Packard Forum Index » General

Hello All,

Wanted to float this idea to get your thoughts. As a setup, always felt that 1954 was a key turning point for Packard. The 359 and gear-start notwithstanding, little was new, sales were low, losses were high and Cadillac's new line-up and strong sales proved there was still a market for fresh product in the luxury segment this year.

Nance took over in May, 1952. Was it enough time to order new styling for 1954? For this what-if I assume yes. Done right, it might have generated sales sufficient to pay for the fairly costly tooling program and would have relieved Packard of the burden of restyling until 1957, allowing them to focus primarily on the new V8s, Twin-Ultramatic and Torsion-Level Ride for 1955. A 4-door hardtop and perhaps a wrap-around windshield could have been offered in 1955 or 1956, rounding out what could have been a very strong 3-year model run that kept Packard in full control of its '57 major redesign.

I won't touch the soon to come quality issues other than to say that it is always best to avoid doing both a restyling and major powertrain program in the same year. On a related note, one could make an argument that a '54 rather than '55 restyle might have made the move to Conner Ave inopportune in '54-56.

For these work-ups I lowered the beltline 2.5 inches except in the rear quarter panels, which remain carry over. The hood is lengthened 3 inches to improve proportions and make the wheelbases more competitive with Cadillac. The 4-door is not a hardtop but does adopt the '41 LeBaron Sport Brougham's window frame design. Front styling would be similar to the Pan American. An open question is whether the frame and floorpan needed dropped. Not having to do this would have saved a lot of money. For those who own a '51-54 hardtop, what would the loss of 2.5 inches do to the interlinked atributes of headroom and seat height?

I also took a stab at Studebaker, whose prospects might have also benefitted from an early redesign, perhaps as soon as mid-1955. A plus for them was that a lowered body already existed in the hardtop coupe. I focused mostly on shortening the dimensions so as to find a niche between Ford/Chevy and Rambler/Jet. Plymouth would have been the closest competitor but the Stude would have been much lower and therefore, if done right, more stylish. South Bend might have also benefitted from a new OHV Six in these years to replace the old Six and perhaps even the heavy V8.

All thoughts welcome, thanks.

Paul West

Attach file:

---

  (58.55 KB)


  (57.89 KB)


  (58.72 KB)

I don't know why it took so long to get this done. By all means full speed ahead. Don't forget the the new V12 for the senior cars....

Make this happen today

Nance

P.S.
Not another green car!!!!!

It was not destined to be. Both S & P approached the union with mutual mistrust and non--genuine motivation. Hell, in chapter 8 & 9 of the Fall of the Packard Motor Car Company ( by James A. Ward), Nance was even mis-leading his own board of directors , page 136, "In this obviously deteriorating situation, Nance resorted to cooking the books." The men involved simply failed to adequately investigate the other side. They made the wrong decisions at the wrong time for the wrong reasons. Wasn't there also a deep recession at the time too, along with both S & P brands being more expensive before they even landed at the dealerships?

In some respect, I'm glad it went the way it did or we'd all have just another common make of automotive. The aforementioned, and a 3 bucks will get anyone that reads this a cup of Joe at Starbucks. I prefer coffee from Circle K however. Just as good, but less expensive and I only have to give 99 cents for the same cup.

Long live the Packards all of us have chosen to restore, drive and or otherwise keep them safe for other generations. IMHO.

Right on Kevin!

Craig