Packard Forum Index » General

Hi

To bolster my position on Joe Frazer, this biographical information may be instructive:

http://richardlangworth.com/frazer-1

All three parts are an interesting read and sure to enlarge one's knowledge of a great automan. Particularly like Frazer's comments about Packard in Part 2.

http://richardlangworth.com/category/auto

Steve

Thanks Steve, a great read. Fraser's opinion that Packard need not have gone away is opposite of what some auto historians and observers have long maintained. Fraser was about as close to the scene as one could get.

Here are a few good artices that I found from Pat Foster writing for Hemmings. First makes a case for Packard/Nash tie-up in '54.

http://www.hemmings.com/hcc/stories/2007/10/01/hmn_feature10.html

Second delves into Nance's decisions and motivations.

http://www.hemmings.com/hcc/stories/2007/04/01/hmn_feature10.html

Third talks about Hudson big car plans for '57 under AMC. Am wondering if the image shown at beginning is the proposal. If so has a few similarities with the Batmobile just discussed.

http://www.hemmings.com/hcc/stories/2005/01/01/hmn_feature18.html

phsnkw - thanks for the thumbs up. Must admit I borrowed Chrysler's less curved & contorted windshield. Still don't like the fins on the Batmobile mod, look too much like Chrysler. Wish Packard had dialed in less boxiness with their '57 concepts and instead found a happy place between the rounded GM/Chryslers and four-square Lincolns.

Looking more carefully at the Hudson image shown in the last article it appears to be the heavily restyled Rambler-based Hudson rather than the proposed large Hudson.

Also, looking at the '58 Ambassador one can see how it had originally been designed as the Hudson Rebel that Pat mentioned, the V-shaped front bumper a clear giveaway.

Well, with packard's boxy designs for 57, the basic body could be used through the early sixties. Since the 40's Clipper and the 50's High Pockets design was used for around six/seven years, the '57s would need to at first, be chromy, flashy and finny and then change to refined, elegant and restrained for the early sixties. I think the '57 design of Packards' long fenderline ending in an upswept fin would be easily be snipped in 1960 and squared up. It would combat the new Lincolns a lot easier.

Great point, Packard could have gotten a lot of mileage out of the platform and rode the styling trends. Large car platforms in the 60s and 70s spanned upwards of a decade and longer so maybe Packard could have held pat until '69 or '70.

Was thinking about how Nash redesigned its Rambler for '56 but ended up with the same wheelbase and roughly the same height as the '55. In effect Rambler stayed with the same proportions from '54 through '62, with the shorter-wheelbase 2-dr Rambler dating back to '50. That's pretty good longevity especially considering that the strongest sales came at the end of Rambler's run. Hood was lengthened 9 inches in '58 to create the Ambassador flagship.

Have never really heard this kicked around but could Packard have reworked its '56 platform in similar fashion for '57? There might have been an opportunity to do something decent and for a cost no greater than, possibly less than, the $9M needed to adapt the '57 Lincoln body shell, and Packard would no longer have been dependent on another OEM for help.

Consider this mod. Moved the front axle forward 6 inches, made the sides straight-through and fashioned a Predictor-like front. Try to envision with the Predictor's grill and hidden headlights (single for '57, quads for '58). Packard already had the rear looking Predictor-like so it could have been saved. The Four Hundred moved the greenhouse forward 5 inches to enhance rear proportions so that task was taken care of too. The roof might have been acceptable for another couple years, ditto the glass. All Packard really needed to do was get the hood length in line with the extended rear, tool new rear doors to create a 4-dr hardtop body style, tool new front door outers and do something unique with the front fenders and frontal appearance. Might have kept them afloat until a new platform in '59? Maybe the roof's rear could have been more squared if it were affordable. Minimal changes to the interior.

Attach file:

---

  (20.45 KB)

Modified or new roof, new backlight.

Attach file:

---

  (20.42 KB)

Nicely done. I always thought the Predictor front end styling is what Packard needed to differentiate it from the junior Clippers. I can also see a reverse canted rear window that could be lowered. Maybe no need for a longer front end, just the Predictor styling and a restyled roof. What do you think?

(o[]o)

Thanks and totally agree about the Packard Seniors getting the Predictor front. In thinking about your suggestion for the reverse canted window, first thing I thought about was packaging. The roof and window would have needed to be sufficiently set back from the rear seatback. For my mod it would have been tight, Packard would have needed to widen the C-pillar to extend the roof rearward. Not a problem had they tooled a new roof.

I think the key issue with Packard this year, had they offered a car such as what I have shown or you are suggesting, would have been basic proportions and design details. This vehicle would have needed to represent what the '37 Twelve was to '37 Cadillac: a previous generation design that compensated by being perfectly executed. Packard did well in '37 so all was not hopeless.

This '57 Packard would have been almost 3 inches taller than Lincoln, 4 taller than Cadillac and 6 taller than Imperial. In 1958 the Lincoln and Imperial would be similar. Quite the challenge for Packard. How might they have dealt with it? First, I would say their advertising would have needed to rag on the others by showing how folks had to fall into these cars where they could simply slide into the Packard. Might have gained some favor with those who found this admirable. Am recalling the 1940 dealer videos where Packard trumpeted their flat rear floors and ragged on the trans humps in the competition, i.e. Cadillac. Of course Packard forgot all about this with the Clipper!

What else to compensate for this narrowish, tall '57? I would argue that this is where proportions could have helped. Everyone was going cab-forward in those years with long decks and comparatively short hoods. I understand that this topic always opens a big debate about which is best so will simply say that to my tainted and subjective eye a front-engine/rear wheel drive car almost always looks better with a longer hood and comparatively shorter deck. This was how Packard visually differentiated its Seniors through most of the Twenties and Thirties. From 1940-56 their Seniors basically used Junior hoods, maybe "Junior+" at best. For the '57s I would argue that this is where they could have caught folks attention.

The reverse cant rear window, to my eye, didn't help proportions though it didn't need to hurt too much. '57 Turnpike Cruiser looked fine, '58 Lincoln looked OK, mid-60s Mercurys looked awful. For this particular Packard am a bit uneasy. The car is a bit rounded. Reverse cant is an abrupt shape change, seems to work better with extremely angled/squared cars. This is why I think the Balboa concept didn't' work aesthetically. Will kick around a few mods at home to investigate...

Thar she blows...

Not sure what grade to give it, need to see the real deal, full scale.

Attach file:

---

  (20.32 KB)

Mahoning63, Nicely done. Did I say Predictor grille styling in my previous posting? I meant to say Request. I have never been a fan of the Predictor, but love the Request front end styling.

(o[]o)