Packard Forum Index » Pre-War (1899-1942)

Did you say the stretch conversion was done by Fitzjohn? Is this the same company that made the Fitzjohn buses? Belleville Ontario had a fleet of Fitzjohn buses made in the late 40s or very early 50s. One of them is sitting in a back yard about 10 miles from me.

Fitzjohn bus in service in the suburbs of Toronto, in the early 50s. This bus was probably built by Fitzjohn's Canadian subsidiary just a few years after the limousines were built.

trainweb.org/oldtimetrains/Toronto/IBL/roseland.htm

TTC = Toronto Transit Commission

CPR = Canadian Pacific Railroad

From a history of the Fitzjohn body company.

geocities.com/fitzjohnbus/Page10txtandimage.html

Notice the phrase " All in all, there were 776 of these stretchouts built, and their existence actually enabled FitzJohn to continue in the bus business all through World War II, as will be seen later."

geocities.com/fitzjohnbus/Page15txtandimage.html

Unfortunately there is nothing specifically about Packard stretchouts.

Anyone know what chassis (singular or plural) Fitzjohn used for these buses?

I don't know if many of you have an interest in the Flxible "Clipper" series of buses, but for many years their most successful models used the big Buick 8 which gave them a wonderful exhaust "twang" at speed.

According to the history linked to above, they built a lot of bodies for Reo and Studebaker in the early days but would put a body on any chassis the customer desired.

Later they made their own chassis with Hercules flathead 6 cylinder engines. Chevrolet and Waukesha engines were also used.When diesel buses became popular they used Cummins diesels.

In view of the extra weight (especially when loaded with passengers and baggage) I expect they removed the original rear axle and installed a heavy duty axle as used in light trucks, with lower gearing, plus heavy duty springs. I should think they also installed heavy duty front suspension and brakes.

The lower gearing would account for a lower speed. But I suspect the 35 MPH speed limit was more a result of wartime regulations aimed at conserving gasoline and tires. I believe a general 35MPH limit was in force at that time.

Wartime restrictions on metal as a strategic material could also account for the use of wood wherever possible in the construction of the bodies.

It appears the roof and doors were made out of Masonite over a wooden framework.

Wow!
I think this link 'Atomic' forum has achieved 'critical mass' in the last week.

Thanks to everybody who has posted their interest and detective work on the 'Fitzjohn' body works history. These are fascinating tidbits of auto history. I don't know how much the National Atomic Museum knows about the origins of their 'buggy.'

I will forward an email and another link to Jim Walther, the Museum director. He can forward it to their curator. These new data and links you each have added to the forum here might interest the curator in doing his/her detective work on the old 42 Clipper Limo.

IN THE BIGGER PICTURE ~ There are so many wonderful old vehicles whose stories are documented and told on this website. What a great place "Packard Info" is for compliing this stuff and consolidating the knowledge and wisdom of Packard-people a virtual format accessible world-wide.

Example, this Atomic Packard started out as 'just a long Taxi.' It was not trying to make a place in history. But like many of the Packards on this website it has been 'resurrected' from the scrapheap. Most of the others have been (and are still being) 'resurrected' from whatever scrap-piles may remain in USA, Canada, Europe, Ireland, Spain, Germany, Norse Clubs, South Africa, OZ, (and I apologize for leaving out some member posts that I can't remember, off hand).

And everybody can add their 'preservation' storyto the mix.
Keep it up.

DanL

From the several links that Rusty and Guscha have posted
Fitzjohn Body must have 'stretched' a lot of Chevys from 1936 to 1942.

A Packard Clipper appears to be a new venture. I wonder how rare the Packard projects were for them by comparison?

Many of these were defense and war effort related. (Of course EVERYTHING was WAR related from March 42 to August 1945).

DanL

Wartime restrictions on metal as a strategic material could also account for the use of wood wherever possible in the construction of the bodies.

Perhaps so, but no doubt an equally and perhaps far more significant reason is that you can't amortize expensive body stamping dies when producing just a handful of vehicles.

Yes.
Readily available materials and simple solutions always make good sense.
DanL
hard to beat. hard to beat. hard to beat. hard to beat.