Packard Forum Index » V-8 (1955-56)

What thoughts do you have regarding Pat Foster's diatribe on The Packard Request in Hemmings Classic Car (current issue, page 45?)

I think he has made some valid points regarding the Packards lack of luxury status by the early 50s--and even before that according to many. While there were some decent cars, IMO Packard had chosen to shoot more toward the Olds, Pontiac, Mercury etc market than Cadillac and Lincoln. The quality of materials was still excellent but in creature comforts and finish, when compared to Cadillac they had a lot that could have been improved. AC, vents, and heat was more refined in Cads for most models but I will give the 55-6 Packard in dash AC setup the edge for convertibles. Cad's 55-6 convertible AC was still the trunk unit with outlets in the top well. Otherwise, Packard seemed to be playing catch up in that department. There was a thorough examination of a 56 Lincoln Premier on one of the car shows recently and even that looked to have a better grasp of what luxury buyers would tend to expect in an expensive car.

Whether maintaining the vertical grill would have upscaled the senior cars is something that will never be known. I rather doubt it unless they also addressed the other shortcomings -- real or perceived. While I like the Request, to me the narrow grill is too tall and just doesn't quite look right on what is essentially a horizontal body. Maybe something scaled a bit wider and more in size to the 48-50 grill with the vertical prewar style bars would have worked better -- particularly in the 51-4 era. That would get more in the consistent Mercedes look the author mentioned. IMO, the Predictor and proposed 57s had a much more pleasing vertical grill on an even more horizontal looking body. It looks to be about the same size but maybe the lack of the narrow vertical bars makes the difference.

What Howard said.....

I always liked the Request, I'm waiting for Ross to build one.
I doubt it would have helped much in sales for Packard.

John

I think the point about the 51-54 styling being less distinctive has merit, but the grille shape is still there, more subtly. The front view is still the easiest one to identify as a Packard.

Mercedes, Jaguar saloons, Rolls-Royce kept their vertical grilles; those cars look dignified but very old fashioned for the early 50's. Cadillac was already flashier than Packard, and they were the real competition. I think Alfa -Romeo is a better example of how to retain a vertical grille - they scaled it down.

I think the Request comes off as less awkward than expected because the hood/fender/bumper integration is decently done with the grille.The basic problem with the vertical grille is that it tends to drive the center of the hood above the fenders when the trend was to a flatter hood/fender line.

A straight 8 engine in this time was perceived as old tech, even though the power levels were competitive with Cadillac. I'd say a '49-50 356 is at least a match for the "new" Caddy V8 on performance.
A luxury buyer expects best available technology for the premium price.

Quote:

No matter what anyone says about the Request today... it is today's reaction and assessment of something done decades ago. While this kind of thing is cute for magazines and internet forums, the only thing that really counts is what people were saying when the Request was new and sitting on the turntables at the auto shows in 1955. And I assure you... I was there... and people loved it. And yes, I still love it today.

As for talk about Mercedes and Rolls still having upright grilles... this was all discussed in the history of the Packard Predictor in The Packard Cormorant magazine a few years ago. While it is nice to see it repeated without attribution, this is not a new discovery or discussion.

As for Packard's air conditioning system in 1955-56, it was far superior to Cadillac (as much as I like the car). The electronic rheostat control was quite good and the plenum mix was advanced along with a very powerful front-mounted separate blower motor. The Lehigh V-4 compressor was a monster with proven reliability and ample cooling performance.

It was also better than most of everything else, except perhaps for Pontiac. The Cadillac system was hopelessly useless and antiquated... particularly in the convertible with a ridiculous mounting in the rear and absurd rear vent over the rear backrest! Even the most expensive car on the market in 1956 (the Continental Mark II) had a/c vents blowing out of the roof! Nice for putting icicles in the heads of balding men, but hugely ineffective and awkward (I know... I rode in them when new). Packard studied a/c systems and determined a theater-type presence of cold air blowing front-to-rear was far more effective than air blowing rear-to-front. And Packard a/c for 1957 would have been even that much better and more advanced still with electronic controls.

The 1955 Packard dealer's showroom album reveals airflow studies that Packard had performed to resolve the design of the 1955-56 factory air system.

No matter what anyone thinks today in 2016, in 1955, the Request was what many long-time Packard customers wanted. The theme was hugely popular again on Predictor and it would have been likewise on the 1957 real Packards. And while 1958 Edsel mimicked the look of the intended 1957 Packards, a vertical grille on a Packard was requested by customers and had a heritage. Sticking one on a totally new car with no customer base and no heritage for 1958 was a totally different matter.

An upright grille on a Studebaker was merely an upright grill added to a Studebaker. An upright grille on an Edsel 1958 was merely an upright grille on a car with no heritage, no customer base and something nobody quite knew what to make of it all. Putting an upright grille on a 1955 Packard, well, that was merely a return to tradition. The issue wasn't simply adding an upright grille for styling's sake... it was not a pure design issue, but rather, a customer reaction issue.

The Request was not a rush project since it had been toyed with ever since JJN arrived in 1952. There were at least a dozen different variations of the idea. Even Dutch Darrin submitted one. On this basis, all of the Packard design projects from 1952-on could be considered "rush projects..."

As far as "marketing surveys done at auto shows" these are notoriously misleading (AMC surveyed people who viewed AMX and some claimed they'd only buy AMX if it had a back seat-so why didn't they buy a Javelin?). The important thing (in effect-a survey) that counted was the fact that customers had already written in to say they wanted an upright grille. People (real Packard buyers) had already spoken. So there was no need to ask joe blow at a new car show if he might buy a Packard if PMCC went to vertical grilles. And quite obviously there was indeed merit to upright grilles on Packard since that was the styling theme that was already in place for the future leading up to 1959. This is not a debatable issue.

What I was specifically referring to was Packards AC venting in the 53-4 era when Cad and Packard used the identical units. For a car aiming at the same lux market segment there was quite a discrepancy. I will agree the 55-6 dash AC was a large step in the right direction and even though crude, the bilevel feature didn't appear on other units until later. Unfortunately very few took advantage of it. Compared to the numerous cars you find advertised as factory AC very few are real factory but are actually the ARA unit. It is unfortunate that either Packard didn't push or incentivize the factory unit more or dealers were more concerned with profit over substance and pushed aftermarket units.

On the 53-4 vents, Packard originally had the flat louvers in the package shelf as did Cad but Cad had originally planned or quickly made provisions on their top line models to use clear ducts and carry the air above the rear window to connect to a duct above the headliner which had a pair of vents on each side. The cold air was distributed more quickly and directly to the front seat area and the frozen rear passenger neck was eliminated. Packard kept their flat neck freezing louvers. It was much later before Packard even made available the clear plastic ducts to at least get air to headliner level. That was a large improvement over the flat louvers but still took time before the front seat passengers felt the cold air.

A heater for rear seat passengers is another detail. Again, on some models Cadillac had heater outlets on either side of the car at the rear passengers feet. Hot air came from the front via a duct thru the front doors and then out a finished grill into the rear passenger area. On pre 51 models they did have the dual underseat heaters on limos and LWB cars but after that Packard made do with the front under seat heater on one side. On most cars that was OK because those heaters do put out but on their most senior 56 Caribbeans, even that was not officially available. Caribbeans that do have the underseat heater installed for the benefit of the back seat passengers IMO, look very tacky. A large box with a very vulnerable exposed heater core in full view of passengers just doesn't scream luxury to me.

Ahh. But what about 1954 Nash's air conditioner. Cheaper and compact than probably all of the above and with two good sized upper dash vents to boot.

As for the Studebaker with a front-end vertical grill. The coupe body definitely looked best and could have had a different hood with an ox-yolk grill. The Lark was so stubby it had to have an upright grill as a horizontal one would have looked even funnier.

The Nash All Weather Eye unit has been a question. It was a highly regarded and compact unit so it would have been a nice choice. Don't believe it was available in 53 so that could explain Packard purchasing the GM unit but in 55-6 with all the supposed cooperation between AMC and Packard kind of wonder why Packard chose to build their own instead of another purchase.

Maybe cost or Nash didn't want to sell it or possibly the integration into the Packard would have been cumbersome without a major redesign of the firewall on the old body. As it was the Packard built unit bolted onto a non AC dash and if AC was wanted only a few small holes were added. The Nash unit being mostly in the engine compt maybe needed too much work to fit in the dash.

Lots of questions and few answers.

I am so glad that my query has garnered so many interesting responses, although I am not sure how we digressed to Packard's air conditioning system vs. rival Cadillac. However,I have gotten a great deal of education!

My response to Mr. Foster's observations on the styling of the Request, as sent to Hemmings is:

Well, it had to finally happen. It is the first time I can ever remember disagreeing with the erudite writings of Pat Foster. Despite this friendly difference of opinion, he remains a true credit to the magazine. Mr. Foster's treatise on "Packard Styling" [pg. 45 of the November, 2016 issue] is actually on-target with what Packard might have considered in the final restyling of the Detroit-built Packards from 1951-56. Too, Richard Teague was certainly one of the most ingenious automotive stylists ever and his restyling of John Reinhart's original 1951 Packard was right in step with the longer-and-wider look demanded in the showrooms. However--to me--his Packard Request was not. Talk about "tacked on." I dare anyone to say anything further about the dual headlight pods on the later offerings of Studebaker-Packard in 1958!

The addition of a classic Packard grille, tandem with pseudo Buick inboard parking light housings looks foreign and very much an afterthought on an otherwise beautifully styled senior hardtop. Remember, until 1955 Packard didn't offer a senior hardtop on the longer wheelbase. With Packard's innovative "plastic tooling" the company was finally able to turn out a real contender to Cadillac's less than lithe Coupe de Ville. The 1955-56 Packard grilles are a variation on the old Packard theme: the cusps are still there, as is the arc at center, yet they scream mid-1950's, and that was good for those who planned to "Ask the man who owns one." Had Packard really looked at what Mercedes was fashioning with their clay models, they would have discovered that an upright grille was the very basis of the cowl line's shape, the resulting hood, and the way the rest of the front end followed in concept. It was an approach much akin to the teachings of architect Frank Lloyd Wright. It was organic.

I think Teague himself would have agreed with me. The Request project was essentially a rush job, allowing scant time to do anything but place a classic grille on little else than an otherwise stock Packard front end. With more time, a truly unique-in-the-marketplace model might have resulted, and as Mr. Foster points out, it could have fostered Packard's attainment of a banner sales year.

I plead guilty to starting the AC hijack. It was unintentional as I just wanted to make a point about luxury refinements. I was agreeing with Mr. Foster that Packard had, IMO, moved downscale in the lux dept due to the lack of the fine touches in creature comforts the competition was offering and the market segment expected. A grill change would have made little difference. For that I apologize.

I do have another question. Regarding Teague doing the 55s, I was under the impression the 55 facelift of the 51 body was largely designed by an outside consulting outfit with some input from Packard styling. Other than the tail lights, am curious how much Teague actually did on the 55s. As I understand it he was responsible for the 56 enhancements to that earlier styling and the Request but not so much on the basic 55s.