Packard Forum Index » General

<i> I don't understand why Nash would even want the thing.</i>

Nash wanted Hudson for dealers, clientele and the service parts business. The rapid abandonment of the Hudson facilities and products shows there was nothing material that Nash wanted.

If Nash had merged with Studebaker, they would have picked up a modern OHV V8 that they needed. Use the 259 in the Statesman and the 289 in the Ambassador, with a supercharger, which the overbuilt Studie V8 could easily handle, as an option.

Of course, if Nash could not immediately shut down assembly operations in South Bend and only keep the foundry and engine plant, Studie would have pulled Nash under.

<i>but nowadays if you are caught shooting Heroin, Speed, or whatever, or selling engines to your friends, or throwing parts in the garbage you are gone.</i>

I suspect drug/alcohol abuse is still rampant in the plants. A few years ago, one of the local TV stations found a cluster of Chrysler workers parked during their lunch hour getting loaded.

Quote:

Didn't believe me, huh? I double checked it in Kimes before I made the statement, because it's such a common misspelling that I couldn't remember for sure myself. It just looks better with the second "o". The building does appear to have a "PACKARD" sign on it in the pic where where a smilin' (unidentified) "Chrysler executive" is handing the "key" to smilin' Packard Manufacturing Manager Neil Brown, who later bemoaned the quality of the cars coming out of the Conner "crackerbox". The "key" still says Chrysler on it. Appropriate, since they held the lease. I wonder if Packard got out of that lease when they folded? (Pic on pg 574 of the Kimes book.)

Quote:
Maybe, but maybe AMC didn't think Packard would be foolish enough to spend that kind of money on Conner, and were waiting to see if the deal fell through and sell the Hudson plant to Packard. That would account for the delay, too, I believe.

Quote:
He used a Magic 8 Ball. I'm quite sure of it.

<i>I wonder if Packard got out of that lease when they folded? (Pic on pg 574 of the Kimes book.)</i>

heh...Chrysler said it was a 5 year lease, and they wanted to be paid for all 5 years, even though Packard vacated after only 2. iirc the Ward book goes into the details of how much S-P had to pay to get out of that lease.

Manufacturing Manager Neil Brown, who later bemoaned the quality of the cars coming out of the Conner "crackerbox".

I don't recall if it was Brown, but I have seen a Packard production manager's reply when the honchos were screaming for more production, that he could hit the production rate the suits wanted, but "none of them will pass inspection"

<i>He used a Magic 8 Ball. I'm quite sure of it.</i>

Well, Radio Shack's "Executive Decision Maker" didn't exist in 55

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVXE5Wk0Z4I

I don't recall if it was Brown

Brown did bemoan the quality of the cars, but probably didn't originate the term "cracker box", which is said to be the affectionate pet name given to the Conner plant by those who actually had to build the cars there.


By personal observation:

Neither of the rear windows rolled down except with extreme effort on our '55 400. We re-worked one of them, but that was enough, and the other one was just left the way it was, as a test of our strength and fortitude.

The left rear door on our '55 Clipper Custom was stuck shut. (That's where I sat, so no need for "child-proof door locks.") You could argue that this car did not go through the "dealer re-work" because it was bought at auction, but it sure had plenty of bugs coming out of Conner. Including...

The windshield, which rattled in its frame (apparently a common problem). When the regional service manager was called in, he just grumbled to my dad something about "whaddaya expect with a big heavy windshield like that?" So, the prevailing attitude at Packard was, apparently, "fix it yaself."

Morale was not high.