New Packard Coachwork Ideas

[Mahoning63]

...and hot on the heels of the fun thread on Rebodied Packards, does anyone have any ideas to share or suggestions for new Packard coachwork? It could be a new body style on an old chassis, an alteration of an existing body, even a design idea for a modern Packard.

This thread was spurred on by a discussion in Rebodied Packards about how Dietrich et al had a particular talent for improving the basic Packard design, sometimes with big changes, other times more subtly. These masters remained restless until they saw their ideas come to life, and they had the ability to find that "last 10%" of opportunity that Packard had left on the table, perhaps a design Packard itself chose not to do, a design not suitable for volume production, or a design beyond the imagination of East Grand Blvd..

You can describe your ideas any way you'd like. Words, images, anything that works for you. What would you suggest if YOU got the call from Alvan, Max, George, Hugh or Jim asking for a little help?!!!

[Steve_Mack_CT]

When I was a kid I wanted to be a car designer or architect but unlike my dad (a draftsman who could draw complex building elevations free hand) I could not draw a straight line more than say 1/2 of an inch! I did not inherit that ability and went to school just before the age of CAD...

That said, I am interested in what people come up with here, but to answer the question, if I got the call I would first refer them to someone who could design, extra points if Ray Dietrich's picture hangs in their office for inspiration, and at all cost avoid creating something like a Zimmer. If it is not a full on flagship or 10% car, forget it.

Oh, the other problem, 90% of those under say, 40, relate the name "Packard" to printers and such, not cars! The target demographic would be a little limited to really use the name to any advantage. I think VW made a pretty good car, but using the name "Phaeton" may have been a tactical error, car people know what it means (although it is an odd name for a vehicle not offered in that body style); many do not.

I have seen some futuristic renderings in the PAC magazine. cool food for thought.

[Guest bkazmer]

Besides the odd name, Phaeton (and it was misspelled on their website!) made no sense because VW had no luxury brand image or heritage, and the company already had several established lux names in production. Somebody at VAG should have curbed a division head's ego.

[Mahoning63]

Great thoughts Steve. I wonder if a hot new Packard might quickly bring young people into the fold, similar to how the Bentley Continental GT did.

OK, here's something to prime the pump. Similar images have already been floated at the Packard Info site but some folks here might not cross-shop.

Let's say Nance calls in early 1953 and says his marketing folks just showed him 250 graphs slicing and dicing the 1953 market every which way. Now he is more confused than ever. I suggest he do whatever possible, move mounains if need be, to get the height down because that's the ticket. Three inches should do it. Get rid of the old-fashioned rear fender bulge and make straight-through sides with a little kick-up in the beltline at the base of the c-pillar. Go with frameless door windows. Find a way to maintain legroom with the lower seats, such as by moving the firewall and engine forward so the front footwell can move forward, and by dropping the rear footwell to make a more comfortable seating positon. Modify the frame and rethink the torsion bar motor locations if need be.

If his call were instead to come in early 1956, with panic in his voice, my suggestion would be to quickly do this car for 1957 on the cheap. Set up a separate body shop operation manned with a few dozen people who would section out 3 inches and reweld body panels. Use a mid-section applique to cover the scars up. The operation would add a few hundred collars to each car but would save millions in tooling and might be the only way to buy time.

Edited February 17, 2011 by Mahoning63 (see edit history)

[Joe Block]

Me

I would like to build and airport limo, 6 or 8 door from one of my 42 part cars. I have quite a few pictures of the atomic/army 6 door clipper made in 41/42.

I think that a cool car.

My second choice is to convert my 42 limo in to a Ralston body town car. I like lebaron limos too, but not sure if I could build one, the raised roof, bigger windows and bigger boot (trunk)

Edited February 18, 2011 by packards42 (see edit history)

[Steve_Mack_CT]

Mahoning, if the rest of our regulars are as talented at design as I am you may consider an audience that might get more of a charge out of this thread, are you a PAC member? If so you may know about TPO, or Tomorrow's Packard Owners, PAC's effort to reach youngsters who are in Packard families. Your work might inspire a design contest - a good acitvity for them. This is a relatively new sub group of PAC and I think AACA is doing something simillar; most 13 year olds can't buy a Bently GT, but some can probably draw some interesting cars!

[Mahoning63]

Steve - great idea and I am indeed a PAC member. Have never heard about TPO, is there a contact?

P42 - very interesting thoughts on an airport limo and town car, hope you get a chance to do one of them. Along those lines, just did a quick a photo alt of a LWB '41 sedan I had been kicking around some time ago. Removed the top to make it a town car. Has a coupe decklid that visually throws the greenhouse perhaps too far forward, but removing the driver compartment roof throws some of it back. Rear seat would be cavernous for two but a tight squeeze for jump seats. Just a thought...

Edited February 18, 2011 by Mahoning63 (see edit history)

[Mahoning63]

You could play with the location of the rear door too depending on the effect you want to achieve.

Edited February 18, 2011 by Mahoning63 (see edit history)

[Steve_Mack_CT]

Great "photoshop" work! I am still trying to upload pictures from my phone to my PC...

Check out the beginning section of the Cormorant, Mr. Mahoning, and you will see the TPO guy's name. Owen or someone else here may jump in with it - I have a few Packard pictures, but no Cormorants here in the office...

[Mahoning63]

Thanks, will do.

[Mahoning63]

Dave - if you could show those pics, that would be huge. Thanks.

On your windshield suggestion... yes!!! That would help give the car needed flow up front and a dash of style. I photo altered a 127" Coupe (many thanks to the owner) extending it to 148". The decklid is the coupe's. Used the coupe front door per Packard practice with the 148" car and roughed out the rear door length to approximate the production door. When you think about it, most of the stuff for this car could have come from the factory. The task would have mainly been to blend the pieces together. C-pillar would need blanked in and abutting rear door frame would need shaped to fit. I like the idea of moving the rear door aft a bit like the second image. Adds some heft to the B-pillar and removes same from the C. Might benefit from a jeweled effect on the wider B-pillar, perhaps using a near flush coach light with a semi-ornate chrome surround. Or maybe a Packard crest.

Have tried this town car config with the early 50s Executive Sedan/Limo to good effect. Also tried it on a '55 with ficticious extended frame. Looks pretty good. Henney could have easily cranked out this design back in the day had the request materialized.

Edited February 19, 2011 by Mahoning63 (see edit history)

[Rusty_OToole]

Why was there no 1951 - 1956 station wagon? Wagons were very much in vogue at that time and were the fastest growing segment of the market. They were also the most expensive body style in most car lines, except for those that offered a stretch limousine. Packard could have done good business with a station wagon as they did with the station sedan in the 48 -50 period.

Here is one built by Peter Portugal, the Packard El Paso.

Packard El Paso - Wikicars

Edited February 19, 2011 by Rusty_OToole (see edit history)

[Mahoning63]

Good point Rusty, totally agree. A third row seat would have been nice in such a car, creating sort of a replacement for the former 7 passenger sedan. Maybe the tooling for the roof was too much for Packard to digest or they just did't move enough 48-50s (in their mind) to justify. Cadillac made one or two wagons in the mid-50s. I thought they looked really good.

[Mahoning63]

8 degrees of rake added to the windshield and a little thingy stuck on the B-pillar. Would lose the running boards and add a chrome stone guard on the rear fenders and maybe a '34 Le Baron crest/spear on the fender skirts. Speed lines have already been removed.

Edited February 19, 2011 by Mahoning63 (see edit history)

[JD in KC]

... Rear seat would be cavernous for two but a tight squeeze for jump seats. Just a thought...

So skip the jump seats and install a bar.

Edit: Although in the real world of 1941 you couldn't order the 148" LWB cars without running boards from the factory, I think with your (excellent) re-design it might look better without them.

Edit Edit: Sorry, just re-read your posts and see you would remove the running boards.

Edited February 19, 2011 by JD in KC
adding comment. (see edit history)

[Mahoning63]

Oops, sometimes I update my comments. Sorry about that. So... all the 148's got running boards. Bummer. That means there are no trim pieces. Oh well, here's a rough attempt at rolling in all these ideas including the suggestion for a Darrin-esque windshield frame. Paint, and my abilities, are somewhat limited with certain subtleties but hopefully this communicates the idea.

Hey, the bar idea would be great. Might as well put that space to good use. Let's throw in A/C in the trunk and power windows that leak fluid. Maybe even a reclining rear seat. Would have been quite the ride back in '41.

Edited February 19, 2011 by Mahoning63 (see edit history)

[Mahoning63]

Maybe we should catalogue this body style as the "1941 Packard Series 1908 Super Eight Custom One Eighty Town Car by AACA Forum".

[Restorer32]

I like it.

[Guest Albert]

Why not this for the 51-54's

[Mahoning63]

Very interesting. Has a personal coupe look and good balance, much better than the ’52 Macauley Speedster coupe. What do you reckon the wheelbase is? Are there jump seats in the back or is it a 2 (or3) seater?

[Rusty_OToole]

I have heard comments about the Station Sedan before. But I believe it was a worthwhle use of resources for Packard for 3 reasons.

First, if you take a critical look at the Station Sedan you will see their designers were the cleverest around. They used almost all the same body panels as the sedan and those parts special to the Station Sedan, were mostly wood. Wood parts are very cheap to tool up for. You do not have a massive investment in dies and stampings.

Packard used standard doors and rear fenders suitably modified. The tailgate and rear part of the body was wood. The only big investment, was for the new long roof panel.

Second, the station wagon at that time was the most expensive model in any car's lineup. This made it possible to put extra time and money into it and still make a profit.

Third, the station wagon was what they now call a "halo car". It brought prestige to the whole line out of proportion to actual sales.

In those days to two most prestigious, and most expensive models were the convertible and the station wagon. Both were associated with the rich, the socially prominent and style leaders. The first with the young sporting set, the golf and tennis set. The second with the horsey set and the yachting set. Both looked natural at the country estate, the country club, the polo match or the yacht club.

I believe they did good business with the Station Sedan in spite of it selling in small numbers. But I can see why they did not tool up for a station wagon in 1951. By that time the wooden body wagon was passe. All the newest models featured all steel bodies. They must have thought the cost of tooling was not justified.

They may have been mistaken in this. Station wagon sales took off about that time. In fact some pundits predicted that 80% of the cars sold would be station wagons by 1960. The trend never went that far but there certainly were a lot of them parked in suburban driveways in the fifties.

There were never any Cadillac Lincoln or Imperial wagons mass produced. So a Packard or Clipper wagon would have been selling against Chrysler and Buick. Mercury and Oldsmobile made wagons too, but they were not quite in the Packard class.

With only 2 competitors in their price range I believe Packard could have sold a substantial number of wagons.

[Steve_Mack_CT]

I really like the El Paso, would have sold well I think...

[Mahoning63]

Rusty - that's a pretty darn good analysis, you sold me.

Question about the 48-50 Station Sedan roof: where did it come from? It almost looks like a trimmed Limo roof. Both are basically the same length. The limo backlight is more steeply raked. And the station sedan's roof curves in, in top view, aft of the C-pillar. But the cut lines on the station sedan are such that it does not appear to be totally out of the realm of possiblility. Just wondering, surely a station sedan owner knows.

If it was from the Limo roof, or if a decent looking wagon could have be fashioned using a Limo roof, Packard could have saved tooling money and perhaps justified both in the 50s.

[Mahoning63]

Here are a few thoughts for the 50s limo platform using the same tricks that were used on the '41 above. The first image uses the Clipper backlight with 5 inches added to the C-pillar, which allows for the use of Patrician rear quarters. The front door and windshield are from the convertible. The second image marries the updated styling to the former 149" wheelbase. Third image plays around with the dual cowl look.

[West Peterson]

Paul

I think I've posted this before.

[huffreport]

Me

I would like to build and airport limo, 6 or 8 door from one of my 42 part cars. I have quite a few pictures of the atomic/army 6 door clipper made in 41/42.

I think that a cool car...........

You mean like THIS?.... Yes, one still exists.....:D:D:D

[Mahoning63]

That's one whopper of an airport limo. I like it! Especially the trunk room for all those travelers.

West - nice limo idea. Sans running boards and whitewalls with blanked in C-pillar makes it very formal, discreet and private.

[Guest bkazmer]

West, on the "40 formal", how about painted catwalks?

[Mahoning63]

Here's a '52 Town Car with similar room inside as the '41 shown earlier. This car sits on a 139" wheelbase, an in between size that was never made. Wonder how difficult it would be to lengthen/shorten a 127/149 frame, not that one would want to. This car would have the one-piece backlight from the 200 with a 5 inch wider C-pillar.

[Joe Block]

I still looking for an airport limo. Any leads appreciated.

[West Peterson]

I think the best lead is Post #28.

[Mahoning63]

Here's an idea for a '34 LeBaron Town Car on what am guessing would be a 168" wheelbase used on the hearses. Employs the same design theme developed on earlier 1941 Town Car concept.

Am imagining a Hollywood starlet pulling up to the red carpet to debark and receive her 1934 Academy award. The car would have stretched seemingly forever!

Edited March 19, 2011 by Mahoning63 (see edit history)

[Mahoning63]

Was also kicking around this idea for 55/56 on the former limo chassis. Since rear legroom would have been much more than necessary, the A/C evap case could have been moved from the trunk to a compartment behind the front seat so that the rear seat passengers could enjoy cool air in front of rather than behind them (the '41 Town Car idea could have done this too). There would have also been enough room to replace the standard rear seat with a power front seat so passengers could have multiple adjustments including recline.

[Rusty_OToole]

Rusty - that's a pretty darn good analysis, you sold me.

Question about the 48-50 Station Sedan roof: where did it come from? It almost looks like a trimmed Limo roof. Both are basically the same length. The limo backlight is more steeply raked. And the station sedan's roof curves in, in top view, aft of the C-pillar. But the cut lines on the station sedan are such that it does not appear to be totally out of the realm of possiblility. Just wondering, surely a station sedan owner knows.

If it was from the Limo roof, or if a decent looking wagon could have be fashioned using a Limo roof, Packard could have saved tooling money and perhaps justified both in the 50s.

So far as I can tell the station sedan roof was a special stamping for that one model. It must have been the most expensive part to tool up for, of the special body. Other than that the tooling cost was low although there was a lot of expensive hand work in building the body, but this was typical of the woody wagons of the time.

[Guest bkazmer]

I believe the LWB limo and 7 p sedan had a center section grafted in rather than a big stamping. An owner who saw his naked in paint prep could confirm

[Mahoning63]

Here's an idea for a '35 - '39 sport sedan. Starting with a coupe on 134" wheelbase added 10 inches aft of the B-pillar (6 inches to the side glass, 4 inches to the C-pillar), lowered the roof an inch and raked inward the windshield and C-pillar 6 degrees. Also did a quick & dirty removal of the sidemounts. New wheelbase is 144 inches although the frame geometry is fictitious. Rear legroom is roughly the same as club sedan. Many thanks to the owner of the '37 Super Eight coupe!

Edited March 26, 2011 by Mahoning63 (see edit history)

[Mahoning63]

Sport Sedan concept for the 1937 138-CD. Underhood would have been a One Twenty-based V12 of 423 cubic inches and 180 HP. Price would have been around $2,500. Thought behind this idea was for a transitional car as Packard began to migrate the Seniors to the Junior platforms and production line and add late-Thirties emergent new body styles such as what was suggested by Dietrich. Ideally the car would have had a split windshield.

Edited April 15, 2011 by Mahoning63 (see edit history)

[Mahoning63]

Once Packard got that Junior line set up they were sitting on a real gold mine. They chose to go downmarket in 1937 with the 115 but could have just as easily gone upmarket car with a car such as this. With sales of the expensive Seniors no where near what they were 10 years earlier, why not try to bring the cost down in a big way? I like the idea of a V12 not only because it would have had that great Packard pedigree but because it could have been built on the Junior line using the 282's bore and stroke, which would have made it much less expensive than the 473 and lighter too. Since it would have packaged underneath the One Twenty's hood, the money saved in not having to tool a new hood and front fenders as was done for the 115 could have been spent on a dazzling new body style such as a sport sedan. One question I have is how did the interior of the 1937 CD-138 touring sedan compare with the Super Eight touring sedan of same year? Were they comparable in quality? If so, the opportunity was there to do a respectable new luxury car.

Edited April 7, 2011 by Mahoning63 (see edit history)

[Joe Block]

I like the coupe rear end it very graceful, on the 148 wheel base, now put the 148 body on a60 inch chassis with thecoupe back end. WOW, any on good at photoschoping that combination.

[Mahoning63]

If you give me a few details I could give it a try. Perhaps we need to clarify first. The car I show is on the 1937 138-CD chassis which was a one year only 138" wheelbase (although the 138" wheelbase reappeared in 1940). Did you want me to use the 1937 Commercial Chassis of 158" that was designed to use the 1937 One Twenty's hood and fenders? What about body style. Did you want a 4 door Touring Sedan with large rear quarter windows, 4 door Sport Sedan with elongated doors or 6 door Airport style?

Edited April 7, 2011 by Mahoning63 (see edit history)