All About Packards

Mr_Shiftright

Well, I think the title is okay...we will try to return to Packard talk whenever possible, okay?

Oh, I am pretty certain that values for many 20s and 30s cars are already going down or are very much bogged down, and I can't really stretch my vision to say that most 20s cars are beautiful. I don't think they are, as a rule---some 30s cars are quite stunning, however (also some very ordinary cars, as this was the Depression Era).

I'd hazard a guess that just about any mass-produced 4-door American sedan of the 20s is doomed to stagnation....the "collectors" for these cars are gone, except for the Model A folks, who aren't exactly what you would call spenders.

FREDERICK

Shift right-

The Packard name went up for sale recently but I've never heard any more about what happened with it. What was the buyer's intent if there even was a buyer?

Blank stares and glazed eyes is a common condition among generation x, y, and z's when the Packard name is mentioned. It is most likely due to too much Riddilin, Prozac, or GHB/X. I no longer take it personally. I'm just gonna enjoy the cars while they're still around.

I finally picked up my Packard from L.A. a couple of weeks ago and look forward to getting it painted and back together this Spring. I want this baby out on the road!

Ever thought about what a chrome cormoran up a trash can sized tail piped Honda looks like in its rear view mirror? That thought alone tickles my fancy nearly on a daily basis.

Cruise on guys.

b4z

A couple of months ago I asked about the Packard auction, but no one seems to know who the new owner is or are.
I doubt if a revival could ever be successful. Cunningham is giving it another shot. Maybe they are hoping someone will come along and buy it once it gets up and running.
Panoz seems to be the only new manufacturer who appears to be making a go of it.

Mr_Shiftright

The casualty rate in a new car start up is absolutely brutal. I think we'll see the LaSalle name reborn before the Packard name.....or maybe even the Bugatti name, once again (fourth time, I think).

b4z

Right. Look at how many owners Lamborghini has had. EVERYBODY has heard of Lamborghini. Look at how many times Lambo has almost gone under.
How many people know what an Intrigue is? How many people know who makes it?
Nobody knows what an intrigue is. Nobody knows that Oldsmobile makes it.
I guess whether its a small company or a large one. The auto business is non discriminatory about its weaklings, they will eventually go under.
Bugatti, on the other hand will probably make it this time. 1001 HP is just too awesome not to generate interest and profit in the line.

Mr_Shiftright

Interest, yes...profit, I dunno......that is a ridiculous amount of HP, don't you think? Gee, a McLaren was about as fast as a human being would want to go on rubber tires, and it failed...and it was a beautifully engineered car. I think the ultra-expensive supercar market is dead and gone....the "hot" sector is $50K-100K and will probably remain so.

b4z

We are a little off topic, but i guess packard and bugatti catered to the same buyer.
The bugatti failed a few years ago, because the supercar market turned down, and the car and the engine was too small. Yes, it put out 550 hp, but it was a very small displacement engine with 4 turbos. We like our torque and this is why Ferrari has gotten away from turbocharging and gone to large normally aspirated engines.
An engine such as the one Bugatti had would produce excellent acceleration times, but would be sluggish and peaky in everyday driving.
I would think the Honda S2000 is very much the same way. I wouldn't own that car if you gave it to me.
1001 hp in the new Bugatti serves no purpose, and will probably be a foot note in automobile history, but it will bring a lot of attention to the line and sell some cars. This halo will rub off on the Audi, VW, Lamborghini line and bring prestige to VW.
This is something that GM has forgotten, since they have forsaken performance and the profits that come with them.
At the rate GM is going i don't know if they will be viable 10 years fron now. They have sold their soul, and their leadership position for quick profits on trucks. This will come back to get them
soon when they realize that they are no longer competetive in markets that they used to dominate.
But, that is another topic.
Maybe twenty years from now we will be talking about GM revival instead of a Packard revival.

Mr_Shiftright

Ah, yeah, we could argue all day about that right? The Viper sure didn't help Chrysler any, and really, the Ferrari has never much gone in for turbocharging on its street cars...Ferrari likes smaller displacement high HP cars to give it that Ferrari "excitement". Nothing sounds and feels like a Ferrari. They don't want it to feel like a Chevrolet or drive like a Viper. Monster torque cars are very hard to control and arduous to drive for the average driver. Besides, Ferrari and Bugatti had plenty of torque...they just put it up higher in the rpm range. There's really no such thing as a "torque" engine or a HP engine....it's more a matter of where you put it. I think monster torque engines are better suited to the American market only...Corvettes and Vipers don't make good "world cars", and I think a really expensive supercar would have to appeal to a world market.

Packard, should it ever revive, would have to be a luxury car I think, sort of an opulent American version of a Bentley or some such (like it used to be way back when).

Too bad Bugatti failed...I sure would have liked one!

mrcpfg1

As a Packard owner, I have to agree with a lot that has been discussed regarding Packards and older classics in general. If no one is around to remember them, how can interest grow? With most boomers coming back to restore the GTOs or Impala convertibles they had (or wished they had) in the late 50s-early 60s, the orphan nameplates will always have a rough time. Lets face it, to bring back a great auto maker name like Packard now....well, it might just as well say KIA.
It was a great car, that had the misfortune of having shortsighted management.

Mr_Shiftright

yeah, I think it's pretty much RIP time. And maybe that's fine. The world is really all about making room for the new.

I don't think Packard will be forgotten as long as the cars survive---and with some surviving cars already over 100 years old, chances are the next generation will know what a Packard was.

Packards are from a different world, and it's a world that is definitely not coming back.

b4z

I personally don't want a pcakard revival. It would just be something that some rich guy would lose a fortune on anyway.

It is impossible for a small company to build a car from scratch and compete. Heck, GM can't even come close to competing with lexus.

Bugatti failed big time. It took a giant like volkswagon to ressurect it.

If rolls royce couldn't survive on its own, how can a start up survive?

BMW and porsche can only hold out for so long before they become a subsidiary.

Lets remember packard the way it was, but lets restore the ones that are here.

Mr_Shiftright

Well, hopefully SOME of the Packards that are still here...let's pick the best and most attractive ones, and maybe use the mistakes for parts.

lemko

...never really went away. It defected to the USSR and became cars like the Chaika and the ZIL111. Take a look at pictures of these two cars and they are very similar to the 1955-56 Packard. The 1941 Packard did became the Russian ZIS car upon an agreement with Packard on behalf of the US wartime government to sell its '41 dies to the Soviet Union.

b4z

I still think this should just be called "Packards" or "Packard Meets Here".
I think more people would visit the thread if it were renamed.

Mr_Shiftright

Okay, b4z, let's try that. Thanks for the suggestion.

Shiftright the Host

fowler3

my dad was a Packard and Hudson dealer from 1945 to 1955. His second time as a dealer, the first time was 1917 to 1920 selling Hupmobiles. Ever heard of those?

The Packard before WWII was thought of and sold as a luxury car. More people bought those than Cadillacs. After the war, Packard brought out the Clipper model, which looked exactly like the top-end one. This is what killed Packard, why pay for a luxury car when the medium priced model looked like it? That mistake and the 1949 "bathtub" did them in. Even dealers were sick when they saw that car and knowing they had to sell it against the Buick Roadmaster and Chrysler models. The Buick was a much better looking car then, In fact, Buick hasn't built a really sharp car since.

The dash on the Packards looked like wood and the surprising thing was they were hand-painted. That is a lost talent along with hand-painted pinstripes. The men who did those stripes got their start painting stripes on Studibaker wagons, the pulled by horses kind. You've probably seen those in old Western movies.

In the late forties, the Packard was still a fine car, just not many buyers who were moving to Buicks and better-built Chevies with modern styling. LaSal was another nameplate (owned by Cadillac) that the Packard competed with. It died sooner. The 1963 Buick Riviera was first designed to revive the LaSal nameplate, that's why the front fender caps covering the headlights looked like LaSal grilles.

Yep, those were the days and I'll never forget borrowing a new Packard from my dad to take my date to a dance at Virginia Tech. Parking was tight on Tech's narrow streets and, in the dark, I scraped the side of the Packard on the bumper of the buss that brought the band. Next day, my dad drove it to the post office and thought some lousy driver in town did it. LOL! It was three years before I told him.

This may be a shock to many young people here, but most college guys did not own cars, they walked or rode a city bus or hitched a ride. I didn't buy my first car until I was 22 and out of college in 1952. Only the Korean War veterans going to college could afford cars, and rich kids.

What I have driven over the years: Plymouth '49 (built like a tank, previously owned by the mother of a Virginia Gov.,in the 80's));three Buick Rivieras ('63,'68.'72); Audi Fox's '74.'76''77; BMw 2002 '75; Porcshe 914 second car; Mazda GLC'81; Honda Accords '86,'92,'97,'98; Honda Odyssey '98; Mazda Protege '2001. Oh yeah, two VW Beetles '60, '68 and a VW Vanagon '73. Plus several others that were shortterm mistakes.

The worst car I ever drove was a 1939 Willys (known today as Jeep) two-door sedan. It had an I-4 and the floor was made of wood which had rotted and dropped out under the driver's seat. The manifold would get loose and at night you could see fire through the hole in the floor. Terrible roar! It was a trade-in my dad couldn't sell, so I drove it sometimes.

Fowler3

gshiwota

Hello all,

I was wondering if anyone had a restored post-war Packard available for a wedding. I will be getting married soon and can't think of any better method of transportation then one of the classic vehicles.

Thanks,

Gabe

kahluver@yahoo.com

b4z

What city will the wedding be in?

gshiwota

The wedding will be in Costa Mesa California.

spokane

Your description of Packard's hand painted dashboards is most interesting. I had wondered about the Packard dealers' reaction to the '48-'50 "bathtub" models - thanks for clearing it up. The more stylish '51 model was surely "too little too late" to save the company.

Sorry about the Willys problems but it could have been worse. On several occasions, my buddy complained of poor visibility in his '34 Chevy due to smoke from the wooden floorboard which had been ignited by the exhaust system.