Re: 1935 - Turning Point and What-Ifs

Posted by Mahoning63 On 2015/9/7 13:51:45

"...mostly wheelbase lengths to reduce the number of frame lengths from eight to six as well as ancillary components required..."

Steve - I totally get what you are suggesting and this would certainly have made Christopher's life easier! For arguments sake I'll take an alternative approach that feeds the consumer's desire for ever greater choice. The Kimes book says Macauley and Christopher had built into the One Twenty line manufacturing flexibility that would allow future changes. I don't know what the One Twenty's biggest cost drivers were but will make an assumption that they had more to do with number of body stampings and unique engine block bore spacings and less with frame, driveshaft, electrical and fluid line lengths. Of course, number of build combinations is always an inventory driver unless just-in-time delivery is used. Not sure how the One Twenty was set up in this regard.

Long story short, I added a 5P Coupe and Convertible on unique wheelbase that includes the decklid from Club/Touring Sedan (see earlier post with updated images and pricing table). Packard made such a car for the 12th Series so it is reasonable to assume such a car could have materialized under this 100% One Twenty-based 1935 Packard line-up. It would have been nice had they moved away from the old Victoria-type canvas roof and instead included a side roll-down quarter window. Were they not able to figure out how to make a pillar-less hardtop style, could have used the tried and true removable B-pillar.