Bear with me, here, as I explain this post. The Studebaker Drivers Club (SDC) has a long history of welcoming modified cars and trucks in its ranks. Since at least the early '80s---when our family got involved with the club---the show field at Studebaker meets has always included classes for modified Studebakers. For years, there has even been a regular column in the monthly club newsletter, Turning Wheels, titled 'Custom and Modified Studebakers'. Also, most of you will remember the ill-fated marriage of Studebaker and Packard in the mid '50s, which resulted in the much-maligned "Packardbaker" models of 1957-58. It is there that this story truly begins. Though this does not involve a period-built concept car, it is a fascinating (and highly successful, imho) home-built look at what might have been... The photos and text shown here are from the June 2020 issue of Turning Wheels. The article titled; "The 'What If' Packard" by John Bridges, is presented below. I'll now turn it over to Mr. Bridges: "In an article I wrote for the April 2012 Turning Wheels called 'Could Design Have Saved Studebaker/Packard', I put on my 'Monday morning quarterback' hat and speculated on how some design changes might have increased Studebaker sales and at the same time saved tooling and manufacturing costs. An example of one of my 'history rewrites' was the idea of using the 120.5" wheelbase for all 1953-55 sedans and coupes. Using the same cowl-forward parts, the sedans would have been more attractive and millions in tooling costs would have been saved. I also suggested that designer, Duncan McRae should have used the traditional Packard ox-yoke grille on his 1958 Packard Hawk design instead of the extremely wide and narrow 'fish-like' front design. There was nothing about that Hawk that said 'Packard.' Also in the article, I included a sketch of what I thought the '57-'58 Packard should have looked like given there was no money for tooling a new body and the only option was to rebadged the '56 Stude President as a Packard. I'll admit one can't tell much from the sketch so I decided to build a full-size running prototype of my idea. The photos show the result. The 'What If' Packard shown in the photos may not have saved Packard from going out of business, but I believe the company would have sold a lot more cars in 1957 and '58 than they did." I agree wheheartedly. Some legit Packard parts were used in the transformation of this '56 President, but many of the dominant design elements on the front and rear of the car were fabricated by the builder. Just amazing! NOTE TO SITE ADMINS: I wasn't sure exactly which forum to post this in, so please feel free to move it, as necessary.
Here are examples of the factory-built '57 and '58 Studebakers (sedans, wagons, hardtop, and coupes).
Well even though I love Studebaker's a lot,and I did like Packard before they became one with Study. I'm not at all liking your take on this,any more then what was to me,very ugly Packard styles after the merg. I guess it's a good thing he didn't ask me. Dose look like clean work and done well,even if styling dose not do anything for me !
You know what they say, beauty is in the beer holder's eye. I like the original one better. The narrow Packard grill just looks out of place. A wide version, with the Packard center hump would look good IMHO and go better with the lower lines of the body and lower hood line, but I wasn't the beer holder that built it.....
Well, I don't like it less that the production Packards. But that's not saying too much since they are not very handsome cars.
Looks like the poor mans version of this.... The 1955 Packard Request, a factory concept. Found in a farm field then restored... The '57 are a rather handsome car IMO, the '58s were the failures as their attempt to graft four headlights onto it was an abject disaster.
The "new" design is, obviously, a compromise, so I totally understand that it won't please everyone. The combined Studebaker-Packard Corporation did not have the resources to do a Packard-specific design, so it had to make due. Like the article's author, I feel McRae didn't make the Packardbaker very Packard-y. That's where I feel the new design is more successful. It retains more of the design cues that one would expect to see on a Packard. As he states, such a car might have been more acceptable to the contemporary Packard-byuing public---and, at the same time, gotten the company through the 1958 recession in a stronger position.
By 1956 it was too late. Packard's last decent sales year was 1950 when they sold 116,000 cars. After that sales fell off steadily. The all new 1951 models resembled the 1948 Cadillac and Futuramic Oldsmobile 98. They may have been the newest thing for Packard but they looked dated. Even though they were restyled every year till 54 the changes were so subtle they all looked the same. In those days if you did not have new styling to sell you were nowhere. Then there was the V8 question. Cadillac and Olds had them in 49, Chrysler and Studebaker in 51. Packard's flathead straight eight was a good engine and performance was close to the competition but lack of a V8 cost them sales and made them look old fashioned, obsolete, like a company on the skids that could not keep up. There were other problems but in short, they should have gotten their act together no later than 1951. By 1955 they were as good as dead. The new V8, torsion bar suspension, new styling were great but the public wasn't interested in Packard anymore.
I am a long time Studebaker owner and SDC member. I saw the featured car in the latest issue of Turning Wheels. While I give the author/builder credit for effort, I also think the throwback to 1940s grille design was a non-starter. I like the ‘57 factory version better, though it looks more like a Cadillac than a Packard. The ‘58s (perhaps excepting the Hawk) were atrocious.....even in a year when there was an abundance of atrocious styling by most manufacturers. I tend to agree with @Rusty O'Toole ......it was too late. Packard didn’t survive and Studebaker wasted time and sorely needed money on the merger. But, of course, that is all 20/20 hindsight, common to most of us and a specialty of mine. Ray
Makes you understand why Chevrolet & Ford sold so many cars during those years. Buying a better looking car for less money is a good thing IMO. Bob
The Jalopy Journal
