Automotive AHC - Improve Studebaker's (and Packard's) prospects

[marathag]

What other factors would have allowed Packard ITTL to accelerate its introduction of the Packard V8 engine by a few years than 1955 as IOTL or what issues the Packard engine experienced that could be resolved under better circumstances?

Make a 1/4th copy of their 2490 cu inch DOHC Aluminum marine engine in V8 form, that's 415 cubic inches, 4" bore and 4 1/8th stroke

That will move a super Eight around with authority, as that could probably do 300hp@4000rpm with early '50s lower octane gas
V6, its still 311 cu inch, not much smaller than the new Chrysler Hemi, does 225hp vs the Hemi's 180 or the old inline 8 of 327cu inch and 145 hp

play up the PT Boat angle for power and reliability

 

[TheMann]

Make a 1/4th copy of their 2490 cu inch DOHC Aluminum marine engine in V8 form, that's 415 cubic inches, 4" bore and 4 1/8th stroke

That will move a super Eight around with authority, as that could probably do 300hp@4000rpm with early '50s lower octane gas
V6, its still 311 cu inch, not much smaller than the new Chrysler Hemi, does 225hp vs the Hemi's 180 or the old inline 8 of 327cu inch and 145 hp

play up the PT Boat angle for power and reliability

That's an interesting idea, though I'd caution that not everything may scale down as one would think it would, and a DOHC aluminum-block engine would probably be an expensive prospect in the early 1950s as well as being far more complex than Detroit V8s of the era, which may be an issue to buyers.

 

[marathag]

That's an interesting idea, though I'd caution that not everything may scale down as one would think it would, and a DOHC aluminum-block engine would probably be an expensive prospect in the early 1950s as well as being far more complex than Detroit V8s of the era, which may be an issue to buyers.

It's Packard: people expected the best, and were willing to pay.

Packard had to build a all new plant to do that V8 of theirs, forward think and do it proper for an engine that is the best on the road
Thousands of servicemen got used to working on high tech, high power engines

They weren't willing to pay for a Studebaker masquerading as a Packard

 

[Masked Grizzly]

Make a 1/4th copy of their 2490 cu inch DOHC Aluminum marine engine in V8 form, that's 415 cubic inches, 4" bore and 4 1/8th stroke

That will move a super Eight around with authority, as that could probably do 300hp@4000rpm with early '50s lower octane gas
V6, its still 311 cu inch, not much smaller than the new Chrysler Hemi, does 225hp vs the Hemi's 180 or the old inline 8 of 327cu inch and 145 hp

play up the PT Boat angle for power and reliability

A bit too clean sheet for my taste and could Packard even afford to go down such a butterfly filled route?

It seems more sensible for them with the right PODs to use any extra cash towards bringing forward a better developed (ideally lighter and less bulky) version of the Packard V8 into production in the late-1940s (that soon spawns a related V12), one that either arrives around the same time as or slightly precedes both the Cadillac and Oldsmobile V8s.

That together with ATL Studebaker's better decisions (e.g. early properly-developed Skybolt Six and SBC-like V8) would have reduced overlap by the time they merge and join AMC ITTL.

 

[marathag]

A bit too clean sheet for my taste and could Packard even afford to go down such a butterfly filled route?

That V-12 dated to the 1920s, a contemporary of the Napier Lion, goal to make a better Liberty engine.
Shaft driven DOHC, but not built up cylinders like the Lion and Liberty.
The market for the big V12 dried up in 1945, but they had the aluminum casting facilities do do those kind of complex Vees, and really, going from a 6" bore to a 4" is not a huge amount of miniaturization.
Individually, yes those motors would be expensive, but the existing plant making the iron Straight Eights was not able to be updated to V8 production, and Packard had to build a brand new plant, that they really couldn't afford either for the cost, or in the delay in getting a new engine to market.
At the end of the day, that effort didn't measure up to what Olds and Cadillac did for their postwar V8s, and they lost the prestige there, along with sales. Debt, with little to show for it

Having that 415 in 1951 would get Packard the Press and accolades that the Chrysler 300 picked up a few years later, the birth of Muscle in a luxurious Ride.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

That V-12 dated to the 1920s, a contemporary of the Napier Lion, goal to make a better Liberty engine.
Shaft driven DOHC, but not built up cylinders like the Lion and Liberty.
The market for the big V12 dried up in 1945, but they had the aluminum casting facilities do do those kind of complex Vees, and really, going from a 6" bore to a 4" is not a huge amount of miniaturization.
Individually, yes those motors would be expensive, but the existing plant making the iron Straight Eights was not able to be updated to V8 production, and Packard had to build a brand new plant, that they really couldn't afford either for the cost, or in the delay in getting a new engine to market.
At the end of the day, that effort didn't measure up to what Olds and Cadillac did for their postwar V8s, and they lost the prestige there, along with sales. Debt, with little to show for it

Having that 415 in 1951 would get Packard the Press and accolades that the Chrysler 300 picked up a few years later, the birth of Muscle in a luxurious Ride.

There was another V12 project in the 1950s that was basically an extension of the OTL post-war Packard V8 with 4 extra cylinders, found both online as well as in Karl Ludvigsen's book on the V12 engine.

It seems the Packard V8 itself suffered from project drift in OTL for a number of years before reaching production IOTL which did not help matters, the only other way would be pre-war PODs where Packard is in a better financial position to afford a new plant for the ATL post-war Packard V8/V12.

Otherwise another albeit merger alternative for Packard to gain a V12 would entail a much lighter Packard-exclusive V12 being developed from the ATL SBC-like Studebaker V8 to slot above the existing Packard V8, which together with an ATL 90-degree V6 (an indirect replacement for the ATL Skybolt Six) would have allowed this ATL 90-degree V6/V8/V12 engine family to survive rationalization upon joining AMC.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

One element worth exploring depending on when a wanked thriving Studebaker-Packard ITTL does join AMC would be how it impacts the development of the Rambler American, Rambler Classic and Ambassador. Especially if the three platforms or modified variations are used as a starting point for various Studebaker and Packard models, which retain their own ATL engines and exterior styling, etc.

Or if it is feasible perhaps have the Studebaker and Packard marques even be utilized in place of AMC ITTL to reposition the company as more of a premium lower-volume high-profit carmaker (plus Jeep) relative to the high-volume mass-market Big Three, essentially becoming the rough ATL US analogue of Jaguar Land Rover or a more Alfa Romeo-like Facel Vega (had their OTL plans to produce their own Twin-Cam 4-cylinder and 60-degree V6 engines been a success).

Undecided who out of Raymond Loewy or Brookes Stevens should style future Studebaker and Packard models at ATL AMC. Would the Avanti-esque looks of the former have worked with the ATL Packards, with Stevens continuing to style Studebakers but now being afforded a larger budget and more freedom compared to OTL?

 

[phx1138]

By appearances, Stude management & senior engineering staff all need to be pushed under a bus for this to work. Copying the Cad cold, but not taking account of bore & stroke differences? Choking the combustion chambers with lousy heads? *sigh*

Could they have gotten in touch with Zora Duntov in '46 or '47, before he did the Ardun hemis for Ford, & put him in charge of the V8 project? Or rope in, IDK, Vic Edlebrock or Doug Thorley or Alex Xydias?

How about poach Delorean? (Too early?)

Keeping Ray Loewy away from car design would be a good idea... The Avanti's got so many peculiar lines, it's about as bad as an Edsel. (I'd do this, instead: )

(If I could edit in 240Z-style headlight buckets, I'd do that, too. )

I do especially like that Stevens proposal; it may be a bit plain, but it has class.

The '53 Commander shovelnose, had it been given a decent V8, could have gone after the T-bird, IMO; selling at a premium (& so larger profit/unit), the unusual (for the era) styling shouldn't hurt it so much. (Put it on the Lark platform to reduce cost?)

If you don't pay dividends, plan on getting sued, and then losing that case.

Except the dividend was, what, four times what the company was worth at the time? How much profit had Stude made the previous year? Can Erskine have said, "We didn't make enough to pay any dividends"?

 

[phx1138]

Is there any way Studebaker could have made better marketing use of their war-time truck reputation in the post-war years? Maybe even internationally? Of course, I'd bet there were thousands of clapped-out Studebakers, GMCs, and IH's scattered across the globe too, to compete with...

A dressed up and tricked out 4x4 Studebaker as a competitor to the Jeepster and its kin.

Stude should definitely have capitalized on its wartime rep. A 4x pickup, akin the Dodge, or something like the (later) IH Scout, would have been an excellent idea. A *Travelall on the pickup platform wouldn't be a bad idea...but I'm seeing something Scout-like as a more direct answer to the Jeep, one more civilized: wider track for better stability, hard body, actual doors, roll-up windows...

A Stude answer to the Ranchero? That should have (& easily could have) been carried over from the '39 ute, or restarted in '46 using the prewar car front half & pickup back half. If you want an AWD variant (not an off-roader, mind), even better.

Similarly, market a Packard V-12 engined car as a Packard "Mustang"?

Not as a 'stang, but certainly the T-bird. That might put pressure on Ford to go up-market with a 2-seat Merc or Lincoln 'bird, which IMO would have been an excellent outcome: keep the 2-seater in production as a premium product, & have the 4-seater as a Ford. That market would get big soon enough, if Packard could hold on.

A V-12 Packard engined vehicle at Indianapolis?

Put some combination of Studebaker/Packard on the early NASCAR circuit - with sufficient factory support. (Yeah, I know early NASCAR's popularity was mostly in the South, but it could help)

Both good ideas, IMO. Don't think there's only regional interest in NASCAR at play: there's national media coverage (if not TV in the '50s, or even '60s). Indy was national, too. Cummins got it right by trying to run a diesel (with a few problems). A Packard-Kurtis winner would have been great for Packard ads. (I confess I'm not sure the average Packard customer then would have cared, but given the need to attract younger buyers, that plus a T-bird could steal younger Cad & Buick/Olds customers {priced low enough, but not too low; target the bottom Cad & top Buick/Olds, not the middle Buick, which the 120 did...}). If it had a 'glass body, like the Avanti, & beat Corvette to market... (Does that prod GM to build the F-88, too? )

No-one says how much you have to pay in dividends, and good luck with suing anyone for reducing the dividend in the Great Depression.
Apparently from 1929-32 Nash paid out dividends equivalent to 89% of profits, GM paid out 93%.

Studebaker paid out 708%

Accumulated dividend payout of 30,952,276 on accumulated profit of 4,369,973. Nash paid out less than that on profits of 32M!

For 1930 Erskine paid out 7.5M on profits of 400K, which is nearly 2000% of profits

A million paid out in 1932, on a loss of five million

So in fact it was even worse than I remembered, Studebaker paid out 26M more than they would have if they did the same 90-100% of profit ratio the other two did. Bear in mind 1932 sales were roughly 38M.....

I knew Erskine had overpaid, but this is nuts.😱😱

Who pays dividends on losses?

As for independent, I also have my doubts they can survive alone, much as I wish they could. I'd suggest the OTL Stude-Packard merger instead also include Kaiser & Willys; maybe instead of the Kaiser-Graham deal (& Kaiser was no help to Graham, really), make it a four-way Packard-Stude-Graham-Willys merger? (That seems to require a fair bit of foresight...) That gives you the Stude & the Jeep rep (& sales!), plus the Packard cachet, plus the wartime money from Packard & Willys, & Packard's high-quality engineering.

My proposal, move Studebaker to Canada in the mid-1960s per OTL. Continue making Canadian Larks, find an engine, and ideally a new buyer for the company. Sign a US distribution agreement with AMC or another dealer network. Next, design and produce a fuel efficient, modern compact in time for the 1973 fuel crisis.

Studebaker should also use its Auto Pact cross border trade advantages to partner with European or Japanese brands. Instead of Volvo assembling their cars in Nova Scotia, Canada they can have Studebaker in Hamilton, Ontario make them. And there’s British cars that are getting killed by the high Pound and US import tariffs. Assemble the new monocoque Triumph 2000 and Spitfire (or TR6) at Studebaker to enable easy access to the US market. Best of all would be Studebaker gaining access to the superlative Rover (ex-Buick) small block V8.

That suggests you've butterflied Bricklin. (Come to that, he might end up working for *AMC.) Nova Scotia's probably less inclined to give tax breaks to a major auto company than a startup, but might still give some...

If alt-Stude's still around, it might well buy the 215 Buick design directly, rather than get it second-hand from Rover... Even if Stude built it with iron block & head, to avoid Buick's problems with aluminum, it was better than what they had. Put it in the Lark/Hawk.

 

[marathag]

Even if Stude built it with iron block & head, to avoid Buick's problems with aluminum

Pretty much what the Buick 300 was

 

[phx1138]

Pretty much what the Buick 300 was

Exactly. Worked pretty nicely, too. Lots of growth capacity.

Not to say I disliked the 215; stretching it to 305ci or 318ci, which the existing block seems to allow, would be great. It seems to want better intake/head design, tho, & (obviously) bigger valves--but most of the bits (except the heads themselves) could readily be sourced, since most of them were already being produced (for other makers...).

Also, let us not forget, the 90deg Buick V6, from the same basis. Can we posit Stude being a bit smart & building a 90deg aluminum V6? (Stuff it in the Lark? Or the *Gremlin?) Add turbo & go hunting Mustangs & Camaros?

 

[Masked Grizzly]

By appearances, Stude management & senior engineering staff all need to be pushed under a bus for this to work. Copying the Cad cold, but not taking account of bore & stroke differences? Choking the combustion chambers with lousy heads? *sigh*

Could they have gotten in touch with Zora Duntov in '46 or '47, before he did the Ardun hemis for Ford, & put him in charge of the V8 project? Or rope in, IDK, Vic Edlebrock or Doug Thorley or Alex Xydias?

How about poach Delorean? (Too early?)

Keeping Ray Loewy away from car design would be a good idea... The Avanti's got so many peculiar lines, it's about as bad as an Edsel. (I'd do this, instead: )
View attachment 628435
(If I could edit in 240Z-style headlight buckets, I'd do that, too. )

I do especially like that Stevens proposal; it may be a bit plain, but it has class.

The '53 Commander shovelnose, had it been given a decent V8, could have gone after the T-bird, IMO; selling at a premium (& so larger profit/unit), the unusual (for the era) styling shouldn't hurt it so much. (Put it on the Lark platform to reduce cost?)

Management and engineering at Studebaker aside, of the view it was within their capability to develop a precursor to the SBC V8 in the same way American Bantam stumbled upon what eventually became the Jeep IOTL.

Do agree with keeping Raymond Loewry away from Studebaker or distracted with another carmaker, allowing Brookes Stevens to do his thing ITTL along with possibly Fissore (who styled the Monteverdi Safari as well as the Monteverdi Sierra and Ford Grenada-based Monteverdi Macho hatchback prototype).

Not well-versed on the US independents, yet if it had been beneficial could a thriving ATL Studebaker-Packard have been in a position to acquire International Harvester? Either by itself or in the aftermath of a merger between International Harvester and Checker Motors? - https://www.hemmings.com/stories/20...or-checker-and-international-harvester-merger

Additionally how would Studebaker-Packard acquiring International Harvester (or ATL International Harvester/Checker Motors combine) have affected their position relative to AMC ITTL (either with or without Jeep)?

It seems like Studebaker-Packard whether or not they became part of an ATL AMC (plus Kaiser/Graham/Willys-Jeep) could have benefited from some of the ideas considered at International Harvester.

Links:
- https://www.hemmings.com/stories/2013/01/21/international-harvesters-passed-over-people-movers
- https://jalopnik.com/have-a-look-at-the-1980s-international-scout-that-never-1758491270

https://www.facebook.com/cardesignarchives/posts/1288661328168867

 

[Masked Grizzly]

Reading into the International Harvester Comanche Slant 4 and related SV V8 engines is pretty interesting.

Apparently conceived as an industrial motor before it found its way into the Scout, it is not clear if the design was completely in house or drew inspiration from any other contemporary American V8 engines of the period.

The V8 derived Slant 4 spawned a short-lived turbocharged version and Bendix fuel-injection was also considered during development, while the company before it ceased production of the Scout / etc was said to have considered diesel versions of the 3.2 / 192 Slant 4 and 5.7 / 345 V8 engines respectively. Both of which bring to mind the Pontiac V8 derived Pontiac Trophy 4 and Oldsmobile V8 derived Oldsmobile Diesel engines.

The engines were said to be reliable yet heavy with curiously little scope for further development in terms of power increases / emissions or a significant weight reduction programme IOTL considering they dabbled with fuel-injection and turbochargers for the Slant Four both in the beginning and in the latter days of the Scout (including its proposed replacement). Perhaps a Chrysler LA inspired approach with Throttle-Body Fuel-Injection and Rotomaster Turbochargers could have also been an effective solution in prolonging the longevity of the International Harvester Comanche 4 / SV V8 engine family ITTL amongst other PODs?

Returning to ATL thriving Studebaker-Packard and the possibility of it merging/acquiring International Harvester (plus Checker Motors) ITTL. Maybe the former could be inspired by the latter to develop a Slant 4 version of its ATL SBC inspired Studebaker V8 (plus V6/V12) engine family if they deem it desirable, while the latter could in turn within the context of a thorough development of the International Harvester Slant 4 / SV V8 family also spawn a related 3.2-4.3-litre 90-degree V6 in place of both the OTL AMC Straight-6 and Nissan SD33 diesel engines.

Neither engine family would replace the other ITTL given the cater to two different types of customers as well as provide a way of differentiating Studebaker (Premium) and International Harvester/Checker (Utilitarian), yet maybe there exists the possibility of a common replacement being developed down the line where by that point Navistar or some other name replaces both the International Harvester and Checker Motors marques.

 

[oliver123]

Joining AMC doesn't help, which will turn ATL's AMC into a full line company, forced to confront the big three head-on
Even if they can reach the scale of Chrysler (which is questionable)，Chrysler itself was often in a survival crisis
The fourth giant would only exacerbate the situation
It would make a lot more sense for Packard to focus on more expensive models after the war and then join Chrysler at the right time（exactly, in 1953）

 

[Simon]

Apologies for such a basic question but where do people see Studebaker sitting in comparison to the various marques of GM's companion make program? Reason I ask is that I had the impression that AMC's Ambassador was positioned lower down but then recently read something stating that it slotted in the Buick-Oldsmobile range, which depending on where Studebaker sits potentially clashes. Thanks.

 

[oliver123]

Apologies for such a basic question but where do people see Studebaker sitting in comparison to the various marques of GM's companion make program? Reason I ask is that I had the impression that AMC's Ambassador was positioned lower down but then recently read something stating that it slotted in the Buick-Oldsmobile range, which depending on where Studebaker sits pitentially clashes. Thanks.

I'm not familiar with the situation before the war
But it's clear that after WW2，Studebaker was direct competitors of Chevrolet、Ford and Plymouth

 

[marathag]

View attachment 631371

Leading to the unhappy buyers of Packards, that had a Packard Price, but the rest a badge engineered Studebaker President with some leftover Packard bits tacked on , the Packardbaker
A top line Studebaker was still miles away from an old Clipper, and sales suffered accordingly, as it awas a $2500 class car

 

[phx1138]

Leading to the unhappy buyers of Packards, that had a Packard Price, but the rest a badge engineered Studebaker President with some leftover Packard bits tacked on , the Packardbaker
A top line Studebaker was still miles away from an old Clipper, and sales suffered accordingly, as it awas a $2500 class car

It's a mystery to me why anybody thought they could get away with it. Packard had long ago blown its premium mystique with the 120; aiming the Packardbakers at Buick, which the 120 had been doing, made a lot more sense--especially if, at the same time, Stude took lessons in precision engineering & quality control. They might, just, have been able to inch Packard & Stude up-market, so by, say, 1970, Stude was firmly on par with Buick (if it hadn't been) & Packard was again in a position to challenge Cad (or BMW, or Daimler {badge-engineered Jag}).

 

[oliver123]

It's a mystery to me why anybody thought they could get away with it. Packard had long ago blown its premium mystique with the 120; aiming the Packardbakers at Buick, which the 120 had been doing, made a lot more sense--especially if, at the same time, Stude took lessons in precision engineering & quality control. They might, just, have been able to inch Packard & Stude up-market, so by, say, 1970, Stude was firmly on par with Buick (if it hadn't been) & Packard was again in a position to challenge Cad (or BMW, or Daimler {badge-engineered Jag}).

They had no money
Nance does want to use three different bodies, but there is no money
In addition, even if they have a much better financial position in ATL, this idea was not feasible
This means that there is only one platform less than the big three. Think about how many times the economies of scale the big three had

 

[phx1138]

They had no money

Which has exactly nothing to do with it.

Picking a price point doesn't really cost anything. Studebaker management picking the wrong one ultimately did, by undercutting sales.

Reskinning a car for badge engineering isn't the same as developing one on an entirely new platform, & at no time did I suggest that's what Stude should have done, even had it been feasible in '57-9.