Packard Forum Index » General

Quote:

Glad you sent me to look at those. Here are two examples. The '58 300 from the rear definitely had "Predictor" taillight treatment. The green '57 4-door hardtop might capture the look you mentioned for the New Yorker.

In any case THANKS TO CARNUT.COM AND THEIR MEMBERS FOR THE WONDERFUL PHOTOS!

Attach file:

---

  (40.92 KB)


  (64.05 KB)

Sorry I couldn't get to these sooner. Mind you, these are very rough attempts at some of the suggestions. Head of Medusa... eat your heart out!

Guy - totally understand your frustration re: design. Should always be a fun experience if managed right.

Attach file:

---

  (78.31 KB)


  (79.17 KB)


  (78.86 KB)


  (78.73 KB)

Had done these some time back. Some have your quad lights nicely integrated. First is actual mock-up of 57/58. Second has mid-50s grill roughed in. Third is a would-be Eldorado Brougham / Conti Mk II competitor inspired by Predictor.

Attach file:

---

  (20.34 KB)


  (20.53 KB)


  (19.39 KB)

For some reason the Chrysler and Packard factory idea car's headlights seem spaced much further apart than the photoshop version, compare the pics, looking way better. Is the scale correct on the Packard? Also a more modern greenhouse/windshield design would improve it I believe... note also the NY'er grille is basically the Packard's, upside down! bunch of frustrated stylists we are, methinks!

The scale is indeed correct and your comments get, I think, to the nub of Packard's challenge with the Reinhart body: it's height to width ratio became increasingly uncompetitive as the Fifties wore on. At over 62 inches high and around 76 inches wide it was tallish compared to the '57 Chrysler at about 57 inches high and 80 inches wide. In fact, the front of the Packard is even narrower than 76 inches because the widest part of the body is the flared out rear fenders.

I don't know what the '57 Packard prototype dimensions are but I think the Predictor show car was 54 inches high and 84 inches wide. Teague went a bit over the top with the width as American cars never got wider than 80 inches throughout the Sixties and Seventies except for the early Sixties Imperial at 82 inches. If he dialed into the prototype a width and height approaching the Predictor, the distance between the headlights would be quite widely spaced.

Quote:

At first view, I thought the front pic of the NY'er was a 58 Stude Prez...had to look twice!

http://auto.howstuffworks.com/1958-studebaker-president-commander-starlight.htm

.

Quote:
Randerson, I've been lookig at that tall narrowing greenhouse for a while, waiting for a comment/suggestion. I agree with you comment and would like to add my suggestion.

As long as there is more than adequate headroom in the body style to begin with, here's a though. A slight chop (a 1.5" should do I would think, but two might do it better). This isn't the hardest mod to accomplish, if people know what they're doing. As the greenhouse narrows more as you go up, chopping will essentially terminate at a wider part of the greenhouse, and square off the sides. Should be no need to modify the side glass, which is quite short to begin with.

Cutting down the top of the glass would also result in a lower and "squarer" look. Actually, saving some weight with a lower windshield, and getting that rakish look of a chopped to would be a double benefit.

There would have to be a compromise between the factors of headroom, visibility, and driver position in relation to the steering wheel.
Keeping seat hight similar, and possiblely softening the cushion could help tweak headroom.

Hard seats were one of Nance's old peeves, and he was right IMO. For a luxo car in the 50s. The Packard's were rugged, but not particularly soft. I don't think Packard's continuing "chair height" seats is a negative. A lot of people like a commanding position, plus ease of entry and exit. Call it a Packard "dignified" feature. Also, the rather squat greenhouse give little indication the the driver has that ample room to enjoy.

Personally, I'd like to have seen a move to a spit bench on the 2-doors, including a console on the hardtops. These were the coming thing.

Mahonig63
You may feel you're struggling because you're trying too hard. A simpe way to achieve the amber lenses is to steal them from the top of the two earlier picture coloring them amber rather than the clear glass look they had. I think you'd be pleased with the result.

In my opinion, the headlight placement is good. We're not trying to copy anything, but just make sure we have striking, fresh styling. The black surrounds look classy. A bit of silver showing around the lights would add some flash. Maybe a 1/2 chrome bezel.

Sorry I fell off the radar, had some pressing matters to tend to. Guy - here's an attempt to get some of your suggestions added. Not sure I started with the right image, you said you liked the black surround which I took to mean the body colored version. Let me know if different. I also chopped the greenhouse roughly 1.5 inches. Will get working on the rear.

Attach file:

---

  (81.67 KB)

Quote:

Rear design first attempt. Not sure what the exhaust louvers should look like. Didn't touch the rounded bumpers, not sure where the roundedness needs to become squared. Probably need to work off a 3Q view but brings with it complications.

Attach file:

---

  (42.03 KB)


  (42.77 KB)

55PackardGuy wrote:

"And get going quickly on some decent ADVERTISING! Nance moaned and groaned about the lousy ad campaigns and the need to change agencies from day one, but not enough happened. You can blame design and manufacturing all you want, but inadequate marketing--to customers and dealers-- contributed mightily to Packard's demise IMO. Packard had long rested on its laurels and assumed that Quality would sell itself, but that could not work in the new consumer economy."

I have long thought that, post-war, PMCC missed the boat entirely on their advertising, especially from 1946 to 1950. They were still building wonderful senior cars - equal or in many cases surpassing Cadillac and Lincoln in luxury and quality if, perhaps in some cases, not performance. They didn't advertise them however as in the pre-war years when they let the senior cars sell the junior ones. Instead, they ran their advertising campaigns as though they'd left the luxury field and were only building mid-market. A whole generation had matured during the war years and needed reminding that Packard's existence had begun in the luxury market and, though they built lower market product, that product was grounded in and based on traditional Packard quality.