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

Agree on the V12 comments. One thing Packard might have been able to do in the late 30s/early 40s was use the tooling and some parts from the 282 to make a V12 of about 423 CID. Ot they could have based it on the 245 I-6 to give 490 although that might have been over the top. A 423 V12 would have cranked out about 190 HP. Perfect. Put it in the new Clipper with styling along the lines previously discussed and call it a One Ninety. There's your Sixty Special fighter.

Packard's V12 packages nicely under the shorter '38 Senior's hood and seems to belong there. But beyond a few instances like that, is a V12 really necessary? Was it ever? Ford beat Ferrari's V12 with a pushrod V8. Jaguar and Aston did the same at various times with a Six. Pierce's Six was more powerful that the original Twin Six (someone please correct me if wrong). And Packard's own Super Eight had plenty of power and made for a loooong hood that added 50 HP just looking at it. The '55 V8 was also plenty big and powerful. So looking at this rationally...

Problem is, can't look at this rationally! The world would be lesser without the sound and charisma of a Ferrari V12 or the smoothness of any V12. And although that Pan American I showed would have done fine with Packard's new V8, had they put an OHC V12 under the hood it might have become the American equivalent of a Ferrari. A V12, in the right car, at the right time can create an air of mystery and specialness that can rocket a manufacturer into rarified air. My conclusion is that Packard could have gone V12 at select times to their advantage. A cost-effective and weight efficient 423 in the late 30s in a hot new torpedo sedan could have kept Cadillac at bay. And in the mid-50s perhaps an optional V12 with hints of race car technology, in a hot car with a sexy low body, could have reestablished the grand old company's exceptionalism.

To add more fuel to this fire, see the following links:

http://ateupwithmotor.com/component/content/article/241.html

and...

http://ateupwithmotor.com/component/content/article/243.html

Not just the articles, but the commentary between the site administrator and a reader...

Ha ha!!! That was certainly a workout. Might you be Aaron??? Or did you just happen upon it?

All the coulda, woulda , shoulda's in the world would not have made a V-12 practical. A near 500 cu in V-12 in the 40's, with current flathead technology that Packard had it would have been an expensive boat anchor. The engine would have been too heavy and wide for the Clipper body/frame, so you might say, OK they should have made a bigger frame with an engine bay for the V12.

If it was such a GREAT IDEA, then why did Lincoln build only the puny approx 300 cu in Zephyr/Continental? Whe not a 500 cu in, besides do you realize what a sales flop the Lincolns were? In 1948 about 8,000 Lincolns were built all with V-12, almost 100,000 Packards were built. Nobody in the world was building high speed/high power large cars.

The speculation of what Packard should have done seems not to take into account the marketplace of the era, the technology available, the cost of producing such a car and most of all the demand at a profitable price.

Lincoln was a money losing operation from the moment Henry Leland started it in 1922(??) until 1961 when the new body style came out. Rich and powerful Ford carried it as a prestige leader, Packard could not have afforded to do so.

I don;t have quote from Thomas Paine or even Thomas the Tank, but I do recall this:

"Yes, and if my grandmother had wheels she could heve been a truck."

Face it, all the independents have gone away, even the two largest car companies in the US have gone bankrupt. Packard had run its course yet it does not make it any less a very sad passing

Fred Kanter

No, they could have just designed a V12 off of the Packard V8 tooling left over from '56 like they were trying to do in 1965. ;)

Quote:

Nope, I'm not Aaron....I just happened to find the site. And since automotive history is a major interest of mine...

Lincoln sold quite a few Zephyrs pre-war in part because some buyers bought into the V12 dream. But as you say, the division wasn't profitable. I'll be honest, I wouldn't go to the mattresses defending the need for a V12 at Packard. It would have been very nice indeed to have had at certain times in their history as I mentioned, but its absense was not the company's undoing. The 356 and '55 V8 were both great motors. The 1915 Twin Six did serve notice that the company was a force to be reckoned with.

I would go to the mattresses on Packard's difficulties with styling, anticipating body style trends and keeping their Seniors propped high on a pedestal. All starting in the late 30s / early 40s.

Must disagree with the longstanding argument that the Independents were doomed. AMC defied the odds and grew quite strong. That they later lost their way is not conclusive proof that their earlier success was srictly a fluke or that there were no means to keep the success going. I think these things always come down to key people in key positions at key times.

Quote:

I totally agree. BUT, it's easy to sit back and say now "if they had done this, then this wouldn't have happened".

Reminds me of a recent South Park episode:

Attach file:

---

  (46.47 KB)

To Mahoning 63,

Re; the fate of independents.

There have been about 2500 American auto brands since the beginning of the industry. Ford was the earlist powerhouse and Henry snapped up Lincoln to be his halo car. Then they brought out Mercury in '39 and Edsel in '58, today they are both history and Ford is left with 2 brands.

GM bought Buick, Cadillac,Chevrolet, Oldsmobile adn founded Pontiac. Several minor brands came and went, but today only Buick, Cadillac,and Chevrolet survive.

Chrysler brought out Plymouth, Desoto, purchased Dodge?? and AMC. Now what's left is Jeep, Chrysler and Dodge.

So out of 2500 makes there are 6 left. With 1/3 of 1% survival rate I'd conclude that the survival of independents
is pretty slim, and yes mistakes were made. but out of the 2488 other makes why are none left, could it be the fact that they lacked the support of a major auto company,in other words they were "independents"??

Could they all have been in the wrong place at the wrong time and made the wrong decisions??

Bummer, couldn't get the link to bring up the video.

I know these things are easy to crank on from 50+ years out. There is just this nagging suspicion I have that Packard went down in the hands of a professional manager. Tens of thousands of us just went through 10 years of living heck at a not to be mentioned Big 1 of the 3 and can tell you it was the so called pros who caused most of the problems. They are a far cry from the entrepreneurs and car folk who built these companies and they would be just as happy running a staple company so long as their title and pay were right.

Hey, does anyone have any weight info on the 245, 282, 356, 473 or V8? This discussion about V12s might benefit from a little data. With it we might be able to do a weight walk from the Eight to a medium-large Twelve of Auburn V12 displacement.