Re: 1935 - Turning Point and What-Ifs

Posted by Packard5687 On 2015/8/31 11:08:48

"I think "Junior" and "Senior" may be the wrong split point. The 120 had to succeed for Packard to survive. So it was a Packard in name and looks. I think the 110 should have had a different name, and would have still been a competitive offering. Since new tooling was required for the shorter hood and fenders anyway, it would only be necessary to not share a grill with the 120 to have a different face. The Zephyr was already out, I could see something more modern and horizontal."

Agreed. Packard failed to master what Mercedes-Benz has done so successfully: market less expensive cars without diluting the image of their premium cars. In the U.S., the least expensive M-B is the "C-class," but in most of the world, M-B offers the decidedly "junior" (to borrow the Packard term) "A" and "B" class cars. But they maintain their luxury image.

As an aside, the Smart is a M-B product. Originally it was to be the Swatch in partnership with the watch maker. At the last minute, Swatch pulled out and M-B went ahead with the project as the Smart.