An important question

[Stude Shoo-wop!]

This question I am going to pose has nothing to do with any one car. It is something that is on a grander scale. It is this: Would it be possible, or advantageous, for us in the Studebaker Driver's Club to merge with The Packard Club (to my knowledge, the largest Packard organization in existence)? While the reasons we have now are similar to those of 1954, we have the advantage of hindsight.

[StudeRich]

I just can't see a SDC/Packard Club Turning Wheels!
What'da we do, have one Half Packard, one Stude.?

Not being Political at when I say: wouldn't that be similar to asking the Republican Party to JOIN the Democratic Party or Vice Versa?

[Skip Lackie]

The cultures of the two clubs are perhaps even more different than the cars and the kinds of people who bought them originally. Packards were (except for a few models) considered to be luxury cars, competing with Cadillac and Lincoln. Many of the 1930s models are full classics under the CCCA and sell for 100s of $K. I believe Studebaker has only one model that qualifies. The cultural differences are reflected in the fact that some PAC members consider 1956 as the end of production.

There are a number of folks who are members of both clubs, and SDC normally welcomes Packards to our meets -- but I don't believe the offer has been reciprocated.

[DEEPNHOCK]

(opinion)

Those that do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
Clubs and cliques don't mix well.
It's hard enough to keep one club going, let alone two clubs siamese joined that the hip.

clique
noun
plural noun: cliques
a small group of people, with shared interests or other features in common, who spend time together and do not readily allow others to join them.

[Silverplate]

No, two totally different types cars. Being a member of the Packard I am sure they would tell just what to do with this idea.

[JoeHall]

I believe it would be both possible and advantageous. It would, however, call for attitude changes on both sides. The main reason they merged in 55/56 would be the same reason now, to keep from going under. Desperation often calls for extreme measures. Maybe neither party is that desperate yet, but the time is likely coming.

[bezhawk]

It would make more sense to merge with the Hudson and Nash clubs !

[Chris Pile]

Okay - 2 totally different kinds of clubs.... We have 2 members in our chapter who also belong to the local Packard chapter. Our guys are salt of the earth folks who love to drive their vintage autos often. They complain about the Packard guys who don't drive their cars, as they are content to own one and look down their noses at the rest of the hoi polloi. In short - they're snooty, and don't want to scratch their dear premium-priced Packards. And finally - if you ask a true Packard man about the Packardbaker era - they blame Studebaker for the downfall of the Packard company. We "killed" Packard.

So, no - bad idea!

[Commander Eddie]

To Brad's point, our local chapter does a lot of activities in conjunction with the Plymouth and Rambler clubs here in the Portland Oregon area. They are a pair of great groups who bring their enthusiasm as well as some great cars to our events. The Plymouth club took over the running of what we called the "Orphan" car show this year. They re-named it and did a good job of running this well attended event. The Studebaker and Rambler clubs participated and helped. We even get a few nice Packards at this event every year. The topic of merging clubs has never come up and likely won't.

[studegary]

I can not see a merger of Studebaker and Packard clubs. Jake, you may not realize that several other Studebaker clubs (SAS, SOCA {?}, --) have been merged into the one SDC. Years ago, I thought that AOAI and ASC should merge with SDC, with AOAI and ASC becoming chapters of SDC. Now, I do not believe that AOAI should merge with SDC . There are now probably more post-Studebaker Avantis around than Studebaker Avantis (even though original production of Studebaker Avantis is higher). Many owners of later model Avantis do not want to be considered to be associated with Studebaker.

[rockne10]

Let's just say, the time is not right; either with Hudson, Nash OR Packard.
Perhaps, ... at some point, that may change.

[Andy R.]

The cultures of the two clubs are perhaps even more different than the cars and the kinds of people who bought them originally. Packards were (except for a few models) considered to be luxury cars, competing with Cadillac and Lincoln. Many of the 1930s models are full classics under the CCCA and sell for 100s of $K. I believe Studebaker has only one model that qualifies. The cultural differences are reflected in the fact that some PAC members consider 1956 as the end of production.

There are a number of folks who are members of both clubs, and SDC normally welcomes Packards to our meets -- but I don't believe the offer has been reciprocated.

Skip about covers it.

[Stude Shoo-wop!]

Alright, so from the way things are looking, it would be ham-handed at best to try a merger due to the wildly disparate nature of the club's members. Great...

[Hallabutt]

I've been a member of both clubs. While the SDC would gladly accept the association, on tours, and on the show field, the Packard people would have none of it. Forty years ago the pierce Arrow Society and the Packard club, would each hold a spring in conjunction with the Portland swap meet. Both clubs would have their get-together at the same restaurant on the same evening (George Chobin's, Marikas {sp.}). Separating the two clubs was a movable, partition wall. On several occasions the PA people put out an overture to the Packard club, to open the partition so we could mingle. The overture was rebuffed on every occasion. The air of exclusivity would have to be experienced to truly be understood.

I could say the same thing about the association of the Pierce Arrow society, of which I have been a member for over forty years, and the Studebaker clubs. But even more fundamental is the lack of interface between the SDC, ASC and the AOIA. If folks in all three Studebaker clubs refuse to recognize that our strength lies in our togetherness, it has to be obvious, that efforts at another association is bound to end badly.

Bill

[JimKB1MCV]

I've started to comment three different times.

I think all the above comments are valid. I belong to both SDC and to PAC, but only for a couple years to PAC vs. six years to SDC so I am a newcomer to both clubs.

My only addition is as my generation (I'm going to hit 78 soon) ages out of active participation I think the culture in PAC might change as the club ( and SDC as well) continues to contract in membership a merging may look to be more of a possibility.