Re: Does anyone else like this example?
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
![]() ![]() ![]() |
I'm not a big fan of the 110, either. Are you bidding based on the often misleading 'Mostly original' description, or b/c you really want a 110? If you don't really like the 110..or know that much about it...or haven't driven one and fallen in love with it...then I'd personally encourage you to get some frame of reference here and not bid on perception or emotion.
We often associate the term 'Original' with 'Factory fresh' and therefore more desirable. And for sure (and as an owner of a 'Mostly original' and truly 'Fresh' car myself), originality adds to enjoyment IF it's really 'Fresh'..as in well maintained and well preserved and close to factory. Otherwise, it's often a fancy use of words designed more to distract from a lack of proper maintenance and care. Old and tired is old and tired, even though the term 'Original' might be accurate. I'm off on a tangent here, but with regards to this car, bid on it b/c you really like the 110, not b/c you're seduced by the term 'Original'. If the model doesn't do it for you, neither will the condition.
Posted on: 2012/9/1 11:07
|
|||
1954 black Patrician, unrestored, mostly original, minty!!
|
||||
|
Re: Does anyone else like this example?
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
![]() ![]() ![]() |
I know of a fully restored turn key car (same model) that I can buy for less than $20K hence my questions in the earlier post.
Posted on: 2012/9/1 12:47
|
|||
|
Re: Does anyone else like this example?
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Something that's no longer readily available is worth what someone is willing to pay. That notwithstanding, my comments to you about desirability of the model 110 itself are valid. Do you want a 110, or are you drawn in to this car b/c of the term 'original'? If you really want a 110 (or any car, ftm), truly original and well preserved examples command a premium, often costing more than so called 'Fully restored' examples.
In much the same way that there are different levels of "Originality" ranging from near mint to basket cases, the term 'Fully restored' also can be misleading in terms of quality and thoroughness. It's not just the terminology, it's the actual condition of the car (and the work done to it) which cannot easily be determined without a thorough evaluation.
Posted on: 2012/9/1 23:47
|
|||
1954 black Patrician, unrestored, mostly original, minty!!
|
||||
|
Re: Does anyone else like this example?
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
![]() ![]() ![]() |
G'day all. I am suspicious of the carpet and interior. I suspect that it has been retrimmed, not a bad job but not like my 115C in 1966. Anyone with some pics of original trim etc out there? PT
Posted on: 2012/9/2 4:41
|
|||
I like people, Packards and old motorbikes
|
||||
|
Re: Does anyone else like this example?
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
![]() ![]() ![]() |
In Richard Langworth's book "Packard Buyer's Guide" he refers to these cars as a "Six" never as a 115. Which is correct? both? Thanks for your response Bobby and I agree about it's worth what someone will pay but there is also some kind of measure as far as value when you speak of each different model. I guess one can try and find like models and avg. their sale prices and go from there. I like the idea of a fully restored turn key car a little more, but that's just me.
Posted on: 2012/9/2 7:18
|
|||
|
Re: Does anyone else like this example?
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Forum Ambassador
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Most authoritative way to establish exactly what Packard called their various models for any particular year is to refer to their catalogs and brochures. For 1938 Packard renamed the 115 as the "Packard Six" and the 120 as the "Packard Eight".
Posted on: 2012/9/2 7:40
|
|||
|
Re: Does anyone else like this example?
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Home away from home
![]() ![]() ![]() |
I've driven very low mileage juinors and they are every bit as nice as the senior cars. However, the build quality wears out pretty quickly by 50,000 miles. I'd buy one, but I don't have the resources.
Posted on: 2012/9/2 8:05
|
|||
|
Re: Does anyone else like this example?
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Forum Ambassador
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
In Richard Langworth's book "Packard Buyer's Guide" he refers to these cars as a "Six" never as a 115. Which is correct? both? From a technical standpoint, "115C" is the official series/chassis/model designation. That's how the 35-41 parts book shows them, unless it's a body-specific application, and that's the shorthand designation I used in composing this site's online Service Index. Seems like Packard played a a bit of a name-game with marketing the Juniors in the years that followed, but the 1937 shop manuals and service letters refers to this line of cars as the "Six". This 1937 accessories brochure specifically covers the "Packard Six", and the cover of the owner's manual that came with these cars refers to them as the "Packard Six". Still, a rose by any other name...
Posted on: 2012/9/2 9:19
|
|||
|
Re: Does anyone else like this example?
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Forum Ambassador
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Packard Six is the correct "name". 115c is the model designation in the parts book. Many people refer them as 115c's because it rolls off the tongue well, and instantly identifies the car as a '37 unlike the 110 designation which can be applied to several years.
Posted on: 2012/9/2 10:00
|
|||
|