If you’ve been following this road trip series, you probably know that we’re now in Idaho, on our return leg, after having “rounded the horn” at Seattle with a side trip into Canada. Today, we’ll backtrack a bit in order to review a car we found last week, during a supper break in Baker City, Oregon.
The Clipper line dates back to 1941—eight months before the attack on Pearl Harbor—and was the mid-market offering Packard President Max Gilman hoped would reposition Packard as a more mainstream brand. Sales for premium automobiles had faltered during the Great Depression, and Packard needed a new direction if it wanted to remain viable as a company.
Packard’s timing could not have been worse: U.S. automotive production ceased for the duration of the war, and while the 1941 design didn’t look terribly dated when production resumed, Packard’s styling choices for the 1948 refresh were questionable, to say the least. The bulbous “bathtub” look had fallen out of favor with buyers, and after bitter internal disagreements management finally decided to ditch it in favor of something more modern.
Packard’s postwar cars were simply Packards, with Clipper used as a model name. When James Nance became company president in 1952, he realized that the Clipper’s mid-market positioning was dragging down the brand. His solution was to spin off the Clipper as a unique brand, a process that was not finalized until 1956. Thus is our 1955 subject car a Packard Clipper—basically a transitional designation.
There were five trim levels available for the 1955 Clipper:
- Deluxe
- Super
- Super Panama
- Custom
- Custom Constellation
Our subject car is one of 14,995 Clipper Customs produced for that model year.
Howard “Dutch” Darrin was central to the design of the early Clippers—it was unclear in my brief research whether he had a hand in the ’53-’55 models.
One feature unique to the Clipper Custom was its torsion-bar suspension; other trim levels made do with coils and leaf springs. Power steering was also an option.
With the benefit of 20-20 hindsight, we can see that the postwar Clippers marked the beginning of the end for Packard. Managing a premium brand during a fundamental market shift is not easy. Few companies manage to make a successful transition, and while those that join the race to the bottom may hang on for a while, they ultimately hit the point of no return. The end comes quickly.
We’ve documented the postwar Packard cars, as well as the decline of the brand, in several other CCs: here, here, here and here. Wikipedia has a pretty thorough entry on the development of the Clipper, which you may also find of interest.
All photos by the author.
You need to keep taking trips. Great find.
When I was a kid this was just one of the cars we couldn’t afford. When I go old enough to afford my own, they were gone. Last one I saw was a stude’pak hawk of some kind.
What a great find. Looks in decent enough shape and I love that two tone paint.
As with the Mopar R body we discussed earlier, these were loaded with problems at launch. New engine, new transmission, new suspension, and even a new assembly plant (that turned out to be too small).
Although I prefer a real Packard, and probably a 56 model to this 55 Clipper, I still would not kick this out of my garage. Finding a Packard of any kind out on the road is an increasingly rare treat. Thanks for capturing it for us.
Also, thanks for this entire series. I, for one, am having a great time following your trip and looking at all the great cars you are coming across.
I have hoped for 56 Caribbean convertible in my garage since the day I sold my 56 Clipper some 30 plus years ago.
I don’t think Darrin was involved with Packard design by this point. I think I remember Dick Teague having some thing to do with the 55-56’s, though.
Glad to see that you got to experience the paradise that is Baker City in the brown part of Oregon.
wow, amazing find. i think it looks great. i’m especially impressed with the interior.
It’s really sad how quickly Packard became an “empty suit” after WWll. I see nothing to recommend this over a GM, Ford or Chrysler from the same period.
For 1955-56 the Packards offered electric, four-wheel, torsion-bar suspension. It was complicated and troublesome but quite inventive.
I’d still submit that Nance’s big mistake was trying to launch a companion brand. Such an effort was futile — Packard was far too small to pull that off without hacktastic badge engineering.
Packard would have been much better off buying another independent and sharing platforms. Hudson might have worked much better than Studebaker.
Also, registering the Clipper brand prompted a lawsuit from Pan-Am, claiming trademark violation. Studebaker-Packard fought the suit and might eventually have won, but after the consolidation of production in South Bend and the decision to drop Packard, it became a moot point. I believe Pan-Am dropped the suit after the discontinuation of the Packard line in 1958.
Packard DID (effectively) buy another independent: They merged with Studebaker, with generally unhappy results, at least as far as the Packard brand was concerned. Nance had serious talks with George Mason of Nash, but while Nance was interested, the Packard board wasn’t having any (and after Mason’s death, there was considerable friction between Nance and George Romney). At the time, Hudson was obviously dying and Packard didn’t consider them a serious possibility.
The Studebaker-Packard merger was supposed to have involved a great deal of platform-sharing and commonality: not stuff like the cobbled-together ’57-’58 “Packardbaker,” but a real GM-style shared-body system with three different shells for Studebaker, Clipper, and Packard. Being able to do that was a major part of the rationale for the merger. The problem was that S-P just didn’t have the money to actually DO most of that stuff — Nance asked the company’s principal backers and was flatly refused — and even if they had, it would have taken time to implement. In the end, Packard died and Studebaker had to make do with variations of the ’53 Studebaker body shell and frame until the end a decade later.
In the spring of ’56*, Packard under Nance toyed with the idea of continuing with a “large” Packard – they approached Ford about buying ’56 Lincoln bodies and frames – and putting in Packard running gear. Henry Ford II was receptive to the idea, but Ernest Breech and McNamara talked him out of it. There are drawings that exist of the Lincoln bodied Packard ’57 proposal (think of a ’56 Lincoln with the ’55 Packard Request grille). Other posts did mention that S-P had in the works a comprehensive body sharing program in the works; Studes and Clippers sharing a junior body; senior Packards with another. The large Packard was to have been based on the Predictor show car of 1956; the Clipper actually got as far as a fiberglass model and a running, cobble together hand-formed metal mule of the Senior Packard. Again, all this died when Detroit Packard went “tango uniform” in July of 1956.
* after the bankers and insurance company backers said “no” to Nance’s proposed ’57 body and model program . . .
They did try to go with another independent; Nash. However, George Mason suddenly died and George Romney was no fan of James Nance and vice versa. The AMC-Packard merger only got as far as Nash/Hudson buying Clipper V-8’s and Twin-Ultramatics from Packard. That ended early in ’56 when AMC launched their own V-8 and mated GM Hydra-Matics to them. By July of 1956, Detroit Packard was dead.
I own a 1955 Clipper Custom Constellation and the Torsion Level suspension system turned out not to be a real problem for the cars. In 1955, Packard was probably the most innovative car company in America, offering not only the only cars with torsion bar suspensions, but also a new, powerful and efficient V-8, standard Twin-Ultramatic automatic transmissions, as well as options such as air conditioning, power steering, power brakes, electric antennas, 4-way electric seat, and power windows.
The weakest point of the 1955 Packard is its transmission. Although as good as any automatic of that year, it demands consistent service and proper shifting on acceleration; otherwise, it seems to work just fine. The engine is smooth and sound at 245 horsepower, with its Rochester 4-barrel carberator and dual exhaust. An oil bath air cleaner keeps the air flow steady.
My car, known as the Bumblebee due to its yellow (citron) and black (onyx) paint configuration, is a terrific driver. The ride from the Torsion Level suspension is incredibly smooth, but with sufficient road feel. With no springs, the suspension is firm and not squishy like some cars — especially Chryslers and GMs. It corners very well, much better than my previously owned Lincoln Towncar. The ride, in fact, is quite modern and the steering is firm and competent.
Overall, this is a terrific, well-built, beautiful car. As a member of several Packard clubs, I can tell all of you that this is indeed a real Packard and is acknowledged by all I have met in both the Packard Automobile Classics Club and local clubs as a genuine, 100 percent Packard.
Here’s my Y&B Clipper. A terrific car and with a little modification stands well with the hot rod set as well as Packard enthusiast
Fabulous find, original with current plates. Nicely done, Ed.
Sadly I agree with you Mr. Zackman. Independents that tried to get business with “me-too” cars all failed. Why chance a Clipper instead of a Buick or Chrysler? All the Kaisers and Frazers. All the fifties Studes except Starliners and Hawks. Post-Airflyte Nashes and Hudsons. No better than Buicks or Fords or Dodges. What were they thinking? Late fifties Ramblers were different, served a neglected market and sold well, as did the Larks that quickly followed.
Those taillights were big favorites in the Kustom Krowd. Got this photo from a Jalopy Journal forum, which said “George Gowlands 1950 Ford”.
James Nance called the ’54 and ’55 Clipper tailights, “bull’s nuts”. Dick Teague was the man behind the clever and handsome Packard facelift as he took John Reinhard’s ’51 Packard and radically facelifted it. The only hint that the ’55 and ’56 Packards were the ’51’s was the high beltline.
Loving the chrome ships wheel. Imagine someone trying to do that today?
I kind of see this (on this generation Clipper, anyway) as the masculine opposite to the La Femme…
I always thought the Fury was like that. There actually was a Red and Black “Tex ” model of that year Dodge aimed at Men, Ranch men
When I was a kid, probably in the early ’80s, my parents took me to a car museum. IINM, it was in Wells, ME. The museum had a gift shop which had posters depicting cars made by various brands. My parents told me I could get a poster, and I picked out the one with, of all things, Packards. I think I picked it just because it was different. I can remember my parents asking me, “Are you SURE that’s the one you want?” I’m probably the only one here who had a Packard poster on the wall of his room when he was a kid….
At the time, I was interested in old cars and had a few car books, so I certainly had heard of Packard, but it was probably little more than a name to me at that age (probably 10 or so). I’m sure I knew that Packard was a make of car that had become defunct in the ’50s, but that was probably the extent of what I knew.
You remind me of my only encounter with one of these. I was probably about 10 or 12 (in the early 1970s) and saw a well-worn old black sedan parked on the street. I could tell it was from the early 50s or so. I looked all over the thing, and the only badging I could see said “Clipper”. I knew enough to know that there was never a Clipper brand (wrong) but did not know which manufacturer made a Clipper. The mystery was only solved years later through reading, probably the Special Interest Autos mags I borrowed from my best friend’s dad (who became my famous car-mentor Howard).
A clarification: the original Clipper was not the car Packard intended to be their mainstream, mass-market product; that was the 120/One Twenty and then the Six/110/One Ten, introduced five or six years earlier. The first Clipper was intended as Packard’s style leader, the answer to the Cadillac Sixty Special. The Clipper was a lot cheaper than a Sixty Special, but was priced toward the upper end of the One Twenty series: it was $129 more than a comparable One Twenty sedan and about $340 more than a six-cylinder One Ten sedan.
The waters got muddied somewhat because in 1942 the Clipper name was applied to the entire Packard line, including the big One Eighty, something continued by the 21st Series cars after the war.
I saw an identical car – same colors too – offered for sale by a fellow just up the road a couple of miles. About the same condition but quite a bit of water staining in the otherwise nice interior.