Re: Ok, I'm calling your bluff. Show me how Packards were "better".

Posted by 58L8134 On 2012/7/12 19:11:43

Hi Gentlemen


Fine in-depth insights shared with civility! What a delight, as has been noted, is the clear-eyed realism freely expressed here, kudos to Big Kev for making this refuge available!

Now, to some points! For my discussion, I'll use the term 'premium' to define that market just above the upper middle segment but just below the all-out luxury one, as generally defined for each period. For example, in the '20's, the upper middle-priced segment was up to $2,000 beyond which a few of their priciest body styles such as seven passenger sedans and limousines arced into the middle of the next $1,000. The luxury segment began at $3,000 on up to rarified levels. Packard redefined the 'premium' market in the mid-'20's by offering the $2,585 Six sedan, something never before available from a luxury car maker. By the late '30's, 'premium' had been redefined as $1,600-$2,200 by the Cadillac 60, 'luxury' from there on up. The former was the showdown arena for volume market dominance, the latter icing on the prestige cake and additional profits in the coffer. Cadillac grabbed the baton........Packard stumbled.


The great irony: The very roots of their volume sales success in the '20's was the development first of the 'premium' Six, then spawning a 'luxury' Eight as an extension, successor to the Twin Six. Really quite a brilliant strategy. The first few years of the Six, they groped their way along, adjusting size, features and prices until they hit the sweet spot, which then blossomed into volume as never before. The Six carried the overhead and the Eight raked in the bucks while both enhanced the prestige handsomely. They were THE aspirational cars of the period. This affirmation of management correctness steamrolled until 1930, then turned to dreck.

That dreck was the next opportunity to repeat the strategy again. This time, first with the 120 becoming the bread-and-butter overhead carrier, and second as springboard for a new, downsized but completely-unique 'premium' Super Eight, something to be truly aspirational, to maintain their dominance in the emergent 'pocket luxury' segment. Perhaps by extension a Twelve for what was left of the true luxury carriage trade. The pale and belated response embodied in the 1939 Super 8 reveals how the wheels had come off management's mojo to meet an emergent market demand, much less lead. Upgrading a '38 Eight Deluxe fitted with a decade-old-technology engine in a one-year-old hand-me-down 120 body, generously copying from the Cadillac 60 playbook, was not what might be expected from a market leader. The 356 did redeem the subsequent Seniors to a degree. Clinging to the separate old Senior format as long as they did, in the face of waning sales, demonstrates management still hoped that type of buyer would revive. The world was quickly moving on, in order to lead, they should have boldly fielded a completely new model line by '37 or '38 at minimum.

Advertising: From "Ask!" to "The One for '51", from tony to tone-deaf, from marvelous to embarrassing! Nothing else I can added to the cogent comments made.

A 120-122" wheelbase Buick Century sparring partner: A horribly missed opportunity, not only in the pre-war market that held the Century a hot car at a great price, but also postwar as proof Packard still was full of stuff for the fight. Packard had great precedence in the Speedsters 626 and 734; hot engines mounted in high-quality, light, compact chassis'. A 356 or 320 version of the 282 in the 110/Six chassis with stylish, unique sport sedan, coupe and convertible, priced to meet the Century would have done wonders for image. A postwar Packard version on the order of the Bentley Continental is lovely to contemplate.

3-Box 'sport' sedan proportions and wheelbase length: As much as I like the 60 Special, GM C-Body Torpedoes and the Clipper, I have to admit there are certain angles from which all can look somewhat "plump and stubby". All three push proportional relationship of the axle-line to top-quarters/trunk intersection to the hilt. All three could benefit from 3-4 more inches of wheelbase committed to the moving the axle reward, allowing less door cut depth and a few more inches of trunk length. Of the surface development, the 60 Special generally the exhibits svelte surfacing of the Cord 810 whereas the follow-ups are expressions of the Rubenesque, full surfaces being popularized by GM. Each has it's appeal. In all cases, the new direction was a breath of fresh air in the stale sickroom of the touring sedan pall.
The 125" to 127" wheelbase shook out as the ideal length to build the owner-driven luxury sedan by the late '30's. Heck, Packard sold it's greatest volumes in the '20's on those lengths. The bit more size 133" wheelbase is about as far as most folks will go when seeking out a luxury sedan to live with daily. All would opine it's for the additional interior room, but few would admit it's the more impressive length that attracted them first! As Beuhrig noted, proportions were all important when making a design work on either wheelbase aesthetically pleasing.


Of the misused term 'sport': generally it was employed as an easy shorthand to differentiate from touring or formal, indiscriminately so. It's simply another term for club sedan, with a dash of cache. As with so many other descriptive automotive terms, use seemed to depend on whatever the maker decided would sell more cars. It is amusing to consider how the prosaic, ubiquitous Chevy sedan could ever be called "sport"!

The functional merits of various power trains: Your experiences and impressions are of great interest since I've never had the opportunity to drive these interesting cars. Thanks so much for sharing them with this novice.

Steve