Packard Forum Index » V-8 (1955-56)

My car has pressed into the firewall: <0289II> Is this a theft proof #? Is there any info to be derived from it? Doesn't match the # on the Ser No plate.

I'm assuming it's a V8 Packard, 55 or 56. I think if you look more closely the first character is a "D", not an "0". It's a sequential # as the bodies were produced (or perhaps more accurately as the cowl panels were produced) and has no correlation to the vehicle number, at least as we know so far except for original factory and dealer records which recorded it along with other pertinent information including the VN, paint, trim, etc. If you have further interest you might want to read my recent article in the The Packard Cormorant on that subject.

Yes, '56 Clipper Deluxe. The "0" seemed somewhat less crisp and distinct than the other numbers, so may well be a "D". Is there any significance to the letters "II" as in a Roman 2, after the numbers? I'd assume it'd have been "11" not "II" if meant to be numbers... these clearly appear to be an "I".

Don't have any recent Cormorants, I haven't belonged to PAC since the 90s, I think Dick Langworth was Editor.

The subject of the 'I' for '1' in the Packard font has come up several times. Here's a link to a previous thread:
Packard Font

Here's something a bit more authoritative on the font used for the thief-proof numbers clearly showing the form of the digit "1".

Attach file:

---

  (88.78 KB)

RAnderson,

The article was indeed a nicely written piece in the The Packard Cormorant's Spring 2010 issue. And until this very moment I hadn't made the connection between Owen and the article's author.

Those body numbers are interesting and it still intrigues me that my 1955 (5587) 400's body number seems to date to 1936 solely based on its chronological order.

Kevin, glad you found the article interesting, a Part II will be coming along as so much new info has surfaced. And we now have 3 55 Packards with very curious numbers, two with 2XXXXX numbers which corresponds to about 1936, and one vehcile with no alpha prefix, but an alpha suffix. It must have truly been chaotic taking back body construction from Briggs, along with all the other changes for 1955. At least that's what I make of it at this time, data for 55/56 has been surprising limited, given the number of cars made and their relative newness.

One would think the "I" with smaller serifs would be the number, not the letter, go figure...

There is no provision for an alpha "I" in the series of letters designated for use in the thief-proof numbering system.

Are we to assume that the ONLY alpha letters used are A,B,C,D, and E ????

OR, to ask the question another way:

Is "I" the ONLY alpha letter not used as alphabetic???