Packard Forum Index » Pre-War (1899-1942)

So says the popular adage. WAY up in fact. My question for the community in 2015 though, is why is this still true to the extreme extent demonstrated by the market?

Using the 1927-28 5th series as an example (for obvious reasons), sedans were among the more expensive available configurations. That they were also the most common speaks to the configuration's pragmatic and aesthetic desirability.

That commonality is the oft cited reason for their diminished value among collectors, but the vast majority were long ago shredded and the quantity disparity is now small (I'll have to contact the roster keeper to remind me of the exact numbers). I do wonder if it doesn't just have more to do with precedent at this point.

To be clear, I'm asking about rank and file production cars, not some one of a kind unicorn owned by a movie star (which more deservedly justifies a high valuation). For example, both of these cars are presented with older restorations showing significant wear (despite any creative language their purveyors use):

-ebay.com/itm/1928-Packard-526-Phaeton-/281704558996

-ebay.com/itm/1928-Packard-526-Runabout/281737133574

The last 526 sedan on ePay, however, which appeared to be in significantly better condition than either of these drop-tops, didn't sell for $30K. I've presented examples of the 5th series, but the same general trend seems to apply throughout the 30s.

I'd like to see a dialog about whether these cars really justify a valuation of ~3X their hardtop counterparts, and why. My motivations are clearly biased, but I think it's a legitimate question regardless. It's all the same running gear after all!

I've donned my flame retardant suit, made some popcorn, and anxiously await your replies :)

Sedans were more expensive to build, and they're also more expensive to restore (assuming that one started with the same condition on each), especially the luxury sedans with so much ornate upholstery and hardware, which the open cars tended not to have.

Part of the equation is the economics of supply and demand. For most Classics of the 1920's - 40's there's a lot more sedans of any given model than open cars. This goes for Cadillac, Lincoln ,Pierce Arrow, Stutz, ect. And then there's the styling of closed cars of this era. No offense, but a lot of 1920's & early 30's production sedans look like shoe boxes on wheels. The roadsters & phaetons looked a lot better with their lower raked windshields. So when you have a car that was 1. made in far less numbers than a sedan, and 2. styling wise looks a lot better, that car is going to command a higher price. Heck, the same logic applies to Model A Fords and 1950's & 60's cars too.

My understanding is this:

1. Open cars are not as 'practical' as a closed car is to most people. Therefore, open cars are limited-production compared to closed cars.

2. BECAUSE an open car is rarer than a closed car, its value is higher.

3. Another major factor is that open cars rust out faster (and in more ways) than a closed car does. A convertible/roadster/phaeton that's left to sit outside will deteriorate more quickly than a closed car which has more protection from the elements.

All of the above factors contribute to a higher value for an open car.

I have certainly heard before and agree with the points made thus far (well, except the bit about the shoe boxes. To each his own I suppose...), but again, I'm asking the question through the lens of 2015. Is that oft recited wisdom still accurate? I didn't write down the exact numbers, but last I checked with the 5th roster keeper, there weren't many of any body style left standing.

Certainly there were fewer open cars made, and their values have understandably been higher. While many have survived as a result of that, however, the "less desirable" sedans have been recycled, turned into trucks, tractors, franken-phaetons, or simply left to the ravishes of time and nature.

I don't necessarily believe the enormous value disparity is representative of the remaining inventory of vehicles in the present day. 1508 makes a good point about aesthetics, which is subjective and hard to quantify, but I smell a racket. As long as there are enough well heeled buyers willing to hurl great gobs of cash at open cars for the perception of exclusivity, the sellers of said vehicles certainly aren't going to disabuse them of those notions.

Who am I kidding though, if I had trust fund, I'd be standing in line to buy one myself to park next to the "lowly" sedan. That blue 640 roadster currently listed on Hyman would do quite nicely I think :) Having done so, however, I'd still maintain that sedans are undervalued.

Using 1934 Eights as an example, production by body style has been quite accurately estimated as:

4-door closed cars (including 5-pass sedans, formal sedans, club sedans, limousines and 7-pass sedans) - about 81% of total

2-4 passenger coupes - 3.2%
5 passenger coupes - 5%

Convertible coupes - about 5.5%
Convertible sedans - less than 2%
convertible victorias - about 2%
Phaetons - about 0.6%
Touring - much less than 1%

Hi

The emotional response over practicality is at the root of the price disparity of open models over closed on comparable chassis. For most, the lower, sportier looks of open cars appeals more than the taller, closed configuration. The driving experience in roadsters and phaetons is more visceral; the un-muffled sounds of the car, tires on the road, rushing wind, feel of freedom are hard to duplicate in a sedan.

Rarity plays a part though it has more to do with old cars are bought primarily for fun and the open car promises to deliver more of it. Their higher value does sop the owner's ego since they are held in higher regard by most all old car enthusiasts, confers on the owner a bit more prestige.

The closed sedan, unless custom-bodied, however handsome will always be regarded a step-down in status to open versions. Unfair, illogical, yes but that's the way humans are.

Steve

I definitely hear what you're saying OD, but that was 81 years ago. I do wonder what those numbers look like today. I'd posit that a far greater percentage of those open cars have survived given their near immediate collectibility. I'm not suggesting they outnumber sedans, but I'd also be very surprised to discover that the split is still 80/20.

For my part, I think Steve hit the nail right on the head.

Anyway, I appreciate everyone's opinions. Thank you for indulging this sedan owner his musings. I knew what I was getting into when buying a sedan from the red-headed 5th series, and would happily do so again. Now, I'm off to drive the old girl in a local parade. Happy 4th everyone (US members at least)!