John N. Packard
-
Posts
511 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Content Type
Forums
Gallery
Events
Posts posted by John N. Packard
-
-
Let me interject another thought. The public knew in 1955/56 that Packard was struggling to stay afloat. Many people would avoid the product simply because of fear that no one would be around to service it and that it would have low trade-in value. Poor quality control didn't help either. If indeed the dealer employees were describing the cars in derogatory terms, that would not help consumer confidence in the product or the company.<P>jnp
-
RO,<BR> The principle that you describe is what Packard used for its gas gauge in the late 20s.<P>jnp
-
RO<BR> It's called snipeing. Goes on all the time for items that people are interested in. Why bid the price up higher, just wait for the last two minutes and have at it!<P>jnp
-
I couldn't buy anthing but a Packard! My dad's first car was a 1946 Deluxe Clipper. I have a 1947 Custom Clipper. I bought it from Packard Parts Unlimited (Roland Crawford) up in the Greater Boston, MA area. I flew to Boston, went out to Mr. Crawford's place, and drove it home. My brother, who lives in the area, thought that I was crazy. That was 35 years ago. My dad's second car was a 1954 Super Clipper. I have a 1954 Patrician. It was advertised in the Cormorant News Bulletin by Howard Lumsden of Knoxville, TN. My wife and I drove down to Knoxville in my Dodge Dakota pick-up and I drove the Packard home with her following behind me. Packards are meant to be driven! The cars that I knew as a kid are the ones that appeal to me.<BR>jnp
-
Packard 53,<BR> I have read Ward's book and found it to be an interesting history of the many business decisions made, particularly during Nance's presidency. However, he leaves it somewhat open as to the cause of the company's demise. He lists many factors and suggests that any one of them being different might have allowed Packard to survive.<BR>Chesapeake Region provided cars for display during the holiday period at Port Discovery, a children's museum in Baltimore. I attended with my '54 Patrician and with a fellow member who has a 1963 Studebaker Avanti. A gentlemen looked at both cars and stated that the Avanti could not have been built by Studebaker. He went on to say that if Studebaker had built such a car it would still be in business!<BR>I wonder if a major factor in the demise of Packard was lack of confidence on the part of the consumer in the company? This same doubt may have been shared by the dealers. It's tough to sell or buy a product that you don't have confidence in. Somewhere along the way in its early history, Packard earned a reputation for producing quality luxury cars. McCauley used that reputation to sell the Junior series cars, when they were introduced in the mid '30s and was tremendously successful, initially. When the distinction between the Junior and Senior cars became blurred in 1940-41 ( by management design, according to the references I have) and quality suffered, customers moved on to other makes. Packard's business diversity was in war production of aircraft and marine engines. They dropped truck production in the twenties. Their car business just could not survive on its own and the merger with Studebaker was a total disaster!<BR>jnp
-
Howard,<BR> The "glory years" are always behind us! We only remember the "good" that happened in the past and dwell on the "bad" in the present.
<P>jnp -
Al,<BR> I checked my '51-'54 Service Manual and it indicates that you have two options. The Patrician was equipped with Auto-Lite. However the "300", which has the same engine, has both Auto-Lite and Delco-Remy options. The Delco distributor is type 1110825. Both options were available on the "Commercial" models and model "200" as well. I read somewhere that you should not mix distributor, coil, voltage regulator; but I can't imagine that it won't work. Fit will not be a problem; only the design characteristics may be different. Hope this helps and if you need me to I'll dig out the distributor from the parts engine that I have.<P>jnp
-
Terry,<BR> I didn't renew my subscription this year; but had no idea that would put them out of business! Frankly, in the sections of interest to me; the same ads appear month after month. This has very little value to me.<P>jnp
-
Al,<BR> I have a '51 327 parts engine with distributor. Would be happy for you to have it. I'll check it out tomorrow.<P>jnp
-
Ron,<BR> The Specialty Equipment Market Association (SEMA) can help with this. Consult the SEMA document "How to Lobby Elected Officials". It is available at <A HREF="http://www.enjoythedrive.com/content/?id=8212" TARGET=_blank>http://www.enjoythedrive.com/content/?id=8212</A> <P>jnp<P>[ 01-08-2002: Message edited by: John N. Packard ]<P>[ 01-08-2002: Message edited by: John N. Packard ]<p>[ 01-08-2002: Message edited by: John N. Packard ]
-
Pete,<BR> Have a great trip! Will you be stopping by Philadelphia for the AACA Annual Meeting on February 15 & 16? If so, I look forward to meeting you there. We will be addressing this topic in the Library Seminar. <BR> My comment about the 1938 Senior models is based upon a reference that states that the Twelve was built on the same chassis as the Super 8 beginning in that year. Apparently, George Christopher was attempting to consolidate the production of the Senior cars.<BR> I have a '37 Super 8 Limousine and had occasion to look at a '38 Twelve limo that presumably was used by General Eisenhower in Europe during WWII. It is in need of total restoration as is mine. Frankly, I was not impressed, which of course could reflect the condition of the vehicle. To me the lines of the '37 Seniors retain the classic look whereas the '38s do not. It is probably the split windshield and changed fender line that give this appearance. The motor seemed crowded in the engine compartment. If the Twelve was built on the Super 8 chassis, could that not be the reason? Price and condition dissuaded me from purchasing the car. I would love to have a Twelve however!<BR> JT, if we accept the premise that size of the company and the breadth of its product line was a criteria for survival in the post WWII era; then perhaps Packard's unrivaled success in its first 40 years as a luxury car builder sowed the seeds of its downfall. Their success in those years precluded any real consideration of merger or acquisition by a larger corporation. Cadillac enjoyed the benefit of a large corporate parent. It would be interesting to look at the various mergers and acquisitions over the years in the auto industry to see if they developed out of a need of the parties to survive.<BR> We haven't said anything about the role of the dealer organization. My dad bought his first car, a used 1946 Deluxe Clipper, in 1948; when we were living in upstate New York. Neither he nor my mother ever drove. My two brothers and I assumed that responsibility. We had routine service done at the local gas station. Shortly thereafter we moved to Virginia, to the town of Ashland just outside of Richmond. There we took the car to Mooers Motor Car Company, the Packard dealer in Richmond. I was always impressed by the professionalism of Mr. Goddard, the service manager, and Mr. Denny, the parts man. They took very good care of our '46 Clipper. Surely the factory needs to stand behind its product in warranty service; but isn't it the dealer that sells and services the car and keeps the customer coming back? Do we have any information on the dealer network? Certainly my small sampling may or may not be characteristic.<BR> I asked Mr. Mooers on one occasion what was his best year in the business and was surprised by his answer when he said 1928! I would have expected him to say 1937, which was a record sales year.<BR> I hope y'all are enjoying this thread!<BR>jnp
-
Thanks JT and Pete!<BR> I believe that George Christopher came to Packard in the mid thirties as Manufacturing Director to produce the Junior cars. My understanding is that he was not enamored of the Senior cars; but they were not why he was brought on board. In a sense the "120" was Packard's second foray into companion cars. The shovel nosed model 900 in 1933 was the first. These were quality vehicles that were directed at a different market segment than the Senior cars. Christopher worked his way up to the presidency.<BR>Was 1941 the year that Briggs Manufacturing started to produce Packard bodies? Somewhere I read that Briggs design personnel were involved in the development of the original Packard Clipper that was introduced in 1941. Does this explain why Chrysler products also used the fade-away front fender?<BR>Packard came out of WWII financially strong because of the defense contracts; but the management's dependence upon this source of revenue to bolster the auto business proved to be a weakness.<BR>It's not clear to me why Packard shifted production from East Grand to the Utica(?) plant; but I wonder if that move, driven by the loss of Briggs to manufacture bodies, led to quality control problems during the early production of the '55 models. By the time the problems were corrected, the image was tarnished.<BR>Pete, I always considered Packard's Ultramatic Drive an engineering achievement. Specifically the shift from torque converter to direct drive. I felt the same way about the Easamatic power brakes; but perhaps other manufacturers were offering similar features. Packard certainly had many engineering "firsts" throughout its history; but when I compare my 5th Series Six sedan to my friend's '28 Studebaker, it seems to fall short. e.g. vacuum pump versus mechanical fuel pump. There is no question but that Packard hung on to the in-line eight cylinder engine too long. The short stroke V-8s could beat them at the light every time. I drove a '54 Super Clipper for the first 25K miles of its life and was embarrased by a date who was driving a '54 Ford Y-block. I couldn't keep up with her! I now have a '54 Patrician, primarily because it represents the final development of that big eight. I can't agree with you more that if you don't sell the product you will soon go out of business. More later...<BR>jnp
-
Thanks Scott & Tom!<BR> Scott, I have Hugo Pfau's book "The Coachbuilt Packard" and he does reference Briggs in the LEBARON chapter. Apparently by the early 50's Chrysler was their principal client; so when Walter Briggs died, the company was sold to Chrysler. That is how they came by the LeBaron name. Packard was also a client at that time and after ownership transferred to Chrysler, they no longer chose to serve Packard. This resulted in Packard resuming the production of their own bodies in the Utica Michigan plant? In Ward's book "The Fall of the Packard Motor Car Company", he cites quality control problems stemming from Packard having to tool up to produce their own bodies. Something to the effect that the layout of the new facility was not adequate for the task. <BR>Tom, I didn't know that Briggs was the power behind Detroit baseball. What puzzles me is the economy of subcontracting the body building to Briggs. The logistics of delivering the bodies to the assembly line must have been difficult. I find some indication that they may have had multiple plants located adjacent to their client's facilities. I have found information relating to labor issues during the post WWII era when Briggs tried to reduce the worker's pay. Your Dad probably had a good bit to say about that!<BR>John Tjaarda worked for Briggs and designed a 'Dream Car" with a rear-engine and unitized body that was displayed at the Chicago Centruy of Progress Exhibition in 1933-34. He was hired by Briggs in 1932 as chief of their newly formed in-house design center. The appearance of this vehicle is very similar to the original VW Beetle. This vehicle became the prototype for the 1936 Lincoln Zephyr.<BR>My interest is the impact upon Packard when they lost Briggs as their body supplier. I would also like to know when Packard started using Briggs. You would think with the huge factory on East Grand Blvd that Packard could have done everything in-house; but perhaps war production of the Rolls Royce engines played a role in tieing up floor space.<BR>jnp
-
Steve,<BR> That's an interesting premise. Packard dominated the luxury car field for many years; but then under George Christopher's leadership moved into the mid-price class. I guess Buick then became their real competition. McCauley believed that Packard prestige helped sell the Junior cars, at least initially. In 1938 the Senior cars were downgraded and by 1940 they were almost indistinguishable from the 120. Interestingly Cadillac struggled in the mid-thirties as well and used the LaSalle to boost their sales. GM however opted to stay in the luxury field with the Cadillac marque and enjoyed free rein for awhile after WWII. GM had the resources, as you point out, to do that. Could Packard have survived solely as a luxury car maker? I doubt it.<P>jnp
-
Ron,<BR> The trick is delegation. We have a good group of folks in Chesapeake who are always willing to help and who do a good job. Looks like you are having success recruiting some of the same type up there in Scoharie Valley land!
<BR>jnp -
Tom,<BR> You are correct, the Utica facility was not an assembly plant. Apparently it was constructed for war production and became the engine machine shop in the mid 50s. A Briggs plant on Conner Avenue was acquired by Packard and set up for production of the 55 & 56 models. My references indicate that the Harper plant was never used and sold shortly after Packard acquired it. There is a facet of the auto industry that you don't get just by perusing the sales literature. I visited the Proving Grounds in Utica back in the mid sixties. It was a Ford facility at that time. I simply drove in, asked to see the place, and security let me drive down to the track and look around. Those were simpler days!<P>jnp
-
I have the assignment to answer this question. There are many opinions from the introduction of the Model 120 in 1935 to quality control problems in 1955. I find many interesting comments in this forum. What do you think?<P>jnp
-
Ron,<BR> Received your January "Rambler". Congratulations! Look forward to meeting you in Philadelphia. Keep up the good work. Now is not the time to quit!<P>jnp
-
Who can provide information or sources of information on the Briggs Manufacturing Company? They made bodies for Packard, Ford, Chrysler, Hudson and others. I believe they were absorbed into Chrysler Corporation in the early fifties. They had acquired LeBaron prior to that. Any websites out there with good information on this topic? Thank you very much!<P>jnp
-
I have several used hoods, doors and trunk lids for various '55/'56 models. Free to good home. You pay the shipping or pick up in Maryland.<BR>jnp
-
Merry Christmas to ALL! My antique auto request of Santa is a lead on a commutator housing for a Owen Dyneto DH-695 starter!<P>jnp
-
Here's what I'm printing in the January Chesapeake Bulletin about our tour.<BR>Ted Schneider arranged a tour to the Cammack Tucker Collection in Alexandria the following Saturday. What a change in weather! We gathered at the Rest Stop on I-95 just below MD Route 32 in a cold drizzle. As we proceeded around DC on the inner loop of the Capital beltway the rain increased and the traffic generated a dense mist that made it difficult to pick out the lead car. For me it was Tommy Thompson's 1969 Chevrolet, followed by Al & Mildred Lawson in their modern Lincoln. The only other antique on the tour was Ray Vanderlinde's 1981 Chrysler Cordoba. We enjoyed an excellent meal at the Old Country Buffet on the Richmond Highway in Alexandria and then proceeded into Old Town to visit the Tucker collection.<BR>Dave Cammack greeted us as we arrived and gave us a three hour tour of his absolutely fascinating collection. Dave bought his first Tucker automobile in 1972 and had acquired two others by 1974. In addition he has a wealth of Tucker memorabilia and extensive knowledge of the marque and its products. I was impressed by his balanced view of Preston Tucker, the Tucker enterprise, and its products. Clearly Preston Tucker was a visionary who chose the right time in 1948 to introduce an advanced automobile design in both engineering and styling. Unfortunately, he lacked a disciplined engineering approach to bringing his dream vehicle to reality. He accelerated the engineering and design process to the point where many oversights plagued the operation and duplication of effort was common as the parallel efforts of styling and engineering conflicted with one another.<BR>In my early exposure to the Tucker automobile, I came to believe that Preston Tucker was a con man who was trying to capitalize upon the pent-up desire within the American public for a new car following the suspension of auto production during WWII. After seeing the movie about Tucker and visiting the Cammack Collection, I have now come to the conclusion that he was sincere in his efforts and truly had a vision of where the auto industry might might have advanced had design efforts continued during the war years. It became clear to me as Dave Cammack related the story of the development of the Tucker automobile that what was missing was a disciplined engineering design process that would have ensured the integrity of the design and provided quality control. Unfortunately, Preston Tucker's detractors, both within the government and the auto industry, took advantage of the situation to portray him as a shyster. This made it virtually impossible for him to acquire the financing that he desperately needed to go into production. <BR>Dave Cammack pointed out that each of the 51 Tucker automobiles built was, in a very real sense, a prototype. As engineering and design flaws were identified they were corrected in the subsequent models built. This was particularly true of the motor development from a huge 589 cubic inch displacement Lycoming engine to the highly modified and refined Franklin aircraft engine that eventually replaced it. Dave has eight of these motors on display.<BR>The Cammack Collection holds three complete Tucker automobiles: models #1001, #1022, and #1026. Some of the advanced engineering features of the Tucker were a perimeter chassis with a low center of gravity, achieved by placing the rear mounted engine between rather than on top of the frame rails; a modular engine assembly that could be changed out in two hours, opening the possibility for dealers to give loaner engines to customers while theirs were being serviced; a light weight, high displacement aircraft type engine, actually an adaptation of a helicopter engine; Kinmont aircraft type full disc brakes, which never made it into Tucker production but were available as an aftermarket adaptation, particularly for race cars; independent front and rear wheel suspension with the king pin directly over the wheel to eliminate adverse gyroscopic forces; an instant heat, gas heater designed by Motorola; and the well known safety features of a pop out windshield, crash protection compartment under the front dash, and cyclops center mounted headlight that turned with the front wheels. Most amazing of all was the suggested list price of $2,450 for the 1948 Tucker!<BR>The AACA Museum is extremely fortunate that this fabulous Cammack Collection will become a permanent display in the Cammack wing of the proposed building. What a wonderful opportunity to expose future generations to the fascinating story of this automotive visionary!<P>jnp
-
Thomas,<BR> I haven't actually tried to start the car with the crank. I have turned it over a couple of times just to get the "feel" of the crank engagement. It seems a little sloppy to me. In the meantime, I have about given up on getting a replacement commutator housing for the starter. Have had two offers of a replacement starter; but I would prefer to repair the one I have. So I used the jury rigged repair of a plate to hold the broken housing to the starter. I've got it working; but it looks horrible! A week or so ago I had the motor running for about an hour and drove the car up the street to my neighbors. It was right after that the starter failed. Found a short in the field coil that I repaired. It is an Owen Dyneto unit and apparently they are rare and replacement parts are nearly impossible to locate. Once I get the car tuned up I'll try the hand crank. I have rebuilt the vacuum tank and the carburetor. I guess the distributor, points, plugs and timing will be next.<P>jnp
-
Back in the 40s we lived in upstate New York and my dad rented his garage to a neighbor for storing his 1936 Chevrolet coach. I used to sneak into the garage (10 years old) and crank the starter with the car in gear to roll it back and forth! It was to defeat kids like me that the industry went to solenoid starting systems.
<BR>jnp
selling 1954 Super Clipper 4 dr parts car
in Packard - Buy/Sell
Posted
What's a '54 Super Clipper doing with a V-8? The one I drove for the first 25K miles of its existence had a straight eight. V-8s came out in '55.<P>jnp