That '36 120 looks pretty straight. The seller certainly doesn't seem to be trying to pass it off as if it were Concourse ready! Sometimes with old cars, owners without the means to proper maintain a car might go ahead and paint over spots to try to stave off rust. The car does not look abused, but I think the price seems a little high for a car in that shape.

Turning to the 1947 7-passenger sedan, my first impression is WOW! It looks to be an honest driver that wouldn't break the bank to take it to the next level. You'd sure be a hit with your friends with this car!

Marston:

I agree with you completely when idiots with too much disposable income decide to turn a rare, valuable car like that '35 (or the awful '36 120) into a custom, hot rod, or worse yet, low-rider. Even more bizarre is when someone takes the body off an antique car and installs it atop a monster truck!

That said, I don't get too worked up when someone takes a Packard that would otherwise be scrapped and customizes it. While it is individual taste, I see that as giving new life to an otherwise doomed car. I have actually seen a few Packard custom jobs that were masterfully done and are beautiful and practical drivers. I would never do this to my Clipper, but to each his own.

(I've got a bad feeling that I am about to be hammered!)

BDC:

I think you are right.

" Possible extended terms to qualified buyer if we can retain physical possession of car while timely non-refundable payments are being paid. "

What this guy is doing is asking a buyer to pay in advance -- Non-refundable payments!!! -- while he holds onto the car. He doesn't even list the sales price.

Something smells rotten in Rockville, if you ask me.

Another source for those kind of parts is Tucson Packard. I bought a Starter dashboard bezel from them. They have a lot parts.

http://www.tucsonpackard.com/

How about something on the higher end?

Top, 1941 Packard 160 formal sedan

Bottom, 1941 Cadillac Fleetwood 60 Special imperial sedan

Attach file:

---

  (84.78 KB)


  (74.08 KB)

Though this is not on Craig's List -- Hemmings, actually -- I thought this might interest you ...

https://www.hemmings.com/classifieds/cars-for-sale/packard/110/1984086.html?refer=home

That is a very interesting comment about Packard wanting to be the next Buick. Granted, Buicks were and are nice cars, but that seems like setting your sights rather low. As the producer of luxury cars, one would have thought Packard would have kept its eyes on Cadillac, not Buick. I always thought that the Clipper line was supposed to compete with Buick.

James Nance seems to always get the blame for the ultimate demise of Packard, and personally, I think that is unfair. Granted, he did make some poor decisions, such as agreeing to buy Studebaker and opening the Connor plant; but he did not make those decisions in a vacuum. There were quite a number of executives being paid a lot of money to give him information and advice who clearly steered him in the wrong direction. I truly believe that Nance did care about Packard and wanted the company to succeed; but judging by the decisions and actions of George Christopher, I have to wonder whether he really cared or not.

I think Packard could have purchased an automatic transmission from either GM or Chrysler that would have worked fine and would have saved the company a lot of money in terms of development and manufacturing. Being the only independent to develop its own automatic did not actually put the company's resources to its best advantages, as compared to bringing out a large, powerful V-8 engine after the war. Car companies had produced V-8 engines since before World War I, so there was nothing unique about them; but by 1950, the V-8 was the feature the public definitely wanted.

In 1954, Packard produced 31,291 cars, compared to 444,609 produced by Buick. In 1955 Buick was the third-largest car manufacturer selling 738,814 units! Packard was No. 14 selling a total of 55,247.

To use a sports comparison, this is like a high school football team trying to take on Florida State University.

I have to disagree with concept of that 1954 Packard advertisement. No wonder James Vance hated Packard advertising! That photo shows some creepy older guy squiring an attractive younger lady with a four-door sedan in the forefront. These were not the people Packard should have been trying to appeal to. By the early 1950s the advertising industry generally tried to appeal to young families or carefree driving in convertibles. Nance was correct when he said that the ad agency handling the Packard account had dropped the ball and that what was appearing in magazines and newspapers was pathetic. By 1954 a Packard was no longer a status symbol. It had lost that appeal to Cadillac following the company's 1948-50 line. Now having decided to swim into its future tied to an anchor named Studebaker, Packard was not particularly well placed to compete in a runaway car market.

Packard had waited far too long to come out with its V-8. Had it brought out a V-8 in 1951 it might have made up for lost ground. Even Studebaker had a V-8 in 1951. I have never received a good answer as to why Packard procrastinated in bringing out something the public clearly wanted.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think a pedestrian staring down a car barreling at him at 60 mph would have a lot more to be concerned about than getting scratched by a hood ornament!

I think it would be interesting to find out about the origins -- and the name -- of the hood ornament used on 1955 and 1956 Clippers. Wherever I go, that ornament always attracts a lot of attention.