1941 Packard 7 passenger 160

[Guest BJM]

1941 Packard Limo 7 Passenger Model 160 Sedan 8 Cyl Engine | eBay

Not necessarily looking to purchase such a rough car BUT I am interested to know more about it. Such as, is this a CCCA candidate? Should the motor be the 356? How hard are hoods to come by? Production and (restored) desirability?

Anything with 7 seats and a LWB piques my interest. Just saying....

[JD in KC]

I'll answer a few of your questions:

CCCA candidate: yes

356: yes

Hoods: not very hard to come by but the correct hood locks and emblems for the 160 may be a very different story.

Desirability: Two-door coupes and convertibles are popular... LWB 7 passenger behemoths much less so. If you find it desirable... what else matters?

Production... It's difficult to say without knowing for sure which model this is. If we assume it's a model 1471 which would be on the 1905 chassis (148" wheelbase), Packard produced 3,525 of them.

Notes:

Replacement taillights will run between $500 - $1800+ a pair depending on condition.

A radio will be $400+

Rubber for the rear quarter window is unobtainable through normal sources.

Edited July 14, 2012 by JD in KC (see edit history)

[Dave Mitchell]

I have a nice hood, side grills and overall, a lot of parts for this car. The 1905 lwb cars are fairly rare. It is a CCCA classic. The motor should be the 356. Dave Mitchell packard12s@hotmail.com

[Guest BJM]

JD

You and I like about the same thing. I am truly surprised at the high production number of 3525. That's a lot of expensive 1941 money for a somewhat specialized vehicle! Coming out of the Depression, interesting. I think I'll go look at it but the seller is - in my opinion - dreaming. This has been on ebay for awhile and he shows 2 rejected offers.

Edited July 14, 2012 by BJM (see edit history)

[Guest BJM]

Dave

Will keep that in mind. Neat old car I would prefer to see saved but can't save them all. I can't tell you how thankful I am to see the air breather still on there. Can you imagine all these years having water go down the carberator?

[Guest BJM]

Notes:

Replacement taillights will run between $500 - $1800+ a pair depending on condition.

A radio will be $400+

Rubber for the rear quarter window is unobtainable through normal sources.

Thanks for the inside information ahead of looking at it. I don't care so much about it being CCCA eligible as I do about what that means to be CCCA eligible, if that makes sense.

[Dave Mitchell]

As to it being a Classic, I am guessing you mean is it a luxurious car that is powerful and easy as well as fun to drive, and is well appointed etc. I would say yes to all of those. The 356 is a great engine for the time, if not the most horsepower of any American car in 1941, which is what I have always heard, it is close. The trans and OD are good units and you can change rear axle ratios to have a higher speed car. They are stately cars when done, as well as reliable and wonderful road cars.

As to the production number, I am also surprised - that sounds more like the number of all 160s. I had a 1471 which was delivered in May of 1941 and it was car # 205.

You can make the rear window rubber by piecing together a couple of ones for smaller windows. I have some NOS ones to start with. I have the hood latches too.

I agree completely that convertibles and coupes are more valuable, but you won't buy one of those for $2000 to start with either. I like my convertibles, but I like my 7 pass sedans a lot too. Of course a professional restoration on a 41 production sedan will exceed its value, but that is probably true for all non custom 41s.

Dave

[JD in KC]

As to the production number, I am also surprised - that sounds more like the number of all 160s. I had a 1471 which was delivered in May of 1941 and it was car # 205.

I should have clarified that. I do believe that is for all the 160's. The number varies depending on the information source.

[Joe Block]

1941 Packard Limo 7 Passenger Model 160 Sedan 8 Cyl Engine | eBay

Not necessarily looking to purchase such a rough car BUT I am interested to know more about it. Such as, is this a CCCA candidate? Should the motor be the 356? How hard are hoods to come by? Production and (restored) desirability?

Anything with 7 seats and a LWB piques my interest. Just saying....

It will be work, I have 42 Packard 180 parts car. as said the missing trim and tailight are cheap, and not easy to find. as to the interior what there and what no is any guess. price, I paid $2500 for one about the same with a hood and it had 42 orginal block I wanted. that was 20 years ago. it the parts car now.

[Guest BJM]

Did some research last night. Not much on it. Dave and JD are correct the 3575 production figure is for all 160's in that year. It's hard to extrapolate the 160 LWB production but no more then 10% probably (300-400 cars). I am not a Packard expert but as I understand it 160 / 180 / 120 etc "kind of" refer to wheelbase lengths so I guess the same 180 is no different then the 160 except is shorter. Interior appointments, the 356, all the same.

The seller so far has not responded to a couple of questions. What I find interesting is how these folks put these cars on ebay with so minimal of photos and information and Hudson Motors format is hard to read. Then, they run it over and over again for months or years because evilbay charges virtually nothing for this auction format.

I suspect all offers not in the 85-90% range are declined. I don't know what happens to them.

Edited July 16, 2012 by BJM (see edit history)

[Guest bkazmer]

Did some research last night. Not much on it. Dave and JD are correct the 3575 production figure is for all 160's in that year. It's hard to extrapolate the 160 LWB production but no more then 10% probably (300-400 cars). I am not a Packard expert but as I understand it 160 / 180 / 120 etc "kind of" refer to wheelbase lengths so I guess the same 180 is no different then the 160 except is shorter. Interior appointments, the 356, all the same.

The seller so far has no responded to a couple of questions. What I find interesting is how these folks put these cars on ebay with so minimal of photos and information and Hudson Motors format is hard to read. Then, they run it over and over again for months or years because evilbay charges virtually nothing for this auction format.

I suspect all offers not in the 85-90% range are declined. I don't know what happens to them.

Your assumption on models is a bit off. The 110 (6 cyl), 120 (282), and 160 (356) 1903 series have essentially the same bodies from the cowl back. the 120 and 1903 are the same size including hoods and wheelbase. The appointments are exactly where 120-160 -180 differ inside and out . The long wheelbase cars use the same front clip but differ in the body. There's a lot more detail as you get into it

[Guest BJM]

Thanks. As stated, I am no Packard expert. So you move up the line you get senior line attention. You could then have a 120 LWB car with a 282 8cyl that has the same wheelbase as a 160 or 180 LWB car?

[JD in KC]

Here's the breakdown for 1941:

110 - 122"

120 - 127"

160 - 127", 138", 148"

180 - 138", 148"

The Seniors (160, 180) offered the superb 356 engine and two levels of luxury.

The 180 had real wood (veneered) window surrounds, cloisonne emblems on the hood latches and hubcaps, the closed cars had electro-hydraulic windows, the finest wool broadcloth with goose down stuffed rear cushioned seats, and Mosstread carpeting throughout.

[Guest bkazmer]

Here's the breakdown for 1941:

110 - 122"

120 - 127"

160 - 127", 138", 148"

180 - 138", 148"

The Seniors (160, 180) offered the superb 356 engine and two levels of luxury.

The 180 had real wood (veneered) window surrounds, cloisonne emblems on the hood latches and hubcaps, the closed cars had electro-hydraulic windows, the finest wool broadcloth with goose down stuffed rear cushioned seats, and Mosstread carpeting throughout.

that's a much clearer answer

I think there is one addition - isn't the 180 Darrin convertible on the 127" wb?

[alsancle]

Since I was just on the highway going 70 with plenty of power to spare I can vouch for the 180/160 engine.

[JD in KC]

...isn't the 180 Darrin convertible on the 127" wb?

Yes, you are correct. I wasn't looking at the LeBaron, Rollson, Darrin offerings.

[Guest BJM]

Since I was just on the highway going 70 with plenty of power to spare I can vouch for the 180/160 engine.

I am finally getting my 48 22nd series Custom 8 delivered on Saturday. Doesn't run, but I'll keep that in mind.

[Guest BJM]

In reading the Kimes book it appears that Packard did not want to risk alienation of the old guard customers by applying Clipper styling to the 160 and the 180. Yet this was a dated body. I thought Cadillac ate Packard's lunch in 1941 production wise with the removal of LaSalle, they could increase Cadillac models but I thought the Kimes book stated no, that Packard outsold Cadillac in 1941.

Kind of off topic but interesting to me. It seems that 1941 was a "perfect storm" for Packard, introducing a new model that was not a loss leader or a 110 like 6 cyl car just to create volume - I mean the Clipper was the most modern car available in 1941.

And I have seen LWB post war Clippers - there was one for sale in the Bulletin 3-4 months ago I would have liked to own - and they are a nice looking LWB car.

[alsancle]

I am finally getting my 48 22nd series Custom 8 delivered on Saturday. Doesn't run, but I'll keep that in mind.

There is plenty of oomph at 65 mph. Turning about 2200@65mph. I should mention the car has overdrive with a standard rear end ratio, edmunds dual carbs and a edmunds head. I would strongly suggest the overdrive, but perhaps the post war gear ratios are more highway friendly. This car is a 40.

[Steve_Mack_CT]

He just may luck out in terms of gear ratios, A.J. - my '39 120 would cruise right along @ 65 with power to spare with the much less powerful 282. Tom L's '39 120 won't, the difference, as I understand it, is he does not have the highway gears in his. I do not remember the ratio, however. No OD on either car.

A.J. you should post up a pic of that engine, one of the nicest I have seen in any Packard.

Edited July 18, 2012 by Steve_Mack_CT (see edit history)

[Phils38cpe]

My 38 jr coupe with the 282 cruises at 66MPH @2500 RPM (my self imposed limit) with an R11 OD unit and the stock 38 4:36 rear end (tires are 700R15)

[alsancle]

A.J. you should post up a pic of that engine, one of the nicest I have seen in any Packard.

here you go.

[Steve_Mack_CT]

Thanks, having seen this car in person I know it is driven (80 miles, I think, one way to our rinky dink show last year -thanks again, guys!) and I was amazed at the cleanliness of this engine compartment. Really a dazzling car overall.

[Joe Block]

Thanks, having seen this car in person I know it is driven (80 miles, I think, one way to our rinky dink show last year -thanks again, guys!) and I was amazed at the cleanliness of this engine compartment. Really a dazzling car overall.

Any idea who built the air cleaner, i have the same set for my packard on the shelves.

[Highlander160]

You guys are killin me. I just put my 160 buis cpe up for sale. Reading this is giving me "seller's remorse", but also a bit of confidence. Power? Oh yeah, every one I ever drove had modern car road manners in that dept. I also read in an issue of MoToR Annual from (I think) 1940, and in the text of another car's new model specs it was stating the additional power. Also in that text they had said the Packard 160 was the fastest American production car available. I believe it. I drove a 160 conv cpe in the 80s. Loved everything about it EXCEPT that it was a rag top. I stomped down at 60MPH kickin it out of OD and smiled so big I had to turn my head to finish the grin. I guess I'll give it a little time, but something's come up I must do. If that window closes I'll probably keep it and treat it to a full blown restoration.

Some of the info's been nice to re-visit as well. Thanks for that.

[Guest BJM]

Highlander160, I have viewed your post for the 160 business coupe. I am, however, also a Buick fan and owner and might dispute the "fastest production car" for 1941. Buicks 320 cubic inch straight eight with compound carbs should have been higher hp then the 160 and when installed in a 1941 Century 2 door I would suggest but do not know for sure - that the Century would be lighter then the Packard and would win in a race, especially a mid length drag race. But I have no actual proof to back that up. The "buff magazines" like Motor Trend and such did not do comparison articles back then, I don't think.

[West Peterson]

That argument is about as old as the cars itself, and probably will never be decided upon between Packard fans and Buick fans. Certainly in 1940, Packard offered the most powerful car in the world (production wise) with its 160hp straight eight. Packard also offered a high-compression head, which improved horsepower to match the 1941 Buick's 165. I think it all boils down to who's driving when the light turns green. However, car for car, the Buick Century business coupe weighed 220 pounds more than the Packard Super 8 business coupe.

Edit: The 1940 Packard Super 8 business coupe, some 430 pounds lighter than the 1941 Century, would probably be the best of the bunch.

Edited July 27, 2012 by West Peterson (see edit history)

[Highlander160]

Also, I was quoting from MoToR which was a periodocal that went to dealers and sales agencies. It wasn't a typical car mag as we tend to think of them. I'd be a very happy man if I could find and purchase a few issues of the annuals which intro'd the next model years, i.e., Oct 40 was for the new 41 models. Yes, the Buick had more available HP. Motor for motor, car for car, I'm with Wes. Speaking from experience gained 1/4 mile at a time, 5HP is not much. Add 40lbs per that add'l HP (220lbs more), it's rendered to nothing. I've driven the Buicks too. Fast for a 40s car in anyone's language. I've never "beat one up", nor have I beat on a Packard, but when I stomped that 41 outta OD from 60? Yeah, that left a permanent memory and opinion.

[Guest BJM]

However, car for car, the Buick Century business coupe weighed 220 pounds more than the Packard Super 8 business coupe.

Edit: The 1940 Packard Super 8 business coupe, some 430 pounds lighter than the 1941 Century, would probably be the best of the bunch.

That's interesting, given that the Century was based on the Special body. That doesn't seem right but as I mentioned, I do not know for sure so we will take your experienced word on it.

[West Peterson]

I got my weights from the Standard Catalog. Actual weights may vary. I, too, was a little surprised in the difference. As the High man says, weight is king.