Overdrive...is it heresy?

Is "over-drive" heresay...?<P>Nope...it is common sense ! First of all...50 mph is WAY too fast for a car of the early 1930's...given their absurdly low final drive ratios, long strokes, and "poured babbit" connecting rod bearings.<P>Do the math...at 50 mph...that long stroke engine is spinning FASTER than a modern car's does at 100....! And the modern car has superior bearings, and a much shorter stroke (thus much less "loadings" on the vital rotating parts).<P>Under the broad heading of "over drives" there are a number of ways to bring the r.p.m. of the old cars down to modern (meaning SURVIVABLE) levels. There are a number of ways to "re gear" old cars so as to enable them to cruise effortlessly at normal highway speeds. GO TO IT !<P>Pete Hartmann<BR>Big Springs, AZ

I knew I could count on Peter for an erudite opinion. The Cadillac has a 4.60:1 rearend which is standard for a 140" wheelbase 1932 Cadillac such as mine. The "high speed" rearend is a breath taking 4:31:1 rearend, not much better than what I have. The biggest stumbling block to installing an overdrive is that the driveshaft is enclosed in a torque tube. I discussed this with a friend who has installed seven O/D units in his Marmons, some of which have torque tubes. He recommended I use the same o/d company he uses. The price is extremely reasonable, $1,175. I remove the torque tube. They install the unit. And I reinstall the torque tube with the o/d and the job is done. The price of a high speed rearend starts at $2,500 and goes up from there. I look to low engine speed cruising starting this summer.

Eddie...good luck..you are going to LOVE it...!<P>PFH

Eddie<BR>I would go with new rear end gears, something on the order of 3.55:1. You acceleration would still be good and the rpms would be considerable lower. As rare as 32 Caddys are it could prove difficult and expensive to convert back from overdrive if you ever wanted to do so. Changing the rear gears also maintains the original look, in case you ever want to show the car.

Eddie says, "...cruising speed of no more than 50 to 55 mph, ...can increase my cruising speed..." through the use of overdrive.<P>As you install your overdrive or higher-speed rear axle gears, you may want to consider what it would take to turn or stop that car from the 65 or 70 mph you'll be traveling. Primitive brakes and narrow tires with hard compounds do make for safe high speed driving. <P>As long as you're modifying the car for higher speed, suspension, steering, brakes and tires ought to be looked at as well.

Bill<BR>I have a friend who is doing a frame off on a 32 caddy right now. From looking at the suspension and brakes I would say that they are both capable of adequate control up to 80 or so, perhaps a bit more. He is going to change rear gearing just to get a more relaxed touring speed.

I agree with Terry - any of the high quality high performance "super luxury" cars from the early 1930's on (that we now call TRUE classics )....have excellent brake swept lining area ratios to weight. Yes, REPEATED extreme speed stops WILL get you brake "fade" that would not be incurred with a disc set-up, but I rather doubt it this fellow is going to enter his car in a "hare and hounds" type sports car race....!<P>As for suspension, assuming the shock absorbers are operational, there is certainly no problem in "handling" - remember the roads our classics were designed for....they HANDLE....<P>The above comments assume a classic is properly maintained. Obviously, a cosmetic restoration on a worn out chassis, with sloppy steering and badly set up brakes, is NOT relevant to the above comments...! <BR>( Sadly, many owners of COSMETICALLY restored classics have NO idea how spectacularly well these cars drive and handle, simply because the restorer correctly recognized most people couldn't care less...they just want a piece of rolling costume jewlery to take to a car show.....My own personal slogan is.."drive it or junk it"...my '38 Packard V-12 is no cream puff...but it has been maintained as a serviceable automobile. While, in my role as a Packard V-12 fan, I would have to say Cadillacs are good for nothing but boat anchors.......let's admit WHY we called the "best of the best" of the classic era's "super luxury cars"....CLASSICS.....it's because they WERE...and ARE....! Go to it...you will LOVE the vastly improved utility of an overdrive ( or "high speed rear end" ) TRUE classic.....! <P>Pete Hartmann<BR>Big Springs

Regarding the issue of safety: The 1932 Cadillac V8 and V12 are identical vehicles except for the engine, length of torque tube, the V12 has a brake booster and the V8 does not, also the"V" emblem is differant. The brakes are identical. The booster only means one need apply less pressure to get the same effect. Body style for body style o the V8 is several hundred pounds lighter than the comparable V12. I have set up the brakes and suspension properly. They are both superb...for the era. I don't expect to be going much faster than 60 mph. When I do so it will be in a very straight line and with little traffic to worry about. You see, I enjoy life and want to enjoy more of it. Nevertheless, with the O/D I expect I can cruise in the mid 60s with no strain on the engine and do so safely. <BR>By the way, my 1933 Packard 12 Convertible Sedan has a 4:06 to 1 rearend. That can cruise at 70 mph. <BR>I don't want to install a high speed rearend because they are considerably more expensive and I can convert back fairly easily if I desire.

Eddie...NO NO NO...dont do it..DONT drive your Packard Twelve at 70 mph....that 4:06 final drive ratio means your long stroke V-12 is thrashing around with MANY MANY times the "intertial loads" on its crank-shaft and rod bearings...as would a modern car at 100 mph..and the modern cars have much shorter strokes and "insert" connecting rod bearings.<P>The discussion I just entered the other day holds just as true for your Packard Twelve. I have a Packard Twelve ( later model than yours...'38...with the "insert" type connecting rod bearings )...and I re-geared it back in the mid 1960's...and have been enjoying extreme-speed crusing ever since.<P>Sure...the ORDINARY old cars of the 1930's had miserable brakes and marginal handling. ONE of the many reasons the vastly superior super-luxury / super powered cars we now call "classics"...are CALLED true classics..is their superior handling. Any of the big-engined TRUE classics of the 1930's....even the late 1920's...would benefit from re-gearing so as to bring their engine rpms at crusing speed down where their designers planned for. The only qualification is...you go back in time far enough..and you are going to face TWO wheel brakes...I would NOT want to try a panic stop from 80 mph in a TWO wheel brake car. I HAVE had to make hard stops in my Packard Twelve at extreme speeds. SURE you only get one or two high speed stops before "brake fade" sets in...after all..there is a REASON why high performance cars have disc brakes..!<P>Again....re-gear...save your classic's engine...make it more fun to drive..and you WILL drive it more....what could be more fun than sailing leisurely across country in a big-engined TRUE classic....!<P>Pete Hartmann<BR>Big Springs, Arizona

Eddie:<P>One word of caution on re-gearing: if you go too low numerically, your car may not overcome the wind loads in high gear. I speak from personal experience from my misspent youth playing with motorcycles. It's easy to convince yourself that lower is better and you can readily change the final drive ratio on a motorcycle. But you will find that you quickly reach the point where the wind drag grows faster than engine torque, and the car becomes so lifeless in high gear that it isn't usable.<P>And don't forget how hard it is to get an under-geared car started on a hill on a hot day with a full load of passengers.<P>Suggest you try to find someone with a similar car who has changed the final drive ratio before you do it. It may be a better idea just to drive a bit slower. Or go with the overdrive, at least you can turn it off if the ratio is too high.<P>Good luck<P>Bill S.

Buick...I think you are confused...we are not talking about the ORDINARY old cars of the 1930's in here....you are correct in that an ORDINARY old car would most certainly NOT have the raw power to handle a "high" (numerically lower) final drive ratio. But when we talk "classic"...at least between people who KNOW what we mean by REAL "classic"...we are talking only about a very special kind of car...the "super luxury" cars of the classic era. When we got togethe orginally to participate in THIS particular Club..our focus was on the most elegant, most powerful cars of the late 1920's thru 1942. These cars most certainly DO have the power to cruise comfortably in the extreme speed ranges. And they have the "support" systems..such as superior brakes and cooling systems, to "deliver" this mile after mile.<P>What many people do not understand...is that the typical NEW car buyer of the 1930's..especially the buyer of the biggest, most powerful, most luxurious cars, was NOT a "car buff" as we understand the term today. They were older people..many came to maturity at or before the dawn of the mechanized era...often had NO understanding of technology. It was considered a "status" thing if your car could start in high gear from a dead stop, and give sprightly performance in HIGH gear without shifting at very low speeds. Given the dismal condition of the highway system of those years, very low final drive ratios were the "norm". Of COURSE the engineers knew better, but there was nothing they could do about it. There was an attempt by Packard around 1931 to get new car owners to appreciate the merits of "high speed" final drive ratios..and it was a disaster ( they equipped a few cars with 3:31 ratios...and virtually EVERY one of them was returned to the factory by irate dealers and customers...!)<P>Unfortunately, greedy people who just wanted to sell old cars, have gotten into our Club and dramatically broadened the definition and use of the term "classic". I would certainly agree that some dinky little Standard Eight limo...with that silly 320 cu in motor, and a large "wetted" frontal area, wouldn't do well with a high speed final drive ratio. But my comments were not directed towards the medium price "ordinary" cars. Again...my comments were assuming we were talking about the big POWERFUL super luxury cars that are REAL "classics".<P>Pete Hartmann<BR>Big Springs, AZ

Peter:<P>Somehow, your posts make we want to puke.<P>I know that you think the REAL CLASSICS that you rever hardly follow the laws of physics. You must know that the '32 Cadillac under disucssion has a mere 115 horsepower flathead V-8 with specs similar to engines in dreadful (ughhhh!) mid-priced cars.<P>You must consider picking up a Peterbuilt, they have huge engines and cruise for hundreds of thousands of miles at high speed. I'll bet it will remind you of your FULL CLASSIC.<P>Bill S

Come on guys, LIGHTEN UP! I didn't invent those LOUSY, WORTHLESS mid-priced NON CLASSICS. Can't you TAKE A JOKE? (Where the heck's my Britney tape). <P>SURE it's got 115 HORSEPOWER, but that's CLASSIC HORSEPOWER! Much different from mid-priced MULEpower. (I know I left it here somewhere).<P>When we designed all those full CLASSICS, we made darn sure you could drive the bejabbers out of them ALL DAY! UP HILL! IN THE DESERT! (Oh, here it is. Now, where's that darn TV?)<P>Where was I? Oh, YES. CLASSICS. Wetted area, piston speed, LOUSY poured bearings, speed, CHEAP, STUPID, LOUSY, SCUM mid-priced cars. <BR>(OK, there's the TV, now where's my Lazy-boy). <P>Look I got to go now. We'll talk later. LAUGH IT UP!

Isn't it interesting that some sixty years after the last REAL true classic was manufactured, ( what a tribute to their superiority over the ordinary cars of their day....and to their designers/builders...that they STILL generate such jealousy and resentment....( and such childish antics as coming in here under counterfiet names..?<P>(the REAL) Peter Hartmann<BR> Big Springs, AZ

Buickplus :<P>You apparently are not familiar with the term "wetted area". The fellow who asked about overdrives does, as you point out, have the smallest-engined of the Cadillacs available that year. However, he has an open car. There is substantially less wind resistance than a closed body of the same era.<P>No doubt he would not get anywhere NEAR the performance of the larger-engined Cadillacs, but the fact remains he would get much better (and less engine-wearing) use out of his classic with an over-drive.<P>The Classic Car Club Of America, and the cars it came into being to protect and preserve, are not for everyone. Perhaps if you find discussions of the "best of the best" offensive to you, you should ask yourself if you are in the right chat-room. <P>My understanding is that there IS a Buick chat, where the people with the smaller-engined Buicks find others whose interests are similar. <P>My suggestion is that you would find this form of communication more worth-while, if you would contribute and share TECHNICAL information relating to CLASSIC cars, rather than dwell on personalities.<P>Pete Hartmann<BR>Big Springs, AZ.<P>Personal note to other Classic Car Club members. It appears we have been "invaded" by some "sour grapes" people from the now defunct "ClassicCarChat". You should anticipate "grousing" and discomfort with our Club, its principles, and the cars our Club was to preserve, and, in particular, watch for COUNTERFIET names - these guys rarely have the courage to stand behind the issues they propose - instead, they think it is "cute" to "counter-fiet" legit. member's names.

I....................<P>don't................<P>even.................<P>have.................<P>an...................<P>opinion..............<P>Please don't hurt me!<P>You guys are mean!

Hey...Chuck...that's no fair...c'mon, man....you GOT to have an opinion....! <P>PFH

Ok, as long as you guys promise not to hurt me.<P>I think a mild overdrive ratio like .75 to .9 could not hurt anything. The power needed at highway speed is a fraction of the engines actual capability. But finding any type of overdrive that's available for any kind of reasonable money is going to be hard to find.<P>Remember the old two speed rearends, what a great idea. Too bad they still aren't produced today. I love those old Halibrand rears too with the externally changeable spur gears, another great idea that should be revived.<P>If you didn't mind the hassle and cost of a Halibrand swap you could get the best of both worlds, just change out the spur gears when you intend to hit the highway. It all depends how original you want to keep it. If it was mine, I would keep her as is and drive a little slower. <P>You get to see more of the world that way.<P>And you know the view of the world through an antique windscreen should be savoured not rushed through.<P>Please don't hit me.

I think that if I were in Ed's place I would have the overdrive unit installed. The convertible sendan that Ed has when the top is up should have the same wetted area as a closed car. It seems that Buick 90 series from 1931 to 1942 are considered Classics. I have seen some custom bodied Buick 90's that would knock your socks off. Peter your idea of what a true Classic is ( PARDON THE PUN) is way out in left field. John Shireman Jersey Shore Pa. owner 53 Packard

I have a 1932 v-8 256 5 passenger phaeton and it has a 4.6 rear end. The car has plenty of stump pulling power with this low rear end that would be great for the<BR>road conditions of the 1930's. I am going to change the rear ratio, not to rip up and down the road but to lower the engine speed during normal driving. I think changing the ring gear will do alot less harm than mounting a overdrive unit under the car. When someone gets the car in the future it will be unaltered to anyone looking under the car. Jeff