Re: We haven't had a good "What If?" for a while, so.....

Posted by Tim Cole On 2012/4/9 17:44:37

Harley Earl was not a nice person and neither was Bill Mitchell. Both of them went on firing rampages whenever they felt miffed. In the fifties Earl became a somewhat senile tyrant and impossible.

At Packard there was Werner Gubritz who was universally admired. He was just too professional for the corporate game. Reinhart and Teague were also top notch talent and did a fabulous job given their budgets.

I don't know where people get the idea that GM products were universally better looking than Packard. I think most Buicks are ugly and Cadillac evolved into the 1959. The 55-56 Packard Caribbean is still the best looking full sized 50's car in my book.

Sure, the Packard radiator is not avant garde and you have to like it to buy it. But gee-whiz the front of the 1938 Cadillac 60-S is horrible.

Anybody who thinks that Packard didn't know anything about advanced styling trends should take a look at the 840 Individual Custom Sport Sedan by Dietrich. It's way ahead of the 60-S.

Packard management was like all management. They concerned themselves most with eliminating personal threats and advancing personal agendas at the expense of the corporation. So they squandered people like Dietrich.

The Cadillacs have weathered time better than Packards. Get behind the wheel of the 60 Special and it is a wonderful car save for the droning of that long stroke V-8. I'm sure though that in 1941 a new Packard was head and shoulders better to drive than the Cadillac.

Packard didn't have a lot of money and I have always felt their only hope was merger. But not with Studebaker. In the 50's Ford was wasting almost a billion dollars attempting to compete with Buick, Olds, and Pontiac. If they bought out Packard they would have done much better than the Edsel.