Re: Did the public think of Imperial as Packard's replacement?

Posted by Mr.Pushbutton  On 2009/8/3 23:08:23

As Rusty O'Toole explained so well, Chrysler tried to market Imperial as its own brand, starting in about 1953. It became a division of Chysler, and was advertized as "Imperial by Chrysler" to reinforce the idea that the Imperial was not just the "big expensive" Chrysler model.
They elevated the Imperial to a fine status by 1955, Virgil Exner's "100 Million Dollar look" styling helped incredibly. Lincoln really pulled ahead with the 1961 Contential, Sherwood Engel's masterpiece at Ford. Those clean slab sides and starburst chisel grille made for the perfect antidote for the Baroque extremes of the late fifties styling. Look at Lincoln's numbers pre-1961 and post. The '58-'60 bizarre "aircraft carrier" Lincolns had a very specific appeal.
Chrysler never really made money on Imperial, despite the fact that for years they were really well made cars, and were carefully built. They came closest to any Chrysler product of having a real automobile body, the introduction of the 1957 "forward look" bodies marked a significant departure for Chrysler in terms of the quality of their bodies. Prior to '57 the engineering of Chrysler bodies were designed (under the skin) by Briggs and were sturdy and up to the quality level of the competiton. After the 1953 acqusition of Briggs by Chrysler the entire job of desiging and fabricating the entire automobile was "in house", the last of the big three to take control of all aspects of the "major pieces."
The 1957-on bodies (for the entire line) took a giant leap backwards in quality under Chrysler's ageis, and continued to be until the grand influx of management talent from Ford came to Chrysler under Lee Iacocca. Everything they designed from the ground up (K-car, its deritives and later cab forward LX models) were finally back on par with the industry.
I have always found it funny that Chrysler was referred to as "the engineering company", a reputation earned by their excellent engines and transmissions. But to me General Motors and Ford illustrated complete mastery of engineering the entire car. GM bought Fisher Body in the 20s, and Ford weaned themselves from Murray body (and others)by the early 50s (while designing and building their own bodies as well).
One retired Chrysler engineer had a saying "we made some of the best components in the industry and some of the worst cars."
Chrysler continued in what became an antiquated business model (by 1950) by farming their body design and (partial) manufacture to Briggs, although it did result in a higher quality product.
Did Packard buyers go to Imperial? I think the others addressed this well, the point about what a Packard buyer was in 1956 vs the buyer of 1930 was decidedly different. Packard wasn't making as many top-level cars by the end, a trent Jim Nance was trying desperately to correct. Compare the 1951 model line up to the 1956--they did a lot of catching up.
One thing I have always contemplated about Lincoln and Imperial is that under the hood there is an engine that also was used in a truck, schoolbus chassis or downmarket common-man product, Packard and Cadillac had engines that were designed and built only as a luxury car power plant, that's it, that's all.
The Lincoln and Imperial engines had differences in some innards, but in the end they were still one-size-fits-all corporation engines. Lincoln got into the game of "all of the parts in the Lincoln engine are the parts that were found in inspection to be absolutely to spec", this engine was made from the hand-picked "best" parts. SO, if I buy my wife a Lincoln, and I buy a F-250 for my business and they both had a 460, am I getting the "C student" engine?
They rolled out a protoype Imperial at Chrysler while I worked there (2007) and at one staff meeting the VP of PR told us "the Imperial got the green light."
One old-time employee turned and said to me "we'll lose our shirt again."