Packard Forum Index » General

I've read several articles describing the style of the '51 through '56 Packards as having a high belt line that made the tops appear to be chopped...huh? I don't see it...some went so far as to say that the cars were purposely designed like this to shorten the distance between the body and roofline as a way to save money on expensive glass. I personally do not see anything but a car that started out modestly designed in 1951 and grew into a classic competitor by the time the 55's and 56's hit the streets. To me the last REAl Packards of these two years were right on track in style and performance...if there's an obvious high belt line then it did the cars a real justice...

I personally like the high belt line, low greenhouse design, and as you look around today, some of the handsome new Chryslers have this same look.

The '55 and '56 models share the same "belt line" as the '51 through '54 models, all being based on the same basic body shell, with some clever mods to the fenders, windshield and side moldings to give the impression of a lower car. The roofline and low greenhouse are the same as well.

The original designs from '51 to '54 were by John Reinhart, and the styling modifications of '55 and '56 were attributed chiefly to Dick Teague.

I may not be an expert, but these things I do know.

I know what I like, AND I like the 55 upgrade. I like the 56 even more. I'm disappointed there was not a real '57.

I don't think the belt line any higher than most cars of the day. I think the grille on the 51-54 was too heavy which resulted in the cars being called "fish mouths". The lighter Arbib grille on the Pan American was much better.
The downward slope of the front and rear on the 55-56 always catches my eye and looks like the car is sagging.

Other than that I think the styling was very good.

I quite like the styling of my 54 Cavalier. At the time I bought it, I was looking at having a 50's car because of the drivability to a distant event. When I saw the Packard for sale I was smitten. My other antique car is a 22 Model T Ford. I used to own steam cars which can easily beat the Packard in a race.

The Packard has a low windswept look as the front appears to tuck back slightly below the headlights giving the effect of speed. This is carried in the lines with the trim and fins at the back fender area. The side trim ads streaks of speed and wind.

The belt line is clean with the door handles all in that line and seems high compared to the 50 Chevy I drove as a kid. This also gives the appearance to me of a slightly chopped top. Even though it is not a convertible hard top look there is a lot of glass.

This Packard sits lower than the chevy did and the Skirts add more of the lowered look.

My car has the tinted windows option, the body is the Polar Blue with the dark blue (Meridian Blue) top and slight blue green tint in the windows effect, it looks like it's moving about 100 mph just sitting in the driveway.

I was at the auction that sold the Bat Mobile. It was actually a 1955 Lincoln concept car (that looked better to me than the Bat Bucket) and you can see how the lines flow into the cars of the period, and then we took a turn to ugly.

Jim

I agree the beltline was at a good location for the car's overall height. It has been written that Reinhart wanted to lower the beltline. If he meant "lower it and bring the overall height down same amount" that would have been fine. Pan American did just that. If however he meant "bring it down but keep the vehicle height the same" it would have looked terrible, imho. Have worked up images bringing it down 1.5 inches as he purportedly said was needed. No good.

Noticed the sagging look on back too, from certain angles. Sloping roof contributes to the appearance. I like the proportions and look of the 51-52 200. Have worked up images of the 4-dr in club sedan form with wide C-pillar, shortened reverse opening rear door and no body insert between front/rear doors. Is one of my favorite 50s Packards except for the minor fact that it doesn't exist.