Re: What would a traditional Packard "Senior" have looked like in 1951?
Posted by Mahoning63 On 2017/8/5 15:25:19
How in the world did Packard go from an initial 1953 to a final 1955 model year launch for the V8? Seems both Ferry and Nance dithered way too long.
$2M to bring body production in-house seems a drop in the bucket compared to the tens of millions in capital outlay and losses in 1954-56.
In thinking further about Nance's options, had he instructed his team to create a 1954 Pacific series along lines above, might well have concluded that the sectioned bodies and hardtop roof could have been mated to standard length hood and deck too, replacing Cavalier and Patrician with a single series. Where things could have really gotten interesting is when Barit approached Nance in August 1953 asking to merge. With word of Conner being sold to Chrysler at around same time would have been opportune moment, Hudson taking on all Packard-Hudson body production. $18M in Hudson losses in 1954 would have been price paid to get its dealers and repeat customers, perhaps a better long term solution than creating stand-alone Clipper brand.
In this scenario Hudson could have gotten the sore thumb taillights and a wrapped backlight in keeping with Jet. Vehicle height with sectioned body would have been within a half inch of the Step-Down that the new series replaced. Maybe this would have been the right time to walk away from the shorter Packards. Alternatively, if Hudson didn't join, the car would have made a great Clipper replacement.
Attach file:
(57.08 KB)
$2M to bring body production in-house seems a drop in the bucket compared to the tens of millions in capital outlay and losses in 1954-56.
In thinking further about Nance's options, had he instructed his team to create a 1954 Pacific series along lines above, might well have concluded that the sectioned bodies and hardtop roof could have been mated to standard length hood and deck too, replacing Cavalier and Patrician with a single series. Where things could have really gotten interesting is when Barit approached Nance in August 1953 asking to merge. With word of Conner being sold to Chrysler at around same time would have been opportune moment, Hudson taking on all Packard-Hudson body production. $18M in Hudson losses in 1954 would have been price paid to get its dealers and repeat customers, perhaps a better long term solution than creating stand-alone Clipper brand.
In this scenario Hudson could have gotten the sore thumb taillights and a wrapped backlight in keeping with Jet. Vehicle height with sectioned body would have been within a half inch of the Step-Down that the new series replaced. Maybe this would have been the right time to walk away from the shorter Packards. Alternatively, if Hudson didn't join, the car would have made a great Clipper replacement.
Attach file:
(57.08 KB)
This Post was from: https://packardinfo.com/xoops/html/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?post_id=194670