Re: IMHO, the 1950s Packard designs have held up well...

Posted by Owen_Dyneto On 2008/10/29 12:44:31

I likewise have always liked the Reinhart 51-56 body shell and thought it quite competitive for a conservative style. Kevin makes a great point about how well the same concept succeeds on the Chrysler 300. I thought the 51/52 models a bit plain and frumpy, even the Patricians were frugal compared to the 23rd series Custom 8 and it was a major error that the convertibles and hardtops weren't a senior car, but by 1953 and 54 I thought the whole line was very attractive and nicely trimmed. One of my largest suprises years back was when I realized the 55/56 cars were reworks of the basic 51 shell, it was nothing short of an amazing transformation; though those cars were glitzy, colorful and chrome-laden, that's what the public wanted - just look at a 56 Hudson or DeSoto/Chrysler for comparison.

I like some of the bathtubs (owned 2), especially the Custom 8s and especially the victorias of that model, but overall the 22nd/23rd series were, while perhaps competitive with Nash and a few other bulbous designs, good sellers in the market but the passage of time hasn't treated them as well as it might have. Tough luck for Packard that WW II took away the excitement and momentum of the original Clipper design. Hindsight is always advantaged of course, but I would rather have seen the 42-47 Clipper style soldier on another year another or two, with a convertible added, and skipped the bathtub era altogether.