Packard Forum Index » V-8 (1955-56)

Anyone have a picture of a bare 56 Caribbean floor?

This 56 400 floor looks just like a 55 floor.

Is the removal of the "heater tunnel" the difference?

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1956-PACKARD-400-rolling-chassis-and-body-shell-rust-free-California-car/352742043824?hash=item52211070b0:g:aYgAAOSwLmhdRIfE

Attach file:

---

  (35.82 KB)


  (31.33 KB)

Don't have a photo of the entire floor or remember any differences in the heater area but one major floor difference between a 56 Caribbean HT and a 400 is the hole spacing for the front seat tracks. The new seat frames in 56 Caribbeans have the tracks approximately 3 1/2" inward from the seats used in the 400 and the 55s.

I found this out in the 80s when I replaced my rusted out body with one from a 400. New holes can be drilled in the floor but the structural piece under the car is welded on. Unfortunately I did not find the spacing difference until I went to re-install the seats. Anyone contemplating a body change keep that in mind.

Before anyone chastises me on the non original body, yes I know in hindsight replacing the body was probably not the best decision on my part. At the time it seemed like a good idea because the roof had become almost non existent. The felt pad under the original Hypalon top material had been water soaked most of its life so instead of structural metal the roof was being held up more by the glass and in one piece by the glue on a replacement vinyl top. Spots in the floor, rockers and the panel under the trunk lid were also well aerated and the fellow that owned the car had held those together with Bondo and tar covered patch metal.

After the body was sandblasted, the body shop said repairing all the rust that was in the old body would be stupid and a waste of money. Since there was no internet or any repro repair parts at the time and I had no sheetmetal talent but did have access to a parts car with a good body, that was the deciding factor. The car was near done when I discovered the difference in seats. Moving the structural piece would have required redoing some interior work as well as time and money and since both were in short supply, I did the next best thing and added a piece of plate steel next to the original piece.

Attach file:

---

  (93.59 KB)

Goodness, Howard, give yourself a break. Body shells are just sheet metal stampings welded together by line workers. They carried a part number like every other assembly and are thus replaceable. If anyone wants to give you grief about replacing a nasty body please give me their address and I will happily stop by and give them five across the lip.

It's either. A 400 carribean. Or a Caribbean 400.

Either one sounds ok..to me.

HH,
Thanks for the reply.

I was under the impression that the 56 Caribbean seats changed the floor pan. I have never studied an original one.

The 56 Caribbean does not have an under seat heater either, is that correct?

I suggest you consult the 1956 Caribbean roster and build slip analysis published by Stu Blond in The Packard Cormorant some years back. As I recall 1 or perhaps 2 of the early convertibles had the underseat heater, Packard then deciding it was too much of a "force fit" due to the lesser space available from the new seat configuration.

OD,

Did your 56 Convertible have the heater tunnel?

Don't know, never took note.

I just remembered another difference when I thought of this underseat heater photo Randy posted a long time ago. The long angled sheetmetal that kind of forms a rear seat footrest under the regular front seats is gone for the 56 Caribbean seat. I remember now having to cut those out as well as drill the new holes. Still don't remember any differences in the heater and honestly don't remember if the knockout patterns were in the floor on the Caribbean.

I did think about adding an underseat heater when I did my car but as O_D said, space is tight and I think something in the seat interfered and I would have needed to move the heater slightly. No idea whether that was the reason Packard decided not to offer it but maybe.

Another reason, as you can see from the photo, the stock under seat heater is just plain ugly. I don't think it would visibly be at Packard quality exposed like it is even if they gave it a different cover. If they shipped it as shown I doubt the exposed core would have escaped damage particularly if there were small children riding in back. I know those little holes sure would have been an area of interest if I were riding back there.

Attach file:

---

  (41.36 KB)