By 1958, Packard was barely casting a shadow, buried inside an also-struggling Studebaker. The Detroit facility had been leased to Curtiss-Wright to make jet engines and Packard-badged cars were being made in South Bend based on Studebaker models. So tight was the budget that the ’58s were simply called “Packards” though internally, the two-door coupe was nicknamed the Starlight. The budget also didn’t allow for any serious styling effort; instead, Duncan McRae borrowed elements from Packard, Studebaker, and the fads of the day – cobbling together one of the strangest fin arrangements ever seen, along with a catfish nose, a hood scoop, and quad headlights in a melange of metal and fiberglass that proved nearly unsaleable. Only 675 were made. This example here on eBay is bid to $12,100 with no reserve. The car is 10 miles from my farm, in Sandy, Oregon – so if anyone wants me to take a look just let me know! Thanks to the inimitable T.J. for this swanky tip!
No Packard engine this – instead the factory installation was Studebaker’s 289 cu. in. V8. with solid lifters, an 8.3:1 compression ratio, and 225 hp. This engine has seen considerable work, with its four-barrel Carter carburetor rebuilt, new front and main seals, new motor mounts, new brakes all around, new hoses, a freshly flushed fuel system, new battery, and new exhaust parts. The shock absorbers have been replaced and the car has new tires. The seller notes that the car starts readily and runs well. It’s a shame that the engine bay wasn’t painted when the work was done, but that’s where the new owner starts building memories, right? A three-speed automatic puts the power to the wheels; zero to sixty came in about 9.7 seconds.
The seats were restored with new foam, and a prior owner installed a vintage FrigiKing under-dash air conditioning unit. The compressor and bracket are with the car but uninstalled. The dash is mildly warped but not cracked. Most of the chrome and anodized parts have been restored. While the instrument panel is a bit antiseptic, I love the style of ’50s and ’60s interiors. What happened between then and now, that we can’t have these groovy patterns?
The underside of the car reveals bondo-laden sills. This car came out of the factory painted Midnight Black. The transition to metallic grey was a slapdash job that didn’t do the body any favors, and the paint quality isn’t great either. The rest of the undercarriage is quite decent. I’m not surprised at the bid, either: Hagerty pegs a “good” car at $19k and an “excellent” car at $30k. There’s headroom to fix the body and paint for a talented do-it-yourselfer, and in the meantime, you can tour and show it as is. If it sells here, I’m going to say “well bought” – what do you think?
Polarizing styling to say the least. The front is definitely reminiscent of the Packard Hawk, and the rear-well, “unique” as the Georgia kin would say about something controversial.
Won’t see a lot of these at any local car show!
Not a Packard! 1956 last year.
It is a Packard. It still carries the name. People call a 55-57 Hudson a Hash, but neglect to acknowledge all Lincoln Mercury’s are basically Ford’s, or that all GM’s are basically Chevrolet’s.
It’s a Packardbaker
What’s sad is, Studebaker lied about their financial situation, otherwise Packard would never have hooked up with Studebaker.
Packards Last Stand looks pretty good to those us who love FINTASTIC late 50S OTT EXCESS. I see a lot of similarities with 59 DeSoto.👍. Studebaker plant would not allow full size bodies of 56 Packards, so a compromise produced the 57 and 58s. Check out Packard Predictor for what might have been.
Yes, the all new 57 Packard would be based upon the Predictor. Also, all new separate body Clipper, and similar but smaller Studebaker. There are many photos online of these proposed new models the Insurance Companies finally would not finance. An interesting question would be, how would the 58 Edsel be viewed since it looked similar to the 57 Packard, a high luxury brand? It could have altered how the public finally judged the Edsel.
The front end of Predictor actually is closer to 59 EDSEL and roof is similar to 58 through 60 Continental. Seems Packard Predictor, actually predicted future styling cues. Not sure if Dick Teague was involved in the Predictor. Believe he moved to AMC. But will always be remembered for 55 Packard Cathedral tail lights, created in a weekend under pressure from J.J. Nance who told him to Do something about those damn BULL BALL tail lights then used on Packard.
The 57/58 Studebaker Golden hawk was the fastest production car available. Packard standard power plant power plant was the same supercharged Studebaker 289. The cost of that engine properly restored will be necessary for this car to be correct.
Philip,
If you are saying the 1958 Packard sedan, wagon, and Starlight hardtop all used the Golden Hawk McCulloch supercharger, you are incorrect, it was only available on the Packard Hawk. The Supercharged engine was used in all the 1957 Packard Clippers, but not the ’58 Packards.
Please tell me you are NOT related to BETSY!
I was at Wal-Mart yesterday and brought home that “Impossible Catfish” for dinner last night. This car reminds me of that.
Those tail lights are fantastic. (Or should I say “fintastic”?) Too bad about the bondo, but it’s fixable.
I bought this package and I tell you this! I have gotten ridiculous offers for this classic which is exactly what it is!
Simply mahvelous. While the word “groovy” severely dates the author, she makes a good point. That word was still a few years away, and the last thing on their minds, but groovy they were. Oxford defines groovy as, beautiful, marvelous(^), and to me, a better word couldn’t describe them. I’m a sentimental old sap, and this car never meant what a downfall of the great marque, but more of a graceful exit to the car world, and what better orphan to share that honor, than Studebaker. Of course it was Studebaker President Starlight based, but rebadging was almost unheard of, and later, a huge cost savings for the car companies. Then there was the price, and few coughed up the extra $600 bucks for the Packard, clearly a last gasp when the Studebaker seemed the logical choice. Someone is going to get one classy car, even though the name may escape most today, it was driving in style.
It’s🎵 Super Packardistic 🎵 Eightcylindered 🎵 Highfinned 🎵 Extra-special in small doses 🎶! Supercalifragilistic Expealidocious! Just Poppin in to make Merry! 😉 laugh 😁 🤣 .
I have mixed feelings about it. From the side and rear views, I like it. From the front, though, and at any angle, it looks like it was designed by school children. It might be fun to drive, certainly get the A/C working, and you’ll be the only one to own one of these. I’d pass on it, though.
0-60 in 9.7 seconds? If that’s true and not a misprint that’s hauling a$$. The 1957 Rambler Rebel was a factory fast stock vehicle. Wonder if they shared the same drivetrain.
Hardly. The `57 Rambler Rebel had a 327 V8 with 255 horses; this morphadite has the Stude 289 V8 @ 225 horses.
That’s not a 0-60 time from a road test, but a “computer simulation” from a site called automobile-catalog.com (also heavily used by Mr. Clarke). A ’62 GT Hawk which weighs about the same with the same-horsepower 289, the 4-speed manual and 3.73 rear gears could only manage an 11.4 to 60 in an actual 1962 Car Life road test. And this car with the slushbox 3-speed automatic is quicker? Doubtful. I’d take the 9.7 figure with a few grains of salt, at least.
Good ol’ Packardbaker – I saw one just like this, only more heavily-patina’d behind an auto shop in McKees Rocks, PA less than a year ago. Bad times for Packard but better days for America back then
Bad days for everyone. 58 was a recession year, and no one sold a lot of cars except Rambler. Worst year of all for Ford…the Edsel
But also a very good year for Ford. They had to put the Wixom plant on overtime building the 58 Thunderbirds.
I’m very close to McKees Rocks, PA. Any details on where the shop is/was?
I’m in Robinson with a Ricks zip code too
Is that really gray or is it just me?? The first pic makes it look like a dark lavender color in that lighting. Also, if not for the obvious bondo, I’d consider it. Can that be fixed?
Looks like there’s mud along the body in other places which may account for the color change. Black has to be flawless.
Interesting car. I like picture 31…the smoke makes me think that one of the ashtrays caught fire. The tailfins remind me of the Sydney Opera House…Chrysler-esque. What Studebaker chassis were these based on? I’ve seen a few at car shows…. can’t identify the platform or was it a Packard with Studebaker power train and embellishments?
Packard actually called this model the Packard Hardtop in sales literature. Starlight was the Studebaker term. Though these cars were disguised Studes, Studebaker-Packard apparently wanted to maintain some brand separation, slight as it was, so didn’t use the Stude model name for the Packard.
Interesting that cash-strapped S-P went to the trouble and expense to produce this one-year-only hardtop roof. Which didn’t pay off in sales, unfortunately.
The roofline/c pillar is what threw me off….just looked at an image of a 64 Dodge Polara 2dr….bingo.
These cars catch a lot of derision, whereas they are no worse than almost every other finned car of the era. Most of the hate come from it being the last car to carry the legendary Packard name. Except for the “something new” pod headlights, I find it attractive, especially the beautiful hardtop, never duplicated taillights.
Love the styling a beauty imho
Lookin’ good from 20 ft. Bring your magnet.
Are these the cars that have the fins a tacked on fiberglass piece? Or did Chrysler do that? The dash seems very minimalist for the era, is it correct?
The hoods and fins were fiberglass, and the lower portion of the under grill gravel guard. Dodge indeed tacked on their fins in a similar way from 57-59. These cars were designed along Chrysler lines as those were all the rage in that era.The dash was clean and uncomplicated.
I think the car looks pretty good. The headlight pods were clumsy; they could have had a more “integrated” design, and not too costly, if the headlights were stacked vertically. All-in-all a “marriage” piece using Packard and Studebaker parts that looks 50’s funky and a car I’d like to own.
My thoughts for years. Why didn’t they just stack the lights? The only possible reason was they were attempting to make their narrow bodies look as wide as possible. It was a bad choice.
!957/58 was a transition for car headlights, and there were a few states that didn’t allow 4 headlights in 1957, and for 1958 a couple of states did allow 4 sealed-beam lights, but side-by-side, not stacked. I don’t believe all the states were aligned for stacked headlights until late 1962, for the ’63 model year cars.
Studebaker used the front fenders from the 1956 Studebaker, which had single headlights, and simply attached the fiberglass pods to center a pair of five-inch headlamps where the 1956 Studebaker had a single seven-inch headlamp. All the US manufacturers adopted four-headlight styling for the 1958 model year, so Studebaker tried its best to keep up. The 1958 Packard two-door also started with the rear quarter panels from the 1956 Studebaker. Then extra sheet metal was added to extend the panels about ten inches rearward, where the 1956 Packard cathedral tail light housings were placed, and the two extra sets of fins were added on top.
As an owner of one of the 675 produced, the driving experience suggests that the suspension design was somewhat antiquated for 1958. The Studebaker body was noticeably narrower than competing 1958 full-size cars, which made the front seat passengers feel rather cramped. Access to the rear seat of the two-door is restricted to gymnasts and pre-teens, which explains why the inside of the rear glass is seldom cleaned. It would be interesting to know whether original buyers were satisfied with their purchase of a 1958 Packard or experienced cognitive dissonance soon afterward. Pity the two-car suburban family who bought a 1958 Packard and a 1958 Edsel.
Triple your money if you can ship it to Finland Sweden or Japan these late 50s Chromed Queens demand huge $$.
There’s a sort of Cult surrounding these big old rare boats in certain areas
I suppose FINland is a fitting destination. Despite its condition shortcomings, this survivor is in a league of its own.
Yes old american cars are expensive in
the nordic countries.It is the shipping,import taxes,inspections etc.that makes them expensive.If you would ship this car you would not make any money selling it 25000usd.
I miss the “good ole days”; Packard, Nash, Hudson, Studebaker, DeSoto, Mercury, Edsel, ad finem.
Elvis
Amen and Hallelujah to that! My 2007 Town Car is the last gasp of TRADITIONAL 🇺🇸 AMERICAN 🇺🇸 Luxury vehicles. Now we have SUVS and crossovers, many not even AMERICAN names! Glorified TRUCKS. Just another SAAB 🤮 story! 😢
Good try.
One the better looking last-gasp Packards imho.
Couple of minor asides:
In the ‘50s GM cars had different engineers, stylists- and running gear. Same for FoMoCo. Lincolns and Mercurys were not badge engineered.
Also the slang term “groovy” actually was coined circa 1920. Referring to the grooves in records which produced such groovy music.
I have won money telling people I could tell them the number of grooves on the A side or B side of a record. And all the tries against my intuition nobody ever got it right. The A side of a record and the B side of a record only has one groove in it. If it had more than one groove in it wouldn’t the needle skip across the top of the record?
I live close to the Packard Museum in Warren, Ohio. They have an impressive collection of cars from all chapters of Packard history. I wonder if they would be interested in this?
They should, but many consider it not a true Packard. BTW, a great museum. Why there’s another one down in Dayton, Ohio is odd. Should merge the two
Not sure, but I believe Studebaker Museum in South Bend may have a couple of Packard vehicles. It’s been a while since I’ve been there.
The taillights look like the inspiration for the Sydney Opera House.
Only 2 pics? Not relay for sale, the lister had nothing else to do for a couple minutes.
It’s on ebay
I own 57 packard country sedan. All were supercharged unless ac was added 10%. 58s were not supercharged. Bodies were based on the studebaker president. I have owned a number of studes and packards all are dependable and easy to work on
I looked up some specs on Packards and Studebakers, I was suprised to find the Hawk had a 120.5″ wheelbase and this hardtop has a 116.5″ wheelbase but it’s 4″ longer than the Hawk. It would be interesting to find out more about this rare gem or should I say diamond in the rough. To bad it did not have the 374″ Packard engine.
People don’t realize how large these cars are and Hawks, long and low. But, when put up against contemporary vehicles, the size becomes apparent.
Wow, a design tour de force . . . very impressive compared to all the generic similar looking designs today. Question: where would you purchase front and rear motor mounts for this car today?
Elbert, I’d start with the Studebaker Club. They are an amazing source of info, parts, sources and help to all who ask.
cheers, ken
First glance I thought it was a old mopar until I started reading
It was designed as closely as possible from the very popular then Chrysler products.
It looks like they just kept grabbing any parts that were laying around, put them all together some how and then decided they needed to add some more stuff some how. The profile shot shows just how little styling effort was put into this last gasp for the Packard name.
I think the side profile is it’s greatest look, very attractive.
There is one of these Packards in a car museum on sterling Road in Dania beach Florida, it’s for Sale and in great shape, no bindi
In my eyes, a work of stylish art! Long gone are the days when you could look at a parking lot and spot your car right off. Now, no matter if you buy the cheapest or most expensive car, the only difference in the homogenous styling is the makers crest. So sad. Carmakers design pride has gone by the way.
Tony
copying other’s designs is the safe bet for carmakers, they love it, no worries.
They all look like turtles now. I’ve been a GM guy my whole life, but the Chev. pickup front ends are so ugly in the quest to look tough. Eww.
And the gaping grilles on the recent Lexus remind me of Jonah the whale about to swallow a Vega. Lol! Actually not a bad idea.😆
Well, Jon, as usual you’re right on target. I remember thinking the Beetle was ugly. But love your reference to turtles. And Vegas, Gremlins and numerous others have thankfully been swallowed. As for looking tough, I noticed a comment on another post stating that the AMC Matador didn’t look like a MAN’S car. 🤔 Guess maybe a cheap JEEP, going BEEP! BEEP! Might do the trick! 😅 🤣 😂
Nothing but badge engineering and it didn’t help Packard at all. The real 1957-1958 Packards were never made. The clay mock ups were great though. They continued Packard design and engineering excellence into a new generation that would have been a sight to behold. Nance and stupidly buying Studebaker destroyed Packard.
Mr McCloskey makes statements with no reply possible. In other words, his pronouncements are the end of the story. NOT SO! The 57 Lincoln AND Nash had stacked headlights. END OF STORY!
Neil,
Replies can be done using the previous commenter’s “reply” button. In this case, that person was you. Had you clicked on the reply button on your original comment, it would have been shown after my comment. That’s how Barn Finds has it set up.
As for my comments, I never indicated what I said was 100 correct, I’m basing my comment on what others have said in this case. I’m pleased you have pointed out the obvious situation where there were indeed other cars made with stacked headlights prior to 1963. However I will stand by the fact that some states DID have restrictions against the number and placement of headlights.
And for what it’s worth, my last name doesn’t have a letter L in it. But that’s ok, lots of people have a hard time with spelling my last name, typically adding that pesky L. A few have had difficulty with my first name too!
My dad was Robert McCoskey, and for all his life people were confusing him with the well-known children’s book writer Robert McCloskey, who wrote “Make way for ducklings” [google it]. Sometimes dad would be approached by people with book in hand, and ask him to sign it. If they kept insisting, he would sign it without the L, and prior to closing the book’s cover & handing it back, he would write in the book that he wasn’t the author!
Not a reply to Neil, but my cousin owned, I think, a Packard Clipper, year I’m not sure of. Weren’t Clippers somewhat styled like mid-50s Mercurys? Straight up and down taillights is what I remember.
Other than that I have nothing to say. Hrumph!
Jon,
Those tall thin taillights would have made it a 1953 Clipper. Those taillights came out in 1951, but the Clipper name wasn’t brought back until 1953.
Not sure about Clipper, but believe that tail lights were the same as Packard. Thin chrome blade separating two round lenses at the bottom. These carried through 54. James J. Nance (head of Packard) called Dick Teague in telling him, You’ve got to do something about those damn BULL BALL tail lights! Reportedly Teague designed the Cathedral tail lights for 55 Packard, similar for Clipper, and in modified form on this car in a single weekend.
By 1958 it was no longer a Packard, IMO. This one is about 4 or 5 yrs too late. It’s still a looker, but this is the wrong year Packard. Underpass AC system also means that compressor, lines and hardware needs installing as well, that = No AC. The bondo around the rockers is also scary. for entry level buyers it may be OK. But it’s a hard pass for me
The fact that the under dash AC unit is not installed, means that the rest of it like comp and lines is also probably not installed either. This one is a Packardbaker for sure, not a Packard.
Although this car isn’t known for its advanced styling or esoteric engineering, it’s still collectible due to its part in an unusual business odyssey. Even new, Nash buyers considered it ostentatious, and Packard buyers thought it was a cheap joke. Whatever, it deserves to be preserved, and this is about as clean an example as you’ll find. Dare to be different!
Would be sorely tempted to modify the headlights and leave the rest of the car as is. Beautiful lines from the side and there was no such thing as fin excess in 1958.
Look at a 59 Cadillac for confirmation.
Doremonger,
The ’56 & ’57 Studebakers, as well as the cheaper ’58 cars [Champion or Scotsman] all had single headlights, and the 4-headlight fenders can be easily changed back to the 2-headlight style. Last time I checked, the chrome headlight rings were still available NOS.
While this Packard shares many styling cues with 59 DeSoto, the ultimate Fabulous FINNTASTIC OTT divinely DECADENT excessively luxurious award must go to 61 Imperial (preferably LeBaron), with FINS soaring higher than fabled 59 Cadillac. The last of Exners fabulous finned fantasies for Chrysler! Sounds like our minds run on the same road! Too MUCH is NEVER ENOUGH! 👍
Rick,
I’ve owned both [at the same time], a 1959 Eldo Biarritz convertible in bright red, and a ’61 Imperical Lebaron in solid black without a vinyl roof.
Most people think the ’59 has higher fins, but I think it’s just the fact that the Caddy fins are so thin, while the Exner fins are a lot fatter and the taillight assembly is bigger. My Eldo was originally puke green metallic paint, and I hated the color, so it ended up red. Years later I found it was Eldo convertible body #1, and was ordered new by the DuPont family.
The Eldo tended to wallow on the road, and I had problems with the air suspension leaking, so I converted it to standard coil suspension. Still wallowed. The Imperial was a wonderful high-speed cruising car, great for long Interstate highway trips. It had all options including dual A/C, and on hot & humid nights the A/C would make moisture condense outside along the bottom of the windshield!
But my favorite “fin car” is the Tatra 87 with the air cooled DOHC V8 engine in the rear, even if it only has one fin!
Thanks Bill. In the mid 80s, I had the opportunity to buy a mint 61 black LEBARON complete with optional trunk mounted spare from a collection of Imperials before it went to AUBURN auction. The $3,500 price was unfortunately out of my reach at the time. That mistake was almost as big as Chryslers with disastrous 62 Plymouths and Dodges. But I have a collage I created of 61 Imperials with LEBARON as central framed and hanging on my wall. Can’t drive it, but CAN admire it.
Before deciding to ditch the restyled 59’s and go with Lark design, the 59’s had cleaned up fenders, no more pods. And, a much cleaner, yet Chrysler like design.
You’re just being polite Bill, you know you’ve owned better year Packards than this 58 Studebaker. I guess the only good thing to say about this 58, is that it was the end of the line car for Packard.
HC, Yep, I’ve owned many Packards over the last 50 years, including both years of Packabakers. While they simply cannot compare to the earlier Detroit Packards, they are however, nice Studebakers! I used to street race my 1957 supercharged Packard Clipper when I was in high school, and we’ve given a few stock tri-5 Chevy owners a damn good run!
Just a general comment. Like it, love it, or Hate it, the volume of responses indicates the SIGNIFICANCE of Packard. I believe there was a book written LAST DAYS IN THE BUNKER about final days before merger with Studebaker.
My error, the LAST DAYS IN THE BUNKER was an article. If interested, enter the title. Information will be available. Can’t resist, Archie and Edith BUNKER, thought their old LaSalle ran great. Another great Marque now Gone With the Wind, just like Margaret Mitchell’s Mercury, Did anyone buy it?
Actually, that moniker refers to the last design days of Packard at the Detroit plant long after the merger, or buyout. IMO, Packard should have retrenched into a smaller Rolls Royce type luxury car maker, and moved Studebaker production to Detroit. That way they could have returned Studebaker to it’s pre 53 large car status building on the large car Packard line . You know what they say about hindsight tho? With Packard, and even Studebaker, so many what ifs
The last days in the bunker was the title of a chapter in the large book; Packard: a History of the Motor Car and the Company, edited by Beverly Rae Kimes, and [If my memory is correct] written by my fellow Maryland residents George Hamlin and Dwight Heinmuller.
Bill, once again thank you for clarification. I thought it was a book, but when I checked net it only mentioned the article! More than ever, I feel like a Vintage Rolls Canardly, Roll down one hill and Canardly get up the next! But still not completely arriving at Old Timers Disease! 😕
Never saw so many subscriber posts for ANY car!!! So many positive, fun and informative commentary.
I’ve been enjoying this fabulous Barnfinds.com website for years and must say how fortunate I am to share it with all my fellow subscribers. This is the only site I go to every day. Happy new year! Best Mike in Arizona.
Just posted a similar comment before seeing yours. Great minds and cars seem to travel the same roads! Happy Trails and Tails (preferably with FINS) to all you Road Warriors!
The taillights of these cars were a favorite amoung customizers. You always see these on customized ’49 & early 50s Mercury’s.
All time favorite alright. Used on every other 50’s, some 60’s customs. The 54-55 Clipper taillights we’re also popular.
For a car that was an alleged dud, it sure got us talking. Thanks to Bill for his expert advice on Packards.
The under-dash AC is an abomination, IMO. Otherwise I like this odd duckling!
It’s authentic for the era.
Aftermarket. So was JC Whitney, but I wouldn’t want a bunch of it’s crap in my classic either.
Its.
Bid ending soon? Last bid now $12,000. Worth every penny for this MONUMENT to Packards Last Stand!
Packard should have kept the supercharger because of it power and uniqueness. That definitely would have helped sales even in recession 1958-59.