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

Thanks, and thanks for the warm welcome!

I think owners of orphan makes are friendlier.

-Dave

Dave Conwill:

I hesitate to discourage Packard ownership but based on your requirements as stated in your posts i would recommend a 55-57 Chevy because parts and service are so common place for these cars.
Packard and other independents are primarily for those who just want something DIFFERENT and luxurious.

For a "daily driver" the Chevies and to a somewhat lesser extent the Fords of just about any time period are the easiest to own. My personal preference 1 st choice would be 55-57 Chevy. STAY AWAY FROM BIG BLOCK chevies and avoid 58 chevies unless they are dirt cheap. The 63-64 Chevies are probably the creme'a-la-creme of all cars ever produced for all around good, economical and easy ownership and any of the 55-64 (not58) chevies are as a good a daily driver as ANY modern automobile.

The chevies are simply NOT for the man who wants something DIFFERENt. Those of us that want something different are just fool enuf to pay the price and fight the aggrevation.

OR to put it another way:
Why buy a Cadillac if u can have a Caprice classic for about 3hree dollars more????

Here's a little more reality tv for u mr Conwill.

Price hydraulic lifters for the Packard Streight 8. THEN price a set of lifters for a Chev,ford or MoPar. Have a roll of toilet tissue and clean pair shorts handy when u price the Packard 8 lifters.

Go to local trans rebuilder and price the labour and parts for a Powerglide or hydramatic rebuild. Then go price just about ANY other trans. Warning: Chevy offered a TURBOglide automatic 1958-1962. It was not powerglide. The Turboglide was a rather weak transmission.

As a side note: the Powerglide was used in Cadillac ca 1958 whe nthe Hydramatic plant burned down. I have no knoweledge of how well they held up in the Cadillac.

As a side note: the Powerglide was used in Cadillac ca 1958 whe nthe Hydramatic plant burned down. I have no knoweledge of how well they held up in the Cadillac.

I believe the facts are that the fire was in 1953, and Cadillac substituted Dynaflow, Pontiac went to PowerGlide. A real looser was Kaiser-Frazer who could no longer offer an automatic until the plant was rebuilt.

When put right and used as they were designed to be used, the 51 through 54 Packards were some of the most reliable cars that Packard ever built. Yes, it will cost you more to purchase SOME Packard parts but, hey, the difference between driving a Packard and driving a Chebby is why those of us who do drive them own them. They're a breed no longer seen, not designed for racing of any kind but rather for comfortable, reliable, roomy transportation needs with a grade of luxury somewhat above the average. Some disparage their bodywork (cheap chrome plating due to Korean, "police action," in progress, lack of material/bracing in the bonnet, etc.) but mechanically, equipped as they were straight from the factory, in proper working order with proper care and maintenance, they were one of the most dependable, reliable cars of their day and, as someone else pointed out, although without tire burning, neck-jerking acceleration capability, will cruise effortlessly at highway speed all day. Although perhaps not as modern, they possessed fewer of the irritating mechanical and electrical quirks than most of their competition because, with slight modernizations periodically, Packard had been building/assembling the suspensions, running gear and electrics for twenty years or more and they had that particular concept and combination down pretty well by the time these cars were produced. Within the parameters of what was available when they were new, they were quality product.

Very well said Loyd!

I too agree Loyd. Recommending someone to drive a Tri-5 Chevy is akin to asking someone to sleep with a $.50 hooker. Sorry Keith, but I have to disagree with ya on this one.

Quote:


You bet. The fact you are looking around at old cars tells me you possess the necessary inclination and aptitude required to gain satisfaction out of this type of thing. I'm not a mechanic either, I just draw on my experiences as a kid when I needed to drive, but did not have money enough to pay anyone to fix what I had, and subsequently performed all my own repairs. Sometimes this was more than frequently. Luckily, the junk I mean cars I had were of 50's and early 60's manufacture as these were the only vehicles in my price range. (Remember the 50 dollar specials?)

My recommendation to you Dave is to look around, and buy the one YOU like. I would buy the Packard if it runs and drives OK without bellowing smoke, torrential leaks or a bunch of weird noises. The price of 1800 seems right.

Owen I think you take me too literally.

I believe the 1951-54 Packards were good cars in their day and fully up to Packard standards. But they are about the cheapest to buy today because they are not sought after by collectors.

Of course this is a generalisation. I know there are Packards for that time period that are very desirable and expensive. A 1954 Panther just sold for over a 1/4 million dollars.

This also does not mean they are not desirable cars. I wouldn't mind having one myself. To me, one of the desirable features is that they are affordable. Another desirable feature is that they are modern enough, and reliable enough, that you could drive one for regular transportation within reason.

But there is no denying that model for model, and in equal condition, they sell for low prices compared to say, a prewar Packard. They also sell for less money than contemporary cars such as a 1950s Cadillac, Buick or even cheap Fords and Chevs. While a Ford or Chev was never in a class with even the cheapest Packard when it came to quality.

As for whether they are cheaper than a 1948-50 model, I think they might be but the difference would be negligable.

What I was trying to say was that the Packard is an excellent buy, and not because it is in any way an inferior car. It is a high quality car. The low price is simply because that model is overlooked by collectors.

As for the automatic transmission. The consensus seems to be that they are a good transmission and reliable if used as the maker intended.

Put the transmission in drive and let it do its stuff. Use the low gear only for emergencies such as starting off on a hill or when you wish to drive very slowly. Make a habit of starting in low for extra performance and you will shorten the life of the transmission.

Here is another thing. Some owners have reported that you can cure a balky transmission by changing to B&M brand transmission fluid. This makes the transmission work like new again. It seems to clean out sludge, and revitalise parts. No guarantees but worth a try.

One feature all Ultramatics have is a lockup torque converter. At speeds above 25 MPH the torque converter locks up and you get the same performance gas mileage as a standard trans.

To answer your other question. Packard has an open driveshaft and it is possible to change to a standard trans. But if you really want a standard I suggest you pass over the automatic and buy a standard car. It would cost as much to change the car over as it is worth.

Personally I would try out the car and if the trans worked, cross my fingers and buy it. Then change the oil and filter and check the adjustments.

Another thing to keep in mind, in normal service the transmission did not shift at all. It started off in hi and stayed there. This made for a very smooth ride but shall we say, leisurely acceleration. They were after the ultimate in smoothness comfort and convenience not performance.