Packard Forum Index » General

This might sound dumb but I would like to what models are referred to as Seniors or Juniors. I have seen a lot of adds listing this way.

I'll take a shot at this, others may have different opinions in a few cases. The division between Junior and Senior really began in 1935 when, as a matter of economic survival in the aftermath of the depression, Packard decided to continue to produce for the luxury market, but also introduce lower-priced cars. Up until 1935 Packard competed only in the luxury (high price) class, and all those Packards are considered Seniors. From 1935 thru 1947, you could apply the selections of the Classic Car Club of America and say that those designated as bona fide Classics are seniors, and the others are not. Thus, from 1t's introduction in 1935 the 120 model and the later 110 model (called the Six and Eight in 1938) were developed as volume cars to compete in the middle or upper-middle price range and are Juniors unless in rare cases they are fitted with meritorious custom coachwork. A hybrid considered a Classic but a close call is the 1939 Super 8, which is really a 120 body with a Senior engine and nicer interior trim. The 1941-42 models 160 and 180 are seniors (and Classics), the 110 and 120 remain as juniors. For the Clipper series and thru 1950, those models with the 356 cubic inch engine are Seniors, this includes the Super Clipper and the Custom Super Clipper thru 1947, and the Custom 8 from 1948 thru 1950. Another close call would be the 1950 Super DeLuxe. Beginning in 1951 and thru 1954 those models with the 9-main bearing engines, either 327 or 359 are considered Seniors. Another way to view the 53 -56 models is that those with the Clipper designation are Juniors, and those with the Packard designation are considered Seniors. One could argue either way about the 1954 Cavalier which has a senior wheelbase and body shell, but a junior (5 main bearing engine) and more pedestrian interior trimming.

I think I'll frame this one. Well done!

Thanks J.D., I appreciate the compliment. Another Junior/Senior close call that I didn't mention are the 51, 52 and 53 convertibles. These are generally considered to be junior cars (short wheelbase, small engine) and it's always been a mystery that a luxury maker that specialized in convertibles dropped the Senior convertible after the 23rd series until 1954. Although the 53 Caribbean was made from a Junior car, it's still considered a Senior because it was of limited production, high cost, and was almost a custom, having the bodies converted by an outside firm (Mitchell Bentley wasn't it?) despite having a Junior engine and chassis. Both the 54 convertible and Caribbean are of course Senior cars, both Packards and not Clippers and with the top-end chassis and engine.

"Owen" Those are great posts.The Senior/Junior classifications was pretty easy between 1935-38 and as time progressed the divisions became much less distinct as chassis and parts were interchanged between models beginning in '39.

Clipper47, thanks for the nice words and you're entirely correct about the distinctions blurring after 1938. Although the chassis were entirely different, the 39-42 seniors (except the 39 Twelve) shared many body panels and othere hardware with the juniors.

Packard's luxury cache began to fade with the introduction of the juniors; just imagine the feelings of the owner of the manor with his fleet of Super Eights and Twelves in the carriage house, seeing his hired hourly help arrive in a Packard with many of the same styling cues as his fleet which probably cost 3-5 times as much! Shows the wisdom of GM's naming the high volume, lower cost Cadillac the LaSalle.

Owen, I guess these questions have been debated since the 1930's. I recall as a boy in the early 50's being told by my grandfather, a Packard owner, that the worst decision Packard made was to call the 120 a Packard and make it look like the "Senior" cars. On the other hand had they chosen a different name, ala LaSalle, and had they not included the Packard look would the 120 have sold well enough to save the company from extinction? Other makers had brought out lower priced companion brands to try to survive the Depression years and were not a success. Remember the Erskine, Viking, Marquette or Roosevelt? The Lasalle was brought out in 1927 so it had a good head start as a brand even before the 1929 Crash and in any event never exceeded the production volume of the Packard Juniors. One source I researched quotes 1937 production of the LaSalle as 32000 units while the "Junior" Packards production was 115,500 units. Was it the Packard name, look and cachet that brought the buyers? I suspect so.

It is strange how the 39 Super 8 is knocked around concerning its senior car status. The Classic Car Club of America FULL CLASSIC registry clearly and unmistakably recognizes a 39 Super 8 as a full classic. The 40-41 is the exact same car with the latter and much less traditional mono-cast iron engine block, yet is never questioned about its senior status. I realize the V-12 was dropped and there is basically no other holy grail left in the declining years from 40 forward. Aside from some basic body pieces, very little of the 39 Super is directly interchangeable with junior cars. Dash, interments, interior appointments, headlight shells, bumpers, trunk rack, engine, trans, air-filtration, radiator shutters, numerous chassis parts, and way to much to even list are totally different from a 39 junior car. Another secret, every time anyone with one of the ?questionable? 39 senior cars goes to buy an engine part it's 3 to 6 times more expensive than a junior part. How about having a dash redone for a Questionable 1939 Super 8? well its plastic, unlike the juniors with re-paintable steele. Guess how much it is to have the plastic dash redone for the 39 Super? about $5000 to $6000 dollars. You know why? because they were limited production cars (like all senior cars were!) I guess for those of us that saw the 1939 Super 8 as the last Packard 8 with the classic aluminum block 8 and a recognized full classic, well we were wrong! We are only entitled to spend senior car money to own and maintain these pieces of Packard history, but must sit back and be snubbed, and excluded from the ?real, secret senior / full classic? Packard circles.

I have seen this description of the 39 super repeatedly, and have finally decided to speak out for all of the 39 Super owners that are tired of hearing this! If this is not a SENIOR or a FULL CLASSIC then you better let Packard's International, and The Classic Car Club of America know, because that's how they see it.

Well, there! it's said. Now everyone can sit back and have a good laugh at the rant from one 39 Super 8 owner that finally stood up and said the words out loud!

Jim, Some Packard enthusiasts hold the view the "real" "senior" Packards (except for the venerable "Twelve")died after 1936 when the old 384" engine was discontinued and the 320" engine appeared in the 1937 Super Eights! The 1939 Super Eight ushered in the era of modern styling and the use of up to date design and also production methods which resulted in a lower costs making the car available to more buyers. With the introduction of the 356" engine in 1940 Packard once again was the car to beat in performance as well as style. I own a 1947 Super Clipper which is also recognized as a " Full Classic" by the CCCA. I know that some purists also disagree with that assessment. The body was manufactured for Packard by Briggs. Most of the body parts are interchangeable with the "junior" cars. In fact other than the 7" of extra hood length it it almost identical to the Six. Mechanically and cosmetically there are differences but it is not a "senior" car in the sense that the pre 1939's were but still it is a "Full Classic" and for the same good reasons as is your '39.

I understand the mentality of some believing there were no senior 8's after the 384 just like Twin 6 guys saying a Packard 12 isn't as prestigious. Where I am totally confused is how the 39 Super 8 is this outcast step child, because of points about sharing body parts with a 120, yet never a disparaging word about a 40 which diluted into levels ranging from 120, 160 to 180 and also shared the exact sake parts in common. With different levels of option between the 160 and 180, yet both recognized as a senior, the line between junior and senior are even more blurred. Don't get me wrong, I realize there will always be a pecking order in any product line a manufacturer offered. I am just amazed how Packard made only one pre-war senior, that was not a real senior car! The looks of the 40 are great, but exactly the same as their junior counterpart. I totally understand the post war banter about senior, not senior, and so on. The company entered a different market, and built cars accordingly (Great cars at that!).

It is what it is. I have read numerous snide posts on AAHC board about the 39 Super, and ran across the commentary posted here about a 39 being ?a tough call? on its senior status and finally figured I would throw my two cents in. For what it costs to do a 39 Super 8 and the distaste the majority of Packard aficionados voice for them it's a wonder they are all not scrapped and forgotten about.

I realize the seeds are sewn for the outcast 39 Super 8 and the car will never be recognized for what it is. I suppose the only hope for owning a real Super 8 (recognized by the not so secret society of Packard aficionados) is to sell the 39 Super 8 that has some things in common with the junior counterpart, and classic Packard looks, and buy the much better 40 160 or 180 that has the exact same things in common with its junior counterpart, with the not so secret Packard society seal of approval.

I guess this is no different than the 54 ford guys feeling so outcast, they formed a 54 ford club. Maybe we 39 Super 8 guys are lucky we get to play with the big boys.

With all that said, good conversation! Someone that owns one finally spoke up. We all like the automobiles we collect, so what the heck, this gives us something to talk about.