Packard Forum Index » General

Quote:

I thought that was the whole idea of this website, to try and convince them. lets post a forum topic, who will you leave you car to when you die ...

POINT NO. (1)
i cant die. would have no place to go. heaven wont take me (they wouldnt like a guy like me going after all the 'good' girls "up there"....

Hell wont let me in - devil does have some pride; wouldnt want a guy like me in there giving the place a bad name...

POINT NO. (2) - HISTORY IS BUNK. FORGET REAL HISTORY. IT IS ANNOYING - YOU YOUNG GUYS KNOW WHAT YOU WANT..MAKE UP A BETTER ONE.
So I think I will just stay here and watch our entire culture and country get richer and more international respect........how do I know this..?

Hmmm...for example, wanna see a great new idea for "success" for a failing car company...?

Take General Motors for example...now...I WONDER where they got their latest ideas....like...reduce their introduction of new products, de-emphasize performance compared to the competition.. after years of a declining reputation for sloppy build quality....?

Ah...that's it...combine with Chrysler...!

Nothing like "linking up" with another failing company that also has un-imaginative products with poor quality control, to improve your chances?

C'mon guys...give me a break - why would you accuse me of making fun of Packard's self destruction in the 1950's, or suggesting that General Motors is following the Packard "model" to failure...?

Be fair! I was thinking of Pierce Arrow combining with Studebaker in the early 1930's......

What....you say I am suggesting there is a pattern there ? Naw...forget about history. You young people know better-you dont want to hear it. Much more satisfying to MAKE UP a new history so we "feel better".

(now..where did I put that advertisement for that idea for a kit that one of you young guys is bound to come up with sooner or later.....what a great idea... to put Packard Ultramatic transmissions into '50s Hydramaitc and Torqeflight equipped cars to improve their reliability and performance..)

Quote:

Someone give Pete a nudge, I think his needle is stuck again.

Actually, I think it's time to call the Orkin man and get rid of our pest problem.

Peter:Studebaker and Pierce Arrow didn't combind in the early 30's. Studebaker owned Pierce Arrow from 1928 till 1933.

You do remember Pierce-Arrow that car company that built cars of luxuary quality that was Packard's equal in many peoples eyes.

John F. Shireman

now that's interesting - Turbo. wants me silenced because I noted some ways of "winning" ?

C'mon...Turbo - you honestly going to tell me you dont think it is a great idea for General Motors to get on board with Chrysler ? Do you have a historical precedent for poo-pooing this wonderful new brilliant idea ?

Nope Peter, just tired of hearing the same old drivel that you spew in every post.

hey peter, im 19 and im nicely restoring my '56. why does me being less than 60 mean that i will create an inferior product?



wont you please just do us all a favor and grow up?

MikeC: When it comes to 55 & 56 Packard's you probably know more about them than Peter does. However saying that, when it comes to prewar Packard's that is entirely a different story.

John F. Shireman