Packard Forum Index » Modification Discussion

Quite an extensive mod.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgZLoCtsoFE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SoEFrHS1Fqs

Incredible amount of great looking work but not much recognizable as Packard except maybe the tail lights. Am curious what was done with the frame to turn it into a convertible. I thought the long frames were too "rubbery" for convertible use which is why Stude could not offer one in the Hawk line using the C-K frame.

That's a lot of work. I don't know if he went away with an award or not, but I think he would have had a better chance had he painted it black and put some decent-looking wheels on it.

Hi

All the K-Body-hardtop-based convertibles that have been constructed have had frame X-members from four door Lark station wagons added for rigidity. The Studebaker frame was a simple ladder type without X-member, not even boxed along the side rails. It was the fruition of Loewy "Weight is the Enemy" design philosophy campaign he had been pushing for their postwar car development. All of their postwar cars were initially designed around the low-priced Champion, light weight to allow the small six cylinder to achieve good gas mileage. Commanders and Presidents were extensions of the Champion, somewhat beefed up where necessary, but generally still light body structures. Early 1953 hardtops parked on uneven ground had doors pop open from twisting misalignment. The C & K frame was beefed up for the 1955 models after the 'rubber' frame problems became manifest.

When the 1953 line was being developed, they did build one prototype of the K-Body hardtop as a convertible. As you'd expect, it was (and is) stunning. Of course, when the line appeared, the convertible was missing. Why? In an interview with Harold Vance reprinted in Turning Wheels years ago, he related the question had been posed by a group of college students at the time. His response was:

"We decided not to build the convertible because of low sales potential."

This conclusion was based on the fact that their current convertible sales had been diminishing. Never mind their 1952 convertibles were a six year old model long overdue for replacement, without even a tenth of the visual appeal a 1953 convertible would have. Duh.....

This one decision was but one indication of the clueless management mindset with which Packard would have to deal when the merger was consummated.

Steve

"This one decision was but one indication of the clueless management mindset with which Packard would have to deal when the merger was consummated."

AMEN! AMEN! AMEN! AMEN!
This is the same mindset that led them to market the Hawk only in the C-body pillared coupe configuration rather than the much better looking K-body hardtop version from 1959-1961. While aging, the hardtop was still a very handsome car and they tried to sell the ungainly coupe version for those three model years right at the peak of the hardtop craze. The "B" pillars in the C-body were too thick and ruined the look of Bourke's otherwise stellar design. It was probably that same retarded thinking by Vance and Co. that forced the C-body when they should have offered the Bourke coupe as a hardtop and convertible.

Bourke wanted the 53 sedans to be based on his coupe. It would have been a spectacular car - but Vance and the other retards at the top forced Bourke to stuff his design intended for a 120" wheelbase onto the 116.5" wheelbase and the result was the dumpy looking sedans that were rejected by the customers. When Nance arrived, he called the Studebaker sedan styling "the drooping penis look".

Here's the story:
https://56packardman.com/2015/09/22/gear-head-tuesday-studebakers-lost-opportunity-in-1953/