PDA

View Full Version : Great article on Packard Hawk



Scott
10-22-2006, 08:21 PM
This from Hemmings (Jan. 2006).

http://www.hemmings.com/hcc/stories/2006/01/01/hmn_feature10.html
Duncan McRae says some things I didn't know:

"We did a facelift for the basic Studebaker that I'm not particularly pleased with. And we were forced to come up with some sort of Packard product...so the franchise dealers couldn't force Studebaker-Packard to buy back all of their spare parts and tools. So we tried to make a Packard line out of the Studebakers."

The other comments he makes are also interesting.

I'm not sure about the outside, but I think the Packard Hawk has the best looking interior of any US made car of the 1950s.

studeclunker
10-22-2006, 08:27 PM
I've heard the same thing about the move from South Bend to Ontario. That Studebaker or more precisely, Worthington didn't want to be sued by the larger dealers, so they killed the marque.

Isn't it funny (sad not ha ha) that Packard people point to Studebaker for the demise of both companies and vice versa. Sadly, it was the marriage of two cripples who were looking for a Knight in shining armour. Unfortuneately, they both lied.

And I for one really like the Packardbakers!:D So there!;)

Lotsa Larks!
K.I.S.S. Keep It Simple Studebaker!
Ron Smith

studeclunker
10-22-2006, 08:27 PM
I've heard the same thing about the move from South Bend to Ontario. That Studebaker or more precisely, Worthington didn't want to be sued by the larger dealers, so they killed the marque.

Isn't it funny (sad not ha ha) that Packard people point to Studebaker for the demise of both companies and vice versa. Sadly, it was the marriage of two cripples who were looking for a Knight in shining armour. Unfortuneately, they both lied.

And I for one really like the Packardbakers!:D So there!;)

Lotsa Larks!
K.I.S.S. Keep It Simple Studebaker!
Ron Smith

56H-Y6
10-23-2006, 07:10 AM
Hi
I like the Packardbakers too. The deniers of history like to accuse Studebaker denigrating the fine Packard name as if it were a nefarious scheme.
They need to be ask to answer the following question: Given the financial Waterloo occurring during 1956, the direction largely in the hands of Curtiss-Wright management whose charge was to stem the massive losses while still keeping some car production going, and assessing that only one plant could be operated and the lower price market holding the best chance for volume sales and maybe profits, what other options did management have to keep a Packard on the market?
I know, long question, but S-P was in a corner with no escape route, they did what they had to do, as long as they had some Packard on the market, and if profits would come, there still was a chance for another new big Packard.
Steve

56H-Y6
10-23-2006, 07:10 AM
Hi
I like the Packardbakers too. The deniers of history like to accuse Studebaker denigrating the fine Packard name as if it were a nefarious scheme.
They need to be ask to answer the following question: Given the financial Waterloo occurring during 1956, the direction largely in the hands of Curtiss-Wright management whose charge was to stem the massive losses while still keeping some car production going, and assessing that only one plant could be operated and the lower price market holding the best chance for volume sales and maybe profits, what other options did management have to keep a Packard on the market?
I know, long question, but S-P was in a corner with no escape route, they did what they had to do, as long as they had some Packard on the market, and if profits would come, there still was a chance for another new big Packard.
Steve

8E45E
10-23-2006, 08:02 AM
quote:Originally posted by 56H-Y6

Hi
I like the Packardbakers too. The deniers of history like to accuse Studebaker denigrating the fine Packard name as if it were a nefarious scheme.

**S-P aren't the only ones who could be accused of that. BMC/British Leyland did the same with the once highly regarded Vanden Plas coach builder. The applied it to tarted up Austin Allegro/Marinas, and Chrysler did the same with the LeBaron name by applying it to a pimped out Volare. :D

I know, long question, but S-P was in a corner with no escape route, they did what they had to do, as long as they had some Packard on the market, and if profits would come, there still was a chance for another new big Packard.

**Assuming that profits did return to S-P by the early sixties and they came out with a 'real' Packard, the 'image damage' to the marque would have been done. Cadillac is still having that problem trying to re-establish itself as a high-end luxury car builder after their early eighties fiasco with decked out Cavaliers.[xx(]

Craig

Steve

8E45E
10-23-2006, 08:02 AM
quote:Originally posted by 56H-Y6

Hi
I like the Packardbakers too. The deniers of history like to accuse Studebaker denigrating the fine Packard name as if it were a nefarious scheme.

**S-P aren't the only ones who could be accused of that. BMC/British Leyland did the same with the once highly regarded Vanden Plas coach builder. The applied it to tarted up Austin Allegro/Marinas, and Chrysler did the same with the LeBaron name by applying it to a pimped out Volare. :D

I know, long question, but S-P was in a corner with no escape route, they did what they had to do, as long as they had some Packard on the market, and if profits would come, there still was a chance for another new big Packard.

**Assuming that profits did return to S-P by the early sixties and they came out with a 'real' Packard, the 'image damage' to the marque would have been done. Cadillac is still having that problem trying to re-establish itself as a high-end luxury car builder after their early eighties fiasco with decked out Cavaliers.[xx(]

Craig

Steve

kmul221
10-23-2006, 10:46 AM
When I purchased mine from the original owner's daughter in 86 for $5k,it had been in storage from 62 .With 58k on the odometer,power windows & signal seeking radio.The car was from a dealer in Williamsburg(Buffalo) NY & was rust free,even the exterior window pads were in good shape as was the leather interior.
I stumbled across the car while looking for a Golden Hawk & wasn't too sure about buying it due to the unusual styling,when I started going to local shows after new brakes & tires all I got was YUKE ! even from Studebaker people.Some would approach me and ask "Why would anybody want to own a car that looked like that?".After enjoying it for 10yrs. I sold it to a Tom Healy in the Boston area & think he still ownes it.Funny I can't remember what I did yesterday but the V.I.N # 58LS1488 has stuck with me.Another one of many errors I've made in my life was selling it !

kmul221
10-23-2006, 10:46 AM
When I purchased mine from the original owner's daughter in 86 for $5k,it had been in storage from 62 .With 58k on the odometer,power windows & signal seeking radio.The car was from a dealer in Williamsburg(Buffalo) NY & was rust free,even the exterior window pads were in good shape as was the leather interior.
I stumbled across the car while looking for a Golden Hawk & wasn't too sure about buying it due to the unusual styling,when I started going to local shows after new brakes & tires all I got was YUKE ! even from Studebaker people.Some would approach me and ask "Why would anybody want to own a car that looked like that?".After enjoying it for 10yrs. I sold it to a Tom Healy in the Boston area & think he still ownes it.Funny I can't remember what I did yesterday but the V.I.N # 58LS1488 has stuck with me.Another one of many errors I've made in my life was selling it !

raprice
10-23-2006, 11:40 AM
I could never understand why so many negative comments have been associated with the so-called Packardbakers. I've always thought that, considering the limited funds available to the stylists and engineers, they did a marvelous job. But then I also like the '53 to '58 sedans too.
I know it's Monday morning quarterbacking, but I can't help but wonder what the outcome would have been if Studebaker and Packard joined forces with Nash and Hudson. To me, it probably would have formed a more viable company in the long run. Who knows, they might still be in existance today. I can dream can't I?
Rog
'59 Lark VI Regal Hardtop

raprice
10-23-2006, 11:40 AM
I could never understand why so many negative comments have been associated with the so-called Packardbakers. I've always thought that, considering the limited funds available to the stylists and engineers, they did a marvelous job. But then I also like the '53 to '58 sedans too.
I know it's Monday morning quarterbacking, but I can't help but wonder what the outcome would have been if Studebaker and Packard joined forces with Nash and Hudson. To me, it probably would have formed a more viable company in the long run. Who knows, they might still be in existance today. I can dream can't I?
Rog
'59 Lark VI Regal Hardtop

62champ
10-23-2006, 11:52 AM
I like this comment:

"I've seen lots of vehicles that look like hell, but when you realize they were competing against, say, General Motors in 1958, they don't look so bad."

Taken out of context, it does look different - but thrown in with everything else from the same year - not too bad!

1960 Lark VI - finally turned 50k in August of 2006

62champ
10-23-2006, 11:52 AM
I like this comment:

"I've seen lots of vehicles that look like hell, but when you realize they were competing against, say, General Motors in 1958, they don't look so bad."

Taken out of context, it does look different - but thrown in with everything else from the same year - not too bad!

1960 Lark VI - finally turned 50k in August of 2006

Studedude1961
10-23-2006, 05:47 PM
The 1957 Packardbaker rendition was particularly attractive, the 1958s less so, but certainly not as unattractive as GM's Buick and Oldsmobile lines. To me the entire 1957 Studebaker line, Hawks, Sedans, Packards, were some of the prettiest cars of the 1950s. I have often wondered why 1955-1957 Hudsons were called "Hashes" and the last two model year Packards were "Packardbakers" but look-alike Fords and Lincolns and Cadillacs and Chevrolets from the 1970s on have never been refered to as "Fincolns" or "Chevrollacs."

Studedude1961
--1963 Cruiser

Studedude1961
10-23-2006, 05:47 PM
The 1957 Packardbaker rendition was particularly attractive, the 1958s less so, but certainly not as unattractive as GM's Buick and Oldsmobile lines. To me the entire 1957 Studebaker line, Hawks, Sedans, Packards, were some of the prettiest cars of the 1950s. I have often wondered why 1955-1957 Hudsons were called "Hashes" and the last two model year Packards were "Packardbakers" but look-alike Fords and Lincolns and Cadillacs and Chevrolets from the 1970s on have never been refered to as "Fincolns" or "Chevrollacs."

Studedude1961
--1963 Cruiser

raprice
10-23-2006, 08:15 PM
Studedude, your point is well taken.
Rog
'59 Lark VI Regal Hardtop

raprice
10-23-2006, 08:15 PM
Studedude, your point is well taken.
Rog
'59 Lark VI Regal Hardtop

John Kirchhoff
10-24-2006, 08:43 AM
I guess I'm going off on a tangent here, but if you think about styling, at one end it's an attempt for an individual to express themselves while at the other end of the spectrum it's an attempt to impress others. Rodders and bike customizers tend to be the former and large manufacturers tend to be the latter. Many people think the '55 coupes with all their garish chrome were a real insult to the orginal Lowey design. In retrospect, a case could be made for that, but the big three was doing the same and apparently that's what the buying public wanted. Marching to the beat of your own drummer is fine as long as you don't have stockholders expecting a return on their investment. So, you do what you have to to sell cars (or anything else). This brings up another problem, trying to mass produce a product that cannot be made homogenous because your customers vary widely. With cars, you have people who want a utilitarian vehicle with no concern about styling (Yugo, Ford Fiesta) to young impress the girls type (Mustangs, T Birds), people with a death wish to rich old ladies in big road barges (Caddys). To compound marketing problems even further, the market demand is always changing. Kind of like shooting clay pigeons, trying to hit a moving target. Some times someone leads the target and gets lucky (Lark, Rambler) and other times they miss (Edsel). Solutions to problems are pretty easy after the fact but quite difficult at the time. But it is fun to cuss, discuss and wonder what might have happened "if only".

John Kirchhoff
10-24-2006, 08:43 AM
I guess I'm going off on a tangent here, but if you think about styling, at one end it's an attempt for an individual to express themselves while at the other end of the spectrum it's an attempt to impress others. Rodders and bike customizers tend to be the former and large manufacturers tend to be the latter. Many people think the '55 coupes with all their garish chrome were a real insult to the orginal Lowey design. In retrospect, a case could be made for that, but the big three was doing the same and apparently that's what the buying public wanted. Marching to the beat of your own drummer is fine as long as you don't have stockholders expecting a return on their investment. So, you do what you have to to sell cars (or anything else). This brings up another problem, trying to mass produce a product that cannot be made homogenous because your customers vary widely. With cars, you have people who want a utilitarian vehicle with no concern about styling (Yugo, Ford Fiesta) to young impress the girls type (Mustangs, T Birds), people with a death wish to rich old ladies in big road barges (Caddys). To compound marketing problems even further, the market demand is always changing. Kind of like shooting clay pigeons, trying to hit a moving target. Some times someone leads the target and gets lucky (Lark, Rambler) and other times they miss (Edsel). Solutions to problems are pretty easy after the fact but quite difficult at the time. But it is fun to cuss, discuss and wonder what might have happened "if only".

JBOYLE
10-24-2006, 12:16 PM
quote:Originally posted by John Kirchhoff
This brings up another problem, trying to mass produce a product that cannot be made homogenous because your customers vary widely. But it is fun to...wonder what might have happened "if only".


I wonder if the Avanti had been brought out by Ford or Chrysler (with appropriate running gear and chassis) if it would have been a major hit?
The public was ready for a "personal luxury" car by 1963 witness the Riviera or T-Bird. You could also make a case that it could have been an upmarket Mustang for the Lincoln-Mercury dealers, or a bankers' muscle car like the (then) fading Chrysler 300.

63 Avanti R1 2788
1914 Stutz Bearcat
(George Barris replica)

Washington State

JBOYLE
10-24-2006, 12:16 PM
quote:Originally posted by John Kirchhoff
This brings up another problem, trying to mass produce a product that cannot be made homogenous because your customers vary widely. But it is fun to...wonder what might have happened "if only".


I wonder if the Avanti had been brought out by Ford or Chrysler (with appropriate running gear and chassis) if it would have been a major hit?
The public was ready for a "personal luxury" car by 1963 witness the Riviera or T-Bird. You could also make a case that it could have been an upmarket Mustang for the Lincoln-Mercury dealers, or a bankers' muscle car like the (then) fading Chrysler 300.

63 Avanti R1 2788
1914 Stutz Bearcat
(George Barris replica)

Washington State