Re: Stuart Blond's History of Packard Revival Attempts

Posted by Craig the Clipper Man On 2016/8/17 9:36:29

I think Ross is right about the use of the Packard name on new cars these days. As an example, I am repeatedly asked who built Packards -- "Chrysler? GN? ..." ad nauseum. The fact is, while we on this site clearly know and appreciate cars built by Packard, Studebaker, Pierce=Arrow, etc., the general car-buying public rarely know much, if anything, about these marques.

Worse yet, some folks think that if an automobile company fails, it must have built a lousy car. Grouping Stutz, Pierce-Arrow, Packard, Marmon, and Duesenberg in with the likes of Lada, Yugo, TH!NK, and other such losers is absurd, as we all know.

The reasons car companies fail are innumerable. Mostly it has to do with finance, since it costs a lot to produce cars. In some cases it is management; in others, marketing or supply. And, of course, some do fail due to abysmal quality.

I brought up the idea of Packard as a new car model only because it seems that that would be about the only way I can see the name returning to new cars. Maybe it is better in the long run to remember Packard as an outstanding brand that flourished for almost 60 years, rather than yearn for something that will likely never be.