PDA

View Full Version : Packard headlights



aostling
08-16-2007, 01:05 AM
This 1930s Packard is in the garage at Scotty's Castle, in Death Valley. I paid $9 (seniors rate) for the tour, and thought it was worth it.

I'm curious about the V-shaped lenses in the headlights. Was this for function, or styling?

http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u183/aostling/Packard.jpg

bob ward
08-16-2007, 03:11 AM
The Vee shape headlights were purely a styling gimmick. Around that time there were some weird and wonderful headlight styles, mainly on the more expensive cars.

Rustybolt
08-16-2007, 07:13 AM
They match the V of the grill. Purely styling.

Dawai
08-16-2007, 10:26 AM
Perhaps to break wind like the vee on a boat?

I creased a motorcycle face shield once out of "looks" and found out at 100mph when you turn your head it acted like a rudder.

I think it's for styling thou.

Rookie machinist
08-16-2007, 08:18 PM
Packard's were great cars. A good friend of mine has a '41 woody, that used to be owned by Clarke Gable. Fun car to drive and gets way more attention than any high dollar exotic made today. I'll see if I can find some pics to post.

darryl
08-17-2007, 02:03 AM
I visited an old fella once to fix his tv, and he was telling me about how they came to be living there. Turns out they drove a '26 Packard on the gravel highway, and the car was still on the property. He asked if I wanted to see it, so sure I did. We went outside, across the driveway, and then across a plank that crossed a creek, then into the garage. There was this old car, nearly mint shape as far as I could tell, upholstery looking original and flawless. Huge headlights, skinny tires- the rubber wasn't in the best of shape-. He said it was a '24 or a '26, couldn't recall exactly. Sitting in a garage cut off from the 'mainland' by a creek on one side, and a riverbank on the other. Packard Island, I figured. Neat old car.

Tuckerfan
08-18-2007, 04:01 AM
I'm sure it was a styling gimmick. About the only person at that time worrying about streamlining things was Raymond Lowey, and he wasn't working for Packard. When my dad was a teenager he and his cousin co-owned a 32 Packard convertable that they drove to school and on dates. I looked up what those are selling at auction these days ($100K+) and was even more upset than when he traded the 68 Mustang convertable we had for the "brand new" 73 Pinto wagon when I was a kid.

A.K. Boomer
08-18-2007, 07:30 AM
Who the hell knows, anybody ask the engineer thats dead? did form follow function or function follow form? they not only part the wind better (which by the way --- on that land barge is about useless)
More importantly they open up a broader spectrum of horizontal light, perhaps not brighter, but broader, Maybe Help see wildlife without to much disadvantage to oncoming traffic??? Hell --- I dont know, ask the dead guy...

Yes its the same angle as the radiators grill, is the radiators grill strickly esthetic or is someone trying to scoop more air with the least amount of wind drag? or perhaps theres a radiator thats shaped the same way under there to increase surface area? once again, ask the dead guy...

When the questions of style and function are brought up things get to be kind of a gray area, because in so many ways --- style is function --- or should be, just try to imagine one of those big finned caddies going down the road backwards;)

Evan
08-18-2007, 10:00 AM
I'm sure it was a styling gimmick. About the only person at that time worrying about streamlining things was Raymond Lowey, and he wasn't working for Packard.

I disagree. There are a number of contemporary examples of highly streamlined vehicles from that era. One in particular, the Tatra T77 (1935) has a coefficient of drag of only .212, a number to be proud of and in the same class as the most aerodynamic cars available today.


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a1/Tatra_T_77a.jpg (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a1/Tatra_T_77a.jpg)

Another was the Dymaxion (1933), designed by Buckminster Fuller. It had a drag coefficient of .25, also a very respectable number.

Yet another was the unusual Rumpler Tropfenwagen (1921) with a very low drag of .28.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/00/Rumpler_Tropfenwagen.jpg

Lew Hartswick
08-18-2007, 10:11 AM
Anyone know what the CD is of the couple "shoe boxes on wheels"
I see running around? Can't recall the names on them now, one is
by Honda and the other is even less aerodynamic.
...lew...

BadDog
08-18-2007, 10:26 AM
Element. Yuck! Seems like the other is a Scion?

Lew Hartswick
08-18-2007, 10:31 AM
Element. Yuck! Seems like the other is a Scion?
Yea I think that is pair. :-)
...lew...

Tuckerfan
08-18-2007, 03:33 PM
I disagree. There are a number of contemporary examples of highly streamlined vehicles from that era. One in particular, the Tatra T77 (1935) has a coefficient of drag of only .212, a number to be proud of and in the same class as the most aerodynamic cars available today.

Another was the Dymaxion (1933), designed by Buckminster Fuller. It had a drag coefficient of .25, also a very respectable number.

Yet another was the unusual Rumpler Tropfenwagen (1921) with a very low drag of .28.

I thought the Dymaxion's COD was .19, but outside of the Dymaxion, the Briggs, and the Chrysler Airflow, nobody in the US was seriously considering streamlining at the time, and Chrysler was the only one of the Big 3 to be doing it. The Airflow sold so poorly that it killed the idea of a radically streamlined car for decades, which is a shame. The Airflow actually was a pretty good car. Chrysler had a promotional film where they showed the car being pushed off a cliff, then when it landed (on it's wheels), a guy walked up, climbed into the car and drove off.

Rustybolt
08-18-2007, 05:30 PM
When I was in high school I had an opportunity to work on a 1938 Packard touring car restoration for the father of a friend. The headlights were round. Like other headlights of that era.

Evan
08-18-2007, 06:38 PM
but outside of the Dymaxion, the Briggs, and the Chrysler Airflow, nobody in the US was seriously considering streamlining at the time,
I still disagree.

1936 Cord

http://vts.bc.ca/pics2/cord.jpg

The 1938 Phantom Corsair

http://vts.bc.ca/pics2/phantom.jpg

BadDog
08-18-2007, 07:53 PM
Ahh, the Cord. One of my all time favorites. As they say, so far ahead of it's time...

A.K. Boomer
08-19-2007, 12:12 AM
Wow that phantom corsair is amazing for any era... never seen a pic of that.

Evan
08-19-2007, 05:22 AM
There is another car from that time that looks like a batmobile for Darth Vader. I have a pic on a postcard somewhere but can't find it and don't remember the name.

wirewrkr
08-19-2007, 07:04 AM
Evan are you sure you're not thinking of an older Tatra than the one you showed? one of Hans earlier cars actually reminded me of the Batmobile the first time I saw one. Cant remember where the book is, around here somewheres. They made some unique autos, Quite fetching actually, and there was actually a settlement paid to them by VW in the early sixties (I think) for some supposed stolen designs by Ferdinand and his designers.

No one brought it up but the VW (aircooled) bugs were also a aerodynamic design.
Robert

Your Old Dog
08-19-2007, 07:23 AM
I creased a motorcycle face shield once out of "looks" and found out at 100mph when you turn your head it acted like a rudder.

ROFLAMO !! :D David, how the hell did you survive your youth? :D

A.K. Boomer
08-19-2007, 09:05 AM
No one brought it up but the VW (aircooled) bugs were also a aerodynamic design.
Robert


Actually the bugs were pretty piss poor with a CD of .38 they just eek out a dodge durango at .39 (suv) and tie with most rolls royces,,,

GM's EV1 was pretty tough to beat for how practical it looked, .19 and it really does not look like a massive compromise with interior space and such.

Evan
08-19-2007, 10:17 AM
The surprising thing about streamlining vehicles for minimum drag is that the overall shape isn't the main determiner of the drag coefficient. It plays a part but what really counts is the details.

As an example, the DC3 aircraft has regular button head rivets throughout. In an experiment the rivets on the forward third of the wings were replaced with flush rivets, a major undertaking. The aircraft gained about 30 knots cruising speed.

With a vehicle it is the design of things like the window moldings, gaps at the doors and hood, especially the wipers. Cooling drag is a large and invisible contributor. The air that flows through the cooling system is slowed nearly to a stop and counts as flat plate drag regardless of how streamlined the intake looks. The underbody of a car is also very important as most have no effort made at all to reduce drag. Just because you can't see it doesn't mean it has no effect.

Most streamlined vehicles are streamlined mainly for appearance, not function. Part of the reason is that the most efficient shapes look ugly and/or are ill suited to a practical vehicle shape. A good example is the teardrop with the fat part forward and trailing edge reducing to a flat plate at the rear. It's a very efficient shape and wholly unsuitable for a vehicle. It's also the shape most used for low velocity aircraft wings because of it's very high lift to drag ratio at low speeds.

To give some idea of how big the difference is between cars and aircraft, a subsonic transport aircraft typically has a CD of 0.012. The best airfoils are around 0.005.

A.K. Boomer
08-19-2007, 11:28 AM
The underbody of a car is also very important as most have no effort made at all to reduce drag. Just because you can't see it doesn't mean it has no effect.

.


How true, You cant underestimate a good coating of wax either, My bro used to wax the bottom t-6 panels on his formula V's before every race (along with the body)

aostling
08-19-2007, 11:34 AM
Cooling drag is a large and invisible contributor. The air that flows through the cooling system is slowed nearly to a stop and counts as flat plate drag regardless of how streamlined the intake looks.

Evan,

However, streamlined intakes are important. The NACA scoop, used on aircraft cowlings and racecars, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NACA_duct ) reduces the overall drag coefficient.

The importance of this (which you obviously understand) is seen from the formula which relates drag coefficient Cd to drag force Fd, namely


Fd = FrontalArea*Cd * 0.5*density*V-squared

[heavily edited] Forgive my pedanticism. But I will let this stand as a statement of the obvious, to some, and a clarification of just how drag coefficient is defined, for others.

A.K. Boomer
08-19-2007, 11:47 AM
Most streamlined vehicles are streamlined mainly for appearance, not function. Part of the reason is that the most efficient shapes look ugly and/or are ill suited to a practical vehicle shape. A good example is the teardrop with the fat part forward and trailing edge reducing to a flat plate at the rear. It's a very efficient shape and wholly unsuitable for a vehicle. It's also the shape most used for low velocity aircraft wings because of it's very high lift to drag ratio at low speeds.

.


The porsche 911 is kind of the opposite but still does pretty good .30, its basically a reverse teardrop --- it does not put the air back together nowhere near as good and has some other flaws but the car takes advantage of some of the inherent defects, for instance, the front ends are pushed down by a type of ground effects from the constant increasing angle of the hood, very critical for this car as the front end weighs almost nothing and would take off and fly with most other designs, the rear however is a different story, it gets sucked off the ground some at a high rate of speed because the car does not put the air back together well, this may create more drag but the 911 is very heavy in the back with engine and trans so is still "safe" at speeds close to 150mph, however when the 911S and the 930 came out which was a radical turbo charged version of the basic shape the cars were starting to experience problems, Enter the Whale Tail, the huge massive reversed scoop put a sharp immediate break to the suction effect (neg. press.) , perhaps not the most streamlined solution but it did keep the cars from turning into kites,,, its important to recognize that drag co-efficient ratings all change with different speeds as the medium in which their being tested behaves differently at various velocities, anotherwords -- one vehicle may show a better rating at the standard in which everything is tested (be it a certain speed or a Drag coefficient rating measured by the objects terminal velocity) but that standard is subject to change with different velocities... High performance cars and aircraft show this effect to the extreme as some that took more HP's than another in a compairison at a lower speed take far less at a much higher rate of speed because thier design does not function well until a certain speed is achieved...

Evan
08-19-2007, 06:47 PM
The NACA scoop, used on aircraft cowlings and racecars, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NACA_duct ) reduces the overall drag coefficient.

Race cars aren't a very good example as they have about the CD of a dump truck. They rely on brute force as they pay the large penalty for the down force foils, fins etc.

The design of the cooling system can play a huge part. The P51 Mustang was superior to all other propeller fighters for one main reason. Speed. This was obtained because of the design of the cooling system for the liquid cooled engine. Air entered the scoop on the belly and was slowed down in the radiator. There it absorbed heat and expanded out the outlet which was shaped to produce thrust. The cooling system on the P51 was so efficient that it nearly completely canceled all cooling drag and added about 50 knots to the top speed.

A.K. Boomer
08-19-2007, 11:58 PM
The cooling system on the P51 was so efficient that it nearly completely canceled all cooling drag and added about 50 knots to the top speed.



Now thats awesome engineering... they had a small little jet engine utilized from the piston engines waste heat, very "cool".

aostling
12-29-2007, 03:07 PM
I spotted this Henney Packard in an alley in Sebastopol, California, yesterday. It's a Henney, which used Packard chassis for their ambulances. Maybe this is a cheap way to get one of these old vintage cars.

http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u183/aostling/IMG_0012.jpg

http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u183/aostling/IMG_0011-1.jpg

topct
12-29-2007, 05:25 PM
I spotted this Henney Packard in an alley in Sebastopol, California, yesterday. It's a Henney, which used Packard chassis for their ambulances. Maybe this is a cheap way to get one of these old vintage cars.

http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u183/aostling/IMG_0012.jpg

http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u183/aostling/IMG_0011-1.jpg

Ambulances and hearses both seem to be in a catagory of their own.

Neat, but a bit odd.

Tuckerfan
12-29-2007, 05:44 PM
Interesting front plate on that puppy. "California World's Fair 39" The 1939 World's Fair was in NYC.

caddy
12-29-2007, 08:22 PM
I saw your post about the V shaped headlights. At one time I had a 33 Packard Club Sedan. The V shape was used on the Super Eights and the Twelves. Just another way to sell cars. I often wondered how they made those bezels. Press made I'm sure. All the headlight buckets were the same on all models. Should any of you have a need, I still have a pair of fender lights all chromed and ready to go. They were indeed elegant cars.