John - I just sent you a PM about the "DuBois Owner Supplement." Mystery solved!

I just sent the e-mail to him asking him to enlighten us. I'm sure he will respond quickly.

I think that the man who sent me the photo of the "supplement" that I posted on the blog likely doesn't visit this website and is thus unaware of this discussion. I'll send him an e-mail and see what light he can shed on how he got that.

For any new readers to this discussion, the item in question is shown here:
https://56packardman.com/2016/09/06/gear-head-tuesday-the-packard-esquire/

<i>"... I always wondered why the company was called "Studebaker-Packard" instead of "Packard-Studebaker" ..."</i>

This is not a dumb question! The merger was done hastily and many details of it were not as well thought out (not to mention researched!) as they should have been. One glaring example is the name. Studebaker had too much say in the way the deal was structured and this is, in part, reflected in the name. Studebaker's chairman and president remained (Vance and Hoffman), adding unnecessary overhead. Both proving grounds remained. More unnecessary overhead. The list goes on. Packard president Nance was hamstrung in many ways because Studebaker had more clout in the deal than it should have. The worst of it was that Studebaker's costs were out of control - and they had no real idea of what their costs actually were. A proper audit was not done until after the deal was completed. Nance complained, with great justification, that "Studebaker was bleeding Packard white."

" ... Hmmmm. A Packard 440 in a Studebaker Scotsman. That would make a surprise at a stop light ..."

I like the way you think! Woo! Hoo!

The Packard V-8 in the '56 Golden Hawk has the reputation of being too heavy, but I recall an article (I think it was in Frank Ambrosia's "56K" newsletter) where someone had weighed a Studebaker 289 and a Packard 352 (the engine used in the Golden Hawk) and was surprised to find that the Packard engine only weighed around 60 pounds more than the Studebaker engine.

In any case, my point is that had Studebaker-Packard kept access to manufacturing engines and transmissions in the relatively new Utica plant, they would have had an engine that would have been competitive for many years while the Studebaker engine was tapped out at 289 cubic inches.

"... still a Studebaker underneath ..."

Indeed! I have long been of the opinion that one of the big mistakes in the Curtiss-Wright deal was giving up the engine and transmission plant in Utica. It seems to me they should have leased that portion of the plant back and kept building Packard V-8s and Ultramatic Drive transmissions there. Everyone knew that although the Studebaker V-8 was basically a good engine, the bore spacing did not allow for a displacement increase beyond 289 cubic inches. (I know that some of the Avanti engines were bored out to slightly over 300 cubic inches.) The Packard V-8 had been designed with expansion in mind - the planned '57s would have displaced 440 cubic inches. Had they kept the ability to manufacture Packard engines and transmissions a Packard V-8 in that Studebaker body as was the case with the '56 Golden Hawk would have made John Bridges proposed Packard Hawk much more of a Packard, especially if it were also fitted with Ultramatic.

Moving from the Esquire to another Packard "What If":
<https://56packardman.com/2016/09/13/gear-head-tuesday-could-this-car-have-saved-packard/>

Attach file:

---

  (32.02 KB)

Being a baker wannabe, that bread looks fabulous! When I lived in the San Francisco Bay Area, I was baking bread often enough that I bought 100 lb. bags of flour directly from Guisto's mill in South San Francisco. You might enjoy Daniel Leader's book, "Bread Alone."

The "After Eight" is shaping up nicely! This is a very well-thought out conversion and your craftsmanship is obvious - and to be admired!

This post has been updated with a couple of minor corrections.

https://56packardman.com/2016/09/06/gear-head-tuesday-the-packard-esquire/