Jump to content

Packard Hawk 1958 how many survived?


Recommended Posts

Hi all,

Just wondered how many Packard Hawks 1958 have survived time by now?

This very special model is said to be ugly, but that's not my opinion!

Okay, the nose is weird perhaps, the looks are very fifties.

I don't know or they survived in Europe and how many were sold to Europe that year.

Mine came in 1988 from the US, together with 2 parts cars in a very bad shape! We still have to restore it completly, but it's not a priority at the moment. I'm sure if we get started our car is going to be an eyecatcher at shows!

Hope yours is too! whistle.gif

Carine

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for the advice, I will take a look tonight!

Sorry Rusty you walked by the Packard Hawk, perhaps some one saved it from getting scraped?!

I have to admit that each time I walk by our car I like it more!

The reason why I was interested in it is that it looks very nice together with our Studebaker Golden Hawk 1956 (Packard engine), plus it's my age also, no better reason to buy one at that time!

smile.gifwink.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

Count your blessings 58 Packard Wagon!

I think you got a perfect collection down there!

Okay, the Hawk isn't there yet, but who knows what's in near future.

Collecting (cars) is looking for the ultimate bargain and completing your collection, whatever you collect.

What to look for if you're complete!

Good luck!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess we StudeFolk like the Packard Hawk better than Packard people, as we are used to cars with bird names.

I much prefer the sleek hood and nose of the Packard Hawk over the Mercedes-Benz type grilles on most Hawks.

Clean the fake spare tire off the trunk, clean off most of the trim that ruins the clean lines - you have a nice looking car that turns heads everywhere!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Look at the competition. The 1958 Thunderbird with body crease lines running in all directions. It had a wider mouth grille than the Packard, and chrome plated yet.

Then they took this clownish looking body and stuck a formal squared off roof on it.

The 58 DeSoto had a wide chrome grille too, and it was bigger and crazier looking than the Packard with bigger crazier fins to boot.

Or a 58 Oldsmobile 98 or Buick Roadmaster, each one has more chrome than 10 Packardbakers

How about the 58 Lincoln? The biggest unit body car ever made, possibly the biggest standard production sedan ever made. The body sculpting gaudy grille and slanted double headlights are a model of quiet good taste compared to some cars, but it still resembles an aircraft carrier on LSD.

The problem is in 1958 the small car was the thing and big cars just weren't selling. All cars were down in sales, especially in the medium and high price class. The only cars that set new sales records that year were Rambler and Thunderbird, the Thunderbird only because it was the first year for the 4 seater.

I haven't mentioned Cadillac because they managed to show some good taste. With that one exception, the 58 Packard Hawk is probably the best looking or at least most tasteful luxury car of the year.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 years later...
Out of all of the 58 Packards that I own, this is the only model that I do not have. I hope to one day. It seems the longer I wait the more expensive they get. I will continue to keep my eyes out for a deal.

I have a 1958 Packard Hawk that i might consider selling.It has 47000 actual miles.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I guess we StudeFolk like the Packard Hawk better than Packard people, as we are used to cars with bird names.

I much prefer the sleek hood and nose of the Packard Hawk over the Mercedes-Benz type grilles on most Hawks.

Clean the fake spare tire off the trunk, clean off most of the trim that ruins the clean lines - you have a nice looking car that turns heads everywhere!

sounds like you described the original 53 version

For 58 my nominee for elegant luxury would be the Chrysler 300D. The Lincoln and Mercury are truly hideous

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

From Imperial, Cadillac, Lincoln, and T-Bird, I think the 1958 versions are all much better looking than a Packard Hawk.

What I can't figure out is why when the verticle ox-yolk grille was a Packard Hallmark, they removed the verticle grille to put on a catfish snout. Seems like it would have made much more sense to simply put an ox-yolk top on the already existing grille shape. And the outside padded armrests are not an improvement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Only 588 Hawks were built, so I bet the number still surviving today is fairly low. I have one available, and don't think it's awful but perhaps a little too flashy for some people's tastes. And what's up with putting leather on the OUTSIDE of the doors?

THIS CAR IS SOLD.

5809-1958-packard-hawk-supercharged.jpg

More info: http://vintagemotorcarsohio.com/Details_new.php?id=41

Edited by Matt Harwood
Car is sold (see edit history)
Link to post
Share on other sites

My first post here. I also saw one in a self service wrecking yard nearly 30 years ago in Santa Fe Springs, CA. It was already in a neglected state and it appeared to have been pulled out from some bushes judging from the dead branches and leaves that were in the car. It still appeared fairly complete when I saw it. It was the first and last time I saw one of these rare cars in person. I don't believe it was saved from the crusher since this wrecking yard never sold any complete vehicles.

I haven't located where to make an intro so I'll get to it when I find where or someone kindly directs me where I may.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Catfish minus the whiskers?" Ouch!

I love the Packard Hawks. Always have from the time I was a lad and the first time I saw a black and white photo of one in late 1957 in a Popular Science magazine. Don't know why, but to me they've always been beautiful and I've always hankered after one.

I've never considered them ugly and I've never really understood that attitude of the Packard folks toward the '57 and '58 models. When one visits Packard sites it's as if the Packard name never existed past 1956. Do vintage Cadillac owners look at every Cadillac manufactured by GM after GM acquired Cadillac and say they aren't Cadillacs? Do Lincoln owners look at every post -1940 Lincoln as just another Ford? Would a Toyota owner get away with calling a Lexus just another Toyota?

It's only my opinion I guess, but it was Packard that bought Studebaker not the other way around. If Studebaker had bought Packard I guess the Packard people could sort of justify their snootiness, but since Packard owned Studebaker at the time it was Packard's prerogative to call their cars whatever they wanted to call them. Heck, they could have simply dropped the Studebaker name and kept the Packard name and would have had every right to have done so. I think the name Packard is every bit as legitimate when applied to '57 and '58 models as when Studebaker built cars with Garford engines and called them Studebakers.

Wonder if a lightning bolt from the Packard gods will come out of the sky now and strike me dead for my heresy?

Nice group of folks here. Glad to see you're keeping it alive. I wouldn't mind learning more about the ones that PackardHawk, the guy in napa or the one that you've got for sale Mr. Harwood.

Mike O'Handley

Kenmore, WA

Link to post
Share on other sites
Only 588 Hawks were built, so I bet the number still surviving today is fairly low. I have one available, and don't think it's awful but perhaps a little too flashy for some people's tastes. And what's up with putting leather on the OUTSIDE of the doors?

5809-1958-packard-hawk-supercharged.jpg

More info: Vintage Motor Cars :: 1958 Packard Hawk

that a beautiful car, I love the scoopy look of the front end, reminds of the intake for jet space plane.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

Packardhawk, Are you still interested in selling? If so, please email me with details.

Rodsofthevalley, Could you tell me more via email about the one in Napa that's for sale?

Mr. Harwood, Really pretty but too rich for my blood. If I finally get one, I hope it looks as good as that one does someday. Baby steps.

Mike O'Handley

Kenmore, Washington

hausdok@msn.com

Link to post
Share on other sites

LINC400 said: What I can't figure out is why when the verticle ox-yolk grille was a Packard Hallmark, they removed the verticle grille to put on a catfish snout. Seems like it would have made much more sense to simply put an ox-yolk top on the already existing grille shape. And the outside padded armrests are not an improvement.

According to at least one book on Packards final days, after the closing of real Packard the Hawk was designed under the direction and supervision of Roy Hurley of Curtis-Wright when Studebaker-Packard was under their (his) management. It was thought that it was to be a one off and to be his personal car. Apparently the designers were as surprised as any when the order was given to build it.

Edited by HH56 (see edit history)
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I heard a similar story re. the PH convertible that's in the American Packard Museum.

I don't remember the model; but I distinctly recall seeing photos of an older generation Packard - some sort of Phaeton maybe - with padded armrest on the sides of the body that closely resemble those used on the outside of the windows on the Packard Hawk. The first time I saw photos of those, I instantly thought back to the picture I'd seen of the older model and had assumed, perhaps wrongly, that it was a sort of salute by the designer to one of Packard's older grander models.

Mike O'Handley

Kenmore, Washington

hausdok@msn.com

Link to post
Share on other sites

i picked some parts off of a Packard hawk back in December a few miles from where "restorer32" lives!!

sadly the car had deteriorated to the point that the hood letters were about all that I could save.. i have all but one if someone by chance might need them

Link to post
Share on other sites

If that car was in that yard near Harrisburg that was recently cleaned out I parted a '39 LaSalle Convertible from there. Quite a few interesting remains but not much of value. Wish I had taken the '40 Ford Pickup that was there and still solid for the $100 asking price.

Link to post
Share on other sites
LINC400 said: What I can't figure out is why when the verticle ox-yolk grille was a Packard Hallmark, they removed the verticle grille to put on a catfish snout. Seems like it would have made much more sense to simply put an ox-yolk top on the already existing grille shape. And the outside padded armrests are not an improvement.

According to at least one book on Packards final days, after the closing of real Packard the Hawk was designed under the direction and supervision of Roy Hurley of Curtis-Wright when Studebaker-Packard was under their (his) management. It was thought that it was to be a one off and to be his personal car. Apparently the designers were as surprised as any when the order was given to build it.

Interesting, but the non-Hawk 1958's had a similar sort of front end treatment, but looked less catfishy.

Also now that it was mentioned, I seem to recall seeing that Hawk convertible at the Dayton museum. Wonder why Studebaker never did make a convertible Hawk?

Edited by LINC400 (see edit history)
Link to post
Share on other sites

Good point on the wide grill on regular cars. With 56 & 57 sales not being all that robust, I expect it was still cost & trying to make do wherever possible. Slim chance it was a bit of trying to break from the past with a new Stude corp. identity -- but in all probability the decision to eliminate production had been made and it was just another stopgap done as cheaply as possible to keep remaining dealers from suing for lack of product until their contracts expired or could be bought back.

The Hawk C-K body frame was not known as being very strong with a fair number of reports of cracking in various places. Possibly a convertible would have required so much reinforcement it would have been too heavy or could not be done economically. Like so much else, new was out of the question. The frames the Lark used were a bit stronger so probably not as big a problem when that convertible made it's appearance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

LINC400 said:

Interesting, but the non-Hawk 1958's had a similar sort of front end treatment, but looked less catfishy.
That's true. I can recall nearly a dozen instances over the past couple of years where someone has mistakenly advertised on the net a Packard "Hawk" and it turned out ot be a 2-dr Hardtop. The nose has a similar wide mouthed look and bumper. Except for the quad headlights, it's easy to see where it can be mistaken for an oversized Hawk nose.

Folks might be getting confused when they try to determine what model it is and google 1958 Packard. With the exception of the Hawk, Packard didn't give the '58 series names like they did in 1957. They were simply Packard 4 door sedan (or sedan), Packard Hardtop, Packard Station Wagon and Packard Hawk. I remember googling packard hawk one time and pulling up an old Packard ad which was a drawing, not a photo, and the ad refers to a '58 Packard Hawk but shows just the nose of the 2-dr Hardtop from the left front.

Mike O'Handley

Kenmore, Washington

hausdok@msn.com

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some interesting opinions and info in this thread, but what I also find interesting is that NO ONE has attempted to answer the original poster's question, which was:

Just wondered how many Packard Hawks 1958 have survived time by now?

So I"ll make a start of it, and perhaps others will add on. There are 21 identified in The Packard Club's 2011 Directory, and I know of 1 other, on the road, located in Bergen County NJ.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK,

If you insist. Nobody really knows. However, Mike Williams had started a Packard Hawk registry a few years ago and used to have a site called packardhawk.com. That site is no longer responding; so it might have been shut down. I saw one posting of his on a forum somewhere where at that time (maybe 2006-7?) he said his registry had over 160(?) PHs listed. I saw mention of his site on another forum not too long ago. That post claimed that Williams has documented more than 180 PHs. If those are restored Hawks, that's not that bad a survival rate when you realize that only 588 were produced. The problem with that registery - or at least so I've been told by someone who has actually seen it, is that it's very light on information and doesn't have the chassis number of every vehicle registered. Without the chassis number, one has no way to know whether the same vehicles have been sold and been re-registered.

If one were to spend a day on the net googling Packard Hawk various ways and carefully documenting leads, you'd end up with roughly 40 to 50 sightings of derelicts that are out there. You'd read about one that's been cut in half so that it would fit in a storage area; about a lady that had three of them that someone picked up for parts; about four of them one guy has in upstate New York; about another one sitting in a field where a lady refuses to sell it because she's been told that any offer will not be enough, and so it sits and continues to rust away. I have photos of at least two in junkyards - one that's practically dust. I recently saw a 1987 magazine article where a fellow has barns full of Studes near Sacramento and in a line of Hawks sitting in a field that was photographed at the time I could see at least one PH - sitting out unprotected in the weather with grass growing up around them. It just goes on and on.

Studes of this era tend to rust out. The trunk pans, body pans, inner and outer rockers, front quarters, etc. A lot of the ones you see "restored" are not frame-offs and if you lift up the carpet or trunk mat you'll find swiss cheese. Here's a photo of the trunk of one taken less than three weeks ago. I'm currently talking to the owner about purchasing it. That gray stuff in the photo? That's the ground below the car. I don't even know how to describe the condition of the front quarters. If I buy this, I'm going to need to purchase every piece of replacement sheet metal that Classic Enterprises has for these and fabricate some areas that they don't have replacement parts for. This will have to be a complete frame-off rotisserie and just getting the tub viable again is probably going to require hundreds of hours of mig welding.

tn_201189123227_beige rt side trunk 1.JPG

How many have "survived" is relative. A better question might be "How many of those that have survived still remain tenable for full restoration?"

Mike O'Handley

Kenmore, Washington

hausdok@msn.com

Edited by hausdok (see edit history)
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, we can account for at least three. There are currently three surviving PHs for sale on Hemmings Motor News. One in Florida for $52, 500 (The same car sold last month for less than $30K on ebay). Mr. Harwood's in Ohio for $59,900 and one in New York for $60K. The first and third are frame-offs, the one in Florida had three owners before it was sold in July; and, except for $15k in work to rebuild the engine, transmission and brakes is supposed to be original.

Mike O'Handley

Kenmore, Washington

hausdok@msn.com

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
"Catfish minus the whiskers?" Ouch!

It's only my opinion I guess, but it was Packard that bought Studebaker not the other way around. If Studebaker had bought Packard I guess the Packard people could sort of justify their snootiness, but since Packard owned Studebaker at the time it was Packard's prerogative to call their cars whatever they wanted to call them. Heck, they could have simply dropped the Studebaker name and kept the Packard name and would have had every right to have done so. I think the name Packard is every bit as legitimate when applied to '57 and '58 models as when Studebaker built cars with Garford engines and called them Studebakers.

Wonder if a lightning bolt from the Packard gods will come out of the sky now and strike me dead for my heresy?

Nice group of folks here. Glad to see you're keeping it alive. I wouldn't mind learning more about the ones that PackardHawk, the guy in napa or the one that you've got for sale Mr. Harwood.

Mike O'Handley

Kenmore, WA

:eek: How many more ways can you miss the facts? The premise that "Packard bought Studebaker" is even only technically true. The idea that Packard "had every right" to drop the Studebaker name is something only those privy to the articles of incorporation can know for sure, but the rest of us should know anyway that this was in no way an option, legally or corporately.

The '57 and '58 "Packards" are quite interesting oddities, but the collectors of Packards and everyone else know darn well that they have absolutely no connection to the line of Packards that was in production through 1956. Other than some parts scavenged from the Packard bins, NOTHING was even close, unless you want to rule out body, chassis, engine, drivetrain... they didn't even put a Packard engine in the "Packard" Hawk. Big mistake IMO. All Studebakers sold under the Packard nameplate would've stood a much better chance of attracting Packard buyers if they had a real Packard engine in them.

But this response is both too little and too much to reply to a statement that really doesn't warrant a response.

Again,

:eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites
:eek: How many more ways can you miss the facts? The premise that "Packard bought Studebaker" is even only technically true.
So, since it's "technically true" is it a lie or is it the truth? It's the truth, that's a fact. One you obviously choose to ignore.
The '57 and '58 "Packards" are quite interesting oddities, but the collectors of Packards and everyone else know darn well that they have absolutely no connection to the line of Packards that was in production through 1956. Other than some parts scavenged from the Packard bins, NOTHING was even close, unless you want to rule out body, chassis, engine, drivetrain... they didn't even put a Packard engine in the "Packard" Hawk. Big mistake IMO. All Studebakers sold under the Packard nameplate would've stood a much better chance of attracting Packard buyers if they had a real Packard engine in them.
I agree with you about the engine but I think there's a logic disconnect about the "absolutely no connection" part.

Let's see, a manufacturer decides that it needs to shut down production of an inefficient older plant and consolidate its manufacturing in a more efficient newer plant that can produce more cars a day. It does so and now no vehicles not produced in the old plant are legitimately that company's product? That's pretty bizarre. Does that mean that every Chevy produced in Toyota's Fremont, CA had no connection to those produced in Chevy's original plant unless Chevy chooses to use the same parts jobber for the Fremont plant it used back east? Sure they were produced by Toyota by way of a corporate alliance between Toyota and Chevrolet, but they are still legally Chevys - that's an indisputable fact.

Like I said - logical disconnect.

I get it. Packard guys are miffed that Packard's executives were dumb enough not to do their homework and then unknowingly hitched their wagon to another company that was already bankrupt, and that by doing so and trying to produce smaller cheaper cars that would appeal to a large segment of the population, they were cheapening the brand.

I also get it that their infusion of cash into Studebaker saved Studebaker's bacon for a while at the expense of Packard, but being miffed and being a snob about it doesn't change the fact that those cars produced by the surviving Studebaker-Packard entity in 1957 and 1958 with the Packard name on them were not produced by Chevy, Ford, Chrysler or anyone else - they were produced by the company that the Packard board, whether right or wrong - decided Packard was to become; and are therefore legally, realistically and legitimately Packards whether you wish to acknowledge that fact or not.

Mike O'Handley

Kenmore, Washington

hausdok@msn.com

Edited by hausdok (see edit history)
Link to post
Share on other sites
So, since it's "technically true" is it a lie or is it the truth? It's the truth, that's a fact. One you obviously choose to ignore.I agree with you about the engine but I think there's a logic disconnect about the "absolutely no connection" part.

Let's see, a manufacturer decides that it needs to shut down production of an inefficient older plant and consolidate its manufacturing in a more efficient newer plant that can produce more cars a day. It does so and now no vehicles not produced in the old plant are legitimately that company's product?

Who said anything about the plant? Your comments show woeful ignorance of the pre-'57 Packards. If you think there are ANY connections in design, manufacture or production of these cars with Packard's designs for '57 and beyond, you need to study up a bit. There is no disagreement in any automotive history that the '57-'58 "Packards" were re-badged Studebakers. A comparison for today's cars would be the many "badge-engineered" models that GM, Chrysler Corp, and Ford have produced.

Your comments about manufacturing plants are entirely erroneous, including the part about "a more efficient newer plant". The Studebaker plant in South Bend was entirely devoted to producing Studebaker cars, and no effort was made to alter production to accommodate the cars designed by Packard.

Your comments reflect an obviously very thin knowledge base. Condescending remarks about "snootiness" and being "miffed," or having a "logical disconnect," lend no meaningful support to your "irrefutable facts." If you are truly interested in the events of the last several years of Packard production, why not post back after you've learned a little about it?

Edited by 55PackardGuy (see edit history)
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well,

From my point of view, the only one who's made any condescending remarks here has been, well,...you. Sorry.

I'll stick to my contention that the owners of a company have every right to call their product whatever they wish; and that since it was the Packard board that made a conscious decision to designate "re-badged" Studebakers, which were their's to re-badge, as Packards then that is exactly what those vehicles are - Packards.

Your I know better than you, so shut the hell up attitude isn't likely to change my mind on that point or to shut me up.

Hope you and your pedestal have a nice day.

Mike O'Handley

Kenmore, Washington

hausdok@msn.com

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...