Packard Forum Index » General

Owen : This is a response to you concerning the Packard Firsts list published by some of the Packard Clubs.

When a list was put forward in the AACA Packard forum a few persons such as myself pointed out flaws in the list. When
I thought there was a bogus claim on the list I present my research and reference sources to back up my statements.

I took some heat from some Packard folks concerning my thoughts of the list of firsts claims. I put forward a challenge to any member of the clubs that published
the list to come to the forum and present proof to back up the claims in question. Turns out there were no takers on my offer.

Again I put forth that challenge and would be willing to go over to the PAC Forum and present my findings and then let some one from PAC come in and prove me wrong.

I will be waiting for an answer.


John F.Shireman

Geez John, lighten up, I have no axe to grind in this one way or another. I thought I made myself quite plain twice in the last few days, I have no interest in pursuing this topic and I thought BH summed up the inherent issues quite succinctly. If you wish to gather some others to banter back and forth about it, by all means go ahead and do so anywhere you wish.

Owen: I have no axe to grind when it comes to this matter. I think that the clubs have a duty to put forth the true history of Packard.

I thought that maybe by bringing this up again and and getting something going in the PAC forum might result in laying the ground work to make an honest attempt by PAC to put forth an honest list.




John F. Shireman

I have no axe to grind when it comes to this matter. I think that the clubs have a duty to put forth the true history of Packard.

I thought that maybe by bringing this up again and and getting something going in the PAC forum might result in laying the ground work to make an honest attempt by PAC to put forth an honest list.

John, I'm not the face of the enemy here, and your post sure reads to me like you have an axe to grind, your feelings about PAC are well-known. Again, proceed with whatever you want, I HAVE NO INTEREST.

Guyz:

I only picked up on Owen's comment on the subject of firsts in the revival thread to provide a little heads-up on the course that some past discussions took and why they went that way. I'd rather history not keep repeating itself.

While I admittedly got some feeling of pride from the first time I read PMCC's list, decades ago, such things don't alter my interest in any brand. I also have no interest in participating in a debate on that.

IMHO, it's up to websites who posts such lists to take care of them. If there's to be any heat for misrepresenting any points, it should be taken up with them directly.

If a "new and improved" list is desired, I had hoped it would have been done privately and academically. However, I'm not saying that questions regarding the finer points can't be discussed openly, here. I just don't wanna see things turn into another "cage match".

Meanwhile, I see Frank has started a new thread on:

Packard Firsts

...with a single point on Packard's "Fuelizer". When it comes to any additional points or counterpoints, I strongly suggest that participants present their "case" objectivley and cite their supporting source(s).

If the discussion remains civil, perhaps some good can come of it.

That's just my $0.02 on the matter.

As I understand it, the "Packard Firsts" list was published by PMCC in 1949 on the occasion of their 50th anniversary. If anyone has any problems with it, I suggest that they take it up with the good folks at 1580 E. Grand Blvd., Detroit 32 Michigan.

(I've sent them several letters on the subject, but for some reason the post office keeps returning them to me.)

Quote:
Funny, they don't answer the phone when I call either. I keep getting a guy named Leroy at a stripper bar on the corner of Third and Willis?

ECAnthony wrote:

Quote:
The list as published at PAC's site that was used to start the discussion at the AACA forum that resulted in so much controversy was clearly (and loosely) edited from the one published by PMCC.

Rather than get off into the subject of journalistic responsibility, how about we leave well enough alone on this, here at the "un-club"?

Again, if someone wants to have a reasonable discussion of firsts in the thread that Frank started, that's fine. However, if people wanna keep stirring the pot, it won't be long before this thread gets locked.

EC: Some persons in here get bent out of shape when questions are asked about modifications or hot rodding a Packard engine and complain and try to chase people out
for asking.

I happen to like Packard history unmodified. I feel that clubs have a duty to put forth a true history of Packard and not be part of putting an inflated untrue history of Packard before the public and fellow club members. So I guess complaining to East Grand wouldn't do much good.

Now it is time for me to move onto other things.


Just my views


JohnF. Shireman

In 2388 BC, Ooog Packard Invented the Wheel.


Prove he didn't.

Attach file:

---

  (13.90 KB)