Re: Packard & Hudson proximity

Posted by Craig the Clipper Man On 2013/2/12 15:28:17

Mr. Pushbutton: You summed up everything perfectly, in my opinion. While Packard in 1955 built what might have been the most innovative cars of any U.S. manufacturer, the body was still basically that of the 1951-54 series with modifications and the public knew it. While everyone seems to like the looks of my '55 Constellation, it was only modestly popular when it came out. It certainly couldn't expect to compete with the new Cadillac Coupe de Ville or the Chrysler 300.

I am sure that the idea of bringing out entirely new bodies almost every year led to the concept of "planned obsolescence," if you look closely, most of the cars produced were not actually "new." The Cadillacs did not change the body style that much from about 1955 to 1958. Neither did Chevrolet and Buick in the same period. The Thunderbird was only slightly altered from 1955 through 1957, and again from 1958 to 1960. Even for the Big 3, changing body styles was more of a chimera than a reality.

That said, I still have to hand it to Packard, Hudson, Studebaker and Nash. While Packard suffered with its 1948-50 line, it did recover with a nice design in 1951. The "Step-down" Hudsons were remarkable cars winning race after race in NASCAR. Studebakers were the most recognizable cars of the early 1950s and I loved their Golden Hawks and Avantis. Nash made good, reliable, albeit rather plain cars, but stuck around a long time.

We should remember that even today cars start up while others bow out. Teslas, Minis, Smart Cars, etc. have appeared while Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Mercury, Saab, and Saturn disappeared. That is the way things are: Survival of the fitest.