In 1912, the White Star Line launched its biggest and most luxurious ocean liner ever, the R. M. S. Titanic. An engineering marvel said to be unsinkable, the ship fell victim to a perfect storm of mishaps that resulted in its sinking to the bottom of the sea with virtually no trace, one hundred years ago last week. Is there a better automotive parallel to the Titanic story than the 1955-56 Packard?
I still remember the first time that I saw a picture of one of these cars. How, I wondered, did Packard go out of business? I had seen enough Studebakers and other orphans to know that a car brand usually went away after building cars that were, somehow, a little strange. Or maybe just outside of the mainstream. Cars that failed to follow the prevailing styles and features offered by the Big Three never seemed to last long.
But the big ’56 Packard seemed to be the very picture of a modern luxury sedan in that time period. It had a modern shape, it had all of the modern styling cues. It had modern engineering. And come on – wasn’t Packard one of the oldest names in the business?
As I got older and read more, I came to realize that the 1956 Packard was not what killed Packard. Rather, a series of miscues and unfortunate events over an extended period beginning during the Second World War led to death by a thousand cuts. Or, we could say that these multiple circumstances sort of came together to form an iceberg. We can debate just when Packard hit the iceberg. But it was certainly before these final magnificent cars hit the showrooms.
Packard had been a grand old company that built things the old way – exquisitely engineered and meticulously crafted. This order stayed in place largely until WWII, with the exception of the junior models like the 120, the Six (CC here)/110 and the Clipper. But the senior cars came to be less and less of the company’s focus, particularly once George Christopher succeeded Alvin MacCauley as president in 1937. After the war, the senior cars were gone and what before the war had been the lower priced Clipper became the company’s top postwar offering (CC here).
The postwar era brought an entirely different concept to the high-end car market. Instead of huge custom crafted cars designed for James the chauffeur to manhandle through city traffic while Col. & Mrs. McBigBucks rode serenely in back, the new age was a more democratic concept designed for the wealthy driver who wanted to arrive at the Club quickly, comfortably, and with style.
While Packard and Cadillac started 1946 with some sort of rough parity, the ensuing five years could not have sent the two companies in more different directions. Cadillac’s engineers got to work on a new ohv V8, new generations of the Hydra-Matic, and styling that would entice the new captains of commerce (and more importantly, their wives) into Cadillac showrooms everywhere. Packard? Uhhh – no. Top quality and impressive engineering? Absolutely, in a high button shoe kind of way. The old prewar straight 8 was a wonderful (if old fashioned) engine, and the home-grown Ultramatic transmission was quite an accomplishment from an independent automaker.
Most have forgotten that Packard was the only independent automaker to engineer and build its own automatic, and did so years before either Ford or Chrysler accomplished the same task. The Ultramatic was classic Packard: a simple but elegant solution that involved a basic torque converter (like Buick’s Dynaflow) that locked up for its “second gear”.
By the 1948-49 models, Cadillac would begin pulling away from Packard at an ever-increasing pace. Make your choice: high style and the most up-do date engine in the industry. Or a prewar Clipper that appeared to have gained a lot of weight. My father told a story about how my grandfather bought one of these late 1940s Packards. When he got it home, my strong-willed grandmother lit into him something fierce. Dad never forgot the sound of his mother yelling “a Packard! Why in the world would you buy a Packard? Nobody drives Packards anymore!”
George Christopher left the company in 1949. His successor, Hugh Ferry, accomplished precisely one thing in his two years at the helm – he hired James Nance from Hotpoint. By the time Nance came aboard in 1952, it was probably too late to save the ship. Cadillac and Chrysler had world class engines in their cars, and Lincoln was trying to revive with a serious driver’s chassis. All Packard had to show was a new 1951 body that was stylish only when parked next to one of K. T. Keller’s Chryslers. But to Nance’s credit, he (and Forrest McFarland’s engineering department – which included a young John DeLorean) gave it a good try. And this car is the result.
The new 1955 V8 was an impressive piece of engineering, that by 1956 came either in 352 or 374 cubic inches, making it the biggest V8 in the industry. In this Patrician, the big 374 put out 290 horsepower with a single 4 barrel carb, while the Caribbean with dual quads was good for 310. These engines had some teething problems in 1955, but seem to have been sorted out by the next year, and have since proved to be close to indestructible. Not bad for what may be the shortest-lived American V8 engine since World War II.
The other big engineering news was the Torsion Level suspension. Unlike the system on the 1957 Chryslers, the Packard system involved all four wheels. It used long torsion bars that linked the front and rear of the car, and was coupled with an automatic load leveling system. Published road tests of the time heaped praise on the Torsion Level Packards, which both rode and handled better than most anything else on the road.
The Ultramatic was now the Twin Ultramatic, and offered a low gear in addition to the torque converter, making kind of a three speed unit (sort of a Powerglide with a lockup torque converter). The new transmission featured optional electric pushbutton control. There was also the new Twin Traction limited slip differential, pioneered by Packard.
In addition to new engines, new transmission and a new suspension system, Packard also began building its own bodies (necessitated by Chrysler’s purchase of Briggs Manufacturing, Packard’s old body supplier.) The need to lease the Briggs Body plant from Chrysler led to one of the few missteps with these cars. Nance determined that costs could be cut by moving all production of these vehicles to the much smaller Briggs plant. In practice, the new production line led to bottlenecks and some quality glitches in 1955, which may have come back to haunt the company the next year.
Although the 1955-56 body appeared new, it was actually a very thorough updating of the 1951 shell. While it continued to suffer from the prior car’s high beltline, the 1955-56 Dick Teague design was a modern interpretation of what a Packard was supposed to be. And a very attractive luxury sedan.
For a more in-depth treatment of the car’s development, check out this 1976 piece in Special Interest Autos magazine (here) that covers the topic thoroughly. It is fair to say that from Nance coming aboard in 1952 to the debut of the 1955 line, Packard accomplished the nearly impossible, and in record time.
This big Patrician was the top end sedan, priced right up there with the Cadillac 62. These cars were available with all the luxury features expected at the time, including air conditioning, power windows, locks, seats, and lots more. These were big, solid, well-built cars that were Packards through and through.
Which brings us back to the question of the day: if this was such a great car, why did Packard only sell about 18,000 of them? Although this nearly doubled Imperial’s 10,000 units, it was well below the 50,000 cars of a newly energized Lincoln, let alone the 154,000 Cadillacs that hit the streets.
Was the problem the Clipper? Yes, the Clipper, Packard’s downmarket little brother. Unlike the junior Packards of the 1930s, the low priced postwar Packards were nothing more than dumbed down/stripped down versions of the high end cars. Instead of being the ancestor of the modern Lexus (as had been the case before the war), Packard became the ancestor of the modern Lincoln. Prestige and snob appeal (necessary in this market) were leaking out at the bottom faster than they were being added at the top. And if not enough people desired Packards, there wasn’t much appeal to trickle down to the Clipper, even if it had become a separate brand name by 1956. Compared to the high-end Packard’s 18,000 cars, the cheaper Clipper’s 10,000 units made for an outright flop.
I have a bit of a drive to get to my mechanic, and I was making that drive a couple of weeks ago when I spied this car sitting in its driveway, minding its own business. Before this car, I can recall seeing exactly one 1956 Packard in the wild - and it was a Clipper parked on the street when I was about 12. I still remember it, because I was trying to figure out what a Clipper was. I knew that it had to be a model name, but the Packard name had been removed from the car that year. Anyway, the Patrician’s magnetic field compelled me to pull into the driveway of its owner, Mick Widmeyer, who was doing some spring garage cleaning.
I introduced myself (and Curbside Classic) and started gushing over his car. Mick was kind enough to allow these photos as we chatted. He has only owned this Patrician for less than a year and has historically not really been a Packard guy. However, he loves old cars and something about this elegant old sedan appealed to him. He tells me that a registry that tracks old Packards indicates that there are slightly more than 100 of these Patricians still in existence. So, although this car is more common than the 1958 Packardbaker that was featured recently (CC here), this is still one rare car, particularly in this condition. This appears to be a genuine original car that has racked up just over 100,000 miles in its life, and looks as nice up close as it does in the pictures. This example appears to lack the optional electric pushbuttons for the Twin Ultramatic, but in a car eligible for its own AARP card, this is probably a good thing.
This big old Patrician makes me a little misty. Not that I ever had one, but there is something sad about an old-line maker of top quality cars going down the tubes, particularly so soon after turning out such a competitive (and compelling) big sedan. But the sad truth is that the car was too little, too late. It took every resource that Packard could muster to get back into the same ballpark as Cadillac in 1955-56, but by the time it got there, it was left with no gas in the tank as Cadillac (and Lincoln, and Imperial) cruised forward with more sophisticated and more modern offerings. Studebaker is usually cast as the villain here, but would an independent Packard have been able to finance a new line of 1957 cars on its own? The answer doesn’t really matter, because the deteriorating economy and stiffened competition of 1957-58 would surely have finished Packard off every bit as effectively.
Just like with the Titanic, there were a few artifacts that floated ashore. The name and logos would go onto a few Studebakers for a couple of years, and the Twin Traction differential would put supercharged Stude power to the pavement into the 1960s. John DeLorean would go on to a stellar career at Pontiac (although he would eventually hit an iceberg of his own.) But these were just traces of a proud old-line company that, for all practical purposes, finally sunk below the waves at the end of the 1956 model year. Fortunately, cars like this are like those few survivors on the lifeboats, and can help us remember the glory that once was Packard.
Nicely written, JPCavanaugh, and what a fine remembrance of Packard’s last independent gasp.
Another great write-up, JP.
Yes, the car in question was horribly out-dated looking, and let’s face it – style helps to sell cars, especially when GM had the edge.
As a designer, I have issues with many of the elements of this car, but they all add up to the same thing – dated, stodgy, just plain OLD-looking, especially when you put a 1956 GM model next to it, not to mention Chrysler or Ford!
Packard, R.I.P.
+1. These cars were “new” when I was a kid but they certainly didn’t look it – bloated, old-fashioned, cartoonish-looking cars that few wanted. I virtually never saw a new one growing up in the midwest but within a few years they would pop up here and there on used car lots, rusted out and priced for a few hundred dollars. Few were surprised when they were reincarnated in the form of limousines by ZIL (as had earlier Packards) for the Soviet leadership, a very appropriate match. I agree, put next to 55-56 Cadillacs, Lincolns, and Imperials at the time, who would want one? Also, pretty much everyone knew that the Packard nameplate soon would be history.
Very well said Zackman.
When I see a car like this I try to imagine how it looked to its original audience. ‘Cause in hindsight it just seems…old, compared to a Cadillac or Lincoln.
Another great story JP.
I don’t think one could attach the term ‘horribly outdated looking’ – the cadillac was rather more outdated stylistically (and criticised at the time) especially with it’s heavily rounded flanks, and of course the excessively high hood line: when the ’58 Buick redid these same Caddy features the period commentary was ‘suddenly it’s 1940′ – the new bodied ’54 and up Caddies were a stylistic mess after the clean ’53 and earlier…
The ’55 and ’56 Packs were thoroughly modern at the time – IMHO where the big stumbling block was was the fact that Caddy styling had a look of continuity since the end of the war (and a V8), and the ’51 to ’54 Packs were just plain boring – they didn’t have a look of affluence about them, no good looking side treatments, no detail work, very plain interiors, and unlike the Chryslers, the old fashioned running gear didn’t make up for stodginess – the ’55 and ’56 packs were almost one hit wonders having everything right, and the sales figures showed it, being almost record levels (for Packard)- remember that at 1956 Cadillac also outsold 9 other manufacturers…
Remember too Lincoln vaccilated between trying to compete in some years for the high price field and sometimes in the mid price, which didn’t help their image continuity at all… and Imperial were always a jollied up Chrysler…
I’ve had all three and to be honest the comparisons are odious anyway – generally most high end buyers in ’56 would’ve plumbed for the known quantity (Caddy) that they knew would’ve impressed the neighbours – which seems to have been such a focus in that period with everything… DeSoto shared a similar fate – sales were down 71% in ’56 from ’55′s figure – brave people to buy something which wasn’t now a commonly sighted quantity, and switched to dodge or chrysler or the opposition,
A rather more modern parallel was how on earth did BMW overtake everybody and is now apparently the “most trusted name for quality” for anything!?!? I bet mercedes is still swimming around trying to figure that one…
We could ponder some “what if?” here, if Packard had arrived with a V8 more earlier (1950 instead of 1955) or a more attractive design for 1948? Some ponder what if Packard had merged with Nash instead of Studebaker?
My dream scenario has always been Packard merging into Chrysler after the war. Both engineering-driven companies, each strong in a market where the other was virtually absent. Chrysler could have obtained a turnkey luxury car that may well have been more viable than starting virtually from scratch as they did with the Imperial. The Briggs sale would have been a natural complement rather than a wrenching change.
That might have been a winner. It likely would have only postponed Packard’s death until the 70s but if the build quality and engineering had stayed high on Packard’s side at least it would have given another 20 years or so of Packard production so I could possibly obtain one as a classic some day. Sigh…
Chrysler with Torsion Bar Suspension and Packard (by Chrysler) with Torsion Leveling Suspension!
And, they would have put the heat on Cadillac to maintain/improve quality!
Very fine article, Jim. It would have been an excellent match. I wonder if Nance ever considered it, he might have ended up at the top of Chrysler.
That big Packard engine with hemi heads? And Packard engineer John DeLorean might have wound up at Chrysler. Don’t you remember that sensational Dodge GTO?
Packard still reigns as the premium car “imported from Detroit”. I can’t stand those lowered bling Packards with dub wheels and deafening sound systems.
Alternate histories are irresistable.
While Chrysler-Packard would have been interesting (letting Studebaker die a quick death), I doubt the end result for Packard would have been much different.
What likely would have happened is, just like the Packardbakers, there would quickly have been Packards that were nothing more than rebadged Imperials. And, also just like the Packardbakers, the ‘Chrykards’ likely wouldn’t have sold any better and the Packard line would have eventually been killed off just as it was at Studebaker.
The biggest issue probably would have been quality. How would Chrysler’s absolutely horrendous build quality during the early ‘Forward Look’ years went over with the owners of premium-priced Packards (even if they did have engineering advances that trumped the products from Ford or GM)?
Nash-Packard would have suffered some of the same problems as Studebaker-Packard, including geographically separated facilities (Nance had discussed having Nash do stampings for Packard, but concluded that the shipping costs would make it too expensive) and quirky styling, complicated by Nash’s embrace of unitized construction. Unlike Studebaker, Nash also didn’t have a V8, either — AMC’s first post-merger V8 was apparently based on an abortive Kaiser design, engineered with the benefit of Packard’s experience. (AMC underwrote a portion of the development costs of the Packard engine and agreed to buy some for its own use in exchange for full access to Packard’s research data.)
One could argue that Nash was better managed than Studebaker, but there was also the rivalry between Nance and Romney, which had no easy answer. I imagine one or the other would eventually have gone elsewhere, but having senior leaders vying for favorite-son status probably wouldn’t have done the company any favors.
Its funny the criticism of the styling of this Packard, here is a wiki article on the FB Holden built by General Motor’s Holden in Australia 4 years later in 1960. A fair bit of influence, especially the headlights and C pillar.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holden_FB
The FB/EK Holdens were following the tri5 Chev styling but years too late to be fashionable
Dang, this could have been my great-uncle Bill’s car, right down to the color. The thing just screams “older businessman with bags of money”, which, sure enough, Uncle Bill was. I must have been only five or so when I first noticed his Packard, but even at that young age I noticed what an imposing, solid, and well, Republican machine it was. Only 100 left? That’s a real pity.
During that same time period, he was also in possession of a ’48 Buick hearse that served to haul the family and piles of gear up to their summer place on a lake in Northern Ontario, so I guess Uncle Bill was front-runner for the title of most eclectic vehicles in our extended family.
@ what an imposing, solid, and well, Republican machine it was.
Although I would never put a bumper sticker on a great old car like this, an “I Like Ike” sticker would really fit this one.
Park a ’56 VW with a Stevenson sticker next to it.
Excellent article. I must be the odd man out. Never cared for Packard. Really never cared for any of the big cars.
For the year this was made I was nuts over the Chevy and the Ford.
I know. Plebian taste.
I was wondering what could’ve killed this Packard… then I found this:
If only it was that simple.
Somebody should try to do a history of the “Dreadnaught Class” American cars made from the custom coach days until the death of the “pre-Panther” Town Car.
My separate comment idea got botched up. So here’s my addendum:
When the top-line model is only competing with Cadillac’s mid range (Series 62), the writing’s on the wall. Series 70/75 was in a class of its own. The erstwhile Packard class, I hasten to add.
When the top-line model is only competing with Cadillac’s mid range (Series 62), the writing’s on the wall. Series 70/75 was in a class of its own. The erstwhile Packard class, I hasten to add.
It’s great when the owners let you pour over the car’s inside and outside, probably confirming his sense of pride that he owns such a great example. The good photos compliment a great write-up.
With a quick glance, I sometimes used to mistake these old models for Mercury Montclairs of the mid-50′s. It was like the designers went from one company’s design room to another with the same ideas.
Nance’s ego was too big for Packard. The idea of spinning off the Clipper as a companion brand was just plain silly — Packard was far too small to field two brands without hopelessly lame badge engineering. Better to suck it up and admit that Packard had become a premium-priced brand much like Buick. What’s wrong with that?
Said another way, how on earth did anyone think Packard could generate sufficient sales as a luxury car brand when Lincoln couldn’t even pull it off in the early post-war period?
Nance also pushed too hard to unveil new technology that wasn’t fully cooked. Packard sales might not have tanked in 1956 if it hadn’t developed such a bad reputation for quality glitches the previous year. Many folks would rather buy boring than flawed. Nance didn’t get that — and proceeded to kill Packard in the process.
Well, my read of Nance was that he was certainly ambitious, but he was also well aware of the kind of pickle Packard was in. The decision to integrate production, for example: while it didn’t pan out well at all, it’s easy to see why he decided to do it, and he was aware that it was calculated risk. As for the stuff they had teething problems with, they couldn’t afford to wait any longer on the V8 and the Twin Traction axle problems were a supplier issue, not Packard’s doing. The Twin Ultramatic was a headache — they might have been better off buying Hydra-Matic, like Lincoln and Nash did — but from what I’ve seen the Torsion-Level suspension worked out pretty well, and it was certainly a conversation piece, which Packard needed. (The biggest problems I’ve heard about Torsion-Level were that the leveler motor could be damaged by road debris and that if you lived in a neighborhood with kids, they might run the battery down jumping up and down on the bumper to watch the system work.)
I agree that the Clipper was an odd and ultimately pointless choice. I think it was a holdover from the original plans for the Studebaker-Packard merger, which involved all-new shared body shells in three sizes, the smallest for Studebaker, the largest for Packard, with a midsize version for Clipper. Had S-P been able to come up with the money for new bodies, it might have made sense, although then the Clipper probably would have arrived just in time for the ’57 recession and ended up as S-P’s Edsel. As it was, it just became a pointless hairsplit of the Packard line — not to mention the lawsuit from Pan-Am, which was trouble S-P definitely didn’t need.
I think Nance recognized what needed to happen with Packard, but ended up not having the time or the money to do it. A lot of these things, like the Dick Teague facelift and the chrome-y restyle of the ’55-56 Studebakers, were seen as holding actions, a way to keep people interested until they could do new bodies.
Also, matching Buick in this era was a daunting proposition. Buick was #3 at this point: it sold more than 700,000 cars in 1955, outselling Cadillac by something like six to one. Other brands trying to compete in that realm were getting hammered (although admittedly they were still doing better than Packard). So, to some extent, saying, “If you can’t go after Cadillac, what’s wrong with being Buick” is comparable to saying today, “If you can’t match the S-Class Mercedes, why not build a BMW 3-Series rival?”
Ate, to the buying public it never mattered a whole lot WHY a car had multiple teething troubles. What mattered was that Uncle Harry had so many hassles with his 1955 that he swore off the brand.
Your Buick metaphor begs the question: Do you really think Packard could have generated sufficient sales if it had moved upmarket into the luxury class? Really? Look at how poorly Lincoln and Imperial sold throughout the 1950s and early-60s.
Comparing Packard’s sales to Buick’s is also beside the point. A better comparison was with DeSoto or the Chrysler brand.
Nance had zero chance of getting his grand, three-brand restyling scheme funded. It was simply too risky and expensive. He needed to dramatically scale it back, e.g., by consolidating production in one plant and sticking with two brands with more modest differentiation. That option arguably wouldn’t have allowed the Packard brand to move upmarket a whole lot.
Very nice write up there, JP. I enjoyed getting a little education about the Packard line. We have an Packard of some sort floating around the neighborhood, always driven by a quite elderly gentleman. I hope to run into him sometime and go over his car. This website just keeps getting better and better because of great writing like this.
Jim, you had a very wise grandma. She really encapsulated the whole Packard problem: folks looking to show their success and burnish their social status don’t buy a car that’s on a downward trajectory.
Thanks for this superb write-up. I had similar feelings as you, running into similar-vintage Packards in my youth, trying to make sense of them. Wish I head read this then!
Some period reviews point out that that perception also had a crippling effect on Packard resale values. That was a real weakness of Packard (and to some extent Lincoln and Imperial) compared to Cadillac, which was sort of the gold standard. A lot of well-to-do buyers would trade their Cadillacs every year because the residuals were so strong; to do the same with a Packard or Imperial would actually have cost more, even if the transaction prices were similar.
Cadillac resale value up to the mid-1960′s was so amazing that it was possible to demonstrate that it was cheaper to own a Cadillac and trade it in every two years than a lot of lower priced cars, even a VW. The cumulative extra depreciation losses on the other cars after a few trade-in cycles outweighed the initial acquisition cost of the first Cadillac.
After Packard ceased production the depreciation got even worse. Same thing with Studebaker. I remember a number of years ago coming across a low mileage ’62 Studebaker coupe in a salvage yard that had been taken off the road in 1968. It had suffered a minor, repairable fender bender. However, I suspect the insurance company totaled it out.
What a grand car. Nicely written. I was fortunate to have seen these driving around L.A. in their time, and one of my Cub Scout den mothers drove this exact car. I remember her picking up some of us kids at our weekly evening dance cotillion around 1958, the side marker courtesy lights on the rear doors shining so elegantly. My mom and dad momentarily considered a 1955 Packard when they bought their 1955 Oldsmobile, recalling its pre-war heritage, but were concerned that the marque was headed into oblivion at that point.
“Ask the man who owns one,” one of the great advertising slogans of the twentieth century!
Great writing JP, really flows well and the pictures are first rate, too.
It is interesting that you mention the snob appeal thing. It is something I really don’t get. Perhaps it is because where I live we are completely immersed in so called “high end” brands that the elusive “snob appeal” loses any meaning. In my case, a BMW has zero, and I mean zilch, snob appeal. The 3 series is crappy and overpriced, while the 5 and 7 are plain ugly. MB cars all look the same and don’t really do much better than anything else on the market.
When I was a kid, a new Caddy or Jaguar really meant something. Was that because they weren’t everywhere?
Very nice write-up on a truly awesome car!
The Patrician you found could be the very same one I used to see parked in my old neighborhood back in Seattle in the late ’90s. I spent a lot of time studying that car from every angle.
The Packards built from ’48-’56 were among the most desirable cars ever made, IMO. Pity most people didn’t agree. The ’55 & ’56 Caribbean Convertible was the ultimate ’50s luxury car!
I remember seeing that (perhaps this) car in Kirkland on a regualr basis in the mid to late 1980′s. There was a bar near the Video store I used to rent VHS stuff from in the Juanita neighborhood. I think the owner spent quite a bit of time at that bar as I saw it almost every time I went to the vid store or the Teriyaki joint next door.
The Russkies copied the exterior design pretty shamelessly to make the GAZ-13 Chaika.
All are equal, some are just more equal than others…
Like the B-29′s they interned during WWll, I wish the Russkies would do something decent – like reverse-engineer a 1957 Chevy Bel-Air!
Oh, yes – make it affordable, too…
Wishing…hoping…dreaming…never happen…
I don’t know Zackman,
GAZ got pretty burned with the whole Chrysler Sebring deal.. I think there’s a better chance of Cuba pulling off a “new” 57!
I always thought the electric push button controlled Twin – Ultramatic was standard ’56 fare and that maybe this Patrician was retro-fitted as I read the Ultramatic push button contacts (much like Edsel’s Tele-Touch drive) would prematurely wear out. Packard was struggling in ’52, started to make a noticeable comeback in ’53, kept in a holding pattern in ’54, but nosedived for ’55-’56 with the Stude merger, the Conner Avenue start-up quality problems and the reverse 1953 strategy to re-integrate closely the Clipper (save name) with Senior Packard and the spring ’56 further dilution of the Executive.
According to the specs on the back page of the 56 Packard brochure, the electric pushbutton control was standard on the Caribbean model only, and optional in the others.
The ’56 Clipper for sale near me doesn’t have the push button transmission buttons either:
When my father bought his “pregnant elephant” 1950 Packard and drove it home from the factory at Detroit, you already had to be kind of an unusual guy to buy a Packard. I’m sure that this was even more the case by the time the 1955-56 cars came out.
In about 1971 I ran across a black and white 1955 400 hardtop and bought it. It was well-used but still in decent condition with no rust or body damage. The front bumper bottom was dented, a condition that seems almost endemic to these cars. The torsion-bar suspension was notable chiefly for its unobtrusiveness, delivering ride and handling qualities that didn’t seem different from other cars of the era.
A couple of quirks I noticed: there were Packard emblems all over that car, inside and out. And, the electrical system was 12-volt positive ground. I remember having quite a time once when I needed a jump-start explaining to the cabbie that the car had a positive ground. He made me attach the jumper cables.
As was typical of most of my car purchases in those years, I only had the Packard a short time. I don’t remember what came along to replace it, but something certainly did.
I’m late to the party that I hoped would happen here. I was born in ’55 and raised near Detroit. I mention that because, going forward, in 1973 I got my first job at a machine shop in Dearborn. One day I noticed an unusual 50′s-ish looking car out in the parking lot. Asking around I found out it belonged to the shipping supervisor. It was a 56 Patrician. At 18 yrs. old, in Detroit, I had no idea that Packard had made cars in to the 50′s! I became enthralled. Turned out the guy had numerous Packards including a 56 Clipper and a 41 limo. I had to have one. He found one for me – a 56 Clipper, in running, but weary shape. I drove that car when I decided to trek to CA that fall. I made it, but not without stories to tell.
I must disagree with Zackman. While most cars of this era appear “stodgy” now, these cars were beautiful, esp. the Carribeans. A short while later, setting up camp in CA, I lived across the street from a guy that had a 57 Eldorado. Nice car, but I’d take the Carribean, in spite of it’s weaknesses, in a heartbeat.
I would be curious to hear from either you or PFSM about the characteristics of the Twin Ultramatic. I read some things to the effect that the lockup torque converter really hated to do kickdown/unlock once you were at speed, and that the V8s torque characteristics did not mate as well with the lockup converter as had been the case with the old super-torquey straight 8. After reading this, I sort of imagined that driving one of these would be almost like an 80s Ford AOD, only with a lot more power in front of it. How would you describe it?
I ask because I have developed this wierd fascination with 1950s era automatics. We sort of forget that not everything always drove like a Torqueflite or a THM. So, I would love an owner’s impressions of living with the Twin Ultra.
Well, being 18 and and pretty green at mechanical stuff, I was at least smart enough to know not to push it – to kind of baby it. I can’t remember a time where I tried to kick it down at speed. That being said, my impression was that it seemed to lock up pretty early and stay there. And I don’t recall a lot of low end torque, either.
I wonder why torsion level wasn’t adopted by someone else. I’ve got a link to the third part of a series of Packard commercials where the talk about it. I didn’t realize at the time it was so special but I do remember the car rode differently than any other car I had driven to that point.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=jAqcD9YrAaY
I have a 1955 400. The lockout on mine works fine up to 55 or 60 mph. Higher than that it wants to stay locked up. But…….., since I’m not in any hurry when I drive it, it’s fine. Acceleration in normal driving seems adequate. Remember, this is a 4200 lb plus car. If you really want to impress your friends with the ride, take them down a REALLY bumpy road! It floats across huge bumps like they’re not even there! jc
A very nicely written article JP. A very nice car too. I think you’re on the right track when you say Packard’s demise was due to a thousand cuts. There is no one thing to point to.
Packard went down market in the ’30s -wisely. If they had not they would not have been around when WWII broke out. There is always a lag between going down market and loosing the cache of being “premium”.
IMO, the styling of the 48-54 cars served to help the public understand that Packard was no longer premium. The 55-56 cars were nice, but it was too late. Until 55 Packards looked decidedly second rate in styling. The bathtup Packards had styling similar to that of Nash, and though no one would confuse the two, it could not have helped it’s image as a premium brand.
The merger with Stude could not have helped Packard’s image either.
The problem with competing against Buick rather than Caddy is that a small company like Packard exhausted it’s resources to get a v8 and and slushbox, so by ’55 Packard was, technologically, on par the ’49 Olds. GM had a bigger R&D budget and could spread the costs better.
I’ll throw out a what if that hasn’t been discussed yet. What if Packard had decided to be the American Rolls Royce ? It had essentially been the American RR until the junior cars of the 30s. If I’m not mistaken the vast majority of RR production in the post war period (well, up until a few years ago) was to the US market. Finely engineered hand built, if somewhat stodgey, cars would have been right up Packard’s alley.
> What if Packard had decided to be the American Rolls Royce ?
Yup. They’d already been building RR knockoffs in the War (Merlin clones), so it would make sense to continue that tradition!
I don’t know what post-War RRs had `finely engineered’ stuff. They were obsolete, outdated piles of junk, selling on the good name of a company that had lost interest or resources in the car business (finally bankrupted/nationalised in 71). They were surely well put-together, but they weren’t worth the extra price, if not for the lady on the bonnet. Similarly to Packard, RR was also steadily moving downward, but had the aero company and nostalgic buyers to prop it up for a while longer. RR used to be a force in automobile engineering, the `Best Car in The World’, but that was very long ago.
This reminds me of a Caribbean that I used to get the pleasure of catching a glimpse of once in a while when I was a plumber. It’s almost the typical “little old lady” story.
She lived in a fairly well to do neighborhood in a run down house, you could tell this place used to be pretty sweet though. She had a large greenhouse attched to the kitchen and under all the clutter inside there were Maple floors and some seriously pricey looking rugs, the furniture was not aging well but it would rival some of the stuff you’d see at Ethan-Allen even today with a good cleaning. (What I really noticed was that all the plumbing fixtures were top shelf Chicago Faucet or Standard Sanitary/American Standard from some time around 1950. I really flip over old plumbing stuff.)
One day I had to go there to replace the water heater and needed to shut the water off. I asked where the meter was and she led me to the garage.
The garage had a stunning Caribbean in Turquoise and White with a Continental kit slowly degrading (it looked like it had been “restored” at least once, Bondo bubbles and all.) next to a late 70s Mercedes coupe (280 maybe?). There was no way either car had hit the road since around 88. They both had the 1979 style Il plates and her then daily driver was an 89 Lumina sedan in the Garnet Red that I guess 78.8% of all Luminas came in.
I was charging about $115/hour to be there so I never really asked a lot of questions. I did find out that her husband was the original owner and it WAS used as a status symbol. I also found that she was at one time a local High School Librarian. Her husband? He published Pornographic story books out of the attic.. The Press was still there in 2008 along with the thousands of unsold “issues” dating back to the late 60s.
I need to run by that place to see if she’s still kicking.
Sorry for rambling. Sometimes a CC spurs a memory.
Now that is one hell of a story. So how does the high school librarian meet the pulp porno publisher? Better yet, how do they keep the school board from finding out?
Don’t apologize Sean, it’s a neat story. If you had photos of that Caribbean you could submit it for the next ‘Cars In Barns’ book!
Also about them story books… a time, er, capsule.
Great write up JP always a curiosity these cars for me they are very rare out here but I do see some for sale on trade me occasionally there is a Caribbean locally. Yeah White Star lauched 3 Titanic class ships but only one lasted long enough to be scrapped. Reguarding the russian Packard I heard somewhere true or not that Stalin wanted a luxury car for himself and his cronies and during lend lease negotiations a defunct Packard line of prewar origin was packed and sent across along with the arms and war gear, Does anyone know the truth to this.? ZIM limos resembled Packard for years not only the one pictured.
Bryce, this is absolutely correct. Stalin had occasionally traveled in Packards and took a shine to them. In 1942, a USSR trade delegation bought the rights to the body design as well as the actual tooling. The Russians modified it for local needs (a process doubtless familiar to Australians and New Zealanders), but at a quick glance, it’s hard to distinguish a ZIS-110 from a 1930′s Packard 180 series.
This wasn’t the first time they copied a US limo: Apparently, the Leningrad L-1 limousine was a copy of a Buick 90 (with possible authorization and even assistance from GM).
My info comes from a FANTASTIC book called “Russian Motor Vehicles: Soviet Limousines 1930-2003″ by Maurice Kelly. It even has a chapter on Chinese limos! You can buy it on Amazon:
http://www.amazon.com/Russian-Motor-Vehicles-Limousines-1930-2003/dp/1845843002/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1335799969&sr=1-2
As Bryce said, great article! There has been a ’56 Packard Clipper for sale near me since January. It’s absolutely gorgeous inside and out. It’s also listed on trademe here: http://www.trademe.co.nz/motors/used-cars/other/packard/auction-443451946.htm
Sean’s story sounds a bit like “Whatever Happened to Baby Jane?” Can you imagine finding a Caribbean moldering away in someone’s garage? Hope you tried to buy it from her!
There is (or used to be a few years ago), a ’56 Caribbean two-door hardtop floating around La Jolla, CA. I would see it on occasion when I lived there, and once when I took my Mercedes in to an independent custom automotive stereo shop for some repairs, this car was sitting there being outfitted with some custom components. Heresy, I thought, but I was more interested in the Packard than I was in getting my own car fixed.
Which reminds me, in Santa Monica when I was growing up (and later on), there was a Mercedes dealer, W. I. Simonson, which was housed in the former Packard dealership on Wilshire Blvd. The letters PACKARD were still neatly arranged on the bell tower/cupola entrance to the showroom, a fitting epitaph to this grand marque, appropriately succeeded by Mercedes Benz. Sadly the building burned down in the eighties, I don’t think they ever restored this nostalgic architectural touch. Didn’t Studebaker-Packard take on early distribution rights for Mercedes-Benz in the U.S. in the mid-fifties?
They did indeed. Which is the basis of the often repeated but yet to be substantiated statement that Daimler-Benz vetoed the idea of reviving Packard with a badge engineered Facel Vega Excellence. I don’t think DB would have feared the competition, such as it would have been, and having Chrysler powered Packards would defeat the purpose. Anyone know anything more?
I can tell you why Packard failed…check out that dash…they couldn’t spell “lighter”.
My Dad came out to the west coast in the war years (that would be the 1940′s) in a Packard. Unfortunately I don’t remember it. Earliest car I recollect was our 1952 Ford “Vic”. But all the years I was growing up, Dad would always say “ask the man who owns one” like it was a mantra or something. It was years later until I realized he was talking about Packards, not a Scriptural reference.
Pop liked Lincolns too, and I’ve had a few of those over the years, including a ’94 Cartier TC right now, but I’ve always dreamed of owning a Packard, any Packard, figuring it’d make him happy somehow. And besides, it always seemed sort of hollow to say ATMWOO if you’ve never owned one.
Yeah, they looked old but guess what? All these old cars ARE old. Yup.