This letter is a response to our story, “The 1955 Packard’s styling was an evolutionary dead end.”
Your need to read more thoroughly what actually happened in the mid-1950s. In that era, Cadillac was the king. Packard wanted that title back. By the way, the 1956 Lincoln Mark II was a sale failure. America had become a space age, Jetson inspired nation.
Old was out! Mercedes had a wrap around windshield and fins. The Predictor was loved at the auto shows. Packard had a hit. Just maybe that is why their proposed 1957 models were based on it?
Edsel design mocked Packard and failed. Edsel had no pedigree to sport a semi-classic grille. Ford hyped Edsel like it was the second coming. People made jokes about Edsel. Edsel was the give away car for lots of TV shows and contests. Its grille did look like a horse collar. Packard’s did not. You fail to see that.
There was also a bad recession in 1958. I think your article is unfair in comparisons and draws conclusions that are inaccurate. Do you even remember how glorious these cars were at the time? I was a child when i rode sitting on my knees facing backwards in the rear seat of my Grandfather’s 1958 Mercury Turnpike Cruiser with the glass down as I looked through the stand up ornament. He gave my parents his ‘55 Packard and bought a dream car. The winged Chryslers of 1957 were most definitely space aged, especially the Imperial.
America’s future was bright then. People believed it. It was a different world and American car design reflected that atomic optimism. Packard was the car of movie stars, politicians and funeral homes. It took tons of Chevy profits for GM to replace Packard with Cadillac. In the end, Packard was outspent and GM stying won out. It was space age modern and so were the 1950’s in America. Rock and roll!
— D. B.
Indie Auto invites your comments (see below) or letters to the editor (go here).
While this is a reasonable position, I think I rather agree that the Packards of 1955 and 1956 were valiant attempts, but dead ends. The 1948-1950 reskin of the 1941 Clipper was the real dead-end. What if the John Reinhart design in 1951 had been the 1948 Packard instead ? Then the 1955 Packards could have been the 1952 model ? With torsion-bar suspensions and a V-8 engine in 1952, THAT would have given Cadillac buyers something about which to think ? Although the 1954 Cadillac’s new C-body was evolutionary in styling, even in the 63-series, all 1954-1956 Cadillacs were impressive cars standing still and in motion ! In 1955, the Packards were “me-t00”. Old car TV advertising provides a key to where the market was moving: If by the early 1960s, pre-Buick Riviera in 1963, the Ford Thunderbird was really “America’s Most Admired Car”, then certainly for the luxury car buyer, the Cadillac had to be the ultimate motor to which to aspire (and the 1961 and later Lincolns). In 1955, who aspired to own a Packard Caribbean or Patrician in 1955 or 1956 ? Even G.M.’s “Motorama” Cadillac concept cars previewed styling touches for Cadillacs in 1954, 1955, 1956 and beyond, whereas the Packard “Predictor” was so unrelated to the cars of 1955 and 1956 that it was not a credible indicator of a future production Packard. I wish the outcome of Packard history had been different.