Very gifted designer Howard “Dutch” Darrin produced the pre war Clipper design for Packard. Customers had their choice of both the traditional style bodies or the new “Clipper Styling” for both “ junior” and “senior “ models. After the war Packard resumed production with only the Clipper styling. Supposedly the body tooling for the older style was sold to Russia. I always thought the original “Clipper styling “ was very pretty, but the “ upside down bathtub “ facelift Packard introduced for 1948 didn’t come off so well.
Dutch Darrins designs were considered a bit too radical by Packard leadership but that is exactly what they needed. I stumbled all over how to say both styles were available and didn't make it clear at all and you did it so easily. Packard often sold their old tooling to ZiL.
By 1942, most Packards were only available as Clippers. The convertibles and certain 180s were not. Not exactly a choice, as each style was their own models. The bathtub wasn't the best looking Packard, but a big mistake was shrinking the Super 8 from being a senior Packard into being a tarted up junior car. Packard corrected that mistake in mid 49, but the damage had been done.
On my opinion Packard beat Rolls-Royce to the market by fifteen years with almost the exact same design language as the Silver Cloud which was RR’s first all steel bodied chassis. We were so far ahead back then.
My uncles father gave me a silver dollar when I was a little guy, he said what are you going to buy? I said, A PACKARD. He got a kick out of it. He as a Packard guy. Just ask the man that owns one. Right?
The styling of the early cars seemed ahead of the competition where the later ones copied the competition if they remained unique their name and individually would have possibly kept them around a bit longer Although the big 3 was unstoppable
@@davidpistek6241 Even not taking styling into consideration, money was often the issue. Making the tough decisions is tough and you can't be right every time. Anticipating a post war recession a decade too early didn't help. Taking on Studebakers debt certainly didn't. The Packardbakers were an obvious cost cutting decision with unsurprising results. And one must wonder if focusing on Packard instead of Studebaker would have had different long term results. Maybe not, as we can only know the results of the decisions that were made and hind sight can't tell us everything.
Styling is just the tip of the iceberg I know, imagine you are shopping for a family car in the mid fifties a Bellaire crown victoria or belvedere is just better they had the money to invest in the product instead of tough decisions and compromise to keep afloat, I get it
The Clipper could have saved Packard, but they botched it. In it's first year, it was a higher priced junior car with the small (for a Packard) 282 cube engine. It should have had the 356 and been a 160 and a 180 from the start. Then, for 42, they did replace the 282 engine with the 356, but they came out with a short wheelbase version for the 282. That was a huge mistake, as in 1940 and 41, the 120 was moving up into true luxury car territory, which was the right thing to do, but the short wheelbase model of 1942 knocked the 120 back down. Huge huge mistake. And no convertibles was another huge mistake. I could see 1941 not having a Clipper convertible, but 42 should have included it. The worse mistake was the continuing production of a cheap 6 cylinder model. That car was in no sense of the word a real Packard. A comedy of errors if you ask me.
I've had 2 Packards and have always considered the 1946-1947 Custom Super Clipper to have been Packard's pinnacle.
I've never met a Packard I didn't like, buy my favorite would have to be 36-37.
As always your content is superb, thank you.
Thank you.
Nice job with this material. Many of these models are very rare indeed.
Thanks.
Just found your excellent channel. Subscribed and happily binging your archive. Great stuff! Thanks!
That is nice to hear, thanks.
Beautiful car, aerodynamically perfect!
I'm a fan.
I always liked that distinctive Packard Grille...
Me too. Particularly in the mid 30s.
1946 and 1947 saw the Custom Super Clipper as the most opulent Packard.
There was also the Starlight coupe in 1958.
Very gifted designer Howard “Dutch” Darrin produced the pre war Clipper design for Packard. Customers had their choice of both the traditional style bodies or the new “Clipper Styling” for both “ junior” and “senior “ models. After the war Packard resumed production with only the Clipper styling. Supposedly the body tooling for the older style was sold to Russia. I always thought the original “Clipper styling “ was very pretty, but the “ upside down bathtub “ facelift Packard introduced for 1948 didn’t come off so well.
Dutch Darrins designs were considered a bit too radical by Packard leadership but that is exactly what they needed.
I stumbled all over how to say both styles were available and didn't make it clear at all and you did it so easily.
Packard often sold their old tooling to ZiL.
By 1942, most Packards were only available as Clippers. The convertibles and certain 180s were not. Not exactly a choice, as each style was their own models. The bathtub wasn't the best looking Packard, but a big mistake was shrinking the Super 8 from being a senior Packard into being a tarted up junior car. Packard corrected that mistake in mid 49, but the damage had been done.
On my opinion Packard beat Rolls-Royce to the market by fifteen years with almost the exact same design language as the Silver Cloud which was RR’s first all steel bodied chassis.
We were so far ahead back then.
Just ask the man who owned one.
And the Rolls was 6 cyl only!
More please!
Thanks, I'm work'n on it.
Beautiful Automobile
I'm fan.
The demise of Packard was a tragedy of the American automobile industry 😢
I feel the same way.
My uncles father gave me a silver dollar when I was a little guy, he said what are you going to buy? I said, A PACKARD. He got a kick out of it. He as a Packard guy. Just ask the man that owns one. Right?
Right. And they meant it.
The styling of the early cars seemed ahead of the competition where the later ones copied the competition if they remained unique their name and individually would have possibly kept them around a bit longer
Although the big 3 was unstoppable
Packards downfall was a rapid one that could be attributed to a lot of factors, but in the end, it all comes down to leadership.
The big 3 had iacocca, exner and Mitchell to keep styling up with budgets for every year, even through better leadership the money wasn't there
@@davidpistek6241 Even not taking styling into consideration, money was often the issue. Making the tough decisions is tough and you can't be right every time. Anticipating a post war recession a decade too early didn't help. Taking on Studebakers debt certainly didn't. The Packardbakers were an obvious cost cutting decision with unsurprising results. And one must wonder if focusing on Packard instead of Studebaker would have had different long term results. Maybe not, as we can only know the results of the decisions that were made and hind sight can't tell us everything.
Styling is just the tip of the iceberg I know, imagine you are shopping for a family car in the mid fifties a Bellaire crown victoria or belvedere is just better they had the money to invest in the product instead of tough decisions and compromise to keep afloat, I get it
@@davidpistek6241 Agreed. And unlike in 70s and 80s, the big 3 were not afraid to spend that money to beat the competition.
The Clipper could have saved Packard, but they botched it. In it's first year, it was a higher priced junior car with the small (for a Packard) 282 cube engine. It should have had the 356 and been a 160 and a 180 from the start. Then, for 42, they did replace the 282 engine with the 356, but they came out with a short wheelbase version for the 282. That was a huge mistake, as in 1940 and 41, the 120 was moving up into true luxury car territory, which was the right thing to do, but the short wheelbase model of 1942 knocked the 120 back down. Huge huge mistake. And no convertibles was another huge mistake. I could see 1941 not having a Clipper convertible, but 42 should have included it. The worse mistake was the continuing production of a cheap 6 cylinder model. That car was in no sense of the word a real Packard. A comedy of errors if you ask me.
I just passed on grabbing a 41 because I'm getting ready for a move. Not my favorite year, but I would have liked to been able to grab it.
Packard should have merged with Hudson instead of Studerbaker.
Might have turned out much differently.
@@thehopelesscarguy IF they went back to making just luxury Packards, and no junior cars, at least not with the Packard name plate on them.
They really know how to make cars . To bad they had to go bankrupt.😂
I feel that way about most discontinued brands.
They did it to themselves.