Packard Forum Index » V-8 (1955-56)

I don't know how my name got drawn into this, I've never had anything to do with PAC's V12 article. That was before my time, meaning before I got online.

Eric: Your correct that I shouldn't have included your concerning the PAC V12 article. Over the last couple of years it seems that we have been on the same side so many times, that it seems almost automatic to mention your name.

John F. Shireman

It's ok, I'm not offended or upset in anyway. I just don't want the credit or blame when it's not due!

Is that PAC article concerning the 1965 V12's the same (or related to) the one in the Studebaker club's Turning Wheels magazine? Could not believe that made it past the editor's desk. At the risk of throwing that editor under the bus I feel it can be safely said that under Fred Fox's editorship (is that a real word?) it would've never seen the light of day...unless it was published as an April Fool's gag.

Predictor,

Though the layouts may differ slighty between PAC's and SDC's publications, the two articles are identical, verbatim.

It wasn't long after that article landed in mailboxes that it became a hot topic of conversation in more than one internet forum - but not in a positive light. Site admins at the AACA complained about our comments, which only fueled our resolve to squawk about it, but the truth that there were many more and even hotter comments made at a Studebaker newsgroup. A few weeks after I had received that issue of TPC, an SDC member came a-knockin' at my door with the corresponding issue of TW in hand and said he smelled a scandal brewing.

I later heard through the grapevine that more than one person in the hierarchy of PAC was upset that the situaion had been discussed in public - that this was a private matter. Unfortunately, you can't take the word "public" out of "publication".

Clearly, those clubs made a big mistake in publishing that piece with insufficient scrutiny. Could you imagine what would have happened to a more visible publisher if a story like that hit the stands?

However, I believe it was the lack of swift response on the part of both clubs that caused the situation to fester. While PAC eventually "withdrew support" for the article, I never heard anything more on SDC's position. In fact, they published another, unrelated, article from the same author.

In my humble opinion, that 1965 V12 revival story was a nothing but a piece of tripe, and those responsible for recklessly going to press with it, as well as the author, deserve being "thrown under the bus".

Aye, I suspect that the respective magazine editors were blinded by the excitement of "what could've been" to have prevented a more critical eye which would've prevented them from going forward with this article.

Trouble is that it didn't pass the sniff test. You'd a thunk that someone would've heard at least a rumor about this project or any one of the several cars that were "built" over the ensuing years. Granted there are many things that have yet to be unearthed and may never will, but I doubt anything of this magnitude would've flown under the radar for so long.

Like Judge Judy sez: "If it doesn't make sense, then it's not the truth"

BH gives a good recount of what resulted from the published articles. However, it is important to also note that the controversy over the 1965 Packard V12 fiasco raged on and on nearly daily for well over a year. Maybe even closer to 3 years. Most of it taking place at the AACA forum.

IT caused a terrific amount of strained relations among those that wanted to bury it under the rug and those that knew such articles were going to continue without end unless a loud enuf dissedence was produced.

I'm guessing that even today there will be someone try to respond to this thread attempting to be a "peace maker" in hopes of stopping any further discussion of the 1965 V12 fiasco.

I hear ya, but cannot fathom why or how people could be so easily duped by what clearly is bovine excrement, I can only attribute it to wishful/hopeful thinking.

Kinda like those people who see Jesus' face in a burnt cookie or a reflection on a dirty window.

All the political crap is what made me leave the PAC/PI and even SDC so many years ago...and that's what I dig about this forum, it doesn't seem to be filled with the stick up the butt mentality of other Packard or old car forums.

"doesn't seem to be filled with the stick up the butt mentality of other Packard or old car forums"

Yeah. But there's only about a half dozen of us that don't allow the BS or sales pitch to 'just slide on by'.

However, be aware that there are many who will still defend and promote various clubs and vendors WITH VEILED AGENDA. Some of them try to be real smooth about it too or they think they are being smooth about it. GUFWAH ha ha ha ha.

I'm not down on any of the clubs or vendors. Not in the least. They are important for our continued operation of the cars we own. But i'm not going to swallow any of their shit and will call their hand on it every time. Sometimes i am wrong tho.

Quote:
Yes, someone was so excited that they were gonna get the scoop with that story and make their club stand out from all others. Problem is they were only half right.

Yet to rush forward with that piece, with those obviously photoshopped pix and without one shed of tangible evidence and no corroboration of the story by anyone else from the company was just plain reckless.

If there ever was some genuine consideration by Studebaker to revive Packard, the real story of that, however brief it may be, will be forever tainted by that whopper of a fairy tale that was served up as fact.