Packard Forum Index » General

I think that Packard advertisement after the introduction of the 120 for the main part was directed at the middle class. The lower priced Packards bought paid the bills so there was less attention and money put forth to advertise the so called senior model line.

One factor that is often over looked by many Packard people is as follows. Unlike some other persons in here I had a chance to become a close friend with a person who actually owned a Packard dealership. The dealership was small and located in the small town of Jersey Shore, Penna. the owner was Brad Berry the dealership went under the name L.D. Berry & Son. Brad and I went to many car shows with two of his Packard's while at these car shows I noticed that Brad had a strong dislike of Buicks. One day I asked him why he hated Buicks and not Caddies. He said the following to me that in a small like Jersey Shore Buick was his main competition not Caddy. I think that might have been the case with more than a few Packard dealerships that were located in rural areas of the country.


Just my thoughts


John F. Shireman

IMO the Continental Mk II was in a class by itself, not even the slightly later Cadillac Eldorado Brougham was equivalent. The Mark was essentially a hand built car on a quality level with Rolls Royce, and probably the better car. The Carib, though great, was a horse of a different color altogether. No comparison.

I agree, they are in a class by themselves. Have you had occasion to read the extreme precautions they took when shipping them by rail? They were treated nearly as nicely as the Mona Lisa when it's shipped.

"One thing I am not clear on. When I read a discussion of this kind, it appears that Cadillac beat Packard by cleverly offering cheaper mass produced cars and easy financing to outsell Packard. While Packard foolishly offered cheaper mass produced cars which only cheapened their name and drove away customers.

I don't quite see why using the exact same strategy was brilliant and successful for Cadillac and foolish and destructive for Packard."

When I read this statement over more closely, I think Rusty meant that Caddy could afford to build a car, of existing quality, for less money. And Packard had to build a cheaper, i.e. lesser quality, car at the to compete on price.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Someone please correct me if i am wrong but it is my understanding that during some long prewar period that Packard was considered by far and away the most prestigous car to own nearing RR status. Definitely higher prestige than Cadillac, Imperial or any other US made cars except for perhaps Dusenberg or Marmon.

So let us assume for the moment that Cadillac had never existed. THen would Imperial and Lincoln have had some advantage over Packard that would have diluted Packard prestige level and thus their demise????

Very interesting discussion of where Packard might have gone wrong prewar. But I think Packard lost the luxury market postwar, not prewar.

All automakers had to come out with cheaper models to survive the depression. But they were not needed after the war in the postwar sellers market. I think any wrong steps Packard might have taken prewar would have quickly been forgotten if they had either made Clipper a seperate division after the war, or dropped the lower price models completely. Probably making it a seperate division would have been the better move so that they would still have something to sell in volume.

But take a look at what they did. In 1935-41 there was an obvious difference between junior and senior models. What was the difference postwar? A hood a couple inches longer, different taillights, a slightly different grill, a little bigger engine? Not enough of a difference to make too many people willing to pay 1 1/2 to 2 times as much for essentially the same car with a few subtle differences. Whereas you could definitely see a difference between a Cadillac and Buick, Olds, or Pontiac. Also the 1951-54 just does not look prestigious compared to the presence of the 1951-54 Cadillacs. To those not familiar with cars, it could easily be mistaken for a Pontiac or other mid-price car.

Also prewar, Packard had power windows, air conditioning, always new innovations, etc. Where was this stuff postwar? Why no V-8 engine? That is what everyone wanted postwar. Maybe Packard's straight 8 had the same horsepower as its contemporaries, but it didn't have that important V-8 buzzword. There were a lot less chauffer driven cars postwar. And there were more women drivers. Suburban housing booms required 2 cars. The wife didn't want a manual transmission, steering, brakes, windows, etc. for when she drove the car. Not when she could get power everything in a Cadillac or even Buick or Olds plus air conditioning. And the husband discovered he liked all the power stuff as well. By the time Packard got in in gear in 1955 and offered everything they should have been since 1949 at least, many Packard buyers had moved on to another brand. And introducing everything at once resulted in quality problems. So those that preferred quality over new gadgetry were disappointed as well.

Advertising was a part of it as well. Cadillac ads showed cars against expensive silk drapery backgrounds or in front of the opera with a woman in exotic ball gown, diamonds, etc. Packard ads showed a middle class neighborhood home or garage with words like "value" and "reliable". If I am spending meagbucks on a car, I want to hear words like "power", "prestige", and "style" not "value leader".

I will never understand why the 1957 Packardbakers were ever made. I hear they were made to keep the name alive while Packard hoped to get financing to eventually get new Packards built. However, I think they would have been far better off doing a minor facelift of the 1956. I cannot see anybody trading in a 1955-56 Clipper Deluxe for a 1957, let alone a Patrician, 400, or Caribbean. I also cannot see anyone buying a 1957 Clipper over a 1957 Cadillac, Imperial, or even odd looking 1957 Lincoln. That wasn't just the final nail in the coffin, it was machine riveting it closed.

Quote:


Very true. As much as I like 1956 Caribbeans, it was basically a just an ordinary Packard convertible with fancier trim and a more poweful engine. The Mark II was designed and built from scratch (except for the engine, which was still specially selected from the assembly line and tested), not a facelifted 1951. The quality of materials and craftsmanship was so high that Ford lost money on every one built. That being said, I still want the Caribbean.

Gerd (Guscha): That comparison is good circa 1956!

Craig

Quote:


For years I have been reading how Packard went out of business after slowly destroying their name by building cheap cars.

To me this is a load of hooey. Packard pursued the same course as Lincoln, Cadillac, and Chrysler. They moved with the times and brought out cheaper mass produced cars, when it became possible to make such cars comparable to the earlier hand made models.

Such cars as the Cadillac V16, Packard V12, Lincoln V12 and Pierce V12 may have been magnificent in their way but by the late 30s they didn't have much advantage over the standard models. Not enough to justify them to the luxury car buyer of the day.

The only firm that stuck to their guns and refused to make a cheaper mass produced car was Pierce and they went broke in 1938.

Cadillac, Lincoln and Chrysler all prospered by moving with the times and so did Packard.

Packard's cars were quite comparable to what the competition was offering. This indicates to me that we must seek elsewhere for an explanation of why Packard finally failed.