Packard Forum Index » Pre-War (1899-1942)

That would be a very interesting restomod. Certainly Packard had lots of experience with OHCs by then. My dream Packard of the 40s would be the b/w image I posted earlier, with a 356, Ultramatic and perhaps guages from the 38-39 Seniors.

You had asked earlier about where the 48 image's grill came from and I don't think I fully answered. Connected to the actual 48's grill top is an image contrivance inspired by the 40-42s. The grill surround is simply extensions of the 48's grill sides. For the louvers I took a small section of the 48 grill center section, extruded it, cut/pasted it a bunch of times to create what appears to be adjacent louvers, then overlaid the grill surround around it to button the whole thing up. The last step was to rotate the grill x degrees to give the impression of a rake. There were lots of other little tricks but that covers the main elements. If someone wanted to modify a real 41-50 Packard to create such a classic grill, I would start with the grill top from the 48-50, fabricate a full surround, then add louvers from a 40-42. The hood and fenders would be a metal tear-up of conventional means.

One of my dream Packards of 50s would be a '52 Pan American body in 6-passenger convertible form placed on a '55/56 chassis with torsion suspension, V8 and Twin Ultramatic. V8 engine compartment components would need to be repackaged under the lower hood which might be a challenge but everything else is doable, as Henney demonstrated.

Another interesting idea. Hopefully someone will make sure the body & frame is properly prepared. I think there was a thread last month re the driveability of one of the show cars because of structural issues. Think it was the Pan American.

According to the owner of one, the Pan Americans are quite driveable, the issues were with (one of?) the 52-era Monte Carlos which was (apparently) just built for show and lacked a reinforced frame, resulting if body-flexing due to the half-roof design.

One thing about the Pan American that might be an issue in adapting to the torsion suspension is the fact that it was lowered. I recall a thread or two a few years ago in I think the AACA forum about lowering the body vs. wheels in a torsion bar set-up. Can't remember what the conclusion was. Didn't someone lower a 55 or 56 coupe? Have seen pics of such a car.

The biggest problem with doing anything with a TL car is the bar is designed around a certain weight. There was limited adjustment available to accommodate options or models and that's about it.

Too heavy a body and they are overcome so you do what you can to increase the twist by increasing the front link length. That only goes so far. They found they even had to build a few bars with slightly greater twist to handle fully optioned Caribbeans. If the body is too light, the opposite happens.

Unless the weight is about right, the suspension will either ride at one or the other bump stops instead of in the middle or in trying to adjust, the links can get to such length that full range can't happen.

Believe there was one fellow who was trying to lower the entire car so managed to change front links and also added a spacer under the rear axle for the additional in back.

Thanks for the info on the torsion suspension, very informative. If lowering proved unworkable could always modify the Clipper suspension but it sure would be nice to throw every advancement Packard had developed at this car... assuming one had the money to do such a project in the first place.

Here's a few takes on what's possible. Once again many thanks to the owner of the beautiful '53 Convertible that these images are based on.

The first is a standard convertible with the body from the door's rear edge forward sectioned 2 inches. The nice thing about this design is that it retains the original decklid, lights and grill and involves only slight modification to the rear fender. The rest of course is major surgury. The key element is the body/fender kick-up just behind the doors, giving the car's rear half some uplift and shortening the backlight when the top is up for a very sporty appearance. It's an old trick still in common use today. Fins served the same purpose. Had Packard stuck with an evolutionary design theme for 1955 and coaxed more money from the bankers they might have been able to take this approach. Not to open up a can of worms but Cadillac was very consistent from 1941 onward with their design language while Packard was more like Lincoln of that era - constantly changing. Perhaps greater continuity might have been prudent.

The second uses the Pan American theme. Car's front half is sectioned the same 2 inches relative to rear to give the beltline kick-up, then the entire body is sectioned an additional 1.5 inches. Suspension is lowered 1.5 inches too. This is my favorite.

Attach file:

---

  (92.75 KB)


  (86.26 KB)

Looks pretty good! It's amazing what a car looks like when you remove some choice pieces of chrome and do a little section job.


I've tossed up the idea of doing something similar to my '48, but chopping a fastback has to be one of the hardest things to do when it comes to chops.

A few points to add. Someone wondered why Packard dropped the V12 in '39 and wished it could have been continued up to 1950. The V12 was very expensive to manufacture and very heavy. The massive frame was needed to support it, and all manufacturers were discontinuing their "supercars" Gone was the Caddy 16 and also the K Lincoln V12 as well as the Packard V12. The sales were miniscule.

The '40 160/180 would run circles around '39 V12 and did not need overhauling as often./

On the Bentley/Rolls/Packard designs, that can be debated until we havelying cars. The #1 drawing of the 2 door coupe is interesting, check out this 1955 Bentley body by Abbott

www.bdcnsw.com.au/models


Fred Kanter
Kanter Auto Products
Boonton NJ

Quote:

Oh God, don't let PFHartmann hear you say that, you're in a world of hurt now!