Hi Packard Info Folk!

You may recall that we discussed who was the stylist or stylists of the 1957 Packard Clipper and that it was pointed out by BH that there was a difference of opinion between The Packard 1942-1962 written by Nathaniel T. Dawes and Packard: A History of the Motor Car and the Company, the pertinent part being written by Dwight R. Heinmuller and George L. Hamlin. In his book Mr. Dawes credits Duncan McRae and William Schmidt for the design. In their book Mr. Heinmuller and Mr. Hamlin credit Dick Teague for the design. In an effort to determine the reason for the difference of opinion I wrote a letter to all three authors, seeking the reasons for their opinions. So far I have received two responses.

The order here is the order in which I received them. Here, word for word, is the response from Mr. Dwight Heinmuller:

Hi Ken:

Thanks for your letter regarding the 1957 Packard Clipper. In retrospect, and after more interviews with Packard stylists and others, I conclude that the 1957 Packard Clipper was a joint effort between Duncan McRae (deceased) and Dick Teague and their respective styling organizations. McRae was head of the Studebaker Styling Studio while Teague headed Packard's, both serving under William Schmidt as SP's VP Styling (he is deceased). When Schmidt came to Packard in April, 1955, he soon canceled the Raymond Loewy Organization consultancy. Remember that the basic car was a Studebaker design, modified to give it some individuality for the Packard nameplate, mainly with 1956 Clipper taillights. Timing in styling matters is really immaterial, since artistic inspiration occurs spontaneously and ends quickly. It's the details and the refinement of the original inspiration that take time, along with obtaining management approval and dealing with engineering considerations.

It is my conclusion, after interviewing so many automotive stylists, including Schmidt, Teague, John Reinhardt and many others, that automobiles are styled by group effort, with each individual contributing certain elements, under the leadership of a Chief Stylist, who may be able to take credit for a basic shape or theme, but not the entire concept. (I also have learned that many, not all, heads of styling tend to take all of the credit, without mentioning the contributions of others.)

For example, the flow-through hood/fender swoop on each side of the 1951 thru 1955 Packards, which was very well received in automotive styling circles, was designed by a Packard stylist named Robin Jones (living). This feature was incorporated into the overall Reinhardt design. The 1953/54 Packard cormorant hood ornament was designed by Packard Stylist Charles Phaneuf. The 1957 Predictor and the 1957 Predictor-style Packards, that were never built, were conceived by Bill Schmidt, Dick Teague and Dick MacAdam, among others, and largely completed by summer, 1955. Dick Teague, of course, designed the 1955/56 Packard cathedral taillights over the Easter Holiday in 1954. It is probable that a Detroit industrial design firm contributed the front end design of the 1955 Packard and Clipper, while Teague took care of the rear end, and members of Packard Styling contributed other features.

I hope that this opinion of mine adds something positive to the question as to who designed the 1957 Packard Clipper.

Regards,
Dwight
--
Dwight R. Heinmuller

Here, word for word, is the response of Nathaniel T. Dawes:

September 17, 2009

Dear Ken,

Re: Your letter to me dated September 13. 2009

Enclosed is our prime source of the information in my book. During the compilation of historic information, Helen, my wife and helpmate of 45 years, persevered to corroborate such information included from another independent source. Starting with the SIA of March-April 1971 we compiled a draft of the sequence of design of the 57-58. We then requested an interview with Dick Teague. He responded that he would be delighted to be of any assistance in our endeavor. In March of 1973, Helen and I met with Dick in his office at AMC on Plymouth Road in Detroit (this was in conjunction with another sojourn to the Detroit Public Library). We asked Dick, "Did McRae do the 57-58 Packards?" He replied without hesitation, "Yes". That gave us our corroboration for the SIA information. Dick, as he preferred to be addressed, reminisced on his soujourn at Packard, prompted by Helen's gentle suggestions. Boy is she good!

Also in the SIA article regarding Bill Allison's torsion level suspension; he was an independent engineer trying to sell his suspension to somebody. He was not a Packard employee. That from Bill himself. That's another whole tale.

Happy Packarding!
Nat
Nat Dawes

Enclosure

(Summary of enclosure done by Ken)
Enclosed was a photocopy of pages 56 and 57 of article entitled "Postwar Packards" done by the Editors of Special-Interest Autos in their March-April 1971 issue. In pertinent part the article states "The 1957 Packards that Teague and Schmidt had designed never made steel. Instead production 1957's were facelifted Studebakers, quickly transmogrified by Duncan McRae to incorporate some of the Predictor's side styling, the 1956 Clipper's cathedral tail lamps, and a bit of Packardish grille." The article also describes William M. Schmidt as Studebaker-Packard's Vice President of Design, Dick Teague as head of Packard Styling, and Duncan McRae as head of Studebaker Styling. (The article does mistakenly state that William Allison, designer of torsion level suspension, was a Packard employee, and that is what Mr. Dawes is commenting on in his letter.) The article cites as some of its sources George Hamlin (for research consultation regarding production figures), Dick Teague, Vice President of Automotive Design of American Motors Corporation, and William M. Schmidt Associates, Inc.

A response from Mr. Hamlin has not yet been received but will be posted if received.

Thanks to Dwight Heinmuller and Nathaniel Dawes for their responses!

Ken

The Grose Jet is of solid metal construction, but in addition to sealing perfomance, I suspect they promoted this design for vehicles where the OE needle and seat sets were NLA and reproduction weren't forthcoming.

Personaly, i see absolutely nothing wrong with conventional SOLID needle and seat.

In addition to the Grosse Jet there was a a kind of donut shaped disk type (no needle) and seat that was offered in some kits during the 70's. I mite still have one in my junk pile somewheere. But i don't recall it as having any magical effects greater than convention solid needle and seat.

Keith -

The seals that came in new, repro overhaul kits that I obtained from Kanter and others required no reworking of the counterbore. The rubber cup seal looks to be newly manufactured. The leather seal could be an off-the-shelf item, but I never looked into that.

As such, I personally see no reason to machine the counterbore except for damage, but - never mind scratches and scores - I haven't even found corrosion in the counterbore of any of the units I renewed that would require machining. Cores from field cars might be a whole 'nuther story, though.

If a rebuilder is modifying the counterbore to accept some sort of other seal, it seems to me that they made too much work for themselves - unless they have darned good reason for a seal of alternate design. If so, I'd like to know the whys and wherefores.

Personally, I've had no problem with the repro rubber seals, but would like to hear if others have.

Be careful about Viton and PTFE(Teflon) being related - that's true but they are not interchangable. Viton is an elastomer (rubbery) and will act as a seal. Teflon is not. (If you tighten a Teflon seal it just oozes to relieve the stress).

T'Packman writes "It seems that a proper rebuild with all the required machining to get it all back to spec is paramount, and expensive."

SURE! And here's another one of my questions that no one will like but i'm gonna ask it anyway:

WHAT the fuck are OEM SPECS ??? WHERE are the OEM specs???? WHO has them????? e.g. Is there some genius out there that has OEM specs for the rubber compounding in the compensator port seal???? The spring??????

And apparently all of the "Qualified, Reputable", christened, confirmed, washed in the blood and dyed in the wool "Professionals" don't have the specs either or there would not be so many reports of returns due to failure.

Of course, everyone is installing their BTV's the wrong way now arn't they????? Couldn't possibly be the rebuild!!! Oh dear, not at all.

I think the emblem is common 110-120-160 (the latch it fits into changes). 180 is cloisonn?. Whether it's painted differently between models I don't know - I'll try to get a shot.

BH. My thots exaclty. The 'sleeveing' that is talked about over at the Tri-5 sites i finally realized they were talking about hte conterbore for the SEALS. But why??? I'm guessing that sleeving is for some other reasons not related to 'cleaning up' the counter bore for the seals. Most likely seals are retro-fitted to the unit that are a different OD dimension maybe.

Also note that at the tri-5 sites 2 or 3 have indicated problems with units from "Qualified and Reputable" BTV rebuilders that required 3 send backs to correct.

I believe we can get to the bottom of this BTV problem. Maybe no solution to the BTV itself but at least understand the problems that seem to go beyond and thru secular rebuilding attempts.

Decades ago, I saw display ads in Cars & Parts magazine for a Grose Jet replacement needle and seat that used a ball in a conical seat. Ball and cone is a very sound principle for sealing; I recall DeVilbiss touting such a design feature for the air cap and fluid tip in their spray guns.

Perhaps the Grose Jet valve was only made for older carbs (prewar cars, brass era?), but it sounds like there's an opportunity, now, for later models.

Be sure that the vendor is aware that the FORWARD end of the MC fits EXTRMELY close to the frame!!

i.e. the OVERALL lenght of the entire unit must not exceed the length of stock BTV!!! OTherwise, frame interference will obtain.

Actualy, i would prefer at least 1/8" shorter or maybe even 1/4" shorter to allow for body sag and road compliance.

The stock BTV sat extremely close to frame at the very forward end of the MC..