58L-Y8

I'm not surprised A.J. would appreciate the most elegantly-styled sport sedan of all KB Lincolns! The Model 240 Sport Berline by Dietrich, of which only eight were built, was the one that got away from Packard. Look closely at the lower body and you'll see its the same as the Packard V-windshield Individual Custom Dietrich bodies. The victoria-coupe style rear bustle wasn't seen on Packards, though should have been. Best part is they retained the convertible-style half-door, thin chrome window frames lending a lightness not even seen on the Car of the Dome. The flat windshield was probably done simply to differentiate the style from the Packards. With its metal roof and lower convertible body structure, if the B-pillar was removable, it would be a nascent four door hardtop decades before they came to the general market. Of the KA Lincoln Victoria coupe, both it and the REO Royale being Murray bodies, they benefitted from the fine aesthetic touch of both Amos Northup and Ray Dietrich. Ray Dietrich was certainly still with the company when these were being developed, would have had much input in their designs. Steve

Perhaps someone could take the '41 coupe in posting #13 and with sections from another coupe, create a credible closed-coupled four door sport sedan like the one rendered by Ross Cousins for Bob Gregorie and Edsel Ford.

Like it or not, its a transnational auto business and market now. Most buyers could care less where their new car is built as long as they can afford to buy it, its has the expected assembly quality and it returns reliable, generally trouble-free service. Country of origin is of no consequence to them. My only beef with Buick is they spring these slick concepts on us, like this Avista and last year's Avenir......then never bring them to market! Note to Buick "If it looks good, it is good, just build it!"

Hi GarryM Your description sounds somewhat like the 1930 Lincoln L Sport Roadster Model 191 by Locke. It has the disappearing top but not the third door rumble seat entrance. Refer to page 186 of The Classic Era by Beverly Rae Kimes. The Model 191 was scaled for the 136" wheelbase of the 1930 Model L, was design rendered for the 1931 Model K 145" wheelbase though doubts are any were actually built. Of the cars cited with the third door for the rumble seat, the 1929 Chrysler Imperial Model L-80 Roadster by Locke is pictured on page 136; the 1930 Rolls-Royce Phantom I York Roadster by Brewster on page 143 of the same book. The Derham convertible coupe pictured on Stutz including a photo with the door highlighted can be found on page 263 of The Splendid Stutz by Katzell. Although long wheelbase roadsters are the very extravagant embodiment of the 1920's ethos, the proportions aren't always that aesthetically satisfying. My personal opinion, the greatest benefit of a 145" wheelbase chassis as blank canvas is the rare chance to recreate one of the full-custom designs lost to history. The one that comes immediately to mind is pictured on page 262 of The Splendid Stutz by Katzell, captioned a "1930 five passenger Coupe by Generaux. A profile view is found on page 72 of The Golden Age Of The Luxury Car by Edited by George Hildebrand. The description is "A faux cabriolet by Etablissement Generaux of Brussels" Though essentially a victoria coupe, a recreation of this design could be built as a quarter window convertible victoria, stunning either way. Whatever body style you decide will be a welcome addition of one more Stutz MB restored to its original magnificence. My two cents, for what its worth. Steve

Hi Noting this 1933 Continental Ace sedan currently on eBay: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Other-Makes-/161920185899?forcerrptr=true&hash=item25b331f62b:g:~ikAAOSwk1JWcYj8&item=161920185899 How many Aces are now accounted for? In the 1977 Special Interest Autos article, they wrote only two were. One being offered by a collector car dealer is sort of restored, are any of the surviving Aces correctly restored? Were the Hayes bodies shared with any other carmaker? The styling seems to be current with its times, looks familiar, most similar to the concurrent Essex-Terraplane, though without the split windshield. Steve

Hi Even in thirty years of attending Hershey, which is never a disappointment, there are certain makes and/or models I have never encountered restored or well-preserved there but would like to see. Here's a couple that come to mind, add those you've got on your bucket-list. 1934 Hupmobile 417W sedan or coupe 1933 Continental Beacon, Flyer or Ace, any style 1929 Graham-Paige 629 1936 REO Flying Cloud Perhaps I just missed these if they were ever there. Your would-like-to-see list? Steve

In my father's black with white top 1963 Ford Galaxie 500 four door hardtop, the nicest car my folks had up to that point.

At Hershey a while ago, came upon remnants of what turned out to be a 1934 Hupmobile 417W coupe. Both it and the sedan share most of the Murray body with the concurrent Ford but with different details and features. The rear of the sedan body is different from Ford bodies, the coupe has half-door construction with convertible-style chrome-framed windows. Does anyone know how few were built?

Paul - You've nailed it, the '41 Cadillac "The Duchess" is exactly the configuration and content Pierce-Arrows should have been from the mid-'30's on. The '41 Packard 180 LeBaron Sport Brougham was also the correct configuration for their would-have-been late pre-war cars. Bringing that in for $3,000 possibly was in their capability.....well, maybe not quite as lavishly in accoutrements as "The Duchess". It must have caused no small amount of consternation during 1936-37 in the P-A front offices while they watched the excitement and, what would have been for them, good sales volume generated by "that upstart fwd Cord!". Rather than grouse about people spending good money on a car with no reputation, ordinary build quality, unproven mechanicals by a shaky company, they should have analyzed its appeal then quickly set about creating their own 1937 version to grab a piece of that market. Standing pat for the 1937 car lines sure didn't work, nor did diversion into travel trailers. When those first streamlined explorations took place in 1933-34, the fastback, so unlike the undercut shape of sedans up to that point, were the very soul of modernity. Through integrated, their trunks were limited by the sweeping shape, didn't fully affording the function expected. As the trunk and its rack hanging off the rear was replaced with a crudely-appended bustle trunk, it fulfilled the function without a pleasing form. The '36 close-coupled club sedan and large bustle-like trunk was a nascent 3-box sedan, waiting to be integrated and refined. If their designers could have conceived the vision, drew inspiration from the Cord, presented the concept to management, who then ran with it for 1937, it well could have been the beginings of their revival. Had they been able to conceive of it thin, chromed window frames, it could have a real knockout.

Thanks Ed for your assessment of both engines from considerable personal experience, something most of us lack. To what engineering features and details of the Pierce-Arrow twelve engine do you attribute the more robust character? Bore/stroke ratio? Bearing surface size? Oiling and cooling system design? Metallurgy?

If you can find a motor number stamped on a surface, it will be much easier to identify what models and years Chandler used that engine. Chandler had at least three different sixes with a further displacement variations on two in its last five years. The largest was a 288.6 ci in the Models 32, 33, 35, 1924-26 respectively, 1927-28 Big Six, and '29 Big Six enlarged to 331 ci. It was 3.50" X 5.00", long stroke unit. In those Depression years when recycling useful items was a necessity, a low-revving, long-stroke engines with transmission sourced from large, cheap used cars to power a sawmill or pump was common. Most like that was why that unit was saved and re-purposed.

Paul, Thanks for the kudos for my bridging strategy, something had to stem the freefall to create the situation that would allow the cars you've described and designed. They looks magnificent, what a shame no one had the vision as the time! "What we don’t know is whether a fourth category - expensive fine cars with excellent craftsmanship, new-school engineering and advanced styling (such as the proposed Pierce-Arrow) would have sold well. We can't know because none ever existed." At $3,000 and above, nothing was ever created specifically that would fulfill all those qualities described in one car. From their lack of action in that direction, one can infur the Pierce-Arrow management hadn't the vision or imagination to create such a car from the time they took over control from Studebaker. But, not to indict them too harshly, neither did any of the principals of the relatively financially healthier luxury car makers either. Packard would have been the most like candid to try, but the mindset had changed: if it wasn't mass-production, it wasn't worth the expense or bother. With Pierce-Arrow and ACD defunct, Packard settled for the few coachbuilt semi-custom formal styles and Darrrin customs to serve whatever demand arose. Cadillac, after the flathead Sixteen died, contented itself with a few Fleetwood formals on the 75, allowed a handful of cars to Derham and Bohman & Schwartz. Edsel Ford kept Brunn building Zephyr-chassis town cars for family and associates; the Continental really his preferred project. The '41-'42 Lincoln Custom lwb cars seem an almost an afterthought, created to hold onto the few K owners loyal to Lincoln. The Chrysler Crown Imperial was a pale effort, though Derham based a few worthwhile efforts on that late pre-war chassis.

Even the highest quality car that was out of step with what the market wanted in size, features and price as well as the tenor of the times would fail, which was exactly what befell the late-years Pierce-Arrow, and its peers, the Lincoln K V-12, Packard Twelve, and Cadillac Twelve and Sixteen. At the close of Lincoln K production, Edsel Ford said it wasn't that "We stopped producing fine cars, just that people stopped buying them" If those who still could afford such a car felt ill-at-ease driving one, it didn't matter how well they were crafted. Perceptions of quality are an ever-changing target in the auto business, relative to everything else available. Pierce was still a profitmaking enterprise just like any other car company, and the primary management charge was to run the company with that as their main objective. My prior comments regarding the 1932-33 product developments for 1934 should have been prefaced with the proviso that a very narrow window of opportunity existed to grab public attention and generate sufficient sales to fend off the mid-1934 receivership and eventual bankruptcy in August of that year. Intended to avoid that situation, the $1,900-$2,000 model described would still have had a high degree of quality engineering and construction. What they built ultimately wasn't profitable for the reasons stated above, were exercises in futility. To decide that in the distressed economy and rapidly changing tenor of those depression years that a degree of production component sharing was somehow anathema to their quality standards and a guarantee of an inferior product, when the unchanged path they followed lead to demise is to misunderstand the bigger picture. Simply put, they didn't have the luxury of continuing as they always had in the face of economic and industry trends, engineering and styling progress. And as important, changing social outlook that came to despise the class who were blamed for bringing the Depression on and trapping of their continued insulation from that distress i.e. expensive ultra-luxury cars. Many a once long-time Pierce-Arrow family understood the situation, chose an egalitarian car as cover for their transportation. No amount of quality craftsmanship could change that view. Packard 120's, Lincoln Zephyrs, LaSalles and Cadillac Series 60 while above the mass-market offerings in price and features, weren't preceived to be so far above or as haughty as were their last grandiose luxury cars. Could management have brought themselves to develop and field an owner-driven, $2,000 premium sedan of modern, Silver-Arrow-inspired styling based on production components shared with Studebaker President? If it meant corporate survival?

Hi AJ If you have a copy of Special Interest Auto, Apr-May 1972, Issue #10, page 28 & 29, there is an article titled "4-Speeds of the Early 1930's". It has a good description of the functions of each type, and a list of year, makes and transmission manufacture and model, ratios and differential axle ratio. For 1931, REO Royale isn't listed. What is listed follows: Chrysler, Packard and Pierce-Arrow manufactured their own. Durant 6-17, Franklin 153, Gardner (all), Graham Special & Custom, Peerless Standard & Custom 8 and Windsor 8-92 had either Warner Gear model T5 or T5B. Franklin 152 and Stutz LA, MA, MB employed Detroit Gear & Machine model RS. Good to see you at Hershey, you're making great project on a wonderful rarity! Steve

The object of the $2,000 price wasn't to get into that highly competitive, high volume segment which was already crowded. Generating sales of a few thousand while maintaining prestige and building a new clientele was the primarily thought. The Packard Light Eight 900 sold very well in that range, accounted for 40.7% of their 1932 total production, just didn't generate profits because they weren't versed in low-cost, mass production.

A little late to the party, but here's my take how they could have started their market revival. At a critical meeting in late 1932, the sales and marketing general manager, with support of the company president, would have put the assembled on notice that the company could no longer survive solely on the sale of impressively-sized, bespoke-crafted, fine carriages for the uppermost socio-economic strata. If they didn't broaden into lower price ranges and attract new customers, they could kiss their company goodbye by 1940! After the heated discussions of the future direction were settled, he would have then outlined what their 1934 model development would be: a smaller, owner-driven, five passenger fastback sedan with Silver Arrow-inspired styling, snappy performance, priced significantly below their most recent lowest, in the $1,900-$2,000. In order to create this new car, manufactured on a cost-affective basis for a good unit profit, a high degree of assembly and component sharing with Studebaker President would be required, including recycling major President components as basis. These compromises were absolutely necessary, however distasteful they might be to P-A traditionalist. The specification would then be laid out: a 130"-132" wb, running the current President 337 ci. straight eight and running gear fitted into lengthened, double-dropped version of the 1934 President frame . The body would utilize major 1934 President stampings sections then in development such as the cowl, front doors, floors, modified to fit the larger chassis. With the Silver Arrow debuting at the Century of Progress shortly, as much of its styling would be incorporated into further unique stamping as possible. Lowered enough to delete the runningboards, with pontoon fenders, V-windshield, fastback and verbatim copy of Silver-Arrow frontal styling, it would be a industy sensation. As support for his concept, he would note that Packard's base models such as the recent 726 and 826 comprised the majority of sales as was their current foray into this lower price range, the Light Eight 900. Industry chatter held that while they were selling in volume, Packard was losing its shirt on every car sold; indicating they didn't know how to manufacture at lower unit costs. P-A couldn't afford to make that mistake; fortunately they had Studebaker as resource for less-costly components and volume manufacturing expertise. The basic straight eight Presidents were designed to sell in the price range in which P-A would be entering, presumably engineered and manufactured with greater cost efficiency than were Buffalo's own units. Their size, power and even appearance similarity making them an indistinquishably ideal for the new car. Shortly, they would have the example of the '34 LaSalle as further proof of concept: it being an Olds eight chassis mounted with a smaller yet strikingly modern styling at an attractive price. Their new car wouild be similar in concept, larger in size, much more powerful, a short step-up in price with cutting-edge styling. It would be but the first move toward regaining market and corporate health that would lead to the other progressive concepts presented. Even as the events of 1933 unfolded, as the buyout was negotiated, the terms detailing ongoing collaborations in engineering, manufacturing, component sourcing and sales/marketing would have been included. Steve

Parts I've seen plated with bright nickel have a nice appearance, more appropriate for driver condition cars, not show cars but much less expensive to do.

The model pictured in post #17 is identified as Gordon Buehrig's design for the "Wowser" while he was employed by Budd for a short time after ACD. Photos are found on page 113 of the book Rolling Sculpture, A Designer and His Work by Gordon M. Buehrig with William S. Jackson.

From The Marmon Heritage by Hanley in describing the Model 8-125 (HH): "The bodies however were a new generation of Hayes designed bodies shared with Franklin Olympic and the REO. It was not another Teague work of art, but an automobile quite a bit about the rest of the crowd. It was a spectacular performer... in this regard a fitting companion to the SIXTEEN. It was powered by the 125 horsepower engine introduced for the Big Eight but the engine was mounted in a chassis where the 5-passenger sedan weighed a surprising 3400 pounds. The specific weight was only 27 pounds per horsepower, just about the same as the SIXTEEN! It not only had GTO type acceleration, it also had a wide track of 58.5 inches front and rear." Just an observation, but the Marmon 8-125 and REO Royales appear to share the same make of headlights.

Hi Gary You raise an interesting point, the Studebaker President engine was five main bearing from 1928 through 1930, then changed to a nine main bearing engine for 1931, same as the Pierce-Arrow. One wonders what the motivation or need to do so was? Hendry described how the Pierce engine casting were different from the Studebaker. But given the drastic drop in sales as the Depression set in, perhaps the companies found it more cost-affective to rough cast one block that could be used by both?

Hi Vermontboy That's a good point, wonder if Seagrave bought not only the engine tooling and equipment but also the service parts supply along with it as an ancillary business.

Hi Kirk The best sources are these books, others will cite their favorites: Packard, A History of the Motorcar and The Company, Edited by Beverly Rae Kimes, published by Automobile Quarterly. The Classic Era by Beverly Rae Kimes and the Classic Car Club of American The Coachbuilt Packard and The Custom Body Era by Hugo Pfau The aforementioned www.coachbuilt.com is a good on-line source, though the books give context to the culture that gave rise to these art-on-wheels masterpieces. If you have a penchant for stellar engineering, magnificent design, bespoke craftsmanship within their respective era, the Classic and coachbuilt automobile will fascinate for life! Thanks for the photos, it's an absolute stunner! Is it your Packard or owned by a customer?

Hi vintagerodshop The Packard factory catalogued a Dietrich convertible Victoria in the Models 833 and 840 Individual Custom lines only. The Deluxe 845 list only 5 passenger Sedan and 7 passenger Sedan-Limousine as factory installed body types. Deluxe 845 Convertible Victorias would have been customer ordered at the Custom Salons. Whether Rollston or Waterhouse, they are the most elegant and extravagantly luxurious of Packards for those years.

Hi Trimacar Yes indeed, some of those self-anointed old car experts of yesteryear came up with some crazy tales. From what I recall about him, if he were still with us, you could show him your 160's engine, point out how it differed from the Pierce and he'd still argue he was right! He definitely was one who wasn't to be persuaded with facts........!

This one, a '41 160 Model 1904: http://wilmington.craigslist.org/cto/4818284129.html