Packard Forum Index » General

New to Packards and have some questions as to ryhme or reason: Why do some 1930/31s have fender lights, driving lights, side mounts, wire/solid wheels and frame work around the wind wings and others don't? Would it be customer preferences or a deluxe/standard issue? Inquireing minds want to know.

Sidemounts and wheel type were generally factory options specified at the time of order, many other features were items could be selected from the Accessory Catalog for dealer installation, yet others could even be aftermarket accessories installed after the point of sale. To understand it better you really have to look at it by specific year and model as to what was factory equipment, factory available, and dealer installed accessories.

The Packard Accessory Catalog had a very extensive listing of items, list from November 1929 attached just by way of example.

Attach file:

---

  (208.44 KB)

A bit further to your question on windshield wings, this page from the 1929 Accessory catalog should answer another of your questions.

Attach file:

---

  (127.36 KB)

As late as the late 1960s a buyer could factory order cars with special equipment. Manufacturers got wise, though, by the 1970s and on, by ditching special orders and offering various packages, which basically forced a buyer to accept options he/she did not really want in order to get the ones actually desired. I am currently considering buying a new car to replace my 2008 Cadillac CTS, but I am not sure that I will go with another Cadillac because I absolutely hate GM's CUE navigation/entertainment system. But I have no option to reject it and still get the car. Frankly, I would much prefer to own a new car without of these dashboard monitor systems entirely. For entertainment and/or information, I have my PC; for my car, all I really want is to drive.

Its interesting you should bring that up, I've got a somewhat similar problem thinking about a new car to replace my 2008 Lincoln MKZ (which BTW has been an outstanding vehicle in every way). I don't really want to buy foreign so I've been thinking about another Lincoln, a Chrysler 300, or perhaps a Cadillac and I've looked at them. What seriously turns me off to all of them is the absence of manual button controls for various functions, almost everything being managed from a touch screen. I wouldn't mind a touch screen at home, but in a car I find it very distracting, probably much more so than texting or using a phone. After a few weeks with the current MKZ I pretty much knew where most of the controls were and could do what I needed without taking my eyes from the road. But it looks like if I want a car without touch-screen controls I'm going to have to give up my idea of a nicely equipped car and settle for a crap box.

Thank you for your inputs, that clears that up.

Quote:
I agree with you 100%. Touch screens are absolutely the most dangerous device in a car (IMO). At least with a push button, you can place your finger on it before actually pushing, allowing you to raise your eyes back to the road. You cannot do that with a touch screen.
The other thing I hate about touch screens is that you don't get immediate feedback that your "touch" actually took affect, until you've waited for several seconds to find out it didn't. With a button, you know full well that you pushed it.
One way in which I've skirted the option package is by buying a car without any option packages, then individually buying the features I want (eBay, salvage yard, Craigslist, etc.). While the car is not "wired" for the options, a quick search on the car's Forum informs you exactly which wires to splice into, and/or how to jump into the fuse box.

I'm afraid touch screens are going to be around for the foreseeable future so we might as well learn to co-exist with them. Even the so called cheapo cars more often than not have them now and doing without is not an option there either. I looked at a low end Dodge Dart and it even had one -- but on that you could get a basic "simple" version without all the features of the more expensive package.

Manufactures like them because for the price of a touch screen and a few chips on a circuit board to drive it, many functions can be integrated into one of the already existing but underused car processors. That way mfgs can eliminate the design, stocking and cost of all those variations of knobs, hardware and multitudes of wiring. The second thing they like is because it is all software driven, it is a very simple matter to make it look Ford, Lincoln, Cadillac or whatever and to refine a function if it doesn't work as intended or change, add to or eliminate it completely for next years model.

Ask Ford about that last little feature. By most accounts many of Fords recent complaints and quality problems have been due to the implementation and lack of reliability of the MyTouch system as designed by a large computer company based in Washington state. That alone has probably given black eyes to other cars and touchscreens. There have been at least two large publicized recall episodes where Ford had to bring cars in to redo that software -- who knows how many unofficial redos when a car came in for something else.

Believe I just read where Ford is dumping the current software implementation after only a few years and now going with the QNX operating system as the "new" underlayment. QNX has been around and used extensively in many cars for several years so hopefully Ford will benefit and their touchscreen issues will be behind them. The vendor who provides the software on touch screens probably has more to do with the success or failure and how hard they are to use.

Some cars (and more to come) with touchscreens have voice activated functions for a lot of the things you would normally need to touch the screen to do. Simple functions now but much more complex ones are just being finalized and should be introduced soon.

I got a 2012 ford f350 king ranch and it wouldn't sell because it didn't have a touch-screen! I'm glad it didn't have 1 and got a really good deal out of it.

How about these for voice demands?:
"Car, [or whatever silly little name you have for your vehicle], let me drive it myself."

I guess I'm turning into a carmudgeon, but I hope car makers will recognize that people would rather plug in their own equipment than have quickly outdated equipment designed into their car. Why not just provide the plug-in pigtail???!!!