Re: What SINGLE factor MOST contributed to the demise of Packard?

Posted by Peter Packard On 2013/10/21 4:05:55

G'day all, I regret my earlier post which appeared to badmouth the Junior Packards. I never intended this as they really did save Packard for a number of years. I have many wonderful "Junior" Packards, ( Junior, in sayspeak only, not in actuality...they are quality Packards!" and locally they continue to show a clean set of heels to the local Chryslers, Buicks,and Fords. However, going around a flat out late 1940's British "sports car" in my 1939 -120 gives me a really warm feeling.
I would have imagined the post war sales would have been very different if Packard had gone to an OHV V12 in 1951, using the same 1939 bore/stroke engine with OHV cast iron heads, in the 51 body, with a minimum of 127 inch wheelbase, and a vertical truncated veed auto shutter 1938/9 Packard grille. It would not have been very expensive tooling and would have catapulted them to the forefront of engine offerings and body design in one move.
With a reasonable boost in advertising... it would have seduced many of the up market buyers and assured Packard.... " The Twelve cylinder specialist" into a real niche marketing spot. But, as many have said, the Board was obsessed with an attempt to compete with "flashy" GM and Ford middle range products. It should not have competed....it should have specialised and appealed to Packard's Grass roots... The middle/upper class of US buyers. Just my 2 cents worth.( actually 4 cents now) best regards Peter Toet.