Packard Forum Index » V-8 (1955-56)

I tend to drive my 56 like a little old man and let modern traffic pass me on the left. Next weekend, it will be going for about 85 miles to a car show in all sorts of Sunday traffic. Somehow, driving it makes me think that it would be a horrible choice if it were my daily driver.

My daily is a 2013 VW GTI that my sons call The Anti-Packard, because everything it does is diametrically opposed to the Packard way of driving. My 1967 Corvette makes me feel the same way; fun to drive and be seen in, but not well suited for today's traffic.

While the 56 does well on the Interstate and has a ride that is hard to beat with modern cars, agility and economy are qualities none of us would expect in our 58 year old cars. Is there anyone on this forum who still uses their Packard as their daily driver? If so, how is the car and the driver holding up?

1956 Patrician is my weekend and vacation car. It handles well and keeps up just fine with traffic. It is a bit of a pig on gas but not much worse than all those SUVs and pickup trucks you see on the road. So far, it has passed state inspection every time I go through (not required on antique cars in NJ if registered as such).Has power everything including door locks. Being a black car, I wish it had AC.

Let me guess. U're running reproduction period correct tirrs on packard snd corvette. If thats the case then thats your problem.
Otherwise your observations are strictly psychological. The small modern cars give most drivers a feel of confodence simply because the car is small. Perhaps noise level is an issie too. Modern cars since the 1980's tend to be better insulated.
Since u find the Corvette to be less desireable than ANY VW only demonstrates that the car intimidates you. Same for the Packard. I'm trying be nice about it.

Gas mileage issue is again strictly psychological. Let me put it this way: i know people making over $150K per year driving $40K modern SUV less than 50 miles per week. THEY complain of $3.50/gal gas while holding a bottle of $2.00/gal Deerfart water in their hand.

Its is all strictly a case to be trendy with no rational perspective.

Quote:

I disagree. I think the usual problem is the expectation that old cars should drive like new cars. When you hop into the '56 or '67, realize what you're driving, drive accordingly, and enjoy it.

I would NEVER put radial tires on a car that was originally clad with bias ply tires unless I was attempting to get it to drive like a newer car. In which case, a lot more needs to be done than just putting on radial tires.

"The small modern cars give most drivers a feel of confidence simply because the car is small."

Are you kidding me? Like a whole industry of engineers and developers really haven't made any progress over the last 1/2 century? American, european and asian companies included? I think things like independent suspension, much better tire/power/weight ratio of a VW GTI to a Packard, all the computer controls of engine, suspension and brakes and airbags also contribute to the feel of confidence that one has in a modern car big or small. I mean an old 33 1/3 vinyl record is nice to listen to at home, but not practical in an everyday commute on the road. Just like a packard is nice to enjoy for a cruise to a car show or for fun, but most (if not all) packards are not as practical for daily use as a modern car.

Count me in the group that uses my 1955 Patrician as a daily driver. It is mostly an original survivor, but as most on this board know, I put modern brake booster/dual MC with front disc brakes on it. I also have a high end stereo which plays CDs and has a subwoofer in the back. I agree on the gas mileage, but it's not that bad compared to the big pickups and SUVs some drive around.

Recently (Oct 2013), I drove to my 50th High School reunion in San Diego (7 hours one way). Rather than drive my Pat (which would not have been seen by anyone), I rented a 2013 Nissan Sentra from Enterprise and drove it. After that trip, you could not pay me enough to own one. The main problem was that the steering was extremely "darty". One had to be constantly paying attention or the slightest road variation would cause the car to move somewhere and then that required correction on extremely fast steering. It was very tiresome to drive due to the attention required. By the way, most of the road there and back was pretty much straight 2-lane or freeway (I-15).

Oh yeah, I have had and recently put new radials on my Pat. Drives like a dream. My other car is a 1976 (Gen-2) Firebird with a turbocharged 400 engine. It drives nicely, but is scarey fast and gobbles gas like it cost nothing.

Craig

My collector cars are covered by a limited-use policy that keeps me from doing the usual driving in them. So I don't. Both the Packard and 67 Corvette have newer radial tires on them, but the stick-shift, non-power steering and brakes Corvette is as different from the Packard as night is to day. Both would be lousy if I had to drive either as I do with my newer cars. My wife really prefers the wide, expansive cabin of the Packard, with its smooth ride and great visibility to that of the old Corvette.

Our family business includes huge to little vehicles, ranging from Peterbilts and Autocars, many Chevy/GMC crewcabs and pickups, down to the GTI. All get your attention when you switch from one to another. But, psychologically, big must matter to me. Both the Peterbilt and the Packard make me hypervigilent when driving them in normal traffic. Both are loved and well-cared for, so I would not want to do anything to hurt them or others. Even the 67 Corvette, which has been in the family for more than thirty years, takes some reacquainting time. I'd never think of leaving either on a store lot unattended.

But the newer cars tend to "cocoon" me, with alert dynamics that transmit road feel in a completely different manner than Torsion-Level. I'll reserve the special times of driving for the forty--seven and fifty-eight year old cars in the house garage, and leave the daily stuff to the newer ones. Someday, maybe a museum will appreciate that.

When i drive modern, it is from point A to B.

When i drive my Packard, i drive the back roads, and enjoy the drive. Stop at things i normally would not.

Its a state of mind when i am driving my Packard. It is for enjoyment.

My 2cts.

While I tend to veer toward Let The Ride Decide's philosophy, I am not afraid to drive my Clipper in traffic and on high-speed highways. People did not baby their cars in the 1950s and 1960s and I think that as long as your cars are properly maintained and serviced, there is no particular reason why you shouldn't drive them like you would any modern car.

This is not to say that I a compulsion to beat new cars off the line or try to keep up with the fools doing 85 mph down I-95. My car is an old car and is simply not as safe as a late-model vehicle with crumple zones, air bags, 3-point seat belts, and anti-lock disc brakes. My car also represents an investment for me and as such, I feel a strong desire to take good care of it and protect it as best that I can. That includes not trying to push it to its limits to see how fast it can go.

I think the key here is to drive your car the way that you feel most comfortable. You have a couple of great cars and you have nothing to prove. I think it is a good idea now and then to take your cars out and run them for a good while at highway speeds because it does your engine good to blow out any carbon build up you might develop after they sit for awhile. It is also a good way to detect any latent problems with the car that you can see in a walk-around.

I have to disagree with Mr. Peterson on his adherence to bias ply tires. They simply do not handle as well as radials, do not last as long, and do not give you better fuel economy. They may have been the best tires available in 1956, but they are not the best now. Just because these cars did not have seat belts in 1956 should not deter you from installing seat belts today. If you are going to drive a 1950s car in 2014, I think it ought to be as safe as you can reasonably make it.