mrpushbutton

Boyd and his boys were little more than a circus side show at the unveiling, they tried to force open the hood, which didn't like that kind of treatment. But hey, it's not like they ruined something good.

There's a shop in Texas that already alters the 700R4 case to bolt up to the Packard V-8.

I have it on good authority that the body is as thin and as fragile as aluminum foil--the car was coated in cosmolene on the outside, but nothing was done inside, it was just a production Belevdere that was put in the tomb. The inner panels are just in primer, some random spots got exterior paint, but very few and the body rusted from the inside out, what you see that looks like an intact body is a fragile shell. It's trashed, the stainless trim is about all that survived the entombment. When you are there at the site you can see that the river isn't that far away, a couple of blocks, and the water table high. They built an addition to the courthouse after the car was buried and all of the construction equipment had to go over that patch of grass, the top of the tomb was not far beneth the surface, so that didn't help. It's hard enough to restore any '57-up Chrysler product, with those sub-standard bodies on those cars.

I can't speak to current value, although several have changed hands at auctions, filter out auction hype and I think you would have a good idea. As for driving, they are good powerful cars of that vintage. No synco-mesh yet, I assume you know how to drive that vs. later synco-mesh cars. 45-50 mph can be achieved with the stock rear end gears.

Classic Steel: Benjamin Franklin's "Poor Richard's almanac" had a very wise quote "a fool and his money are soon parted". I think you hit the nail on the head--spend some time getting to know the model, brand and year of the car you are interested in, know what is real and what is bogus--especially in regards to muscle cars, where there is incentive ($$$$$) to pass off a dog meat coupe as a certified muscle model. Number matching is usually good, but I would make friends with someone who already has that knowledge, and owns one of these cars. As for street rods, I, and many others here on this site haven't a clue, we by and large don't care for the idea, being somewhat orthodox in our appreciation of original cars, as-built. I honestly don't know how that crowd sets value--I guess what they can get. It would be hard to judge value on a product that is different every time (and yet the same with a crate SBC, Ford 9" rear end and the Summit catalog thrown at each one). Prehaps there is a street rod site where a panel of individuals could be more helpful. BTW--we tend to use the term "classic" here carefully, usually referring to CCCA approved "full Classics", cars of exceptional status (expensive when new) built between 1925 and 1948. The term "antique" or "Muscle car" is more specific here. Good luck, this is a great hobby, and the people here are wonderfully helpful, and many own muscle cars, post questions on the Pontiac section here, there are many Ponty mavens that will be of great help I'm sure.

Scott--I had experience with a 1941 Packard 120 woody wagon that Hill and Vaughn restored, frame up. It was a superb restoration in most every way. If I were to be critical of one thing, it woluld be the paint, the customer specified that Nitrocellulose Lacquer be used, and it did not age well, the only way we could get the car to shine up for a show was to use Pledge furniture polish, that would keep for a couple of weeks, then go dull again. I don't think that all Nitrocellulose Lacquer behaves this way, but the paint on this car did. A word about restorations, restorers and customers: There are many great shops out there that do a fantastic job, and several that have earned a great reputation of making beautiful cars that drive well. Having said that, I have to go on record to say that a restoration shop does what the customer tells them to do. It isn't very often that a customer hands a car over to a shop and says "make it perfect, call me when it's done". What can happen is that a customer gives the car over, pays his monthly bills on time, the shop starts doing some very good work, the powertrain and body start right away. Some (not all, some) body men will keep working until "it is perfect". I have seen cars where the engine , transmission and chassis were completed and the body was somewhere inbetween started and completed and the bills have added up to what the owner envisioned the total bill for the completed car will be, and sometimes the owner can not keep going, or can't keep going at this pace or grade of quality, and there is lots to be done yet. Some body men can really play the clock out, because "you want it perfect, don't you". Other times, in their defense, decay is discovered when the paint comes off that was not seen before, and that means more time = more $$$$. I have seen cars done "for auction" which is a different criteria than a car that an owner wants to drive and enjoy for the rest of his life. Walk around the big auction on Labor day in the Hoosier state and you will see a lot of that going on. I have seen cosmetically beautiful cars that you would be hard pressed to drive 5 miles in, I have seen kind of rough looking cars that drove beautifully, reliable as the day is long. I have seen restored cars with wavy body panels, orange peeled paint but ran like a top, I have seen cars on a Concours field with a flawless body, paint, chrome and interior that leave a blue cloud where ever they chug--I mean run. Back in the 60s and 70s those engines had fewer hours on them, and as long as they ran that was good enough. A 1932 car, in 1972 was almost half the age it is now. There weren't as many parts being replicated back then, some engines you only rebuilt if you absolutely had to back then. Today we wouldn't think twice. I noticed the standards of restoration take a giant leap in the 1980s, a trend concurrent with the rise in resale values of cars, especially "Full Classics" , although I know of several "Full Classics" that were painted 1965 Ford Robin's egg blue in 1965 and are running on a tired engine. The 1941 120 wagon had a completely rebuilt engine and trans, and drove like a brand new car, beautifully.

In that class of vehicle (a 60s muscle car) you will find that there is pretty much just one of each replacement part being made, although several retailers (Year one, etc) will carry it. There isn't enough of a market for two people to invest in tooling and pay the up front costs. So if there is a slight flaw in the repro part, it may well be that way from any of the vendors because it is the same part, coming from the same supplier. There are times when a replica part is "close but no Cigar", especially to a critical "expert" who got all of the NOS parts when the getting was good. This is simple economics. There might be one detail the orginal part had, a stampled ridge or such thing that the replica part just can not have because the cost to have that feature would be the cost of making the whole part again, so the part is made without it, the part functions just fine, but cosmetically not the same. Many replica parts are made because of a weakness or defect in the original-- a door handle that always snapped off or other endemic defect. The good news is that you have a car to restore where you can buy replica parts. Some of us have cars for which very few replica parts are made, and when they are the cost, part for part when compared to the mass-market Mustang/tri-five Cheby/T-bird/muscle car is higher, and that's that.

Sad indeed. II had a couple of Pontiacs, I liked the features for the dollar of a Pontiac vs other brands, unfortunately the 1980s morass of Roger Smith's GM erased that difference, few of their offerings after that stood apart from other GM cars made from the same core. I still want a 1966 Bonneville, a man's car if there ever was one.

For me, I'm with the guy who voted for the '63 Chevy (big car, Biscane, Bel Air) with the 283 V-8 and Powerglide powertrain. A proven powertrain in a well made body, affordable by most employed Americans and durable as heck. Now, some replys that might not be well received: Early Ford V-8 (flathead) bad fuel pump design, location, often called by the old wives name "Vapor lock". How a major corporation could persist in this stupidity is beyond me. They are great cars on an April day, but terrible on the Fourth of July, when everyone wants you to be in the parade. Roll-Royce: Pain-in-the-a__ wonk engineering to make silence. Silence is good, I've driven better in every decade, from America. I have driven/serviced a PI, PII (2 of them) , PIII and PIV, and lots of 70s and 80s silver this and ghost that, big whoop. I drove a 70s sedan, and drove an extrememly low miles Cadillac Fleetwood of the same vintage, and I much preferred the Caddy. Look at the R-R six engine (a truly great powerplant, BTW) there are two covers on the side of the engine to access the valve train components, just like a stove bolt Chevy, except the stove bolt Chevy has two large bolts to hold the cover in place and squish the seals. The Chevys rarley leak, and when they do, it's your fault. The R-R has 32 screws for each cover, and you can't keep oil in them for love nor money. Did anyone mention Lucas' contrubution to the marque?--oh, sorry. Duesenberg--truly great cars, but a bear to drive. Incredible power, and nothing else looks like that. I had an interesting debate with a fellow in San Francisco re: Duesenberg vs R-R. His assertion is that Duesenberg used pot metal castings in places where R-R used much more durable, stable materials, so not everyone feels that the big D is perfect in every way. I happen to like and admire them a lot, having driven two. OK, done trashing everyone else's favorites. Many props to early 60s Fords, good cars, simple, before the Gub-ment mandates hit. Some Chrysler products were amazingly durable, they could build a powertrain that couldn't be killed, I know people who try with every car they get. Chrysler, after the '57 model year had very sub-standard bodies, if you lived in the salt area they excused themselves from the road due to rust issues in the unit body frame channels, especially where the torsion bars mounted. Too bad, because the engines and trans' would go for another eon. I think the Ford T&A are some of the best cars of their era, dollar for value and dependability. The simplicity of both is admirable, and they held up exceptionally well. I have to say that if I totally look beyond the nostalgia of the past, my love for history and the look I love in the cars of the 20s-60s, the GM cars of the early 90s with the 3.8L V-6 are hard to beat. They just work, get great mileage, and went three times the miles that a beloved heirloom car like a 55 chevy, 65 Mustang or any muscle car could be asked to endure and still run as good as they do 250,000 miles later. Cars of the 50s were pretty well shot at 100,000 miles. Trans-gone, engine-blowing blue, front end-a wandering fool, hit a bump and involuntarily change lanes. The other big three manufacturers had their own triumphs in this era. We may not be making many "heirloom" cars that we will want to set aside, the electronics may make that near impossible, but the "transportation appliances" made today are great to get in every day, electronic fuel injection alone made a huge difference. Anyone who owned the last generation fo carbureted cars of the mid 80s knows this to be true.

See my response on the Packardinfo forums.

I have the PI judging book, it is pretty vague there, except for a couple of pictures, and no definitiave word on those items. I have never seen a 56 with those times you mention painted black, in 27 years of following and owning one. Those could have been done incorrectly by owners.

all of those listed items are painted bronze. the genetator arm is also painted bronze. the valve covers should be silver with red lettering, or optional chrome.

Mahonging63--Packard did not set out to build an engine plant originally, the Utica plant was built originally for defense contract work, specifically jet engines. After "Engine Charlie" Wilson gave all of the defense contracts to his former employer, GM, Packard was left with an empty, very modern, efficient building. They elected to build their V-8 line there instead of the Boulevard. From some reports Packard was already planning on leaving the East Grand Boulevard complex had they stayed in business--there was talk of an auto assembly plant being built in Utica next to the engine plant for all AMC "Big cars", ala GM's BOP consolidation of the 1980s. I know/knew people who worked at Packard before and after Nance, many thought he was mad as a hatter, spending money like a drunken sailor. Thier only point of reference was Packard before Nance, when the only large expenditures made were for the 22nd series body changes and the 24th series all-new body and chassis, and the Ultramatic. Nance felt he had inhereted a moribound corporation and had to play catch-up fast. I think we all agree that they could have stayed in the EGB factory and saved a lot of hassle and cost, cost that could have been put to better use in the new V-8 engine and the Twin Ultramatic.

Packard had the first "air conditioning" unit in a car, meaning that it was a referigeration system that cooled the passenger compartment, this was in 1939. As Rusty pointed out, the evaporator was located in the trunk/rear of the car, in the case of the Packard and the Cadillac that followed for 1941 there was a simple rectangular outlet vent. The clear plastic tube types appeared in the 1953-54 units (depending on manufacturer). This is interesting, I did not know who first integrated the AC into the instrument panel (the dash board is that angled portion of the floorboards between the flat part of the floor and the verticle firewall, as in "Curved DASH Oldsmobile").

Simplyconnected hit it right on the head How in the world, with the extensive scientific staffs and labrotories that GM, Chrysler and even Ford maintained going back to the 1920s could such a folk-lore thing like "Vapor lock" exsist and these learned men, with their vast scientific facilities could not find this and cure it? Most of the people I know in the hobby who ascribe to this faith have cars that are by and large original, they have not done much heavy mechanical work on them, which is a good thing, but there could be any number of rational age-related things wrong in the chain of the fuel system, the most likely of which is heat warpage of the two halves of the fuel pump castings. THAT is what "Vapor lock" is found to be. I have fixed it on more than a couple of cars. Early V-8 Fords defy this, they were designed to heat-warp (oh, sorry "vapor lock") . I have seen fuel bubble in the glass sediment bowls of engines, but noticed one thing: there was gas present, in its liquid form. I don't see a gas present, nor do I release pressure when the bail wire is removed and the glass bowl taken off.

Pete-- I don't disagree with you in what you espouse re: 50s Packards vs GM. I think a '49-'56 Oldsmobile is a damn hard car to beat, the Rocket V-8 matched to the Hydramatic, a Fisher body, that's it. I have driven a few of these cars, worked on them and they are truly great cars. The same can be said of Cadillacs of that era. I'm not a big Dynaflow fan, although I like Buicks as a rule for their styling audacity. Still, I don't harbor illusions about my '56 Packard. I know its short comings. Yes, we find our way around them. It is still a very decent car, and a worthwhile piece of the Packard story. My particular car, being a Packard company car and belonging to the Comptroller, and its very late production date make it historically significant to me as a student of Packard. When I bought it I wanted (and still want) a 1932-1934 big eight sedan or coupe. Would I like a Dietrich 12 convertible coupe? of course, but since I haven't bought tickets lately I figure I'm not going to win the lotto. I think in about 15 years I will be able to get that pre-war closed car, after the CCCA implodes from its membership all dying at once and the supply far outstrips demand.

Rusty--those Darts ad Valiants of the 70s (I liked to call them "bar of soap cars" because they looked like what we carved as kids when the project was to carve a car out of a bar of soap) would run forever, you could not kill their powertrain. Here in Michigan, especially in the Detroit area the thing that finally took those cars off the road was when the unibody frame-box rusted out where the torsion bars mounted, then the car took a mean lean in one corner and it was "game over". Detroit sits on top of one of the world's largest salt mines and they use the stuff liberally. But lord, you could not kill them.

Steve, I acknowledged the vast improvement in the Cadillac line, ergo my comment about "improvements to that line by Bob Lutz", Cadillac has come a long way. Not to make this thread turn off course, but in looking at GM's line up in the past few years it seems as though much attention has been paid to Chevrolet and Cadillac, Saturn is just sort of there in looks and in marketing and I think their sales reflect that. Buick has a nice look right now, I'm not seeing any marketing to back that, but then again, they are a guest of the US Gub-ment for the time being. I think GM needs to rethink their strategy to get buyers back, the 60 day buy-back does not address the problem: cars (from GM, a lot from the last 25 years) that $300,$400, $600, $1,200 repair bill you to death after the warrenty expires. Guarantee that for as long as you own that car no repair will cost over $100 and you have my undivided attention. This is what loyal buyers of foreign brands cite most when discussing why they won't help out and buy an American car--they get a little old, go off warranty and things start breaking and they cost you a lot of money to get fixed and my import doesn't do that. Much like the Bell Telephone Company learned in the late 1930s when as a monopoly, they had to fix your telephone when it broke. They figured out quickly that if they built a little more quality and robustness when they made the phones they would not be out repairing them. The big 3 want the squeeze every fraction of a fraction of a cent out of every part hoping to hit it out of the park with profits (for executive bonuses) and that always comes back and bites them. They shave fractions of a cent out of parts, the engineers and vendors are saying "I don't know about that"--"I wouldn't make it that way" , the part fails, there is a recall, it's on the 5,6, and 11:00 news and the brand and company has lost face again. Steve, I like the new Cadillac, want one, and acknowledge that it is a world-class car. I don't like Mercedes-Benz, we have a lot of people around here who drive them, I just have never warmed up to them. I understand them to be great cars mechanically, but they just aren't for me.

Jim, I saw the cars stacked on end and met your Grandfather, I think this would have been about 1977. I was only 18 then, old car crazy. He allowed me in his office, we talked for a short while then he had to get back to work, fair enough. I am grateful that I got to see that and meet him (and your Grandmother, she was there that day). Any man as busy as he was that took the time to talk to a young car nut must have been a decent guy.

One thing that happens in "buying patterns" in the USA is that the American consumer likes buy from "a winner" and is very reluctant to buy from a manufacturer who is against the ropes. This may well be a world-wide phenomenon. This thiking worked magnificently for Cadillac after the war. Any business owner worth his salt WANTED TO BE SEEN in his Cadillac. That car said to the others in his community that he is successful at what he does, and caused other people to desire that vehicle, from the top down. The reverse of this situation is what must have played out around countless water coolers during that time period, say 1953, a dialogue that might have gone something like this: "hey Bill, what did you do this weekend?" "we went shopping for a new car" "Oh yeah, what are you looking at" "We went down to Smith Studebaker (or any other orphan) and were looking at a..." "what do you want to buy that for, they aren't going to be around much longer, you won't be able to get parts, service" "well, what should I be buying?" "Get a Buick (Dodge, Mercury), that's a much better car, I really like mine, anything but a Studebaker (Packard) I have heard the same discussion in recent times, this time it's biting Cadillac, somewhat less since the improvements to that brand/line by Bob Lutz, but the buyers are going for Lexus and Mercedes over Cadillac and the water cooler talk is the same. The scary thing is, no amount of advertising can turn that influence around. MBAs hate that.

Rusty, There are people I know who were at Chrysler during the 50s and 60s, they claim that the company never made money on the Imperial. Shame, they were very good luxury cars of that era, especially the 1963-'68 models. Again, going back to my "conglomerate survival" theme beyond the 1950s the Imperial used an engine that could also be found in a Dodge truck, just as the engine used in a Lincoln could also be found in a Ford truck. Cadillac stood alone in the big three in designing and building a seperate engine for only its luxury make.

I don't buy Packard lasting as a stand-alone, had they not taken on the Steadybreaker dead weight. Let's reexamine the mindset of the 1950s car buyer in America: There was an overwhelming trust in the future and security of the big three, and a feeling that anyone else was going to go under "and you won't be able to get parts or service", especially after K-F faded into the sunset after besting Chevrolet in 1948. The nation decided, for a while, that all they wanted was GM, Ford and Chrysler, that one weird family on the block bought Ramblers, but that was it. Packard's reliance on private banks and insurance companies for operating capitol was a huge problem in that day, and the reliance the dealer network had on the local bank for financing options (advantage: GM) put them in a permenant "also ran" status. GM had new bodies and chassis in 1957, '58 and '59, again in '61. This would have been during Packard's "5 year plan" , and I think Dick would have been pulling magic out of a hat for no $$$ again, reskinning the '57 in an attempt to keep up. You mention "Beginning in 1955" -- Packard spent a lot of money on a new beginning in 1955, with all of the money they borrowed they could not afford a new body shell (see my comments above re: the high fixed costs of all-steel body construction and how it shaped who survived and who didn't) The belt line on the '55 Packards was still stuck in 1951, a huge difference when Harley Earl started dropping belt lines in '53 and the public LIKED that difference. Had Packard not rushed the development of the 1955 models and had they not been plagued with the design and production problems they might have stood a chance of eeking out an existance as a Checker-esque company that made an unchanging product. But overwhelmingly, the money was with the big three.

Packards52, you are right, the correct name is "Tropic Air", "Air" might be spelled "Aire".

Randy, the heater for that car is available, Packard bought accessory heaters with the Packard radiator shape stamped into the two doors that open to let the heat out. Many owners back then bought other accessory heaters from the auto parts store, Arvin was a popular manufacturer, there were some made/sold by "Tropic breeze". Most guys with a Packard like that want the Packard heater. I probably saw 2 or 3 of what you need at Hershey last month!

Exactly, Rusty, thank you. Which is why Cadillac, Lincoln and (to some extent) Imperial would not have survived that period were they not part of a multi-bracket comglomerate. As I stated earler, and still firmly believe, in order to make it to the present, or at least the present before the NY money boys runied it, the multi-bracket conglomerate with a healthy low-price, high-volume line was the only kind of domestic to survive. It took a lot of Fairlanes to pay the way for a Lincoln. When they sold a Lincoln they made a nice profit, but there were quarters when the market didn't feel like buying many new Lincolns. Base-line and up Fords kept rolling and selling and covered the fixed costs.