). Far from junk, far from being useless, but not the most desireable of examples. Could it be? I can see it all black with oxblood leather, a deep maroon/burgundy chassis and wheels, blackwall tires, linoleum running boards and floors, grey or black folding top...

 

I think this is the smoking gun photo. This was from another Packard site that I am not on. here is the link to the forum post

http://www.packardclub.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=1673&start=10

 

Highlander, what would you value that car at as it sits? He does not want to part it out, but that may be the best way

 

Yes, yes, let's part it out and destroy it permanently.

 

Well if he cant sell it whole, that might be his only option. He has fielded calls on the engine, frame etc.

Personally seeing the car, it would be something that would be too cool to build, just do not have that kind of cash laying around to buy it right now.

As quoted by one of the Packard People, its a mongrel. I did not see any of them stepping up to the plate to purchase.

I would like to have time make some paper patterns of the body.

 

Now THAT sounds like AACA people. They won't cough up $$ to buy it, but they will tell you what you should do with it.

 

Close to my standard line, if you own it, not worth much, if they own it, its worth a ton.

 

A friend of mine once referred to "The Principle of Borrowed Ownership"....the commonly found attitude of some people, who have no investment, telling someone else what they can, cannot, or should, do with their property.

There is a not so polite suggestion that can and should be made to such people.

Ray

 

So true, since day 1, most likely never will end. I believe the 'suggestion' begins with Go and ends with Yourself, but you can still be polite about it

 

That about sums it up.
So my question is, what will it cost to put that pile of parts in my shop?

 

I think that would make a great project, whether to "restore" it to something resembling what it looked like in the '30s, or build a hot rod out of it...which IMO would not be the best choice here.

 

My dad was a PT Boat officer in WWII. The boats (ELCO) they used had Packard v-12 old aircraft (Liberty) engines modified for this new service concept. Some later were even turbo-charged. He told me a Packard engine specialist friend was sent to England during the war to the Rolls Aviation Engine plant to learn how to assemble Rolls Merlin engines in the Packard USA plants under a Rolls license. This venture more than doubled the Rolls Royce Merlin fighter aircraft engines so the England could install them in a variety of applications like the Spit Fire, and other planes like the North American P-51 built in the US. Later, many of the Merlin engines were used to replace the Allison V-12 engine made here that were problem prone at altitudes. I used to see those engines installed in the "Unlimited Class" hydroplane race boats. In trhe collector aircraft market a good Rolls Royce Merlin engine will bring at least $200,000. from those having aircraft that are restored.
Normbc9

 

While you are entitled to your view, I disagree. From the Cloud series in the '50s to the Shadow series in the '70s, Rolls did have some trouble spots and maintenance issues. The earlier cars you mentioned were made from the best materials available at the time, used state of the art designs and engineering(often aircraft based), and were produced to the highest standards of workmanship. Those cars are what earned Rolls their reputation. Where possible there was double and triple redundancy. For example; multiple and/or overlapping ignition systems, dual or triple brake systems, screw in valve seat inserts that were heat shrunk in place with interference threads, tightened against a locking taper, then staked in place. Those don't fall out. Due to similar precautions I doubt a wheel or wheel hub has ever fallen off of an old Rolls. Rolls-Royce engines had fairly aggressive cam profiles for the time. To get better cam life with the relatively low quality oil available at the time, the engines had either roller cams or hardface cams and followers. Depending on whether it was a Sr or Jr model, the '37 you worked on could have had induction hardened cylinder liners, that's the same as heavy duty industrial engines still use today. Ignition points were expensive. That is because they used a premium tungsten alloy rather than whatever short lived material points are normally made of. Even by today's standards, the aluminum crankcase/block castings Rolls made for their engines were works of art. Due to the variability of fasteners available at the time, Rolls that made their own high quality fasteners. A '30s Rolls-Royce cost about 20 years of the median income at the time. Then you needed a body! Maybe you don't like them, but they weren't junk.

If you gave all the pieces for an average car to a decent mechanic he could get it together correctly. On a Rolls-Royce the same mechanic would make mistakes. That doesn't mean the designs are, (the biggest peice of clusterfuck engineering) as you say. The cars just aren't as simple and idiot proof as most. That is especially so of the V-12 engine. I have fixed numerous failed Rolls repairs done by people thought of as experts. Maybe they were, but they didn't know enough about Rolls-Royce.

As to the body being the; "worst body construction of any automobile I have ever encountered in 45 years of automotive repair"....... if you read the entire discussion you know Rolls didn't make the body for the '37 you worked on. The body was made by an independent body builder on the Rolls chassis. Some body builders did better work than others. And, if one paid for something cheap, that's what they got. In any case, it had nothing to do with Rolls. Even the best custom bodies of that era were hardwood frames with aluminum panels tacked on, not the welded steel one would get with a higher production car.

The cars are notoriously expensive to repair and restore. That isn't because they are junk, it is because they are made like fine watches rather than the relatively crude and simple execution found in most cars.

 

Nice commentrary.......very informative....thanks!


Ray