The automotive landscape of the late 1950s was a crucible of change, with the once-mighty independent automakers facing immense pressure from the Big Three. Packard, a name synonymous with luxury and innovation, found itself caught in this maelstrom. As the company struggled to stay afloat, an intriguing proposition emerged: a Packard sharing a platform with the 1956-57 Lincoln. This article delves into this fascinating “what-if” scenario, exploring the potential benefits and drawbacks of a Lincoln-based Packard and its chances of survival in a rapidly evolving market.
The Genesis of a Partnership: Ford and Packard
The idea of a Ford-Packard collaboration wasn’t entirely out of left field. According to automotive historian James Ward, Ford CEO Ernest Breech saw potential in sharing platforms with struggling independents, including Studebaker. Studebaker-Packard CEO James Nance, desperate to save his company, even proposed a full-blown merger with Ford, citing the value of Packard’s dealer network. While Henry Ford II was allegedly open to the idea, his lieutenants were less enthusiastic, ultimately scuttling the deal.
A Glimpse into an Alternate Reality: The Lincoln-Based Packard
While concrete details are scarce, historical accounts suggest that designs for a Lincoln-based Packard were indeed drafted. Richard Teague, a prominent automotive designer, even sketched a potential 1957 Packard incorporating Lincoln underpinnings. This intriguing design retained Packard’s distinctive styling cues while adopting the Lincoln’s sleek roofline, hinting at a harmonious blend of luxury and brand identity.
Image: 1957 Lincoln four-door hardtop. Could this have been the basis for a revitalized Packard?
The Allure of Shared Platforms: Cost Savings and Modernization
For a company on the brink like Packard, sharing the Lincoln’s platform offered several advantages:
Reduced Development Costs: Developing a new car from the ground up was incredibly expensive, a luxury Packard could ill afford. Utilizing an existing platform would have significantly slashed development costs, freeing up vital resources.
Access to Modern Engineering: The 1956 Lincoln was a thoroughly modern car for its time, boasting unit-body construction and advanced suspension. These features would have given Packard a much-needed dose of modernity and competitiveness.
Enhanced Brand Image: Aligning with a respected marque like Lincoln could have bolstered Packard’s image, signaling to consumers that the brand was still a player in the luxury market.
The Downside of Shared DNA: Market Positioning and Brand Identity
Despite the allure of cost savings and modernization, partnering with Lincoln presented significant challenges:
Market Overlap: Both Lincoln and Packard competed in the upper echelons of the market, albeit with different brand identities. A shared platform risked blurring these lines, potentially cannibalizing sales from both brands.
Diluted Brand Identity: Part of Packard’s appeal lay in its exclusivity and unique engineering. Sharing a platform with a mass-market brand like Lincoln could have been perceived as a compromise, diluting its prestigious image.
Dependence on a Competitor: Relying on a competitor for such a crucial component as the platform would have made Packard vulnerable to Ford’s decisions and market strategies.
The Shifting Sands of the Late 1950s: A Shrinking Market for Opulence
Even if a Lincoln-based Packard had materialized, its long-term survival was far from guaranteed. The late 1950s witnessed a dramatic shift in consumer preferences, with buyers increasingly drawn to smaller, more efficient cars. Packard, even with Lincoln’s platform, would have been competing in a shrinking segment of the market.
Market share versus length, premium brands, 1951-59
Graph: The shrinking market share of premium brands during the 1950s.
The success of the 1958 Ford Thunderbird, a smaller, sportier, and more affordable alternative to traditional luxury cars, further underscored this trend. Packard, even with a modernized platform, would have struggled to compete against this new breed of personal luxury cars.
A Missed Opportunity or a Stay of Execution?
The Lincoln-based Packard remains an intriguing “what-if” scenario in automotive history. While it offered potential cost savings and modernization, it also presented significant risks to Packard’s brand identity and market positioning. Ultimately, the success of such a venture would have hinged on factors beyond a shared platform, including savvy marketing, a compelling product lineup, and an ability to adapt to rapidly evolving consumer tastes.
It’s impossible to say for certain whether a Lincoln-based Packard would have saved the company. Perhaps it would have granted Packard a temporary reprieve, allowing it to limp into the 1960s. However, the company’s long-term survival would have required a radical departure from its traditional approach to luxury car manufacturing.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: Were there any other proposals to save Packard?
A: Yes, various proposals were floated, including a potential merger with Studebaker, adopting Studebaker bodies for Packard models, and even selling rebadged Mercedes-Benz vehicles. However, none of these proposals came to fruition.
Q: What ultimately led to Packard’s demise?
A: A complex interplay of factors contributed to Packard’s demise, including declining sales, high production costs, an aging product lineup, and fierce competition from the Big Three.
Q: Did any of Packard’s innovations live on in other cars?
A: While the Packard brand disappeared in 1958, some of its innovations, such as the torsion-level suspension and push-button transmission controls, continued to influence automotive engineering for years to come.
What’s Next?
This exploration of a Lincoln-based Packard offers a glimpse into a fascinating alternate reality. In the next installment of our series, we’ll delve deeper into the final years of Packard, examining the factors that ultimately sealed the fate of this once-proud automotive icon.