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

Get these two engine numbers and report back.

Attach file:

---

  (111.73 KB)

West,
Please see below:

Attach file:

---

Size: 221.58 KB; Hits: 80

Steve:
HMMMM...... 500707 is a correct number for a 160.

Yes, the front doors are interchangeable between a 120 and 160.

Finding the thermostatically controlled grille louvers, a proper radiator and mechanism would take some effort, but it would be a bolt-on item.

Here are some comparables for you to review:

1940 120 convertible sedan for $63,250rmauctions.com/lots/lot.cfm?lot_id=1064753

1940 160 convertible sedan for ????tomlaferriere.com/1940_Packard_super_eight_convertible_sedan_160_for_sale.htm
This car APPEARS to have an original interior - notice the stitching around the door handles/ window cranks. Also notice the radiator with the thermostatic control. BTW, the radio antenna base is from a 1941- the 1940 was somewhat different.

The dates and numbers on your engine are correct for a 1940, but they would be for an early 1940. It's suspicious because the serial tag says the car was delivered almost a year later.
So, in my opinion, even though it's a correct engine, the huge difference in build-date of the engine (August 10, 1939), and delivery date (July 20, 1940) of the car throws up a red flag.

Steve
Can you show us a picture of the back of the car? I'd like to see the trunk handle and the bumper.

So, in my opinion, even though it's a correct engine, the huge difference in build-date of the engine (August 10, 1939), and delivery date (July 20, 1940) of the car throws up a red flag.

Assuming the VN is correct (which isn't known), I'd say more like a pale yellow flag. The engine early build date is reasonably consistent with the early vehicle number and if you examine lots of senior car plates you'll quite often find early VNs with very late sale dates for the less-common and upper price-range cars. At the beginning of a model run Packard would want at least a few examples of all their offerings to be available for the public to see, whether they had a firm order or not.

Sorry for the delay.......had to do the husbandly thing.
Here are photos of the rear:

Attach file:

---

  (56.97 KB)


  (55.74 KB)


  (58.12 KB)

The rear shots show more things that are inconsistent with "factory correct". The trunk handle, trunk lid emblem, and bumper are for a car that originally came without a luggage rack (which would be more common on a 120). Notice that the license plate area is completely blocked by the luggage rack itself. The bumper should not have the word "Packard" on it. Only cars without luggage racks had that.

And the extra bumper/trunk guards, while they fold down, are totally incorrect for a car with a luggage rack.

West,
Based upon the feedback, I'm to assume that this car is a 120 rather than a 160?
I'm still trying to process this information, because part of me wants to believe that it is a 160 and not a 120.

I guess the engine and the nameplate could have been swapped out many years back.

This turn of events really creates a conundrum, but thanks for all of the input from everyone.

Better to find out now, than after you bought. I suspect that would produce an even bigger conundrum. It looks like a pretty nice car, but I certainly wouldn't pay more than 120 price for it. In my opinion, a real 160 would be worth around $75 in "tour" condition. My brother just bought one in tour condition for quite a bit less than that, only his is a '41.