Packard Forum Index » General

Had Packard, Hudson, and Nash merged this is part of what might have happened.

The new Rambler would have been the basic volume car sold by all three divisions of American Motors. The Hudson Hornet, Packard patrician, and Nash Ambassador would have been all based on then current Nash Ambassador body shell.
With the body shells being produced at the Hudson plant and final assembly at the Packard on East grand.

John F. Shireman

Don't forget the little Metropolitans. They would have had to fit in somewhere

I still wonder if the marketing practices of GM, Ford, and Chrysler would have doomed such an organization.

Not to mention economy of scale.

Where so you see Nash's Kenosha plant in this? closed and all operations moved to Detroit?
Would the new company want to make good on plans to build a new, single floor modern plant in Utica, next to the engine works?
I have talked to many old hands from Packard, and if you read through the books (AQ-Kimes book "the new testament" and the Ward book) and have come to the conclusion that Packard didn't take care of their buildings like other companies, most likely due to their tenuous cash position for many years leading to their demise. I think they were about done with the EGB plant and wanted out.
AMC had a really good run coming out of the recession of 1958-1961, their Rambler line was very well received and was named "cars of the year" in 1963. They, like Packard were a one-man management scenario, in the case of AMC George Rommney was their Alvan McCauley, as long as he ran things they did well with product and business/finance decisions. After he left, not so much, the acquisition of Jeep being the notable exception. GM and Ford at one time had a very well developed system of leaders grooming future leaders, so that programs continued on with no noticeable difference, at one time that meant a lot, especially in terms of survival.

"Had Packard, Hudson, and Nash merged this is part of what might have happened.

The new Rambler would have been the basic volume car sold by all three divisions of American Motors. The Hudson Hornet, Packard patrician, and Nash Ambassador would have been all based on then current Nash Ambassador body shell.
With the body shells being produced at the Hudson plant and final assembly at the Packard on East grand."

That may have been a possible scenario if you are talking the post George Mason years. Don't forget the other part of that deal was the merging of Packard/Studebaker/AMC. With George Mason in the picture I think Studebaker and Rambler would have been the low end cars, while the Hudson would slide into the mid-range with the Packard and Ambassador bringing up the high end cars. Is there something(document, literature) available to suggest that the body shells would have been shared? I did not think body shell sharing came about until the later 60's. I could be wrong but up until 64/65 most of the bodies were very easily told apart. You tell a chevy from an olds from a pontiac etc. etc. Then uni-body contruction came along and the lines got very blurry.

Of course after G. Mason died all bets were off and the complete merger never came about as Romney wanted no part of playing second fiddle to Jim Nance, since the deal with Mason was that J.Nance would run the show.

Now I could be all wet on this, but these are the things that I have read along the way.

I've always envisioned the "Big AMC" merger like this, a lineup like GM's:

Nash making the cheapest cars, the Ambassador would no longer be needed. (IE Chevrolet)
Studebaker making a little more expensive cars, factory hot-rods, and pickups. (IE Pontiac)
Hudson making the next higher priced cars, with a modified Stepdown chassis, banker's hot-rods, (IE Buick) and a more luxurious pickup. (IE, GMC)
Packard making the top of the line luxury car, no Clippers, and competing directly with Cadillac, only with more class and style.

V8 engines would be Studebaker and Packard, with 6 cyl engines being an OHV derivative of Hudson's 308 flathead. The little Nash Metropolitan would have used the Austin engine like it always had. The Nash 6 and the Studebaker 6 would have been dropped in favor of Hudson's engine, albeit the OHV form. Studebaker made an OHV engine off their flathead design, so my theory could work in that respect.

Transmissions would be manual availability throughout the lineup, as well as the Borg-Warner auto for the first three, and a reworked Ultramatic for Packards and cars/trucks with Packard engines. A '57 Hudson 1 ton pickup with a 352 Packard V8 would have been something to behold!

I apologize for going just a bit off the topic, but your mention of the combine making an OHV conversion to the Hudson 308 (I drag raced a 54 Hudson Hornet extensively just after high school) reminded me that both AMC and Studebaker did successful conversions of flathead sizes to OHV.

And in re-reading Robert Neals excellent article in The Packard Cormorant (#110, Spring 2003) on the Monobloc Twelve I noted with interest Jesse Vincent's tinkering with a 4 valve-per-cylinder OHC conversion to the 385 c.i. Packard flathead 8.

Again, apologies for digressing.

A 4 valve per cylinder 385 would have put Packard at the forefront of the luxury car builders, no question!

The Packard Clipper, Hudson Wasp, and the Nash Statesman bodies would be built in Milwaukee, with final assembly in Kenosha. The Packard Clipper and Hudson Wasp bodies would have been based on the then current Nash Statesman body..

John F. Shireman

Nash had a long history of OHV engines going back into the 1920's. I had a 1947 Nash 600 for several years with the little flathead six which gave very good gas mileage. The Model 600 referred to the Nash as getting 600 miles out of a 20 gallon gas tank or 30MPG. The big Ambassador Nash had the OHV six which was an excellent engine and a good performer. In the 1950's Nash experimented with twin carbs and even a twin overhead cam head for this engine. In the 1930's the big Nash engines had twin ignition also. Also a bit off topic but nash would have been a good fit with Packard having a similar interest in engineering good engines and innovative cars like the Nash-Healey