Re: SP merger

Posted by Mahoning63 On 2015/3/19 20:17:16

Dave - if you have it check Langworth's book on Hudson, pgs 102-103, mentions the 308 fitting into the Italia and it even having been orderable. Not that the written word is always correct but it is, in this case, a good starting point.

Steve203 - what I was trying to show, working from a Clipper-based Panther image, was what a Packard and Hudson sedan might have looked like had they been built with a Hudson step-down unibody. Because the beltline height and many other dimenions would have been different than the 48-54 Hudsons, the only hardware that had any chance of being carried over would have been the 48-54's floorpan and frame side rails from the firewall back to the rear wheels. The bodies would have been engineered and built by Hudson while Packard would have supplied the V8s and Ultramatic. The rest of the content would have been a combined effort.

The engine frame rails would have been new, designed to accomodate the new V8's mounting locations, and to enable a lower cowl. Two versions of front frame rails would have been created, the longer for Packard and the shorter for Hudson (in my work-up, 3 inches shorter which you can see if you toggle between the two images). Hudson would have had no problem with this level of complexity, the Wasp having been 5 inches shorter than the Hornet.

When one adds up the conributions both companies could have made - torsion level, A/C components 100% underhood, flow through ventilation (Spring used this on the Italia, years ahead of everyone) - the cars would have leaped to the front of the pack. And when one considers the pooled engineering resources developing the car, perhaps design flaws such as with the V8 might have been caught during testing by Hudson engineers doing road testing to confirm body durability.