Packard Forum Index » V-8 (1955-56)

Does anyone know of or heard about any Custom Clippers being made without Torsion Level suspension? I believe it was standard equipment on this model. The Clipper Supers and Deluxes had the coil and leaf spring suspension along with the smaller, 320, V-8. Thanks.

(o {} o)

I haven't heard of any but that doesn't mean anything.

My failing memory could be wrong, but believe one of the books said early on due to newness & uncertainty about how it would be received while it was "standard" except for low end model, they made it a delete option for all Clippers. If that's the case, guess some could have been made. After things got rolling with no issues and many favorable reviews then that delete option went away.

Would have been interesting if there had been problems what they would have done for Packards since no fall back springs were ever available for that chassis.

My understanding is that it was standard on the Custom in In 195655 and optional on all other Clipper models. In 1956,I believe it was standard on all models except the basic "DeLuxe" model.

I know of at least 2 1955 Clipper Super with T-L. It would be interesting to find out the pct of 1955 Packard Clippers with coil/leaf suspension, as well as ANY with standard brakes.

Craig

On edit: both of the above had/have BTV brakes.

I wonder if there's such a car with manual brakes, transmission, and non-TL suspension?

I once looked at a 56 Clipper with regular suspension. My interest dropped immediately when seeing that. The fellow who drove me up to see it couldn't understand why I wasn't interested in looking at anything else on the car. There was a spare engine (374) sitting alongside the car.

Not only do they exist this guy just bought one.

"I have just purchased me first packard which is a 55 Clipper. I have had a few people tell me that the car is a freak car because it has no options at all except for a heater. It is a standard shift with no power anything. It also has a throttle handle on the left side of the steering column that I didnt see in the owners manual that appears to be from the factory. Can someone tell me if this is wierd or if this was just a poor mans packard?


Thank You"

Here it the thread

forums.aaca.org/f134/1955-clipper-question-274224.html

Not sure which year or model we're talking of now but there are bare bones 55 Clippers out there. One was a daily driver about 40 miles from here until parked because the rings or valve stems got so bad someone turned it in and was cited as a pollution problem. Nothing extra in it but radio and heater and radio was installed after the present owner got the car.

The original question of a 55 Custom with standard suspension, I have not seen but that's not to say there are none--If in fact the TL was a delete option early on. Wish I could remember which book or article suggested that so I could check it out again. 56's equipped that way, I would seriously doubt.

Sure hope the fellow on AACA forum with the bare bones car follows thru with pictures. I'd like to see where they mounted the hand throttle and how "factory" it looks. Sounds to me as if a dealer installed with proper knobs and used the hole destined for the underseat heater fan.

Maybe this'll clear some of the mystery up:

"Torsion-Level [in 1955] . . . was standard on the Caribbean, a required option on the Patrician and Four Hundred, optional at $150 on Clipper Customs . . . [According to Allison] 'The decision was made to build 25% of the Clippers [Customs] with torsion bars [but] three months later the dealers were ordering Torsion-Level on 75% of their cars.' Thus the system was later made available on [1955] Clipper Supers."
Packard, a History of the Motor Car and the Company, 1978, Automobile Quarterly pub., Beverly Rae Kimes, ed, p 593.

There obviously could have been a number of '55 Clipper Customs (75% of the early run) without T/L. Then there were many late Supers and perhaps others that had the T/L as an option.

I can't find the reference, but I believe T/L was standard across the board in '56. This could be wrong, though.

I don't know the source of the information in Kimes, though we could of course ask the authers of that section, as others have done with other questions. It would be interesting to compare the Kimes information with the RPO codes which are on this site.