1935Packard

I have a question about the history of automotive design: Why were rumble seats popular with car buyers in the twenties and thirties? They're incredibly impractical: they take up trunk space, they're hard to enter and exit, they're dangerous, you get wet when it rains, and it's hard to talk to the driver of the car. But based on the popularity of rumble seats on 2-door cars of the 20s and 30s, presumably they looked at rumble seats differently back then: Presumably they thought it was one of the better solutions to a problem. I wonder, why? I can see liking the sporty design of a 2-door and the option of having more than one passenger. But there's always the 5-passenger coupe body style (or a victoria body style for open models),kind of like a 2+2 of today. Was that too expensive to manufacture for some reason back in those days? Or maybe they thought no one would want to sit in smallish back seats?

I agree that the trunk looks much better with the top up; when the top is down, the trunk ruins the smooth line down the car that tapers off to the rear. It's just too boxy for that, especially when you have the more aerodynamic style introduced in '35. In terms of car shows, I like to see tops down. But then I love to put the tops down on my cars: my view is that a convertible should pretty much always have the top down except when it's too cold or it's raining.

Thanks, all. The car is just a driver, so I'm not worried about show judging either way. As for appearances, I can't decide which looks better; but given that I can't fit the car into my garage with the trunk rack down, I certainly don't have any plans to use the trunk often! (And West, excellent point about touring.)

I found some text on the lock itself: It says "Excelsior USA." I googled around a bit and it seems there was an Excelsior lock company in CT and an Exclesior trunk company in NJ. I'm not sure which this is, but the name was only on the lock (and in very small font, too.)

Allcads.com probably has them, although they'll charge you an arm and two legs for the,.

Jim is right: Digital cameras are key for this. Take pictures of everything and send them on.

Interesting! I couldn't find any mark or logo on it, although I'll check again. It looked a little bit like the trunk below, although it's clearly not the same one.

This trunk came with my 1207 (see pictures below). I know the trunk has been on the car for decades, but I don't know if it's an original Packard trunk or an aftermarket add-on. Does anyone know? It turns out that with the trunk rack down, the car is too long to fit in my garage, so I'm going to be keeping the trunk rack up most of the time. Still, if it turns out that it's an original trunk I might try to put it on for shows and the like. Thanks!

Owen, Turned out I was just looking on the wrong side -- thanks for your detailed description. (Although I found that the transmission fluid was full, which means that I must be leaking from somewhere else.)

Thanks, Dave. Probably no need to open the can; I reinstalled the jar and sealed it up so I think I'm okay for now. My car is a coupe-roadster. It was "restored" in 1978, and the guy that restored it replaced the glass jar of the Bijur system with a tin can painted black. I have no idea why -- maybe the glass jar was broken? Who knows. Anyway, I bought a replacement jar from Kanters for $70 and figured I would at least make sure the color was right even if the system is disconnected. Looks a lot better with the glass jar than with a tin can.

Are the plugs nearer the front end of the car or the back? I see a bunch of bolts on the side, but nothing that looks particularly like a plug. I do see what looks like a plug at the very back of the transmission at the bottom, but sounds like that's not it. Thanks, Speedster, for your help.

My '35 Series 1207 appears to be leaking transmission fluid, and I was hoping the more experienced folks on the list could help this newbie check the fluid and add fluid if needed. In particular, I have two questions: First, where exactly is the filler hole to check the fluid? The manual suggests that there is some kind of filler hole right on the transmission itself, looks like towards the driver side, but I wasn't sure exactly where it was or what the best way was to check it (try to angle in from below, or do I need to take the floorboard out from above?). I looked from below and nothing was an obvious filler hole. Second, what kind of fluid should I should to top it off it if it's low? The manual says to use SAE160 mineral gear fluid in the summer and SAE90 in the winter, but I didn't know if there is anything to watch out for in terms of certain brands or additive issues arising with modern gear oil. Thanks!!!

Thanks! Yes, the drip plugs were replaced with grease fittings, so I really just need something that looks about right. And I should add -- yes, I do plan on driving the car!

I have a 1935 Series 1207 with the Bijur chassis lubricator. The system has been disconnected, so it's just for "show," but I was wondering what kind of oil is supposed to fill the reservoir/glass jar. The manual speaks of "Packard Chassis Lubricator Oil," and I have seen pictures of Bijur systems with a greenish oil in the jar. But I don't know what it is. Any ideas? Thanks!

Terrific work.

I'm new here, so I don't know. How far back are you thinking?

Steve Mack, Thanks, glad you agree. I totally agree about the importance of legislation (and not only because I'm a lawyer!). The classic car hobby depends on low barriers to entry: it needs to be relatively easy to buy, title, insure, and drive our cars. All of those steps require favorable laws. You're right: we need to be really mindful of the law to make sure it doesn't get in the way. It's also worth thinking about the fact that these sorts of questions -- what will happen to our hobby -- are pretty much universal for hobbyists. Jazz afficionados wonder who will listen to jazz in 50 years; baseball fans wonder who will play baseball; modern art collectors wonder who will collect modern art. In the grand scheme of things, it's nothing we can control very much. And besides, surely 100 years ago some hobbyists devoted to some craft that seems really boring to us today was wondering what would happen to his favorite pastime. We're just lucky we were free to pick cars as a hobby instead of what those hobbyists wanted us to like. And just as surely, there is at least *someone* around today who really loves that 100-year old hobby (whatever it is) and is just waiting around for its revival. Okay, I'll get off my soapbox now.

One more related thought. When I was in high school in the 1980s, I had a good friend who drove a 1966 Mustang with a 289 instead of the late 1970s beaters that every one else had. Like the rest of us, he didn't have any money, but he could get away with it because the car only cost him $3,000 (counting for inflation, that's about $5,500 in today's dollars). That car today would be worth more like $15,000, however, making it a lot harder for a high school kid to afford.

I'm under 40 and have two classic cars: a '35 Packard and a '49 Cadillac. So yes, we're definitely out there. But I think the classic car hobby has to change as the cars we think of as "classic" get older. A hobby based on collecting 30 year-old cars will draw one kind of crowd. You'll get a lot of 50 year-olds who wanted those cars when they were young, and the cars will be relatively affordable because you will still be able to find parts easily and the skills needed to repair the cars won't be outdated. It can be a pretty popular hobby. On the other hand, a hobby based on collecting 60 year old cars will draw a very different kind of crowd. The hobbyists won't remember the cars on the road, but instead will be a smaller but dedicated group who just love old cars. The size of the group will also be smaller because it will be harder to find parts and the skills needed to repair the cars will be harder to find. This is a pretty specialized hobby. A hobby based on collecting 100 year old cars will draw yet another kind of crowd. You'll get an even smaller crowd of dedicated and eccentric car nuts. The hobby will survive, but it will be less like picking up golf and more like picking up ballooning. I don't think all of this matters much: I'm in the hobby because I love old cars, and I'm going to love them if I'm the last guy on the planet who cares about them. But I think that kind of change is pretty much inevitable as the cars we love get older. The big open question is whether cars of the future will be special enough to collect decades later; only time will tell.

No, unfortunately the pictures aren't appearing. Looking forward to seeing them, though.

Beautiful! Thanks for posting. Now that my car is back from the shop, maybe I'll get around to posting a picture, too....

Thanks! I'll check with both.

I need new carpeting for a 1935 Packard coupe-roadster. Any suggestions for where I could order/purchase it? Thanks!

Yes, I had noticed that. What I can't figure out is whether the privacy threat is real or whether folks just got into the habit before that law existed and never noticed that Congress had changed the law. Take the case of car shows. It's very common for car show visitors to photograph cars at shows and put the pictures on the web. Does that suggest that we should take the plates off our cars when we get to car shows (and maybe put them back on when the show is over and we need to drive home)?

I've noticed that many classic car owners photograph their cars with the license plates taken off, and I was wondering why. Is the reason that the plates may not look so great? Or is the concern that bad people might be able to trace the plates and identify the home address of the owner? Or is it something else? Along these lines, I recently learned that Congress passed a Driver's License Privacy Act in 1994 that basically makes it illegal for a state DMV to give out your information without your consent: you can get info on that law here. I don't know if people don't trust the state DMVs to follow the law, or maybe people don't know about the law, but I figured I would mention it if privacy is the major concern with having plates in pictures.