Ebay Packard

[cooter9]

Looks like a pretty nice pre-war open Packard. How do you know it's a Phaeton? And what do you guys think she will go for?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Cars-Trucks___1927-Packard-Phaeton-426_W0QQitemZ320349458246QQddnZCarsQ20Q26Q20TrucksQQddiZ2282QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUS_Cars_Trucks?hash=item320349458246&_trksid=p4506.c0.m245&_trkparms=65%3A7%7C39%3A1%7C240%3A1318

[Guest Faust]

A long time since high school, but Phaeton was Apollo's son. Back in the horse and buggy days, Phaeton was applied to carriages. I think it was just adopted by car makers. I am not sure it has an actual definition. VW now makes a closed "Phaeton". I have never seen a two windshield car that wasn't called a "dual cowl Phaeton".

[cooter9]

Man, that Packard didn't last long, the auction has already ended and the car sold.

[West Peterson]

No. It wasn't a phaeton. It was a touring. It doesn't have a rear cowl, just a rear windshield.

[trimacar]

Hi- I have always thought that a phaeton and a touring are the same, in old car talk; a four door open car with no roll up windows (i.e. no windows contained within the doors). Then the sub-set of that definition is a dual windshield (a regular touring/phaeton with a pop-up or stationary windshield for rear seat) and a dual cowl (a separate metal piece forming a base for the rear windshield, usually hinged to raise thus allowing better access to rear seat; on a dual cowl the windshield would be fixed, not pop-up).

Here is an interesting reference for car terms:

http://www.buyclassiccars.com/glossary.asp

Whatever you call it, put the top down and have fun with it!

By the way, that looks like a very nice buy on an open Packard, if it really sold at that price.

[cooter9]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: trimacar</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hi- I have always thought that a phaeton and a touring are the same, in old car talk; a four door open car with no roll up windows (i.e. no windows contained within the doors). Then the sub-set of that definition is a dual windshield (a regular touring/phaeton with a pop-up or stationary windshield for rear seat) and a dual cowl (a separate metal piece forming a base for the rear windshield, usually hinged to raise thus allowing better access to rear seat; on a dual cowl the windshield would be fixed, not pop-up).

Here is an interesting reference for car terms:

http://www.buyclassiccars.com/glossary.asp

Whatever you call it, put the top down and have fun with it!

By the way, that looks like a very nice buy on an open Packard, if it really sold at that price. </div></div>

That particular Phaeton was a 6 cyl. but still a very desirable Packard Phaeton indeed.

[tbirdman]

The difference between a touring and a phaeton is the touring has the two jump seats making it a 7 passenger car. Though I have seen the term touring to describe a closed car. Touring's seem to have a less resale than a phaeton becuase of the extra body length required for the two jump seats.

But who knows. My 32 is described as a coupe roadster though it has roll up windows. The 31 coupe roadster was a true roadster as defined because it had no roll up windows which were added in 32.

[West Peterson]

Correct, Ken. The body of an open touring extends well past the rear axle, while on a phaeton, the body ends at or soon after the rear axle. They are not as desirable as a phaeton, thus the extensive price difference.

Some companies didn't have phaetons and called their "touring" cars "phaetons," which may confuse the situation... but, a touring by any other name, is still a touring.

The car on eBay was definitely NOT a phaeton, thus the relatively low price. Nice car, though, and probably should have sold for more than that.

[cooter9]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: West Peterson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Correct, Ken. The body of an open touring extends well past the rear axle, while on a phaeton, the body ends at or soon after the rear axle. They are not as desirable as a phaeton, thus the extensive price difference.

Some companies didn't have phaetons and called their "touring" cars "phaetons," which may confuse the situation... but, a touring by any other name, is still a touring.

The car on eBay was definitely NOT a phaeton, thus the relatively low price. Nice car, though, and probably should have sold for more than that. </div></div>

This Phaeton definition has got me a little confused. I found this pic of a 1927 426 Phaeton. The one on Ebay seems to have a body that ends very soon after the rear axle like you described a true Phaeton did. Isn't there one true way to know if it's a Packard Phaeton? I also think the one on Ebay should have sold for more, it was really restored nicely and in my opinion was worth much more.

http://mmm.lib.msu.edu/search/record.cfm?i=EB01e699

[West Peterson]

I believe that car is also a touring. If there isn't somebody standing in the way, usually a phaeton's rear door notches a lot around the fender while a touring's rear door will probably be square or notch very little.

[cooter9]

I noticed the one Ebay had some kind of divider window right at the top of the back rest of the front seat, it divided the front from the back. It was supported and within a really nice fancy chrome structure that looked as if it could swing back and forth. Really fascinating, the seemingly endless different things to each of these glorious old Packards is so neat to me.

[trimacar]

Hi- here's a picture of the rear windshield on my '31 Pierce. I understand these were accessories, and not factory installed. A dual cowl would have been factory fabricated and installed, I guess.

The previous owner always called this a "sport phaeton," and I continue to call it that, correct or not.

[West Peterson]

David

If your car doesn't have jump seats, which it appears that it doesn't, it is a phaeton. I'm not sure what the word "sport" would add or mean, except that some manufacturers used the term. The body on your car appears to be the same as those that have the dual-cowl set-up.

[trimacar]

Hi West- no, no jump seats on this car. It is a four passenger, or, if friendly in the back seat, five at most. We've traveled in it with me, my wife, and 4 young girls (this was in the '80's, they're grown now), but no place to put luggage or supplies. I found the trunk at a local estate, and it fit perfectly, the previous owner of this car did not like trunks. And I agree that this body style could have the dual cowl on it. At times I've been tempted to fabricate (or have fabricated) a hinged section to add the dual cowl, but make no modifications to existing body. Just an idea, though, as I have plenty of other projects. best- David Coco Winchester Va.

[tbirdman]

I have always equated sport phaeton as a dual cowl phaeton. However it seems like the term sport phaeton is used for a simple phaeton style without the dual cowl.

Doing some research I found that Phaeton in the 19th century referred to an sporty open horse drawn carriage which I suspect how the term became used for a sporty open car in the 20th century.

What ever the terms used thereis a definite pecking orde in value from the 7 seat version up to the most desirable (defined by $) dual dowl phaeton. Two other things to note. A dual windshield is not a dual cowl and there are many fakes dual cowls out there.

[West Peterson]

If a phaeton body is the same weather it has a dual cowl or not (and the model number does not change), I have no problem with adding the cowl. If it was just an option, no foul. No different than adding Trippe Lights in my opinion. In some series of Packards, if one originally had the second cowl, vents were added into the post between the doors... such as on the 1930 series.

[tbirdman]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: West Peterson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If a phaeton body is the same weather it has a dual cowl or not (and the model number does not change), I have no problem with adding the cowl. If it was just an option, no foul. No different than adding Trippe Lights in my opinion. In some series of Packards, if one originally had the second cowl, vents were added into the post between the doors... such as on the 1930 series. </div></div>

West,

In Packerdom, it is a foul, as Phaeton and Dual Cowl were two different model numbers.

Look at the 1932 body reference from the Packard Club website here.

DCs have a higher resale than Phaetons based on the body style.

[cooter9]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: West Peterson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">David

If your car doesn't have jump seats, which it appears that it doesn't, it is a phaeton. I'm not sure what the word "sport" would add or mean, except that some manufacturers used the term. The body on your car appears to be the same as those that have the dual-cowl set-up. </div></div>

So if the Ebay car didn't have jump seats it would be considered a Phaeton?

[tbirdman]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cooter9</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: West Peterson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">David

If your car doesn't have jump seats, which it appears that it doesn't, it is a phaeton. I'm not sure what the word "sport" would add or mean, except that some manufacturers used the term. The body on your car appears to be the same as those that have the dual-cowl set-up. </div></div>

So if the Ebay car didn't have jump seats it would be considered a Phaeton? </div></div>

Yes. If it had a dual cowl body then it would be called a sport phaeton or a dual cowl phaeton.

[cooter9]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: tbirdman</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cooter9</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: West Peterson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">David

If your car doesn't have jump seats, which it appears that it doesn't, it is a phaeton. I'm not sure what the word "sport" would add or mean, except that some manufacturers used the term. The body on your car appears to be the same as those that have the dual-cowl set-up. </div></div>

So if the Ebay car didn't have jump seats it would be considered a Phaeton? </div></div>

Yes. If it had a dual cowl body then it would be called a sport phaeton or a dual cowl phaeton. </div></div>

Bear with me, so there is a plain Phaeton, sport Phaeton and dual cowl Phaeton, right? The plain is identified by the absence of jump seats?

[Owen_Dyneto]

Don't forget the most unusual phaeton of all, the one with steel fixed roof and power windows, the recent $75,000 Volkswagen Phaeton. What a dumb name for a 4-door sedan.

[West Peterson]

Cadillac's sport phaeton of the early 1930s did not have a second cowl. That's why I said that "sport" is sort of a term that individual companies have added. There are always exceptions to the "rule", but I think you can pretty much be safe in saying that no phaeton would have jump seats (Cadillac's "All Weather Phaeton" probably did, but it wasn't a "phaeton," it was a convertible sedan).

I'm not sure you can be safe in saying that "no touring cars came without jump seats."

[trimacar]

Wow, this is getting complicated. How about these definitions:

phaeton- close coupled open car (rear of body extends only to back of rear tire area), no windows in doors, 4 or 5 passengers

dual windshield phaeton- a phaeton with a rear windshield attached to rear of front seat

sport phaeton, or dual cowl phaeton - a phaeton with a separate cowl piece and attached windshield extending from back of front seat, partially covering rear seat area

touring- open car, no windows in doors, 5 passenger, back of body extends beyond back of rear wheels

7 passenger touring - touring with jump seats built into rear of front seat

Does that make sense? Didn't mention next iteration, convertible sedan with roll up windows on an open car.

David Coco Winchester Va.

[West Peterson]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: tbirdman</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: West Peterson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If a phaeton body is the same weather it has a dual cowl or not (and the model number does not change), I have no problem with adding the cowl. If it was just an option, no foul. No different than adding Trippe Lights in my opinion. In some series of Packards, if one originally had the second cowl, vents were added into the post between the doors... such as on the 1930 series. </div></div>

West,

In Packerdom, it is a foul, as Phaeton and Dual Cowl were two different model numbers.

Look at the 1932 body reference from the Packard Club website here.

DCs have a higher resale than Phaetons based on the body style. </div></div>

I agree, Ken. That's pretty much what I said.

[tbirdman]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: trimacar</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Wow, this is getting complicated. How about these definitions:

phaeton- close coupled open car (rear of body extends only to back of rear tire area), no windows in doors, 4 or 5 passengers

dual windshield phaeton- a phaeton with a rear windshield attached to rear of front seat

sport phaeton, or dual cowl phaeton - a phaeton with a separate cowl piece and attached windshield extending from back of front seat, partially covering rear seat area

touring- open car, no windows in doors, 5 passenger, back of body extends beyond back of rear wheels

7 passenger touring - touring with jump seats built into rear of front seat

Does that make sense? Didn't mention next iteration, convertible sedan with roll up windows on an open car.

David Coco Winchester Va.

</div></div>

That make sense but as you can see from the Cadillac and VW examples there is no set rules. I own a 32 Packard Coupe Roadster which could be more accurately described as a convertible coupe. Auburn also had an All Weather Phaeton which was also a convertible sedan.

My 1912 cadillac is a touring model, but it has no jump seats. So who knows.

[tbirdman]

Here's a 34 V12 Phaeton that I think went for way under market unless the market has crashed.

it sold for $211K. Must had been some seriously wrong with it or someone got a real bargin. $211K is 34 Super 8 pricing.

[West Peterson]

The market has definitely slumped. This is a very legit car with a high quality restoration. The color, while it may please some, might leave others to believe they have a $20,000 paint job in front of them. Even then, it was quite a buy in comparison to 6-9 months ago.

Update: I just read through the description more thoroughly. It's a former eight cylinder car...

[West Peterson]

Do you know of all the results, or just this one? I'd like to know what the Packard Panther brought???

[West Peterson]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: tbirdman</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: West Peterson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If a phaeton body is the same weather it has a dual cowl or not (and the model number does not change), I have no problem with adding the cowl. If it was just an option, no foul. No different than adding Trippe Lights in my opinion. In some series of Packards, if one originally had the second cowl, vents were added into the post between the doors... such as on the 1930 series. </div></div>

West,

In Packerdom, it is a foul, as Phaeton and Dual Cowl were two different model numbers.

Look at the 1932 body reference from the Packard Club website here.

DCs have a higher resale than Phaetons based on the body style. </div></div>

Ken

I'm revisiting this part of the discussion in relation to phaeton vs. dual-cowl phaeton if their bodies are identical...

If somebody fabricates and installs a cowl for a regular phaeton, it WOULD NOT depreciate the value of the car in relation to other phaetons. It would be worth less than a real dual-cowl, but would be worth more than a phaeton without the cowl.

Likewise with the green Twelve you've brought to our attention: The car is not worth as much as a real original Twelve, but is worth more than if it were left a Super Eight.

[tbirdman]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: West Peterson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The market has definitely slumped. This is a very legit car with a high quality restoration. The color, while it may please some, might leave others to believe they have a $20,000 paint job in front of them. Even then, it was quite a buy in comparison to 6-9 months ago.

Update: I just read through the description more thoroughly. It's a former eight cylinder car... </div></div>

That makes sense, it is a tribute car using Barrett Jackson terminology

[tbirdman]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: West Peterson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Do you know of all the results, or just this one? I'd like to know what the Packard Panther brought??? </div></div>

If you go to their website you can do a search.

FYI, the Panther sold for $700K.

[tbirdman]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: West Peterson</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: tbirdman</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: West Peterson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If a phaeton body is the same weather it has a dual cowl or not (and the model number does not change), I have no problem with adding the cowl. If it was just an option, no foul. No different than adding Trippe Lights in my opinion. In some series of Packards, if one originally had the second cowl, vents were added into the post between the doors... such as on the 1930 series. </div></div>

West,

In Packerdom, it is a foul, as Phaeton and Dual Cowl were two different model numbers.

Look at the 1932 body reference from the Packard Club website here.

DCs have a higher resale than Phaetons based on the body style. </div></div>

Ken

I'm revisiting this part of the discussion in relation to phaeton vs. dual-cowl phaeton if their bodies are identical...

If somebody fabricates and installs a cowl for a regular phaeton, it WOULD NOT depreciate the value of the car in relation to other phaetons. It would be worth less than a real dual-cowl, but would be worth more than a phaeton without the cowl.

Likewise with the green Twelve you've brought to our attention: The car is not worth as much as a real original Twelve, but is worth more than if it were left a Super Eight. </div></div>

West,

I don't think it be worth less, but not sure how much more it be worth. However in the case of the V12 card which was an original eight car, it might had hurt it as I would had thought it would had brought closer to $250-275K as it was a very desirable body style though you have to like green.

However, I find it a little unsettling that this car won awards from both the CCCA and the AACA even though it had a major modification. The description reads "Thereafter, the car was awarded its AACA First Junior at the Fall Meet in 1998 before securing its First Senior award in 2000. Another CCCA badge on the car attests to its “Grand Classic Award both Primary and Senior”."

Though I can probably assume that the owner probably never informed the judges that the V12 mod had taken place. I mean radial tires and seal beams headlights have deductions, but a whole engine? Seems like grand larcency to me Though i glad that the upgrade was mention in the auction listing.

[cooter9]

I found this definition on the Packard club website. That Ebay Packard appeared to be a real Phaeton by this definition.

http://packardclub.org/

If the link doesn't take you straight there just go to the body types and you'll find it there.

[trimacar]

Hi- according to the body style chart on the Packard website, there is no such thing as a "touring" car, they are all phaetons; 4 passenger, 5 passenger, 7 passenger with jump seats, are all in the "phaeton" definition. Interesting. David Coco Winchester Va. 22602

[cooter9]

My goodness, it appears there is a lot of interpretation in this area that isn't very easy to interpret.

[West Peterson]

"What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet."

In comparison, a "touring" looks like a bath tub compared to a phaeton, thus the huge difference in value. This, of course, is my opinion. Many people actually like the look of the touring body style. I prefer the phaeton, because it's shorter.

If one cannot tell the difference, then choose the touring and save yourself a lot of money. However, be aware that many sellers say their car is a phaeton when in fact it's a touring.

[Guest bkazmer]

the desire of marketing depts to abuse the language is not new and not past. The "Phaetons" that are in fact convertible sedans and tourings were mentioned, and now any two seat convertible coupe is a "roadster" (the original Viper and Jeep Wrangler might actually qualify) and some four doors are "coupes" because they don't have the silouette of a shoe box. Don't get me started on the oxymoron of "sport truck."

[cooter9]

Quite honestly after reading back over all the posts in this thread I'm not sure anyone can really define what exactly a true Phaeton is. It just seems so open to interpretation.

[tbirdman]

Me thinks the topic has run it's course

[West Peterson]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cooter9</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Quite honestly after reading back over all the posts in this thread I'm not sure anyone can really define what exactly a true Phaeton is. It just seems so open to interpretation. </div></div>

I'd say it's open to interpretation to those who don't know the difference. I find it very easy to tell the difference.