Packard Forum Index » Post-War (1946-54)

I'm a bit confused. My resources say that a '52 200 (non-Deluxe) should have a toothless grille, but this one is in the photo archives as a standard 200 and it has the teeth. What are the external differences between a 200 and a Deluxe. Is it that chrome proto-tailfin I see on some of them? Or is that a 250 thing?

Help is appreciated.

-Dave

BTW: To the poster who suggested I seek out a Patrician, I actually would prefer one of the short wheelbase cars, as I like the favorable power-to-weight ratios of things like Buick Centuries.

Fair point on power to weight, also better handling. This is an advantage of the earlier 356 cars when the swb body styles are chosen.

You may be interested in the effects of swapping heads between the 288-327 family and dual carb set ups - there are people here who know a lot more about it than I

That picture may be mislabeled. According to the 52 facts bookpackardinfo.com/xoops/html/modules/article/view.article.php?32 the deluxe has the teeth and 3 ventiports, wheel trim rings and sedans have swing out rear vent windows. Interior differences as well. Others have pointed out though that most of that was available thru the dealers so a lot of cars might have upgraded pieces a bit after the fact, as well as items supposedly reserved for seniors.

Quote:
G'day David,

Sorry, I'm the one who erred here in that I mis-identifed the '52. I've just updated the Photo Archive to reflect the fact it is a Deluxe!

You fellows who THINK you know what a "stock-authentic as-built" Packard of that era SHOULD look like, may be over-looking the fact that guys like me were repairing them when they were still in service as used cars.

If they have survived, there must be at LEAST a dozen '51 - '54 Packards of various series running around whose "front clips" dont quite match what the factory info. and "experts" say....

For example, there may still be a '51 "250" convertible running around with NO "rear vent-a-ports" ( I didn't like em..took em off and bondod up the holes), and NO "teeth" in its grill, and a nice '54 four barrel "327" motor under the hood.

There may be at least FIVE other '51-'54 Packards who wound up in our shop needing "front clips". In those years (late '50's - early 60's) in the wrecking yards of So. calif. you could get a nice "front clip" off a early 50's Packard - typically we'd pay $35 or $50 ) (on one occassion, I got "ripped off- had to pay $75) for nice "front clips" on cars of this era.

Typically Packards of that era that had "blown" their Ultramatics and were thus worthless wound up in wrecking yards. Or if they were rear-ended (we did not, at least at our shop, repair major-rear end Packards - no matter how nice they were otherwise).

Remember, in those years, you would be lucky to get $200. for a used Packard of that era. So that limited how much labor and materials a customer would tolerate to repair one.

I wonder when some "expert" (if the car still exists) will tell us how a '47 Super Clipper wound up with the "Custom" interior, meaning windshield chrome, door sills, seats, etc.... (no, I did not take out the unique "front to rear" head-liner, or the chrome steering column).

Our shop didnt try and take advantage of anyone - we didn't buy and sell these cars. We just repaired them for customers.

Now, if a customer tried to pass off a '51 as a '53, he might get away with it if it were a convert. Obviously coudlnt do that in a '51- '52 closed Packard car - the upper curve in the windshield on the '51 - '52 should give it away.

Suggest you would NOT be happy with a bone-stock Ultramatic transmission. The service record of the Ultramatics was....well.....

I know we arent supposed to discuss the FACT of what "killed" Packard's reputation in the market-place dead...(combined the Ultramatic's dismal reliability record with what one poster in here said "designed for leasurely accelleration" (I didnt make that up - a guy in here actually typed that )...and...well...

Somewhere around here I have an old (hmmm..was it Floyd Clymer's publication) "ROAD TEST" magazine from '53, in which they found the only car that they ever tested that was SLOWER than a '53 Ultramatic-equipped Packard, was a '49 Chevrolet with Powerglide !

That, to put it mildly, would NOT have been the case had they tried that with Packard products ten years before... Hint - I dont care WHAT pre-war car you are driving - dont go picking fights with a "356" '40-'42 Packard...!

Packard's earlier advertising discussed the "soft spoken boss of the road", which noted that Packard products were quiet, but would out-run just about anything in their respective price classes. Dont expect to do that with a 1950 or later one.

I once crossed the North American continent in 2 and a half days SLEEPING AT NIGHT in my '51 Packard convert. with its '54 327 four barrel engine. But it cost me a set of valves, and I sure as hell didnt try and "drag" anything other than garbage trucks and city busses!

Update: I drove by the '52 last night while on a date with my wife. She said "Oh, that's a cute car."

I will be calling the seller when my tax refund comes in.

-Dave

What a lucky man. I love it when my wife says things like that.
Which, I might add, has happened every now and again.

Go get I'm sure you will love it.

Argh! The car disappeared tonight. Unfortunately, I've caught the Packard bug. If this doesn't work out, does anyone know of a similar-condition, similar-price '53 or '54 Clipper for sale in mid-Michigan?

-Dave

Sorry Dave! Bummer.

Keep looking.
Something will turn up.
The regional Packard Clubs have ads in their newsletters.
That era has many good Packards.
But anyway, It will work out.
Packards are always looking for Packard Lovers. One will find you.

DanL

Dave,
Here is one on ebay right now that might be a BETTER buy than the "one that got away!" (if you're willing to travel to get it).

cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1952-Packard_W0Q ... 317%7C65%3A12%7C39%3A1%7C240%3A1318