Re: 1951 Packard Twelve What-If

Posted by Mahoning63 On 2011/6/14 15:38:06

Agreed. Would add that the 48-50 cars needed work too. The design has been much maligned in some quarters but is actually not a bad effort, at least in part. I saw a really nice '49 at the show last weekend and two things jumped out about the design:

1) the design works well front to C-pillar with its modern, progressive straight-through body sides, which Packard backed away from in '51. I think they should have refined the straight-through idea for '51, perhaps as shown in my image workup.

2) the design aft of the C-pillar is all wrong. Too short of an overhang, too droopy a trunk. Proportionally it just doesn't go with the sedan body. Works better with the convertible because sporty cars often fall off in the rear for a swoopy look.

Inside the Proving Grounds building were some old images of Packards, amongst other things. One rendering that struck me was of a '48 Packard Coupe. It was an advertisement for something - a part maybe, not a Packard specifically - but showed the car front and center. What was interesting was that the artist added the overhang and bustle to the decklid that was needed to bring it all into proportion. He also made it a hardtop coupe with a defined decklid rather than the production's fastback design. What this told me was that folks weren't blind to what the car needed back then. Good proportion is timeless and recognized in all times. Frankly I think this is part of the reason Packard fell off the map at the high end. They forgot how to do the simple things they always use to do, like add inches to the hood for their top-of-line models.