Re: History Revised Again

Posted by Guscha On 2013/3/23 14:32:27

It's all on the surface.

Seen from a historical perspective, it couldn't be a follower that lend the body. Its year of release was 1956. And good that you've mentioned its body. To inherit the underlying technics wouldn't have been a progress. Albeit pricewise not in the same market segment, Packard was one step ahead. Listen to this sales conversation between customer and salesman in a Continental showroom:

C: Torsion level suspension?
S: No, conventional leaf springs.
C: Pushbutton control?
S: Overrated. Newfangled contraption.
C: 310 HP?
S: Almost.
C: Air condition?
S: Yes! ... y..yes.
C: Yes?
S: True it would cost more.
C: More? You mean $10,000 plus extra charge?
S: Yes, but the extra charge list is small.
C: The moon appears quite small too.
S: The moon, the moon. Don't ask for the moon.
C: Tri-tone paint schemes?
S: No, but ...
C: Two-tone?
S: No, we prefer the classic look.
C: Convertible?
S: As standard not available.
C: Twin Traction?
S: Tw.. tw .. twhat?
C: Sir, I thought a Continental is a class of its own?
S: Yes, it is. Take a look at the price tag.
C: I prefer to look at gold-plated exterior script.
S: Then you should buy a Packard.

[picture source: www.carphotos.oldride.com]