Packard Forum Index » Project Blogs

I think there is a correct trunk handle on ebay now. One of the regular sellers. If it spot it, will send the link.

Just a personal opinion; unless you're planning or doing a lot of longer tours and really need the space a trunk would offer I wouldn't do it - I think the car is far more attractive without the rear trunk rack.

Thanks. It's good to know those handles are available, of course I found 3 different ones, all for "1940."

I'm torn, Dave, because 1940 is a crossover year. It had the all new power plant, but the styling of the main series is 30s, unlike the new Clipper look of the 40s.

Trippe lights, especially senior Trippes, look more 30s. I have a pair but replaced them on the car with fog lights which look proportionally better to me, but I think that fog lights are more of a 40s thing.

Also I bought a spotlight, which I think is also a 40s type accessory (possibly), but Jim Hollingsworth advised me that sometimes on a senior car a spotlight is too much, so I haven't installed it. But again, on a trip it might come in handy, though GPS makes reading street signs unnecessary and playing 'chase the spot' at the drive-in movie is a lost opportunity.

Fender skirts are another accessory. On earlier 30s models they look fantastic. On the first post war models, they look modern, more "airflow" Part of the smoothing of the body.

The trunk rack makes the car look grander and older (especially that license light fixture pulls it toward a 30s look). Is it appropriate for a convertible? Did more convertibles have trunk racks. I wonder?

I don't know what I did wrong, but when I had the rack on the car and put it down, it hit against the top of the bumper. I used to stick a couple of rubber pieces in between, but I suspect it entire apparatus wasn't adjusted correctly.

I'm interested in opinions here.

My 38 super 8 convertible sedan has a trunk rack but I've never put the trunk on it cause its such a long car already.

Attach file:

---

  (92.60 KB)

Joe
Of course it's a personal decision, and I appreciate your tenacity in wanting to have it correct.

Here are two trunk handle examples on ebay for 1940... the long handle being for ??? and the "T" handle being for cars with a trunk rack. Possibly both are for cars with a trunk rack, and long one is an early version while the T is for later versions (I have a T on my car, and it is the highest serial number known for its body style)

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1940-PACKARD-180-TRUNK-HANDLE-RECHROMED-RARE-/181966572941?hash=item2a5e0d8d8d:g:hm8AAOSwdndUleWo&vxp=mtr

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1940-PACKARD-160-COUPE-TRUNK-T-HANDLE-MINT-/181966573471?hash=item2a5e0d8f9f:g:-ZkAAOSwnDxUlzMy&vxp=mtr

That longer handle isn't striated like my existing. Anyway, it says it's for a 180. So I'd go for the T. Price is better, too.

West, does your rear bumper match your front bumper in design?
I noticed that the maroon car I posted has the Packard script, so I'm guessing the bumper can be drilled.

Joe, do you have Jim Hollingsworth's book on the 1940 Packards? If not, maybe David Flack has a source for it. I got mine from Jim and while not autographed, I have a letter from him when he sent the book. I would be pleased to look up things in the book you have questions about and share information with you.

BDC, I too have a trunk for my 37 Six Convertible Coupe, and like you never mount it as I think the car is unattractive with the trunk.

My trunk rack was a retro fit sometime in its past, probably when it was restored in the 1990s. The bumper guards were moved outboard to clear the rack. This change is noticeable to a Packard expert. I believe the rack adds a nice look to the back of the car.

(o{}o)

A few minutes later: Here are a photos showing the bumper guards and overall view of the 115C. Having problems loading the photo showing the trunk installed, probably too large.

A few more minutes later: Photo shows 115C with trunk.

Attach file:

---

  (27.87 KB)


  (145.56 KB)


  (57.84 KB)

JayDub, I do have Jim's book. I actually met him in Portland in the 70s. He was the first to point out the Duchess was an early because it had no moulding strips on the side mounts. There's an accessory section in there. I'll look at that. Thanks for reminder.

Edit: Wow! THAT'S a trunk!

Joe
Yes, my front bumper and rear are of the same design. I don't know if the curvature is different or not, or if holes are in different places. I believe there are pictures of the front and back of my car in my restoration blog.

I like the look of a trunk on a coupe. This is on my 35 eight.

Attach file:

---

  (125.67 KB)