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

Steve - Geoff uncovered more information last night. I'll post it here this afternoon. What Geoff learned indicates to me that the convertible was an in-house project for Henney. Don't have time to post it now; will do it this afternoon - it's very interesting!

Anxiously awaiting whatever new information you have. But in the meantime, let me ask - what do we know for fact about the relationship between Henney and Packard (if any) as it relates to the Monte Carlo hardtop? It would seem almost beyond possibility that Packard would have commissioned Henney for it, or to have authorized it, or even had any formal interest in it, or spent a nickel on it - afterall the 24th Series introduction was right around the corner so it would have no impact on future styling, useless as a concept car, equally useless in showrooms to draw traffic. So, what were the circumstances surrounding its creation? Knowing or strong speculation on that may help better understand the origins of the convertible.

I was away from the computer far longer than I thought I would be today. Here is the update I promised earlier.

It now appears that Arbib's Monte Carlo proposal was much more involved than has been remembered or recognized up to now.

Geoff also notes that the grille on his Monte Carlo convertible is an interesting hybrid between the Super Eight and the Custom Super Eight.

56packardman.com/2018/02/20/gear-head-tu ... rlo-convertible-about-to-be-reborn/

<i><b>(Scroll Down)</i></b>

Hi

Dave raises good points: the timing of the Monte Carlo hardtop build coincides with the development of the 24th Series. The major take away from reading Neal's Packard 1948 To 1950 covering the 1949-'50 period was that management was 'done' with the bathtubs, desperate to get a new car on the market as quickly as possible. As such they were in a crisis management mode trying to build enough cars to satisfy sales, while clearing material inventories, while maybe breakeven without the massive overproduction glut caused by Christopher's late dictates. Body style selections were reduced from the 22nd Series offering, no new body styles were added. Only the Super Deluxe model was added to utilize the discontinued Custom Eight parts, recover some investment.

From what Neal details of the Monte Carlo's development, it appears to have been purely a Henney speculation project to demonstrate design consultant Arbib's capabilities to Packard. Photos dated April 11, 1949 of the unfinished car were concurrent with the 24th Series design process which was well underway, completed October 1st. Any hope the Monte Carlo hardtop would cause management to contract Henney to build a low-volume production run was a vain hope as best.

To keep the situation then in context, the later months of 1949 were fraught with management conflicts climaxing in the ouster of Christopher, a demoralized dealer network suffering free fall loses, masses of 22nd Series leftovers stifling 23rd Series sales. Not a happy time, all around. Those dealers who stuck with Packard, pushing heavily discounted Eights to move metal, were screaming for a completely new car. 200 production began August 1st 1950, dealer introduction by late in that month, much to their relief.

Where did the Monte Carlo by Henney or a convertible version fit into current or future model planning? They really didn't!

But, that doesn't make their history or this Monte Carlo convertible any less interesting now!

Steve

<i>"the Monte Carlo's development, it appears to have been purely a Henney speculation project to demonstrate design consultant Arbib's capabilities to Packard." etc. ...</i>

Excellent summary of the situation at Packard!
Dealer volume in 1950 plunged.

My own opinion is that with the 24th Series pending, especially in light of the management turmoil, the Monte Carlo proposals from Arbib/Henney were just that - to showcase what Arbib and Henney could do for Packard. My opinion about this is that Packard neither encouraged nor commissioned Arbib or Henney in this project. I don't know the history of the "bathtubs" - I've always been more interested in the V-8s.

That Arbib/Henney pitched three Monte Carlo proposals to Packard indicates a persistence on their part.

Steve....

All points you made make sense to me. Thanks for the explanation. Where can I locate the reference of the dated photo of the Monte Carlo you mention in your post? I purchased the Neal book but it has yet to arrive.

Thanks again for your contributions here.

Geoff

Hi Geoff

Mr. Neal's book on the way to you has the photo referenced and all the information that will help you understand how the Monte Carlos fit into the picture. I'd recommend you read it in chronological sequence to thoroughly understand how management optimism turned to desperation. That will give you an understanding of the context in which your car was built. The book doesn't cover 24th Series (1951) development which was concurrent with 22nd - 23rd Series production, detailed in the follow-up Packard 1951 to 1954.

Glad to help out in any way I can. I look forward to seeing your progress on your project blog.

Steve

25 February 2018
New photos from Geoff:
??Theft Proof Number
? Briggs Body Number
? Engine Number
* How Henney filled in the taillight space viewed from inside the trunk.

56packardman.com/2018/02/20/gear-head-tu ... rlo-convertible-about-to-be-reborn/

My original blog post, which also covers the 2 Monte Carlos based on the 24th Series Mayfair hardtop is here:
56packardman.com/2014/12/28/before-chevr ... -there-was-the-packard-monte-carlo/

There is a photo of a "barn find" Packard Monte Carlo convertable on PI's Facebook page.
Richard Arbib also designed the 1956-57 Hudson V-line styling that didn't go over too well with the public. ( even though I own 2)