PACKARDS

b4z · November 2002

Almost reminds me of a Citroen from the front.
The grille area is so small that I wonder if there
were overheating problems?

Mr_Shiftright · November 2002

Citroen is much cleaner and more rational in the front I think. Purely functional aerodynamically at least, if not to everyone's taste. But there is no excuse for that ugly "Packard", unless all the people who made the lovely '53 Studebaker and were dead 5 years later?

andre1969 · November 2002

...looked alot like a '58 DeSoto or Chrysler with severe overbite!

speedshift · November 2002

Part of the problem with that Packard is that it's 1953 meets 1958 on steriods. Most of the car is left over from the '53 wagon and, like the sedan, it was no work of art even then. The front is a caricature of 1958 post-modern Detroit excess. However, it has a certain odd fascination for me.

The '53 coupe and hardtop are easily in the top ten of Detroit designs although strictly speaking they're not the work of Detroit. The industrial designer Raymond Loewy did them (or at least they were done in his studio). It would be interesting to know who did the '56 redesign. It's passable but not timeless. Grafting on fins in '57 made it even less so.

b4z · November 2002

Are you talking about the Caribbeans?

jrosasmc · November 2002

Can '58 Packards even be used as daily drivers?

speedshift · November 2002

No, the Stude and Stude-based Packards. Looks like I wandered off topic.

I always thought the '54-6 Packards were quite handsome. Wasn't Dick Teague, the guy who did so much with so little for AMC, involved in that design? IIRC they're a reskinned version of the previous generation which, with maybe one exception (Caribbean convertible with rear wheel cutout?) was really homely. What elderly spinster designed that car?

A '58 Packard as a daily driver? I see an immaculate '58 Buick Special four door hardtop around here fairly often so why not? And boy does he make an impression. Last I heard (well, this goes back to 1970) Stude parts were plentiful through a dealer in LA. Just be careful not to scare small children.

b4z · November 2002

I don't see why not. I would guess they had 12 volt systems by then.
Don't know about where you live, but A/C is a must here in SC.

grbeck · November 2002

speedshift: Vince Gardner, a freelance stylist who used to work for Raymond Loewy, performed the facelift on the 1956 sedans. Raymond Loewy turned the coupes and hardtops into the 1956 Hawk line.

Our driver's education teacher used a 1957 Studebaker Champion two-door sedan as a daily driver well into the late 1970s. Those Studebakers didn't really make any statement - they weren't flashy and good looking ('57 Chevy); flashy, sleek and outrageous ('57 Mopars and '57 Fords); or even no-nonsense, homely but sensible ('57 Rambler).

The 1957-58 "Packardbakers" were a grosteque end to a proud marque. It hurts just to look at them. Apparently they were built in the hope that money would be found to revive the true, big Packard. Even if the money could have been found for a true Packard revival, I don't think the nameplate would have had any credibility as a luxury marque after the 1957-58 models.

speedshift · November 2002

Gardner didn't have much to work with. The sedans, the bread and butter volume cars, never wore the Loewy look well. That was a big part of Studebaker's (and later Packard's) problem.

Loewy did the '56 update? Hmmm. I had two but I still think the '53-4, even the '55 coupes were miles ahead. My father had a '53 that was so sporty (for the time) that he had to buy a racy cap to drive it.

I think the '58 Packard Hawk front end is "interesting" in a jet-fighter-swallows-Dagmar sort of way but way out of proportion to the car (and probably to any car not from Mars).

Mr_Shiftright · November 2002

They were sporty "looking" but that's about it. They were clumsy old-fashioned cars, even by 1953 standards. It was just a modern skin on a tired old idea.

speedshift · November 2002

His had the six and OD so weight distribution was probably favorable but yes, my two '56s drove like trucks. That's what keeps me from getting too enthusiastic about the '62-4 which is one cool looking car.

Looking though my books, the '46-7 Packard is very handsome, I guess based on the earlier Clipper. Trouble starts in 1948 although the club sedan looks a bit like the '49 Merc.

Are any of the '51-3s particularly collectible aside from the Caribbean? About what would that one sell for these days? One book says it was designed by Dick Teague.

lemko · November 2002

...had a 1955 Packard Four Hundred when she was a child. He later traded it for a new 1962 Cadillac Sedan DeVille. I wouldn't mind having a 1955 or '56 Carribean convertible.

Dick Teague designed the beautiful "cathedral taillights" for the '55 and '56 senior Packards to replace what chairman James Nance called the 1951-54 Packard's "bull's nuts" taillights.

Mr_Shiftright · November 2002

The 51 on up sedans are probably the least collectible Packards of any ever made, but if you had a nice clean survivor it would be worth more than chump change. Maybe you could get $5,000 for one if it were really a sharp car and if you could find just the right buyer who wanted to own a Packard and join the club without a heavy investment.

b4z · November 2002

I thought the'48-51s were the least desireable.
Those were the bathtub cars, right?

b4z · November 2002

When I went up to the Packard Meet in July I only had eyes for the Packards of the '30s.
I saw some '50s that were truly the class of the field.
There was several Caribbeans there, a '53 convertible that won class 8-b and another '53 Carribbean owned by one of the head guys in the club that was green and had a million mile deep paint and real wire wheels.
These are beautiful cars.

If I knew how I would find somebody to host my pictures of the Show.

Best of Show, postwar was a 1954 Pacific 2 door hardtop. An older restoration that was still a knockout.

If i had my druthers I would still go for a '37 which was the first year for the independent front suspension and hydraulic brakes.

Mr_Shiftright · November 2002

Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder, but it is indeed a reasonably attractive car for the period, in that busy, chromey 50s kind of way. I like 'em better than the 55-56 cars, which I think are a mess stylistically. The Caribbeans are pretty valuable, and you can see that no expense was spared on this one.

Mr_Shiftright · November 2002

Here you can see Packard styling going over the top, a la '57 Lincoln. Severe lines, slab siding, sharp edges, lots of glitz stuck on. The car makes no sense to me.Nor did it to buyers. I think something like 11,000 Packards TOTAL (all body styles) were sold in 1956.

The rear wheel overhang, the "square" wheel well openings (ugh! Can any one thing be more unattractive on a car?) and the forward leaning headlights are all very clumsy styling cues that very few companies ever copied. It really would have made a better motorboat!

grbeck · November 2002

By 1956 styling wasn't Packard's only problem. The company had purchased the old Briggs body plant in 1954 and proceeded to move its final assembly operations into the plant. Unfortunately, the plant was far too cramped, resulting in horrendous quality control problems for the 1955 models. By 1956 word had gotten around, and buyers shunned Packard.

andre1969 · December 2002

...although that triple-tone paint job is a bit too much! I never thought about it before, but it DOES look a lot like a '57 Lincoln!

I think the '53 is a much better looking car though...almost looks like a big sports car. The open rear wheel wells make it look a lot sleeker and more modern looking than your typical '53 era car.

carnut4 · December 2002

the Packard topic here. I've been away for a couple weeks and I can't believe all the posts.

Fun stuff to read. All of it.

Mr_Shiftright · December 2002

carnut4 · December 2002

But, is that one of those Packard built Merlins they put in the P-51 Mustang? I didn't think there was an OHV 12 in a Packard auto. Huh? Duh?

Anyway, good pic. Where is this engine located?

Mr_Shiftright · December 2002

Yep, looks like a Packard Merlin but altered somehow. I'll try to find the auto engine.

Mr_Shiftright · December 2002

isellhondas · December 2002

They must have been one smooth running engine.

Mr_Shiftright · December 2002

yes, it was, almost perfectly designed I'm told.

The old V12s back then were not built for power, but for smooth operation.

isellhondas · December 2002

Were those Packard flathead sixes and eights very durable? I never got much exposure to them.

When I was a kid working in a gas station, we had a customer, an old Italian guy from the old country who had a pretty nice '54 sedan. As time went by, he had scraped it on both sides getting into his garage.

So, he took it to Earl Schieb for a 39.95 special.

I couldn't believe my eyes when he pulled in for gas after the paint job. He had it painted bright green (it had been black)and the paint job was done sans any bodywork. The emblems hadn't been masked off nor were the door jambs painted.

It was,indeed, a 39.95 masterpiece.

" They no takka outta da bumps"

Guess he thought the bodywork came with the job.

What a waste of what could have been a cheap restoration.

andys120 · December 2002

that Enzo Ferrari himself was so impressed by the Packard V12s that he decided his cars should offer twelve cylinders. I'm sure Shifty can tell us if there's any truth to tha this.

carnut4 · December 2002

I've been to many Concours D'Elegances over the years. At the end of the show, I always sit and wait for the old iron [Franklin V8s, supercharged Duesies, Auburns, Cords, Cad V16s, V12s, etc] to fire up and drive off to [in most cases] their trailers, just to see what they sound like as they start up and "clear their throats." I don't recall ever hearing a Packard V12 though. One time I was right there when a guy was trying to start his '34 Packard 8 convertible. I guess it would have been a 160? Anyway, he cranked and cranked that engine, but it WOULD NOT start. Cranked over VERY slow. I realized what a chore it was for those old electrical systems to turn over that much rotating mass. I think he finally got a can of that starting spray [ether?] stuff to get it going.
Anyway, I'd love to get a ride in an old Packard V12 sometime.
Now, what years were the V12 offered?

Mr_Shiftright · December 2002

Packard made the Twin Six from 1916-23 and the Twelve from 1932-1939. They were not all that similar. The Twin Six was 424 cid with a 60 degree V and the Twelve was 446, later stroked to 473 cid. The massive car could do 0-60 in 20 seconds which was very good for the times.

speedshift · December 2002

Wasn't the critical yardstick a car's acceleration from like 5 mph in high?

dranoel · December 2002

I can remember driving my dad's 1939 Super 8 (1703)touring sedan in the early 1950s. It would accelerate from under 10 MPH to whatever in high gear--I think I had it up to 80+ once--with no strain. You had to take it easy on the accelerator until it built up some speed or it would knock like crazy, then smooth as an electic motor thereafter. The car had around 80,000 miles on it when I drove it and was in great shape. The motor was so quiet and vibration free that when at stop in traffic, you weren't sure whether the motor was running or not. The only bad habit the car had was an insatiable appetite for oil--thankfully Sears had very inexpensive single weight oil for sale in those old 10 quart metal cans. I guess the rings were ready for replacement. I think my dad got $350 for it when he traded it in on a new 1952 Plymouth. --oh if I only had $350 then--also a place to park it for a few years.

seeburg222 · December 2002

Where I grew up, there was a local car collector who rented a large barn nearby to store his collection of Packards. I don't know what he did with them, he rarely drove them or showed them, it was very unusual to even see the door open on this barn to take a glimpse at them. One summer evening sometime in the early '70's my best friend and I were riding our bicycles nearby and this guy had taken ALL of his Packards out of the barn and parked them in the street! I guess he was sweeping the place out or cleaning. Well, for a couple of bored kids with nothing else to do we were most fascinated by his '34 V12 convertible sedan sitting there next to the sidewalk. It was a beautiful restoration and we spent a few minutes walking around & admiring it. When we got to the back of the car, we couldn't believe what we saw! Puffs of exhaust were coming out the tailpipe! We had started looking at this car from the front and worked our way around to the rear and heard absolutely nothing. We assumed it was parked with the engine off. We then walked around to the front again and listened carefully at the radiator, sure enough you could very faintly hear something in there!

b4z · February 2003

The 50th Anniversary of the Packard Auto Club and the 38th Annual Meet will be celebrated this year in Santa Rosa, California.
The dates are from June 22-27th.
You can go to packardclub.org for additional info.

scott1256 · March 2006

Custom 8 line, especially the LWB models and the convertible.

Some of these have been bringing big dollars lately.

Mr_Shiftright · March 2006

That's true I've seen convertibles of that era sell for very good money, but not sedans...those are a hard sell in that less-than-popular body style. Most Packard people don't share your enthusiasm for the "bath tubs". I like them because the straight 8 is a very torquey engine and they are actually fairly pleasant to drive by 1940s standards. I bet $10,000 could get you a very nice sedan (buyer's market) but it would take nearer to $50K to get a very nice convertible (seller's market).

fintail · March 2006

And then there's the woody

scott1256 · March 2006

IIRC a couple of #1 Custom 8 convertibles have sold in the $80-100,000 range over the last couple of years.

I will try to find the details and post a link.

scott1256 · March 2006

that sold this year at the CCA sale for $105,840.

This was a no reserve sale: the car must be exceptionally good!

http://www.barrett-jackson.com/auctionresults/common/cardetail.asp?id=182333

Mr_Shiftright · March 2006

Well cars like that don't really establish the true market, because they are so exceptional that 99.9% of people never even see cars of that quality, not even at most car shows.

The difference between a $100K Packard and a $50K Packard might not even seem very great to the casual observer. Both cars look great, both cars shine.

But the $100K car has been completely disassembled down to every nut and bolt. Very often, New Old Parts, purchased at enormous expense, were installed rather than re-chroming or reproducing old parts. It's not uncommon to pay $4,000 for an original new bumper or $1,000 for the correct air filter box. And all the bolt heads are the right size and shape. The simulated wood grain dash has all been done by hand, by an artist. All the gauges were disassembled, and the numbers redone and the guts rebuilt. Look under the dash and you'll see the same quality as on the outside of the car.

A #1 car represents thousands of man hours, and probably no profit whatsoever to the seller.

scott1256 · March 2006

an article by a restoration shop owner who claimed the cost of a #1 restoration is seldom justifiable.

He said doing a #1 restoration on cars that have little collector value costs nearly as much as doing a #1 restoration on very rare and desirable cars.

I wonder if the $105,000 Packard owner broke even on his restoration costs.

Mr_Shiftright · March 2006

Hard to say without seeing the car and without knowing what he started with. If he paid like $30,000 for a shabby car to start with (shabby but rare I mean), then I doubt he could get to #1 for $70,000 unless maybe he was skilled and did the work himself.

Restoring cars is generally not a for-profit enterprise. Sometimes speculators can flip a car real quick that's hot but even that is quite risky and certainly not something you do in the Packard market. That's more of a muscle car type of behavior.

scott1256 · March 2006

car listed for sale - 1940 model.

Packard offered air conditioning many years before any other make.

http://forums.aaca.org/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=290184&page=3&view=collapsed&sb=- 5&o=&fpart=1

Mr_Shiftright · March 2006

Interesting but price seems nuts for something dragged out of a barn. That's show car money.

scott1256 · March 2006

CCCA classics are going up fast after steadily dropping for 15+ years. Looks like today's brass/classic buyers are new to the hobby but coming in with a lot of money.

Still, someone who bought a senior Packard, Mercedes 540, Pierce-Arrow or V-16 Cadillac in 1988 is still upside down by a big margin. These cars need to be enjoyed as cars: occasionally they may appreciate in value.

Mr_Shiftright · March 2006

They call those "the heavy cars" and while certain rare open, flashy, special-bodied models might appreciate, I think the big old standard production sedans are doomed to stagnate. They are also a very very hard sell to anyone. You'd be lucky to get .30 cents on the dollar for a fully restored Packard sedan.

b4z · March 2006

Whoa!

I started this thread 3.5 years ago and it was resurrected.
Wasn't the "Classic Cars" topic eliminated too?

Anyway,
I still haven't bought a Packard.
2 years ago the CCCA came ot Charleston, SC on their tour.
These guys and gals are really commited to the hobby.
Some of them drove from California!
In fact the cars had to be driven. Could not be trailered anywhere.
I talked to some of the guys about my plans to buy a Packard.
They were interested, until I told them I was thinking about a 120.
Apparently they only care about the full classics and a 120 does not qualify.
Getting married soon and have put future car purchases on hold.
Currently have a '04 SRX and a '04 GTO and will probably be getting rid of my '87 IROC because it is just languishing behind the garage.
No room for a Packard and I wouldns't buy one until there is an opening in the garage.

andre1969 · March 2006

the other day, in the movie "The Hills Have Eyes". It was a Clipper; I think it was a '55. You can see it in the trailer for the movie they show on tv, too; it's like one of the first scenes.

Nothing really special about it, I'm guessing, especially since in the context of the movie it was leftover from the old days of nuclear testing, so it wasn't in the best shape. But still kinda neat to see something that obscure, as opposed to the stereotypical 1955 Chevy or whatever.

Mr_Shiftright · March 2006

'55 was a bad year for Packard unfortunately. The cars were very problematic, with engine oiling issues. They fixed it in '56 (Packard always had an outstanding engineering department) but by then the company was struggling. Attaching themselves to an even sicker Studebaker was the final nail in the coffin.

PACKARDS

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles