The 1958 model year was the swan song for the Packard brand. After the merger with Studebaker in 1954, the marque would morph into rebadged Studebakers after 1956 to cut costs. These “Packardbakers” were not well-received by Packard dealers and buyers and sales numbers dropped like a rock as a result. This 1958 Packard (sometimes referred to as a “Starlight Coupe”) saw only 675 copies built as a 2-door hardtop. Located in Bakersfield, California, it’s a running car that may only need TLC to stay on the road. It’s available here on craigslist for $12,000 OBO. Yet another great tip from Barn Finder T.J.!
For 1955 and 1956, Packard maintained its own identity and products. But the sale of the Packard engine plant in 1956 would signal the changes that were coming. The 1957 Packards looked like the smaller Studebakers and had the same mechanical components, such as a 289 cubic inch V8 engine instead of the 352 that the luxurious Clippers had used just a year earlier. The 1958 models saw the addition of quad headlights (which look like an afterthought; Chrysler pulled it off a lot better) and they added fins on top of the rear fenders which now used 1956 Clipper taillights. Buyers only purchased 2,000 copies of the non-Hawk Packards in 1958, so there would be no 1959s.
The seller doesn’t provide any history on this rare Packard. The automatic transmission has less than 100 miles on it and the radiator and heater core are new. No photos of the engine compartment are provided as well as none of the interior which is said to have been redone before the seller’s acquisition (but when was that?). We’re told it runs and drives, so you’d not be trying to revive a 65-year-old automobile.
The beige over copper paint looks okay for the age and there’s no mention of any rust. The curved portion of the glass is said to be fine, but some of the side flat panes will need to be replaced. We’re advised that everything here works as it should, so assuming the tires are good, you could start taking it to Cars & Coffee. While the asking price is subject to negotiation, the seller is willing to accept cryptocurrency. When was the last time you saw one of these “Packardbakers” in person?
They must have gotten the “ugliest late ’50s” award for this thing.
Until the Edsel came along
Edsels are a moving work of art compared to this monstrosity.
Thé Packard placed second. The 58 Buick won.
A ’58 Buick Limited is my dream car!!!
That belongs to ’59 Chebbies!
1958’s ugly is 2023’s beauty.When you see all the generic copycats cars of today this stands out as pure art.
The Rolling Stones were accurately predicting the future when they sang “I see a line of cars and they’re all painted black.” And it’s true. Nowadays the bulk of vehicles seem to be black, white or silver.
As an old geezer, I can tell you the white cars are the easiest to keep “looking clean”… black shows dirt the most and the others colors are a bit “less dirty” than black. My wife has always wanted white cars, so that has been our primary color. For my work cars, I had a gray Honda, a blue Nissan pickup, and a green Honda hatchback (I still have this one 1996 in very good condition). My wife loves colorful flowers, but white cars… sigh!!
And, Rick, as another BF reader so succinctly stated on this forum a few weeks ago, “blobs that do NOTHING well except meet federal mandates.” This is why we see many on this forum and others purchasing older cars in decent condition and making them daily drivers. At least they have some style, comfort, and drivability.
And white cars are cooler … when it’s 110 in the valley one appreciates the white cars … cool to the touch under any conditions whereas black will take off the skin … nothing prettier than a newly waxed black car but harder to get cool and and keep cool …
I like it.I’d wouldn’t mind it in my garage.The styling is awesome at least to me.The headlights and top of the fenders look like a 60 Corvette kinda.Glwts.Cool car.
The nose of these Packards was awful, but the rest of the car was right for the time it was built. Just sad to see the demise of a great automotive company.
The front always reminded me of a big-mouthed fish.
The biggest marketing/design mistake of an era that was rife with them. A bigger blunder than the Edsel; bigger than the later shrunken Chrysler line.
The blue-blood primo luxury car company of the era, Packard…buys the money-losing Studebaker company with its obsolete line of patch-on-patch early-50s cars. And expects to make money at it.
WHILE Packard was farming out their body production – to Briggs Body Company, which was, at that time, negotiating to sell itself to Chrysler.
Obviously, Packard should have been building its own body plant, or trying to buy Briggs itself, rather than buying a money-sump like Studebaker.
And once done, with Packard debt-free and Studebaker deep in the red…Packard should have taken on the cost of making PACKARD, not Studebaker, bodies and cars in South Bend.
But they didn’t. James Nance was at the head of Packard when these decisions were made; and Nance was not a car guy. Like Ed Lundy, Nance only knew numbers – and it was not happenstance that he turned up later as a bank president in Cleveland.
But, mistakes were made. The bad product, Studebaker, spoiled the good, Packard, and BOTH went down. On the way down, this laughable example of badge-engineering, insulted Packard loyalists and dealers…paving the way for the final insult to Studebaker dealers, eight years later: ONE car model, based on this very chassis (shortened and then lengthened again) with GM-Canada running gear, and sold for a higher price than an Impala.
It is sad that these marques did not survive; but what happened to Packard, and then the Studebaker combined company…was deserved. Every bit of it…right down to the later purchase of its ancillary businesses and oblivion.
Packard buying Studebaker is akin to two drunks helping each other to cross the street.
Packard’s big mistake was paying top Dollar for Studebaker without having an independent auditor check the financial records. Studebaker was indeed “cooking the books” and instead of making a slim profit, the company was losing money on every vehicle they built.
To learn about the details of the Studebaker-Packard era under the helm of James Nance, I suggest reading the book “Spellbiinder” by Stuart Blond.
Ironically, and lost on Packard people, is that Studebaker made its largest-ever (in 107 years) one-year profit in 1959, after no more Packard products were in the lineup. Biggest loss ever? The $43 mil in 1956, which dropped to $11 mil in ’57 with a largely-unchanged Studebaker line and no more Detroit Packards. They built cars for almost a decade after other independents folded. They had far-more varied and interesting products in the sixties than did AMC, IMHO.
There’s no doubt in my mind that Studebaker dressed these Packardbakers fugly and sent them out to play with the mean kids.
This car was MAD magazine’s inspiration for many of their satires! It exudes every negative stereotype that period was known for. Fins on top of fins, last-minute pods for quad headlamps, etc. and a front end that looked like Martha Raye swallowed a coat hanger!
However, I will say this: This one appears relatively rust-free, where the same car in the MW would be eaten away already by the tin worm. Too bad no interior pics were taken. These had that elaborate tinsely fabric on the seats so I wonder how much of that survived.
I dont mind the basic looks of the car , if Packard/Studebaker had the money to change things it could have been a decent seller . If the fenders had been made to fit quad lights instead of the pods ; if the taillights were smaller like the 57 Dodge, and if the roofline could have been lower like the Fords and Mopars of the same time, and of course if it would have been Packard powered . The fact that it was all Studebaker with slapped on pieces didnt fool anyone
Always thought the Starlight roof was bought from Chrysler (Plymouth), so similar.
Gotta wonder why people who are trying to sell cars don’t clean ’em up, don’t post interior, trunk, engine & underside pictures, and don’t tell you everything they know about the car. Stupid? Ignorant?? Just really don’t want to sell the car??? BAT goes way overboard on pictures, but too many is better than too few!
Mind games. It’s not perfect, so dirty it up a little and the buyer will think it’s a FIND! No interior or under-hood pictures? Ooooh, mystery!
Yes, it’s on purpose.
That said, wow, for the fan of obscure and intriguing automobiles, this is a great example
I’ve considered buying a Packard, but my cutoff years would be 55 or 56 before they morphed into the Catfish faced 58 Packardbaker like this one. But hey, it is a 2 Dr hardtop and a CA car. Shame doesn’t even have engine bay pics. Wonder what Bill has to say about this one. Still a good find
Fugliest car I have seen in a while, if this is your cup of tea, please humbly accept my apology.
I love it. Fins, chrome, V8 power, two-tone paint, rarity, 4-bbl. carb., power steering and brakes, and it will draw a crowd wherever you take it. Studebaker V8s are very good engines. A true 1950s icon from two historic car companies. I would love to own it.
All Packardbaker jokes aside, this is a rare piece of S-P history and you’ll never see another one at a show.
The ’57 Packards were all supercharged from the factory, right? Did they offer that as an option in ’58 or not?
Only the Packard Hawk was supercharged in 58.
wrong, they supercharged 4 door cars and wagons too
william wintermoyer,
Sorry, only the Hawk was supercharged in 1958. The 1957 Packard Clipper sedan and wagon both had superchargers, but not the 1958 sedan, wagon and hardtops.
Knew a guy in high school that had one by of these with a Paxton supercharger on it. Factory option.
I always thought the full sized ’58 Fords were the ugliest cars for that year, until I saw this one. They look similar when you compare the front-ends.
The problem that caused the downfall of Packard was not sticking to their original market. They should have stuck with luxury cars and not making cars to appeal to a broader market. I love the old Packards, pre WWII.
I guarantee the buyer will literally turn heads wherever they go. Great conversation starter, especially to start lamenting about the demise of two great American companies. Imagine this beauty in a parking lot of modern econo boxes. Of course, you will need three parking spaces…😮
As quality as Packard was in design, it didn’t extend to its bean counters and accountants when it came time to purchasing Studebaker while waiting for a merger with AMC. Bad business decision. And wound up with a Catfish faced car that didn’t hold up to Packard standards.
If you ever see a Packard Hawk and this coupe from this year restored, they can be quite attractive, especially the Hawk. The four door version of this is beyond hope though. The tacked on tailfins and tacked on quad headlights on this coupe look a lot better with a good paint job.
Word is that Studebaker/Packard continued to rebadge the Stude cars as Packards in 1958 to allow Packard dealers some time to scramble and pick up other makes to sell before the Packard make was discontinued. I think some state also had laws, even this far back, which protected dealers from product disruptions without notice.
i was thinking it was Studebaker that was buying packard! but on a kinda joint buy of each other and both were going down hill money wise. funny Packard was dropped not the other way around?!
with all the leftover packard motors, funny also they did not use them in all the 57 packards. would have saved lots of money just on that move.
There was a time right after WW2 that the government was trying to get Studebaker to buy Ford! Oh how (quickly!) the mighty have fallen! I’m a Studebaker lover as well as a Packard fan. I’ve got a 23rd series Packard and 2 Studebaker Gt Hawks. When I want to go somewhere, i get in a Stude, not a Packard.
The decision to drop Packard was made for a multitude of reasons, the biggest were;
1. Studebaker sold a dozen cars for every Packard.
2. There was only enough cash to create the new 1959 Studebaker Lark, and that car was considered at the time to be the company’s savior.
There was no huge number of complete Detroit-built Packard engines hanging around at the close of 1956, and once everything was consolidated in South Bend, adding a second engine foundry, plus the machining and assembly facility, was simply not possible. And besides, the Packard engine was really too heavy for the smaller Studebaker body. Plus I’m sure the corporate board had already made the decision to kill off the South Bend Packard cars anyway.
Bill the supercharged Studebaker V8 was as heavy as the Packard V8.
I have a picture of myself as a toddler next to my parents 1952 Packard. Later in life my father purchased a 1953 Packard limousine at an auction. My dad did a valve job on it cleaned up nicely. He would occasionally pick us kids up from grade school in it and we would pretend we were rich. I am 65 years old now and my wife and I summer drive and occasionally locally show our 1952 Packard Touring Sedan. Every time I see one of these Studebakers with a Packard badge on it I get sad.
Go for a business that any idiot can run – because sooner or later any idiot probably is going to be running it.” ― Peter Lynch
Applies to the Packard/Stude C Suite
IDK, I kinda think this thing is so ugly it’s cool. Stuff a later model engine/trans combo of choice, soup it up some, address the other chassis bits, and keep it original fugly in and out. You’d be the hit of the local cruise night!
I doubt anyone who buys it will do anything but restore it and keep it original. Local car shows? This car could go much further than that.
I suggest if someone wants to install a more impressive engine, consider keeping the Studebaker 289 V8, but add the 1957-58 Golden Hawk Supercharger and carb pressure box. I’ve been advised that the original intent was to keep the Supercharger on ALL the ’58 Packard models to add value compared to the Studebaker President.
The Packard cars were basically Studebaker Presidents except for minor trim changes, just like in 1957. However at the last minute they decided to fit the supercharger on the Packard Hawk only. This would explain the center hood bulge in the sedan, wagon. and hardtop cars, as the belt driven supercharger would fit up into the underside of the bulge.
Remember this is an extremely rare car [the Packard Club info shows they have only FOUR 2-door hardtop cars listed by club members]. Changing to the Hawk supercharged engine, while keeping the non-supercharged parts like the 4-barrel carb, manifold, and air cleaner, means that a future owner can convert it back should the stock version really become valuable.
Best looking 1958 Automobile. Cleanest 1958 front end with least amount of tacked on chrome geegaws.
My father had a ’57 or ’58 Packard wagon that he did not want to talk about. He bought it used and my older brother had warned him to reconsider. The owner was trying to get rid of it and it had low mileage! This was in the mid to late ’60’s and so I was only 5 at the time. I only heard about it later. I was at first excited to hear from a longtime neighbor that my father used to own a Packard! And I have always loved cars. Then my brother filled me in, however, and I learned why the car didn’t last in the family for very long. My mother, who was not a car person, refused to even ride in it because it of it’s garrish looks. My father really crossed the line when he pulled up the driveway with that car. She was mad. We later owned an early Valiant and a Lark that were also bought used but which were much more acceptable. However, that Packard was off limits for her due to the ugly fish styling.
Richard,
I’ve owned both ’57 and ’58 Packards, and the fish mouth was only on the ’58 cars. The ’57 looked far more like a “normal” car.
I’m attaching a photo of the ’57 Clipper from one of the ads so you can see the difference. My first ’57 Clipper was solid light blue in color, and it was reported to have been the light blue car used in the brochure and the ads. 95% of the 1957 Clippers were 2-tone paint, so I suspect my old Clipper, with a very early build date, was indeed the car in the ads [but I have no proof].
Reminds me of a 55 Cadillac.
the left over Packard motors were all in crates and sold to hotroders till up to 1970. company in CA had them. so these motors could have been put in cars but were not. they sold them to drum up cash.
Sterling,
I was in the Packard parts business for almost 40 years, and I had never heard of a group of ’55-’56 Packard complete engines in the crates. So before I responded, I decided to check into this a bit further. I spoke to some of the biggest Packard parts sellers all over the country.
No one has ever heard of more than a couple of complete V8 engines available, crated or not. Any parts inventory still in Detroit that would be required for future warranty claims [including engines] would be shipped by rail to South Bend and put in the big Studebaker parts facility.
The Packard parts considered to be redundant were all sold off to salvage companies, and 90% went to Muldaver’s [or Muldauers, not sure of the spelling] in Detroit. Well up into the 1980s I used to visit that salvage yard to buy Packard parts in bulk, but I never heard of any engines, blocks, heads or internal parts there. Heavy steel, brass, & aluminum items quickly went for scrap.
To cover just the ’57 and ’57 production numbers for Packard would have required about 10,000 engines and Ultramatics. They actually expected to sell about 3 times that number over the 2 year period, so they would have made plans to have that many available. As the foundry and engine building/machining areas, and the Ultramatic manufacturing areas were closed in mid 1956, and all the manufacturing equipment sold off, and there being no room in South Bend for continuing the Detroit V8, it wasn’t financially feasible to continue plans for making the Packard V8.
I’ve also been able to talk with someone who knows what happened when Detroit Packard was shut down. He’s done a lot of the research into what happened in Packard’s ” last days in the bunker”, and he assures me they didn’t have more than a couple of hundred [at the most] of all 3 sizes put together, all destined for South Bend to cover warranty liabilities.
There is a possibility that in the 1960s someone made arrangements to buy some of the remaining stocks of the V8 engines in South Bend, but my Packard parts contacts tell me by 1970 there were no 352 or 374 engines in South Bend, only a few 320 engines intended for shipping to Nash for their 1956 Ambassadors. I can tell you from my own experience searching thru the SASCO [Studebaker Automobile Sales Co.] warehouses starting in 1970, there were no Detroit V8 engines there. Back then one could go to SASCO and negotiate very cheap deals [often at prevailing scrap metal prices] if you bought a larger quantity, but again, none of the Packard parts guys have ever heard of a large quantity of engines.
Packard made their engines and transmissions in their own facilities, close to the assembly plant, so there was no need to order large numbers of such bulky items in advance. There were no outside vendors making engines, blocks, heads, & cranks in advance, assuming they would be needed.
I’m not suggesting you didn’t see ads claiming to have huge numbers of such engines in the crates, but I suspect they were perhaps exaggerating the numbers available.
Bill, if anyone had a Packard V8 and wanted it rebuilt, or a transmission, it seems like it would be a daunting task to source the parts needed for such a job. Do they make replacement parts for Packards?
Sterling,
While major items like complete engines were in short supply, because it was still cheap to rebuild things [lower labor rates], replacing complete engines was only done if the block was not repairable. For example, if a rod went thru the side of the block.
V8 Packard engine parts have always been available. Dealer parts stocks included most of the parts one would use in a rebuild. Remember if you will, in 1955-56 there was an expectation the Detroit company would continue for decades, so dealers stocked the required inventories. Dealers who still continued selling Studebakers often continued stocking rebuild and service parts, as they were available from SASCO all the way thru the 1980s.
I bought multiple dealer inventories in the 1970s, still sitting in old storage buildings, garages, even basements of the dealership’s family members after they stopped repairing the cars. Most I bought at scrap value rate, and a few inventories were given to me because they didn’t want to see the parts be scrapped, or they could use the storage space for other things.
While older Packard engine parts for the “Senior” Packards can be hard to find today [for example, main bearing sets for the 1940-50 9-main bearing 356 engines are becoming increasingly expensive due to scarcity, but they ARE still available], other Packard engine parts are still available. While Packard did make their own blocks, heads, manifolds, etc, the smaller internal parts like pistons, rings, bearings, valve parts, rods, etc, were made by suppliers who did make extra parts they later sold aftermarket. Well into the early 1980s one could still order some Packard engine parts from J C Whitney! Eventually the majority of Packard parts was sold to Kanter Auto Parts in NJ, who still have thousands of square feet of Packard parts.
Until the internet became a huge source of Packard parts, events like the big Carlisle, PA flea markets were full of Packard parts. There was even a building at Carlisle devoted mostly to vendors of Packard parts, myself included.
a hot rod company had packard motors all new, that took them years to sell off. it was even on one of the hotrod tv shows they talked about it and it is a well know hotroders parts company in CA. now yes they may have only had couple 100 of them but back in the day. they even put the motor in there parts caloge.
and if i recall right last was sold in 1970
Sterling, if you can possibly remember what the name of the hot rod company was, or what magazines they advertised in, can you please let me know? I would like to find copies for my Packard research library, and perhaps see if anyone is still alive who could shed some light on how they got them. It might make an interesting story.
You can email me at billmccoskey[at]aol[dot]com. Thanks.
Greetings, Bill … are you going to, or have you, put your research library information online for all Packard enthusiasts to enjoy … I’m quite sure many would enjoy spending time delving into Packard history … thank you … I wish you well with your endeavors …
Jon.in.Chico,
The best place to find Packard information online is packardinfo.com, and I’ve been a regular contributor for many years. It’s free to register, and gives you access to a huge database on everything pertaining to PMCC.
Great published books include Beverly Rae Kime’s book on the marque and the company. It’s a major work so it’s not cheap, but for anyone owning or repairing Packards, it’s a must own book.
Stuart Blond’s recent 2-vol book “Spellbound” concerns the years 1953 to the early 1960s when James J. Nance was the CEO of Packard, and is a highly detailed account of the last days of the company and the various situations that eventually spelled the company’s demise. The actual reasons are likely not what you think, or read about elsewhere.
And finally, if someone is interested in Packards, owns one, or is thinking about buying one, it’s imperative they join the Packard Club [Packard Automobile Classics].
Bill McCoskey,
Thank you for your reply … I will certainly check into that … I have several over-sized books on car makes and models so it doesn’t surprise me about book prices … women have shoes – men have cars and all that that entails … cheers
i do not recall but there still around selling hot rod stuff.. and i do not recall what TV show talked about it. it was one of the hot rod shows. it gave there name and that they sold packard motors up to 1970. and it was in there catalog up to early 70s is i think how they said it.