The vast difference in size between Packard and Studebaker Products, makes it seem that Packard+Hudson and Nash+Studebaker might have been better combinations.

John

It wouldn't happen for the reason you stated but I think I would rather build 50,000 Packards and max out E Grand with however many Studebakers you can build there, maybe 100,000-125,000. Maxing out the plant even if you could sell more than you can build is better than having two plants that cant even breakeven.

John

I didn't write my question well, sorry. I had heard that the Packards/Clippers wouldn't fit on the Studebaker line. What I was envisioning was moving the Studebaker Champion and Commander production to East Grand and building the Packards/Clippers and the Champion/Commander on the same line in Detroit, and close South Bend. I just wonder if the Champion/Commander would be to narrow to work on the Packard assembly line.

John

On the original question:
It seems to me that the single biggest factor was the failure of Packard to use the 120 to allow Packard to produce the senior cars in a cost effective and efficient manner. In my mind the Packard 8 should have been terminated a year early leaving the 120 to be the entry level car. The 320 straight 8 was only 7 years old in 1935 and could have been moved over to the 120. The money used to develop the 257/282 engine should have been used to bring out the 160 with the 385 engine and the 180 with the v12 in 1935.

Also the 120 should have had a different grill look than the 160/180 to keep the cars a bit more different. In 1937 the money used for the 115 could have been spent to both upgrade the v12 and use it to create a companion 6 cyl to put in the 120. The rest of the money could have been used to finish the 160/180 roll out.

The money for the 356 could have been used to bring out a family of 2 engines to replace the 320 and 385 engines.

This would have given Packard the ability to use a mid price car to support the tooling and assembly of senior cars allowing increased profit margin on the seniors to lower cost of production.

John

Steve,

I was actually saying the opposite. Make the Junior Packard, sold as the Packard Clipper, a Studebaker Clipper with the 289 in the Deluxe and Supers and the 320 in the Customs. Essentially turn the Clipper into a Studebaker not turn a Studebaker into a Packard like in '57-58.


So Packard would have the 400 line (senior body/352 engine)
They should have built a 300 for '55 (senior body/320 engine)
They should have built the Executive for '55 (junior body/320 engine)

John

With the SP merger in 54 it seems to me that the new 1955 stude president should never have been built but the clipper line should have been studes with a stude 289 v8 for base models and packard 320 v8 for the deluxe models. Packard could have had a 1955 executive and had 2 versions of the senior small and large v8. All built at EGB. Then get the stude champion commander conestoga and pickup production to EGB as soon as possible. South bend is contract work or sold.

Even better Packard could have bought the Studebaker name inventory tooling and dealer network and not the factory or company.

Looking at the amount of design changes in studes between 1954 and 1957 seems that stude got the money not packard. Seems this money might have been better spent to merge the production of cars to produce economies of scale instead of running 2 seperate companies.

John

I have never heard it discussed. Even though the Studebaker Champion and Commander were narrower than a Clipper or Packard could the 2 Studes have been built on a common line with the Packards?

Thanks
John

Thanks so the v12 had overheating issues? Didnt the v12 debut in 1932 and last till 1939. Thats only 8 years. Other engines were produced longer by Packard. So was the v12 an antique in 1939?

Thanks
John

Thanks
So the 357/358 became the 385
The 320 was always a 320 and was never enlarged.

These 2 engines were completely different I assume and didn't share a common block casting?

Do you know the cylinder spacing on the 385 and 320? I am guessing the 385 was probably enlarged all the way but not the 320.

Thanks
John

Trying to understand the whys of Packard pre-war engine development.

Thanks that is interesting. Do you happen to know about the 320 and 385 engines. Where they enlarged earlier engines or initial designs. When they were eliminated where they at the end of being able to be enlarged.

Thanks
John