Re: Packard in the media again

Posted by portlandon On 2008/11/10 0:10:03

What if Packard had merged with Hudson? The Hudson bodies were outdated by 1954, being built on the same platform since 1947. The Stepdown hudsons were a great design but were really dated by 1954. Packard had the new 1955 bodies. I could have seen the Clippers become Hudsons and promote the Packard V-8 in the clipper as a performance "Twin-H" type of factor.

Hudson was a good solid name, better than Studebaker I feel. I'm sure Hudson was in worse shape than Stude, but I think Studebaker was the "red headed stepchild" in the merger. In my view, the merger was like Cadillac merging with Nash.

As for the Edsel comment by the media, Packard was a solid name in the business. To compare it to a New brand of car is kind of ridiculous. Edsel wasn't a bad car, just too radical of a design, and being introduced in the recession of late 1957-58 didn't help either. The term "Edsel" has become a adjective for failure or flop. This is unfortunate.