Packard Forum Index » General

I really think that Pete has good information to share, the problem is the abusive tone in his delivery of the information. Similar to the tone we had from PackPrince in his posts.

This is the core reason why he ask been banned from other website forums. If Pete can keep himself in check and converse with everyone in the same respectful tone that most of the other folks here do, then I have no problem. If not then perhaps Pete's welcome here has come to an end.

His good information gets ignored when it wrapped up in his "Post-War Packards are bad" manifesto he continually spouts. In one hand he complains that Packard was just a car assembler, not building anything themselves, then slams Packard for developing their own Automatic transmission.

No person that just bought a Post-War Packard and discovers this weeksite wants to hear over and over that the car they bought is a P.O.S. There is a time and place for every discussion, but not every post needs a "Corporate Suicide" history lesson. So folks enjoy their Packards and be able to post about them without the constant manta being spouted.

Every book I have read about Packard mentions the problems they had after WW2 with market niche, quality and supply problem etc. that led to their demise and it is covered pretty well in Packard, A History... etc. so we really don't need this PFH broken record playing every time a discussion on post war Packards comes up.

I can remember some years back being at a Packards International event. The speaker for the evening was Lyman Slack. There was an article about his speech in one of the quarterly publications. He was there! He stated that the main problem was Packard being unwilling or unable to purchase extra manufacturing facilities and supplies at the time. I did a Google search for Lyman Slack, and sure enough he is in the book The Fall of Packard. From about page 53 to about 100. I am not sure how to transfer the location to here for all to see. But it looks like it is books.google.com/books?id=7d11a-EPzwMC&pg=PA53&lpg=PA53&dq=lyman+slack&source=web&ots=jbjBXg

1905 Earle C Anthony opens a Packard agency in Los Angeles at the age of 25. Later that year Earle Anthony becomes the Southern California Distributor for Packard.

John F. Shireman

It seems that in 1902 many people in Warren didn't want Packard around because they thought it would turn into another factory town like Youngstown had.

James Packard was considering moving the Packard operations
to anther town. He received offers from Youngstown and Philadelphia. James decide that it might be better to relocate to Cleveland. Colonel J.J. Sullivan of the Cleveland Chamber of Commerce stated that it was already home to Winton and the city just had induced the largest clothespin manufacturer in the US to build a factory in Cleveland. He told James Packard Cleveland didn't need and wasn't interested in in anymore manufacturing companies.

John F. Shireman

1923 there only remained seven luxuary car manufactures. The list below is of sales figures for these seven companies
in 1923.

1. Cadilliac 17,809
2. PACKARD 13,382
3. Lincoln 4,348
4. Peerless 4,775
5. Marmon 2,830
6. Auburn 2,443
7. Pierce-Arrow 1,669

John F. Shireman

You have to remember that Packard faced the same problem that all the other independents faced after WWII. The sheer size of GM. It was one of worlds largest companies. Cadillac didn't HAVE to earn a profit every year. Sales from the other divisions could make-up any difficencies. So any time an independent had a quality problem, labor issue, material shortage, etc., it would weaken the company as a whole. GM could weather these problems easily. They had tremendous resources, and Packard (& others) just could not compete long term with such an economy-of-scale.

On the automatic transmission question:

GM had the first automatic transmission on the market by a major US auto maker. There were efforts in this direction by the English Lanchester (Fluid Flywheel model) and I think Reo and possibly others. But GM deserves credit for the Hydramatic, in 1937 Oldsmobile and 1938 Cadillac models.

At that time the torque converter had not been invented. The fluid coupling was the last word. So the Hydramatic used a fluid coupling which would slip but would not multiply torque. Therefore they needed the multi speed gear. For certain technical reasons planetary gear sets work better for automatic shifting than sliding gears and planetary gears come in 2's so they used 2 sets for a total of 4 speeds.

Chrysler followed suit in 1939 with their own fluid coupling, combined with a 3 speed manual transmission. Shortly thereafter they brought out a 4 speed, automatic shifting sliding gear transmission. It had a 2 speed High range for all normal driving and another 2 speed Low range for slow going, or heavy going such as snow, sand or mud or when starting off on a steep hill.

A short time later,in the mid 40s, someone invented the torque converter. It has the advantage that it will multiply torque the same as a gear set.

This advance hit the automotive world like a thunderbolt. For the first time it was possible (in theory) to eliminate the transmission entirely and make a gas car that was as smooth as an electric or steam car, with no clutch and no shifting at all.

The Buick Dynaflow, Chev Powerglide and Packard Ultramatic were all efforts to make the "perfect" shift free drive. It wasn't quite possible to eliminate shifting entirely, they had a low speed for emergency use but for all normal driving they were smooth and shift free.

This was considered the ultimate accomplishment at the time, smoothness silence comfort and convenience being more important that performance or economy.

For the tightwad, or the performance addict, the manual transmission remained an option.

So in the context of the time the Ultramatic was a better more up to date transmission than the Hydramatic or Fluid Drive.

The Fluid Drive was awkward to drive but had the advantages of simplicity, rugged construction, and being more familiar in operation to those who had grown up with manual transmissions which back then was everybody. It was also possible to get a better performance out of them with a few simple tricks.

So at least in the late forties and early 50s, the Ultramatic was the leading edge design. This did not change until Chrysler introduced the first 3 speed torque converter transmission in 1957, the Torqueflite.

Tom McCahill reported on Packards regularly and always in a positive way. He was impressed with the 1947's but did question the cost of repairs, particularly the cost of auto body repairs in case of an accident. In his opinion the way the fenders were smoothly integrated into the body would make repairs more difficult. But he did like the side opening hood.

In 1952 and 53 he reported that Packard was going after the steady conservative luxury car trade in the upper medium and high price brackets. They did not have the most powerful motors or the flashiest styling but they were justly proud of their quality, fine upholstery, smoothness and silence. He also reported that their high speed road holding and handling was exemplary. He also liked the fact that Packard offered a manual transmission on all models if the customer wished. He compared this to other makes who offered automatic or nothing, then said their customers "demanded" automatics! He went on to compare Packard owners to free thinking Americans and the other make's customers to prestige buying stooges.

He rated the bigger engined Packard an extremely fast American car in spite of the weight of its luxury features and sound deadening insulation and described it as looking like a lot more dough than its immediate competitors, having more than passable performance and luxurious appearance.

The Mayfair he described as a glamor barge with excellent paint jobs and interior materials and comfort leaving little to be desired.

The 400 he described as a modern version of Cleopatra's barge and a real tycoon's scooter. He got the feeling Packard was taking a sort of American Rolls Royce approach meaning top quality and more than passable performance. This was an attempt to regain the prestige they had in the days when everyone who was anyone owned a Packard Twin Six and only characters from under the railroad tracks would be found dead in a Cadillac.

At least up to 1953 he felt the Packards had a lot to offer and were a top buy for the more conservative luxury car buyer, especially one who put quality and comfort ahead of gaudy styling and tire burning performance.

This wasn't a bad strategy. I know in many sections of the country the really rich never drove Cadillacs. They bought Chrysler New Yorkers and Buick Electras. They probably bought Packards back when they were available.Unfortunately in the end there weren't enough customers who felt this way.