Very interesting discussion of where Packard might have gone wrong prewar. But I think Packard lost the luxury market postwar, not prewar.

All automakers had to come out with cheaper models to survive the depression. But they were not needed after the war in the postwar sellers market. I think any wrong steps Packard might have taken prewar would have quickly been forgotten if they had either made Clipper a seperate division after the war, or dropped the lower price models completely. Probably making it a seperate division would have been the better move so that they would still have something to sell in volume.

But take a look at what they did. In 1935-41 there was an obvious difference between junior and senior models. What was the difference postwar? A hood a couple inches longer, different taillights, a slightly different grill, a little bigger engine? Not enough of a difference to make too many people willing to pay 1 1/2 to 2 times as much for essentially the same car with a few subtle differences. Whereas you could definitely see a difference between a Cadillac and Buick, Olds, or Pontiac. Also the 1951-54 just does not look prestigious compared to the presence of the 1951-54 Cadillacs. To those not familiar with cars, it could easily be mistaken for a Pontiac or other mid-price car.

Also prewar, Packard had power windows, air conditioning, always new innovations, etc. Where was this stuff postwar? Why no V-8 engine? That is what everyone wanted postwar. Maybe Packard's straight 8 had the same horsepower as its contemporaries, but it didn't have that important V-8 buzzword. There were a lot less chauffer driven cars postwar. And there were more women drivers. Suburban housing booms required 2 cars. The wife didn't want a manual transmission, steering, brakes, windows, etc. for when she drove the car. Not when she could get power everything in a Cadillac or even Buick or Olds plus air conditioning. And the husband discovered he liked all the power stuff as well. By the time Packard got in in gear in 1955 and offered everything they should have been since 1949 at least, many Packard buyers had moved on to another brand. And introducing everything at once resulted in quality problems. So those that preferred quality over new gadgetry were disappointed as well.

Advertising was a part of it as well. Cadillac ads showed cars against expensive silk drapery backgrounds or in front of the opera with a woman in exotic ball gown, diamonds, etc. Packard ads showed a middle class neighborhood home or garage with words like "value" and "reliable". If I am spending meagbucks on a car, I want to hear words like "power", "prestige", and "style" not "value leader".

I will never understand why the 1957 Packardbakers were ever made. I hear they were made to keep the name alive while Packard hoped to get financing to eventually get new Packards built. However, I think they would have been far better off doing a minor facelift of the 1956. I cannot see anybody trading in a 1955-56 Clipper Deluxe for a 1957, let alone a Patrician, 400, or Caribbean. I also cannot see anyone buying a 1957 Clipper over a 1957 Cadillac, Imperial, or even odd looking 1957 Lincoln. That wasn't just the final nail in the coffin, it was machine riveting it closed.

It is definitely postwar.

However, comparing it to a 1940-41 is not accurate. They already looked like this in 1942. The main difference is the 1942 used horizontal grill bars while the postwar used the eggcrate grill. Personally I think the eggcrate looks better than the horizontal 1942

http://www.fordflathead.com/images/boneyard/old_42/1942LincolnContinentalL.jpg

Quote:


It was a 1926 Hudson

http://forums.aaca.org/f169/todays-wind-em-up-275292.html

http://www.classicandperformancecar.com/front_website/octane_interact/picture.php?getid=13632&table=cars

Even though the styling was more dated, I can't see Rolls Royce using a horizontal grill.

Quote:

I have to disagree with a lot of this.

Continental humps started on the 1956 Mark II as a modern interpretation of the original Continental's rear mounted spare. Not only were they carried over to all following Mark series Lincolns, but there was a huge aftermarket supplying Continental humps for everything from Eldorados to Pintos. The Mark series outsold the Eldorado every year in the 1970's. So I may be biased, but I don't see how this is a vestigal element that should have gone away.

Buick portholes were not only requested by Buick customers, but they became such a must have bling thing that you can now buy them at Walmart and put them on anything. I don't see how Buick using their own trademark is a mistake.

Currently some of the most critically acclaimed cars carry vestigal styling cues. The Challenger, Camaro, and Mustang rely very heavily on retro styling. Even the new Cadillacs retain verticle taillights and an eggcrate grill. The original Taurus copied heavily from the 1949-51 Ford, right down to the lack of grill and badge placed where the bullet would have been on the 49-51. Cadillac carried over its tailfins from 1948-1964 with more modern interpretations of them every year. They absolutely clobbered everyone else in the luxury car field with these vestigal remains. Many cars have looked to the past for inspiration and then used a modern interpretation. Many of these designs are quite successful.

So since Packard customers were actually requesting a return to a verticle grill, I think that means they would have wanted a verticle grill on the 1957.

The 1942 Brook Stevens design is interesting and might have worked for senior Packards 1946-49, but I cannot see it being successful past that. The original Clipper drawings on the other hand, with the exception of number 1, look much less attractive, too Mercedes/European looking to have been accepted here, especially after 1950. The first one doesn't look all that different than the bathtub 48-50. Except it looks like it was based on a Hudson or Jaguar instead of a Clipper.

I think it would have been successful with a verticle grill. As previously mentioned, it is easy to automatically compare it to the flop of the Edsel. However, that was different. The public was promised an all new unlike anything else on the road car. And got a Ford with a horsecollar grill instead. Rather disappointing. The Edsel grill was less attractive and overall had more awkward front end styling than the proposed 1957 400. Plus several insiders at Ford wanted the Edsel killed. It's first year sales were actually not bad for an all new division.

Packard on the other hand had been getting requests for a return to the verticle grill since 1951. The 1955 Request was a response to those requests, and was received favorably. The 1957 400 would have been much closer to the Predictor than any other concept cars from other manufacturers were at that time. And the Predictor was well received. Prewar senior Packard buyers most likely ended up buying 1957-59 Cadillacs. So those were not any less flashy than the proposed 1957's from Packard.

The 1957 Clipper proposal on the hand, I think is ghastly. I do not think that would have sold over much better 1957 Buick, Olds, Mopar, Mercury designs.

Ok I looked at the 4 pics I found. The cars look nice. One thing I would say though is I would like the backgrounds to be more interesting. Backdrops of palm trees and art deco buildings or palatial estates might make the wives more willing to see them on their walls.

I am a friend of Patrick Martin and have ridden in his Bayliff many times. I have heard him repeat the entire history of Bayliff many, many times, and can answer just about any question you might have. There were only 2 of the combination coaches made. We saw the other one a couple of years ago and took pics of both cars together. However, there were definitely many more than 15 of the regular Rivieras built. He started in 1979 and built some on speculation and some when ordered. Bud Bayliff himself (who we have both talked to several times) doesn't know how many he made but guesses around 200. The last one was built within the last few years from a low mileage Riviera. He also has done a newer Mercury Cougar, Chrysler 300, Ford Crown Vic, and others as Packards.

The combination coaches were very labor intensive, and are a work of art, although an odd looking one. Since he was converting Cadillacs as well, I have no idea why he used a Riviera for the coaches.

The 1934 "reproductions" are also interesting. But with the price they are listed for (and none of them seem to sell) I'd rather buy a real Packard.

However, putting a Packard grill and weird taillights on a Riviera or Cadillac does not make it a Packard in spite of owning rights to the name. I think they look better left as Rivieras and Cadillacs.

I agree, $50-$100 depending on size. And it is nice to have a choice of sizes. However, I have not seen any examples of your work. You should post some pics here.