1957 Hornet

Unknown
Unknown
edited November -1 in HUDSON
How does the 57 compare with the 56 in terms of driveability? Is the 327 V8 auto better than the 56 with Packard engine and Ultramatic? Does the 14" tires make a difference? Please chime in - advice is needed.

Comments

  • Nevada Hudson
    Nevada Hudson Senior Contributor
    lonemalt wrote:
    How does the 57 compare with the 56 in terms of driveability? Is the 327 V8 auto better than the 56 with Packard engine and Ultramatic? Does the 14" tires make a difference? Please chime in - advice is needed.

    The 57 engine is 250 pounds lighter than the 56 Packard , its not as nose heavy. The 57 handles much better than the 55 and 56. The 57 has a steering knuckle assembly which pivots on anti friction bearings -contributing to improved steering. The 327 has 255 horsepower compared to the 352 Packard v8 which has 220 horsepower. With less weight, more horsepower, the 57 is much faster and handles quite well. But with all AMC Hudsons,the rubber control arm bushings must be in good condition, or the front end will be sloopy.
  • Nevada Hudson
    Nevada Hudson Senior Contributor
    Nevada Hudson wrote:
    The 57 engine is 250 pounds lighter than the 56 Packard , its not as nose heavy. The 57 handles much better than the 55 and 56. The 57 has a steering knuckle assembly which pivots on anti friction bearings -contributing to improved steering. The 327 has 255 horsepower compared to the 352 Packard v8 which has 220 horsepower. With less weight, more horsepower, the 57 is much faster and handles quite well. But with all AMC Hudsons,the rubber control arm bushings must be in good condition, or the front end will be sloopy.

    Also , The AMC 327 is much more durable than the Packard v8, and the Hydra -Matic is much more durable also. I have a 56 with the Packard v8 and Ultramatic, but it has been taken care of, and is trouble free. The 57 also gets better gas mileage. 14 inch tires work fine, and the 57 is the same height as the stepdown, as the 57's roof is one and a half inch lower also.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    I find it hard to believe that the money was spent to change body dies to flatten the roof on the 57's when everybody on the planet knew the big Nash and Hudson was about to breathe its last. How did they accomplish this magic? Or was it just that the tires were 14" which made it appear shorter?
  • [Deleted User]
    [Deleted User]
    The 14's were on there for that purpose - to leave the illusion of a lowered car without the expense. Several automakers went to 14" wheels in the same era for the same reason.
  • Nevada Hudson
    Nevada Hudson Senior Contributor
    66patrick66 wrote:
    The 14's were on there for that purpose - to leave the illusion of a lowered car without the expense. Several automakers went to 14" wheels in the same era for the same reason.

    look at any 57 Nash or Hudson alongside a 55 or 56 of the same and you will see a flatter roof on the 57's, with less crown. If you don't believe me, look at the back of the latest WTN for our clubs 55-57 expert on these models and he will tell you the same thing. We both have owned 55-57 models since the early 70's. There is also a 55-57 group in our club under "special interest groups" that you can call or E- mail to get further information. It is in the front of the WTN.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories

In this Discussion