I was perusing the latest postings at the Cohort when this Packard (1948 or so) woody wagon shot by Lee Perrin at a museum caught my eye. Ouch! That is not the right way to do a woody wagon, mostly by just by slapping planking on the steel doors.
Just a few years earlier (1941), this is how Packard built a proper woodie wagon. Understandably, wood was giving the way to steel after the war, but perhaps there was a better way?
Admittedly, it was better from the rear. The tailgate appears to be the only thing actually made out of wood, as the rest of the inner wagon structure is steel.
Apparently, Packard saw the error of its ways (frankly, the pudgy 1948 models were an error well beyond the wagon) as the new 1951 models had a much better side treatment, with wood planking the whole door.
But the tailgate is now a hybrid. Oh well.
The 1954 brought some more changes, although it’s hard to say for better or for worse. It was the end of the line for Packard woody wagons, or any genuine Packard wagons, as there apparently were none for 1955 and 1956. The Studebaker-based ’57 Packard did have a wagon, but it was neither a woody nor a genuine Packard.
Update: these later models are strictly custom made, and at a later date. See the very detailed story on all of these Packard wagons in the comment thread below.
Well, Packard was nothing if not conservative. The 48 treatment would have been well served by additional wood behind the doors,but the trim along the greenhouse works so well to my eye as to forgive the rest. By the 54 model, it was more a copy of competitors than a unique interpretation. I still love the early 60s Ford and Mercury versions best, but would happily take a Vista Cruiser or SportWagon with the di-noc cladding.
If a tree falls in the forest and hits a Packard wagon, does it still exist if nobody can bear to look at it?
I always thought that 1950 was the year for Packards last wood wagon. I believe the pictured 51 and 54 are custom built.
I would agree. This is the first I have ever seen a post-50 (non-Studebaker) Packard wagon, woodie or otherwise.
Yep. Can’t believe that even Packard would have a split window tailgate on a 1954 model. These are just too awkward.
Another thing that indicates that these were custom built is that the roof lines and window frames and glass are quite different between them. It would not have made economic sense to do such an extensive restyle on such a low volume car.
I’ll hazard a guess that the ’51 was converted relatively recently while the ’54 could’ve been done back in the day. There’s something about the squared-up corners in the ’51’s C and D pillars and I can’t figure out how the metal tailgate opens.
I actually saw one of these abominations (the 1951 woody) at a car show in New Hampshire back in the late 1970s. The section of the tailgate window that drops lower than the center merely overlaps the rectangular lower tailgate. Strictly a styling exercise that made it into production, I hope done by the custom coachbuilder who created this monstrosity.
I will be the first to admit, Packard holds a soft spot in my heart. My great-granddad started buying Packards in the early 1930s, when the Depression was tightening its grip upon the American economy. He was a prosperous co-owner of the biggest lumber and home-furnishings company in southeastern Connecticut (the Raymond & Alexander Lumber Co.) and, as most post-nouveau-riche did at the time he bought tasteful, refined yet understated vehicles so as not to stand out from the less-fortunate people in the community. (He worked for no salary for six years (as did Levi Raymond, his partner), making sure his employees were paid, When the inevitable end came in 1937, his son (my grandfather) and a fifth cousin, Bill Miner, bought the remains of the business and opened the business as Miner & Alexander Lumber Co. but that’s a different story for another day. My great-granddad foreswore the Pierce-Arrows he used to buy, going “down-market” to buy mere Packards. I remember riding in Gramp’s 1950s Packards. Musty-smelling caves of a car, doors that closed more tightly than a Mercedes, not all that powerful but fast and comfortable with every creature comfort one could want. He bought Nash vehicles for Gram, and got hooked on them himself by the mid-1950s and the Statesman he bought in 1955 was still in the garage when he died in 1966.
Those Packards I remember were probably the best cars made at the time. They put Cadillac, Buick, Imperial and Lincoln to shame. The worst thing they ever did to survive the Depression was to go down-market and offer the 120 (and related models). Had they resisted the urge to compete with the plebian marques from Ford, Nash, GM, Chrysler and Hudson I have no doubt they’d still be around today…as a low-production, exclusive niche-production marque. Why they offered wagons is beyond me, although their station sedans were favored by livery companies picking up arriving passengers from train stations. Trying to appeal to everyone killed them…same as Cadillac’s offering a tarted-up GMC SUV to increase sales. All that does is decrease exclusivity, hurting them in the long run.
Ever seen a Bentley or Rolls-Royce wagon or SUV?
OH – Rolls Royce and Bentley wagons come in all shapes 🙂
https://www.google.dk/search?q=rolls+royce+wagon&espv=2&biw=1642&bih=854&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjFvvSBt_fRAhUB3SwKHReIApUQ_AUIBigB
I’m a a real fan of station wagons but these really don’t do much for me. Maybe it’s because they’re so awkward looking, combined with the odd wood placement. I actually like the ’57 Packardbaker non-woody wagon more! Go figure.
I used to really dislike 57-58 Packards. But then I readjusted my thinking. They are the nicest 50s Studebakers ever made. 🙂
I have seen one of those Packard wagons pop up for sale from time to time, and I lust after each one. The Studebaker National Museum auctioned off a 57 sedan and I really ached for that car.
I like your way of thinking. The 57-58 Packards really are the ne plus ultra of Studebaker. When you judge something for what it is, versus what it is NOT, then you can really find yourself liking something that you really did not like before.
Speaking of adjusting your thinking, I have long thought of the 57 Packard in a much different light than most. I think of it as the inspiration for the Cadillac Seville, long before Cadillac ever thought of it. Packard should have marketed it as “International Sized”, making its size seem planned rather than a last ditch effort. Probably wouldn’t have mattered anyway.
In another variation, I always thought it would have made a wonderful 1959 Studebaker President. It was a very nicely trimmed car and had they been able to sell it significantly cheaper than when it was a Packard, it might have made some headway in that recession year for exactly the reason you cite. That 2 door hardtop body coupled with a genuinely nice interior (and properly designed quad headlights) could have hit an empty spot in the market for a year or two.
S-P President Harold Churchill in the early planning for 1959 Studebaker line-up in addition to the 108 in wb compact that became the Lark, there were to be on the 120.5 in wb chassis the Silver Hawk coupe and also a continuation of the Y-Body President sedan. As finances tightened and the situation became dire throughout 1958, the Lark production began in September, the Hawk held off into early 1959 and the big sedan fell by the wayside. The lack of at least one full-sized Studebaker sedan simply sent long-time customers who didn’t want a compact Lark or a Hawk sport coupe off to other maker dealers for their next sedan purchase.
It’s interesting that they didn’t transfer that one-year-only hardtop roof to the Hawk.
Eh, the 58 Packards are so gorpy that they lose the modest dignity of the 57 sedan. Nice interiors, tho.
The long fins and short roof of the Packardbaker wagons spoil it for me.
I have to agree Frank. Looking at these I begin to understand why they went out of business.
The clash between bulbous, rounded body and strict, rectilinear woody trim on the liwer doors makes it look like an amateurish custom job by an owner with no design sense.
But one would suppose that Packard did have some design sense. Or should have.
Yeah, I agree with you. I may be mistaken, but I understand Dick Teague (the younger, not his father) worked for Packard before moving to AMC in the late 1950s. Hope someone corrects me, if I’m mistaken. I just cannot see Teague designing such a caricature of a woody. His designs were understated elegance on a low budget. Knowing that Packard farmed out their wagon production helps some…but not much.
Have a look at Teague’s 1960s AMC production cars, and there’s NO WAY that man designed those revolting Packard woodies. (Have a look at his 1965 Ambassador 990 4DR sedan, you’ll see what I mean.)
Here’s the ’65 Amby ~
Credit for the Free-Flow styling as Packard named it, goes to a collaboration between Briggs Body Company’s in-house design department with the small Packard design group. Work on the styling follow-up to the Clipper began immediately as those came on the market in April 1941. Al Prance lead the Briggs group while Styling Director Ed Macauley headed the half dozen that comprised the Packard effort. Briggs Body had talked Packard into letting it take over its body production beginning with the 1941 Clipper.
At the time, no one knew what theme would prevail in postwar styling, many through-fendered, high-domed hooded, bubble greenhoused, fastback concepts were sketched. Macauley had a custom Darrin known as the ‘Brown Bomber’ which became a rolling styling lab as new features were developed and tried out. The ‘mouth organ’ grille and through fenders were among the features that would eventually be incorporated into the production 22nd-23rd Series design.
Because the Clipper had just been introduced in April 1941 and produced only until February 1942 when all civilian automobile production was suspended, it would be the car to carry on when the war ended. Management decided because the body was still up to date, that a restyle to get further use of the tool and dies was the course to pursue for their next new series.
Of Dick Teague, he came to Packard styling in 1952, became styling director shortly thereafter with Frank Hershey returning to Ford. Teague was key to the 1955-’56 styling, helped build a viable in-house design department. Bill Schmidt was brought in in mid-1955 to head the work on the all-new 1957 Packard and Clipper lines that never made production. Teague left first for a brief time at Chrysler then onto AMC in 1959.
Here’s Ed Macauley’s 1941- 1948 Packard “Brown Bomber” styling concept car, in its final iteration, which would be in the 1945-’48 period.
Yes, I never really understood this car. With the way the wood is just stuck onto the doors, the stylists could have done those panels on the doors in any shape at all, so . . . they only had access to saws that cut at right angles? And why no wood on the rear quarters. Cool concept, poor execution.
I’d have thought those were home-built looking at them.
The pictures made me hum “Redneck Yacht Club” – Craig Morgan.
Wooden bodies must have been one of the most inherently bad concepts in all of the history of the automobile!
There’s many a reason they no longer exist. Also, can you imagine what a modern safety test would look like on a wood-framed car? The horror…
There is definitely a beauty to wood though, but this one…
The following is a synopsis of the Station Sedan episode from a fine book: Packard 1948-1950 by the late Packard authority Robert J. Neal. It is a great book and worthwhile read for anyone interested in why things went so wrong for Packard in the postwar period.
The Station Sedan, as the feature car is named by Packard, was a further effort to widen the appeal of the 1948-1950 22nd and 23rd Series cars. They were based on the entry-level 2201 Series Eight, 120 in. wb, 288ci engine but very pricey at $3,425. Compared to the $3,433 Buick Roadmaster Estate wagon, 129 in. wb, 320ci engine; the Station Sedan was clearly no bargain. This situation did not improve when both Buick and Chrysler presented up-to-date new styling for their 1949-1950 station wagons.
Functionally, as can be seen in the photos, the cargo area is only as wide as the regular sedan trunk which is relatively narrow to begin with, being carried over from the 1941-1947 Clipper on which this series was based. Combining that narrow opening with the forward curved slope of the tailgate renders the enclosed usable space very limited. The wood doorside appliques, which are actually inserted into model-specific door stampings, look unfinished without a further carrying out of a decorative wood panel on the rear quarters.
The whole Station Sedan episode was a debacle within a debacle. The main thing to know about Packard under President George Christopher was it was a company bent on volume production at all cost, even to the point of failing to coordinate production with current sales rates. Christopher declared an edict that 150K 22nd Series cars had to be produced before a model change to the 23rd Series. By the time the 1948 22nd Series became the 1949 22nd Series (cars unchanged) in November 1948, it would still be May 1949 before finally satisfying that arbitrary 150K figure. As that change happened, there were still some 13K leftover 22nd Series cars to be cleared from inventory including nearly a thousand Station Sedans, poor scheduling management at its worst. Dealer allowances and other financial help were allotted by the factory to help sell the glut; a de facto paying people to buy their leftover cars, giving away unit profits.
Then as the 1949 23rd Series began, running only to November 1949 when it became the 1950 23rd Series, still leftover 22nd Series car sales competed with more profitable 23rd Series sales. To identify the 23rd Series models, minor detail and grille changes, a mid-side-level continuous chrome trim and oval tailights were applied, except the leftover, re-numbered Station Sedans which didn’t have their styling updated to match. Of course, caught up in this mess were approximately five hundred leftover, re-numbered 22nd-now 23rd Series Station Sedans which proved to be continually slow sellers for the reasons cited above. Unused cars in inventory were re-numbered as many as three times before the last were finally gone. Although an upgraded Station Sedan was prototyped for the 23rd Series with 127″ wb and 327 ci engine, none were built. Re-numbered leftover 22nd Series Station Sedans carrying 23rd Series serial numbers but with no styling trim updates were sold up to and beyond the introduction of the all-new 1951 cars. Some poor dealer somewhere breathed a sigh of relief in late 1951 as that last leftover Station Sedan drove off his lot. If all these series starts and renumbering sounds confusing that’s because it is.
That’s it for the 1948-1950 Station Sedan from Mr. Neal’s book.
Those 1951-1954 station wagons one encounters now are recent creations, most by a Packard enthusiast named Carl Schnieder in Washington State. Packard did not build or catalogue any more station wagons for its remaining time producing cars in Detroit. The South Bend “Packard-baker” 1957 Clipper Country Sedan and 1958 Packard station wagon were, as everyone knows, simply Studebakers in Packard drag intended to fill out the product line. In fairness, the South Bend Packards were never intended to be the final form of the Packard car but as interim models until a proper all-new large Packard could be developed when Studebaker-Packard corporate finances allowed which of course they never did.
Wow, thanks a lot for all this info! So this means that ALL Packard wagons with the “pregnant elephant” styling were ’48s, at least initially.
The decision from the CEO that they would change to the new MY only after 150k of the present MY were made is beyond rational understanding. With top brass like that (and with a Board that likely rubber-stamped these ridiculous practices, no questions asked), it’s little wonder that Packard were circling the drain by 1952, finally merging with the only other company that was in a worst state than they were (Studebaker) by ’54.
As for the 1951-54 Packard wagons, there was one (just the one) made by Henney in 1954, apparently.
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/1954-packard-super-station-wagon-yes-i-want-one/
Thanks for the full explanation. Remarkable story. No wonder they went bust.
Could they not have done the greenhouse and liftgate just as they did, and left it at that? Would have been much cleaner, and still provided enough wood to make the suggestion.
The yellow woody Packard is on display in the Packard Museum in Fort Lauderdale.
A highly recommendable museum packed with cars and items and running a very
informative movie.
We were there during the Christmas Holidays in 2016
That 1954 Packard looks like a Pontiac.
And the Packard and Pontiac were the last American cars with straight-8 engines.
To further add to the debacle…Station Sedans required their own roof panels and (I believe) quarter panels, used on no other body style. With all of its other troubles at the time, PMCC could ill afford that, especially for a limited-production, expensive car.
Perhaps the thinking was that this unique vehicle might persuade some buyers to consider a Packard? I don’t know. I’m not sure why they made them
That being said, I personally don’t find them ugly, particularly in dark colors. ’48-’50 Packards are not my favorites (thought I’ve heard they drive very well).
If I had to pick one from those years, it would be the 2-door sedan.
For me the Pregnant Elephant was one of the main reasons why Packard went under – it was a good example of how not to do the new “bathtub” styling and sold only because of the demand for any new cars after the war. The first Kaiser-Frazers were also guilty of that but, being smaller and lower, were not as elephantine. How could anything like that get the go-ahead is no less damning to George Christopher, particularly when the previous models were so elegant and ahead of their time – so much so that a simple update of the 47 Clipper would have been enough to bring it into line with conventional styling cues prevailing then (and even later), see below…
The bathtubs *were* an update to the ’40-’47 Clipper, an attempt to make the prewar design with pontoon fenders look like a postwar “envelope” design by filling in the area between the front and rear fenders; it didn’t work. Packard was unlucky to unveil the Clipper shortly before the US entered WWII and convert automotive production to military items (like Merlin engines in Packard’s case) well before the new design was amortized. They couldn’t afford an all-new design in 1948.
The “bathtubs” generally looked too bulbous, but somehow what didn’t work at all on the sedans and wagons worked beautfully on the convertibles where somehow the smooth flowing lines all come together wonderfully. I saw one once in brown-over-tan two tone and it was stunning.
You’re welcome, Tatra87. Actually all Station Sedans were produced during the 22nd Series which encompasses both model years 1948 (2786 cars) and 1949 (1099 cars). Then with all the leftover 1948 cars renumber as 1949 models even while the 22nd Series production continued including station sedans, it simply resulted in more slow-moving inventory. When the change over to the 1949 23rd Series happened a glut of nearly one thousand Station Sedans were still on hand. More renumbering happened after November 1949 when the 1950 23rd Series began. Absolutely poor management, ignoring the realities of the market.
President George Christopher was first and foremost a production man almost to the point of obsession, the board of directors went along willingly. He made plans for Packard to sell 200K cars annually in those first postwar years. This in spite of the fact they’d only cleared the magic 100K units once (1937) and came close (98K) in 1940. To support this ambitious objective, set up production lines and promised the dealer network to supply that high quantity, only to fail when material shortages and industry-wide labor troubles thwarted the goal. Dealer confidence suffered but they hung in there….for a while.
The arbitrary objective of 150K units annually for model years for 1948 and 1949 was born of the optimism in the pent-up demand and the resultant seller’s market, something of which they hoped their 22nd and 23rd Series cars would take full advantage. The other motivation was 150K units per annum was decided to be key to profitably amortizing the tooling costs. Altogether 300K units were planned for a market hungry for Packard’s take on postwar styling and engineering. When 1948’s 98K calendar sales bested Cadillac’s performance, the BoD and Christopher celebrated, ignoring the fact that 80% of sales were medium-priced models. Self-delusion was rife among management.
Ultimately, 148K 22nd Series and 109K 23rd Series cars were built and sold between the last quarter of 1947 and mid-1950. As the competition introduced their new postwar cars, demand for the Free-Flow-styled Packard slackened significantly. By early 1950, dealers were screaming for an all-new car, reduced to pushing the cheapest Eights to make a sale. And like a bad penny, when these cars hit the used car market, their resale values were very low, further contributing to Packard’s tarnished reputation.
In defense of the cars themselves, they were well-engineered and built, bullet-proof mechanically, luxurious in a pre-war sort of way, even the lowest-line Eight. The top-of-the-line Custom Eights are the last Packards running the nine main bearing 356 cu. in. straight eight that began in the now-Classic 1940 Super Eight 160 and Custom Super Eight 180. If one can live with the styling, the 22nd and 23rd Series models are a tremendous value in a collector car.
That one 1954 Packard-Henney Super Station Wagon was an effort by Henney Body Company to tap whatever market there was for a long-wheelbase, luxurious station wagon. As it turned out: none. It was built on their ambulance/hearse body with ‘civilian’ color and trim. It was found abandoned and vandalized in Port Chester, NY in 1963, no one saved it.
Your insight and knowledge on these cars is encyclopedic. I should just stitch your comments together to make a whole post!
Seriously, would you like to contribute and share some more of your knowledge? It would be most welcome.
Seconded!
Hi Paul, Glad to contribute whatever I can. I’ve been an automotive history student for fifty years, especially for independent makes with emphasis on Packard. The synopsis is garner from a great book by the late Robert J. Neal: Packard 1948-1950.
These immediate postwar Packards are both maligned and misunderstood as cars and what events brought them to market. Understanding of this period is key to knowing how Packard ended in demise only a few years later.
Was there, or was there supposed to be, a prestige aspect to owning a woody, as in “I can afford the upkeep on this”?
How about a trailer – a reel woody
Much inspired by the TAB trailer
With a kitchen in the rear opening.
We found this unexpectedly at a boat fair this weekend.
I have a 1950 woody wagon and when i first opened the back door it feel apart in my hands -luckily i caught the window- .What i need now is a template or some way to put this door back together. Your help is much needed-Thanks David.
Have a 1948 original Packard Woody Green in great condition! 54,000 original miles. Garage find of a relative that passed. Plus some other Packards.Also some 1960 Lincoln Convertibles. Would love to chat and figure out how to move on with these vehicles.
Kevin