Re: Why no Packard in a "Packard"?

Posted by 58L8134 On 2012/4/8 11:59:36

Hi

While there were service engines available, management would be reluctant to commit them to a further production series with no back up production taking place without major expense. The additional problem would be what to do about the transmission since Ultramatic production ended at the same time as the engine. The engineering work to adapt the Packard engine to the Studebaker Flightomatic and whether it was up to the challenge of that powerplant was just one more hurdle to clear for such a mate-up.

Mostly it comes down to a company in dire financial straits utilizing what minimal resources they had in hand to try to bridge one of the most difficult periods of their existance. Survival for the corporation was their focus and that met concentrating on the volume sales. As much as we like the special models, the bread and butter cars allowed a car company to survive. In '57 and '58 S-P wasn't completely sure if it could come up with bread and butter cars that would sell enough volume to allow survival. Churchill hit upon the Scotsman concept and it turned out to be nearly their bestseller. They are about the plainest jane cars one can imagine but the market responded and helped them bridge to the Lark era. Initially the Lark sold well and generated $28 million in profit for '59, less in '60. Of course, as soon as the Big Three introduced their compacts, all but Rambler and VW were forgotten about. Any thoughts about continuing Packard or a revival thereof would have had to wait until the corporation itself were back on solid financial ground again.

Steve