Packard Forum Index » Post-War (1946-54)

When I click on them, they display correctly on my iMac.

(o[]o)

Apple systems use an orientation metatag in images that allows photos to orient properly on any of their system but it is not a standard so other systems ignore it, making the photos appear in whichever orientation the camera was in when taking the photos. In this case, though, they look fine as they are so I would not have noticed an issue if you hadn't mentioned it.

Might be a reason for system envy.

1) I do indeed apologize to Ozstatman for my harshness. It was simply inexcusable. However he did post on: 11-8-16 "I invite you to include the prototype(!) '53 Caribbean and any other Packard/s in the Packard Owner's Registry" which I clearly read as he endorsed this clearly as the 1953 Caribbean Prototype. REGARDLESS, my attack was inexcusable and I sinceerely apologize.
2) It is refreshing that photographs and facts are FINALLY being published now. The veil of secrecy on this car is being lifted finally. Hopefully more photos will be released of the vin plate etc... The owners previous desire to not release information and then as stated on the Roster entry that this car's "PLANNED USE: Restore for Resale" raised the question of "what's really" going on here?
3) The owners can prove this once and for all maybe? by locating the build sheet for this car if it still exists. My 53 2679 mayfair convertible (not a Caribbean, YES, I WISH IT WAS!!!) had this intac.
4) If any of you think i may have caribbean envy, i indeed proabably do
5) where are chrome moldings on the top of the rear 1/4 panels?

Kelvin,

Thank you for the apology, it is appreciated.

I see what you're saying and, because it was misconstrued as an "endorsement", I will be more careful in future.

Hi

You've shown us front fenders and door trim mounting holes brazing closed which would be expected since a production 1952 convertible was the basis. As indicative, is there also patchwork on the lower rear quarter panels to smooth away the stamped speed-lines on either side of the opened wheelhouse?

Comparisons of the build method for the production '53 Caribbeans might be useful. One would think that since they contracted with Ionia to build 750 Caribbeans, would not want to pay to punch the trim mounting holes then pay again to close them. Examining a production Caribbean should reveal that no trim mounting holes were originally punched. Frequently the shapes of hand-formed features on prototypes vary from the production versions, something else to look at in detail.

Steve

58L8134 posited:

Quote:
I wouldn't be too confident about that.

The 56 Executive, though based on a Clipper chassis and main body shell, used Senior front fenders. While both Junior and Senior lines used the same big, die-cast fender molding, the Senior fenders were punched for a short molding below that, but the Junior models were punched for a higher molding that ran above.

I have a reconditioned front fender for an Exec, and on the back side, I found little tombstone-shaped (punched) pieces of sheet metal had been tack over the holes that were pre-punched for Senior trim. From the outside, you can barely see outlines of the original holes in the primer, but I haven't ground the primer back to see what kind of filler was used.

Kelvin, it is my turn to apologize. I had forgotten about the wording on the invitation to register the car. The registration asks what my plans for the car are, I picked the one I thought was the only one that said resale. I DO NOT plan on restoring this car. I may yet try and get in running.

The chrome pieces from on top of the quarter panels are in the trunk. At some point they were removed and the holes crudely filled in.

You mentioned the build sheet. This is not the first time I have heard this and probably won't be the last. My car came out of a barn and to call it a mouse palace would be a major understatement. I just have no faith that it is on top of the glove box. To climb through the car to get to the glove box is surely worthy of a tetnis shot.

May I suggest getting a copy of Leon Dixon's book The untold story of Detroits Secret Concept Car Builder and a copy of Packard 1951 To 1954, by Robert J. Neal both books have both answered questions for me as well as posed more questions.

As far as leaving the holes out it depends on whether they were punched at one time as part of the fender forming or individually afterwards. If all at one time, I couldn't see them going to the expense of a new die for 750 cars. I expect labor was relatively cheap so it would have been much less cost to fill a few unneeded holes. Reading Bob Neal's 51-4 book, it was a struggle to even justify the tooling costs to make the convertible and hardtops at all and to convince the board to allot the money was another exercise.

They did do something with the front fenders eventually and eliminated the holes. In 53 or 54 they found it was cheaper to make one fender for 51-4 service replacement without any holes rather than warehouse fenders for each year or model with the only difference being where holes were positioned. Maybe that was done early enough that it also applied to production cars.

Steve, I understand the Production Caribbeans were sent to Ionia with out the trim holes.

I did not remove the paint from the rear quarter panels, so I can't tell you what is back there. At the time I was removing paint the car was parked in an unheated shed and I the bare metal would have rusted. The cars current location, although heated, also contains my restored Nash-Healey. Please excuse me if I don't rush out the to sand or throw chemicals at the Caribbean.

I have started a list of what I think are unique things about this car. (How is that for a disclaimer). But, as I have mentioned before not quite ready to spills all those beans.

Matt