Packard Forum Index » Post-War (1946-54)

In the list of all time American Greats, like Cadillac, Chevy, Pontiac, etc , how does the Packards compare ? Not just looks but also reliability ?
I used to think Chevy was top, but really unsure, would like you views?

I'm thinking that these Packards are tops for reliability...how many of use are doing any really serious rebuilding? Not many. Mainly electrical, carb, ignition issues. Stuff like that. Not a lot of guys getting machine work done, putting in a whole not bottom end, etc. The ultramatic in mine is getting rebuilt, but for the price i found, including the kit, it's the price of getting a reman TH350. And i think the ultramatic would last longer. Just my 2 cents.

Also, been seeing quite a few pontiac flathead straight eight articles in hemmings, etc. Man does that motor look A LOT like a Packard eight!

It depends on what vintage/model/series you are comparing. In the earlier years Packard was thought of as "the American Rolls-Royce" which is in part true, a dedicated, stand-alone manufacturer of high-end luxury cars. I might add that I feel that Packard's engineering was more to my liking and that they didn't to some cumbersome things that R-R liked to do in the name of silence. Through the pre-war and immediate post war era I would like to think that Packard designed and built a quality, solid, reliable car that gave good service to its owner. Some, like Peter from AZ (who goes by many names) has his very definite opinions on when Packard abdicated this place of quality and prominence.
Reliability with a Packard really wasn't much of an issue (they were quite reliable, especially when compared to some big 3 offerings) until the gear start Ultramatic/V-8 engine models, and even then, their competition was fighting a lot of the same issues, on a larger scale.
Styling is SO subjective that I don't quite know how to address that in a few words. In the 1930s and 40s Packard did quite well with styling in the eyes of buyers. They bought a lot of 22nd & 23rd series cars, with styling that was very much an acquired taste simply because they were buying anything with 4 wheels and a motor that they could get delivery on. The 24th series cars made their debut just about the time the demand was met, and again were a subjective call in terms of styling.
One thing that happened to many manufacturers in this era is that reliability alone did not sell cars. Flash (power+chrome) and features became more desirable. Rock steady brands like Dodge did battle with this, one year they were touting reliability and the nest it was all about power.
The question of build quality and value is a big bottom line in this discussion, many American firms that made a superior product has gone under, and many mediocre manufacturers have lived on.

quote from first post:
"In the list of all time American Greats, like Cadillac, Chevy, Pontiac, etc , how does the Packards compare ..."

An age old debate that rages on among many different cars.
What always surprises me is that in nearly every such question always includes Chevy for some reason.
NOTE! That up until 1965 Chevy was never touted, marketed, nor in any other way claimed to be ANY form of luxury, prestige or high end car with any concept of opulence in any way shape form or fashion by anyone anywhere.

Plymouth, dodge, MErc or ford is rarely ever mentioned in luxury car comparisons.

Packard was a luxury car. A car of prestige and opulence and well deserved during its reign.

However, one mite conclude that since Chevy always seems to be some kind candidate for comparison (in any type of car comparison debate) then perhaps there is an unspoken widespread and subconscious belief that the chevy is in someway the superior car of all times.

OR to put it another way:
"Why buy a Cadillac when u can buy a Caprice for 7even dollars more."

OR this one:
" About the only difference between the Cadillac and a Chevy is the seats and the price."

I sure as hell won't argue about the seats. I've drove and ridden in alot of chevies. WORST damned seats i ever sat on in my life.

Bottom line: Strange isn't it that chevy, more often than not is used as a yard stick or standard for comparison to just about everything????

Probably because you see so darn many of them on the road still. For some reason anyone around my age is still dreaming of getting that tri 5 Chevy he couldn't afford back then. Nice cars, but even fully loaded with nothing else you could add on, still more in a Clipper deluxe class than a Packard. And you're right, they were not the most comfortable cars available--unless your idea of comfort is an upholstered park bench.

Quote:

Good luck affording it now! Another problem with the tri-5 chevy crowd is that almost ALL of them are rodded. Hard to make a fair comparison. Suspension updates, better motors and trannys and rear ends, aftermarket air conditioning and interior. For what the tri-5 crowd puts into those cars, it should ride like a jag, take off like a vette, and handle like a new civic. For the price people want (and get) for those cars after being updated, i feel they fall short.

I have herd that in it's hay day, the Pontiac was thought of as an old mans car and not so cool with the young, back then ( were they right ?), today's world it's sought after by collectors(1947-1954).
Sounds like the Packard 1948 super eight I'm hoping to get is among the good ones Packard made? In 1956, was this the end of Packard? I think Cadillac just has that name (often herd in pop songs, ) for me the older packards are just so perfect, a real upmarket car. The Bently of old cars. Seen other 1948 cars like the Pontiac Chieftian 1948 convertible, 1949 62 series Cadillac Convertible looking just great, but will be very happy to get a Packard. Plus any help or advice needed, you guys are simply the best.

IMHO, Pontiac was absolutely an old man's car up until about mid 50's when they got the V8 and square bodies. Same with Buick. After the general had his mid 50 changes, more started taking notice with performance across the older grayer brands. By the late 50's early 60's and some good advertising campaigns, I believe they were starting to become more popular with the younger set.

I am by no means an expert on Packards or any other car and I have limited experience with working on old cars. The one thing more than any other that strikes me about Packard and what makes them stand out from mediocre cars is the engineering, perhaps even over engineering of things which one cannot often see but which contribute to durability over time. On many occasions when taken something as simple as the clutch linkage apart I noticed that Packard used bearings and not simple bushings and made provision to lubricate these parts. The supports for the transmission and frame, the huge nine main bearings supporting that enormous crankshaft, the use of fine thread bolts ( I didn't break one when I restored my car!) are some of the things which set Packard apart from the "bean counter" companies including GM. The only other make of car that I am familiar with that even comes close is Mercedes-Benz.
Alas as H.L Mencken once said;
"Nobody ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American public." but some perhaps overestimated that taste of the consumer by thinking that engineering and quality would sell cars and so Packard died.

In the twenties and early thirties you could DEFINITELY tell a luxury car (Cadillac Pierce Arrow Packard etc) from a low price mass produced car. More elaborate design, better materials, better built in every way from a technical standpoint. From a purely superficial standpoint anyone could examine the upholstery, bodywork, paint, instrument panel etc and see at once which was the expensive car.

By the mid thirties the better mass produced cars had largely closed the gap. For all practical purposes a Nash Chrysler or Buick was as good as the high priced brands, although you could still see the difference in finish and appointments.

This is when Packard Cadillac and Lincoln introduced cheaper lines while Marmon Stutz and Pierce Arrow went out of business.

In the late 40s all cars were mass produced in the same way but you could still tell the high priced cars from the low priced cars in quality and quantity. The expensive cars were better built and offered size and features the cheap cars did not have.

By 1959 this difference had largely disappeared. You could buy a Pontiac that was practically as big as a Cadillac and in fact, used the same body suitably modified for brand recognition. Both had an OHV V8, and the Pontiac engine was actually larger than the Cadillac. Both could be ordered with automatic transmission, power steering, air conditioning and all the same options. The difference in fit, finish, upholstery etc was small.

There was a sort of convergence as the cheaper cars were improved, while the more expensive cars were cheapened in a competitive market.