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

Owne: After the speed run at Daytona Packard changed the name of the Panther to the Panther Daytona, but later dropped the Daytona name. I remember reading this at one time how true is that.

John F. Shireman

Responding to BH's correct comment that the earlier pictures I posted of Ralph Marano's Pan American didn't really show the color very accurately, here' some other more recent pictures taken at the Marano museum. Hopefully they show the color a bit more accurately. If you're lucky enough to see the car with hood open, you'll find the modifications necessary to accomodate the lowered body (and hood) interesting, such as the revised radiator top tank, thermostat housing, and air filter. Sorry, took no pictures of that though I should have.

Attach file:

---

  (126.40 KB)

The article in the Spring, 1984 issue of The Packard Cormorant was indeed copyrighted, so yes, it is a violation of same to copy it and post it. While it is nice to see references to the Panther Story and The Panther Log, it is nicer when folks ask permission to print or reproduce parts of the article.

By the way, The Panther Log was originally a collaborative effort between Leon Dixon and George Hamlin, however I have since updated the log to the present.

In recent years, some people have touted the silver-gray car as it exists today as THE Mitchell-Bentley car, but in fact, the car that was originally owned by Mitchell-Bentley is the yellow/bronze car with the removable hardtop,side windows and 55 rear tail lights.

Thanks anyway for the plug.

Lee,

I don't think there was any malice on Dave's part, and he did post that it is probably copyrighted, as well as the source and author. If anything, people may now want to track down a that back issue of that Cormorant from almost 25 years ago to read it. Whereas they may have not know about it before. Dave also contributes to the Cormorant, so I am sure he is familiar with all the effort that goes into it.

the yellow/bronze car with the removable hardtop

I'm assuming that is the Panther schedled for the RM auction, as noted elsewhere in this forum.

BigKev... No need to defend the post. And no need to explain what it said. I read it. But nowhere in my response to the post was there any mention of "malice intended"... this word, concept, implication was never mentioned-except in YOUR post. Show me where the post I made stated this? I am sure that whomever posted my work meant well... and I never said otherwise. I even thanked the person for the plug. I am sorry if you found this offensive.

However, this article and information was not merely some filler piece or just another car article. It was a milestone since no one, no article, no book, no verbal or written work had ever assembled this information on the Panthers before I did. And there was never an accurate accounting of the Panthers made prior to this article- no matter how many years ago it was. Don't take my word for it- you can go check all of the books and articles yourself. Much of the information in this piece was saved by me since the 1950s-and while not attributed to me in the article-most of the unusual original photos in it also came from me. I knew these cars personally. The fact that people are still arguing, guessing and speculating over the Packard Panthers ought to point up the importance of knowing the facts. It was bad enough that large parts of this Packard Cormorant article ended up in a car magazine afterward with someone else's name on it. So pardon moi if this is a sore spot, but my work is my work and whether it is an automotive design I did or an article I wrote, I have a right to say so.

And since you brought it up that this person has done pieces for the Cormorant magazine, etc... then it should have been ALLLLlll the easier to simply ask permission to post it in an internet forum. A very simple matter- even if only out of courtesy and respect, if not out of legality. What is so malicious about that? I have worked in the automotive industry and written for over 35 years and even I get stopped and quizzed at Kinko's for trying to copy my own stuff! THEY know about copyrights. So if it is offensive for one to even state that permission ought to be sought before publishing copyrighted work, then we might as well abolish the U.S. Copyright office and the entire concept of intellectual property!

It is sad and disappointing today with the internet that so many people seem to bristle when anyone even dares to mention the concept of copyrights and protection of intellectual property. Again...one more time...thanks for the plug.

Lee -

I don't mean to speak for BigKev, but he never said that you used the word "malice". In fact, he simply wrote:

Quote:
Perhaps that was merely was a knee-jerk reaction to your post, where you said:

Quote:
Given past experiences that some of us have had with some control freaks in some of the clubs, your response could have put any number of us on the defense.

While one of the missions of this site is to collect information for the benefit of Packard enthusiasts everywhere, I believe we've been pretty clear about not posting copyrighted material without permission. Should there be a problem in that regard, I'm sure that if the copyright holder brings it to BigKev's attention, he will remove the material and place notice as to why it was removed.

Sounds to me like you have more of an issue with the Packard Cormorant for not giving due credit for your contributed material. Also, did you call the other "car magazine" on the carpet about plagiarizing the original article? Please don't take any frustration arising from those sources out on us.

Meanwhile, I hope you continue to post here. A well-respected author on Packard subjects has already cast a "fishing net" here for his next project, and you're welcome to do the same.

Packard never made a supercharged straight eight as a production model. The only supercharged Packard was the 1957 and 1958 "Packardbaker" models. They came with a supercharged Studebaker V8 as standard equipment.

Gusha, note that Rusty said "as a production model". The picture is not a production car, it's Macauley's toything as restored by Ralph Marano. It was a car constantly subject to changes as young Macauley's whims desired.

Packard also tinkered with a supercharger on the 385 cubic inch 8 around 1920-30 or so, but it never left the laboratory as far as we know. It certainly never got anywhere near production.

Packard carried out experiments with the McCulloch supercharger. On the Panther and possibly on some stock sedans. I say "possibly" because I have seen under hood pictures that I took for a test sedan but it might have been the "special" in your pictures.

The VS57 was offered to the public as an accessory in 1953. The first cars to offer it as factory or dealer equipment were Kaiser in 1954, and Ford Thunderbird and Studebaker in 1957.

Since Packard had their new V8 in 1955, it is obvious why they did not follow up on the supercharger.

By the way I have 3 VS57's in my garage. For various technical reasons I believe they are a perfect match for a flathead engine. I mean to test this theory on my 1951 DeSoto.