Packard Forum Index » Post-War (1946-54)

Here is the plate from my car. Seems to back up what O_D is saying. I will go over later today and look at the plate.

Later on- the paint and interior codes are inked with no stamping behind them.

Attach file:

---

  (57.29 KB)

Quote:

I am in total disagreement with you on that one, Dave. Engraving the number absolutely looks wrong, plus you would have the wrong font, whereas not many people will recognize a wrong font if it is stamped correctly ... unless the font is so far off or way too big.

In my opinion, if it looks too neat, it looks wrong. That's not to say that some original stampings didn't look well done (such as on Stephen's car, above), but they still look different than engraving.

This, of course, is a minor detail. In my opinion, though, I'd rather have a rough-looking original plate than an incorrectly stamped new plate, even if I had a perfect restoration on the rest of the car.

That brings up a question: What would be wrong or difficult about imprinting the new paint onto an original plate???

In my opinion, though, I'd rather have a rough-looking original plate than an incorrectly stamped new plate, even if I had a perfect restoration on the rest of the car.


I fully agree with that!, though you'd be hard pressed to find a Pebble restoration with an original plate. Repainting a plate is pretty simple on the earlier plates that had a relief etch, I'm not sure how to approach a restoration of one of the later plates that's just silkscreened on aluminum. I guess you'd have to find or make a new silkscreen stencil?

I agree with West on the "to neat" problem, but I've seen pictures of metal stamping that was a long way from authentic looking plus the font was wrong. I'm pretty sure the maker used silk-screen to make mine, so cleaning and polishing the old plate to "re-print" the black may be the best of both worlds.
- Anyway I kept my original as it was.

I would like to know about the screws as Owen mentioned. Which is correct - flat or phillips?

Attach file:

---

  (46.60 KB)

On the postwar one that Stephen posted, it looks like it was riveted from the factory. For prewar, it should be flathead screw.

My 39 120 had straight head screws on the data plate. Phillips would be pretty unusual - the only Phillips head screws I've seen on the older cars are on the window and door trim.

Jim Hollingsworth had made a number of reproduction plates for the 1940 Packard. They were printed on aluminum and looked dead on accurate, which is what one would expect from someone like Jim. I've seen other ones on Ebay; the trick is knowing which one is year correct with the patent numbers. The 51-54 versions are a lot easier to find.

Dave, I'd just slightly modify your last statement about 51-54 tags. 54 tags are completely unlike 51-53 and very much like 55/56, stainless steel but without paint/trim info. Though paint and trim info was later added to 55 tags, the very earliest of 55 cars had the same tag as 54 - picture enclosed.

There are at least 3 sources for the patent plates, Pulfer & Williams seems to know which is which; the supplier of those on eBay is getting better about it but still is wrong as often as he's right. Jim Balfour in Michigan has made a lifetime study of patent plates and is without doubt the authority on the topic - he has a sizeable collection all the way back to 1901 or so and he's privately published a small book on the topic which I'm lucky to have a copy of.

Best I can tell from a few samples, plates that were riveted were those between 1951 and 1953. 54 and up were tack-welded, 50 and back were attached with ordinary sheet metal screws though the Briggs plates were generally attached with Phillips head screws, at least in the 48-50 era.

Attach file:

---

  (61.35 KB)

Here are pix of the plate on my '50. Very careful examination of the reverse side reveals the impressions of the vehicle number (you can discern "238" in the third photo). That would tell me that the vehicle numbers, indeed, were metal stamped and not engraved at that point in time.

Attach file:

---

  (30.75 KB)


  (19.98 KB)


  (15.66 KB)

I have to confess, those factory stamped numbers look like they'd be nearly impossible to duplicate individually today. I guess I was thinking more about the date and dealer location stampings, that always look like someone handed a kindergartner the tools and told them to go at it.

I still think that if you're going to screen print a new plate, why not just screen print over the cleaned-up old plate???

From a legal standpoint, if you are ever stopped by the police, or questioned when you sell the car, you could be accused of fabricating a bogus plate. This happens sometimes when the car is stolen, or presented as a more rare car than it really is. My advice is to put the new plate on, and keep the old one in an envelope in the glove box in case you are ever questioned.

For what it's worth, some of the local cars here in Billings have new plates engraved by a local jeweler, using the same type font as the manufacturer. It looks slightly different, being cut in rather than stamped, but if you can't line up a punch, maybe it's a good idea. Some of the dealers (mostly the larger ones) used a jig to keep the letters and numbers aligned.