Packard launched its first true station wagon in 1937, but the post-war period called for something different. Rather than developing a new wagon body, Packard adapted its existing Eight sedan, renovating the cabin and body panels to add birch wood to a steel substructure. The Station Sedan arrived as a cross between a sedan and a wagon, a compromise that ultimately saved nothing. The sedan body limited both passenger and cargo space; meanwhile, the labor costs involved in construction were very high, boosting the sticker price. While today we appreciate these vehicles for their rarity and uniqueness, back then, sales were disappointing enough to pull the plug after only three years. Here on craigslist is this 1949 Station Sedan with an asking price of $45,000. The car is located in Olympia, and we owe thanks to Curvette for finding it for us!
This engine is Packard’s 288 cu. in. straight eight dressed with a single downdraft Carter carburetor, generating 130 hp. A column-shift, three-speed manual with overdrive brings power to the rear wheels. That beefy-looking canister is an oil bath air cleaner – de rigeur in the late 1940s, and actually quite effective. This car would have weighed about 4,075 lbs, about 200 lbs more than its sibling, the Eight Sedan. That metric alone adds up to a performance detriment.
The cabin is in fine condition, beautifully appointed with two-tone leather upholstery, art deco-style gauges, a locking glove box, and that swanky steering wheel. By the late 1940s, dual sun visors and wipers were standard equipment on most vehicles, though the windshield is still comprised of two flat panes. The cargo area is lined in wood, and the rear doors open clamshell-style. The narrow rear opening limited loading versus offerings from Packard’s competitors.
This view emphasizes the uncoordinated look of the wood decor grafted onto the Packard’s body panels. Compare this design to contemporary wagons from Ford or Buick, where the door paneling in particular was incorporated into the entire design from tip to tail. On the other hand, I like the tourist stickers here – nice touch! It’s time to discuss values, and it pains me to report that these beautiful cars are largely drifting down in price. Oh, a few standout woodies remain popular and can command very high prices, but on the Packard front, this perfectly adequate 1949 Station Sedan sold in January of this year for $23,500, then again in June for $14k! Only about a year ago, this 1948 went for $54k, but ten years ago, prices were closer to $75k. I love these iconic cars as part of our history, but buyers should understand the price trends before committing to today’s example.
Where have I seen that hood ornament,,,an $18 dollar option, don’t you know. And a special thanks for the author calling it “3 speed on the column”, and not “on the tree”. I know, similar kvetch with “miles on the clock”,,,anyway,,the author only scratched the surface, and if I may,,,the wagon shown here, is probably a 1948, and I read only 3885 wood bodied wagons, not including pre-war models, were made, mostly in ’48. Only 1800 were sold in ’48. I believe ’49-’50 were leftover unsold ’48s. They weren’t cheap. This car sold for a whopping $3450 new, or almost a grand more than my grandfathers Touring Sedan. This was one of the most expensive Packards then. Ironically, it was made from the cheapest Packard, and probably the flashiest Standard 8.
Wonderful cars, roll like thunder, the stick,,,well, I’ll tell ya’, if you can’t drive a stick, I wouldn’t bother looking at these cars, for that number, but they really are an easy car to drive. They handle, steer remarkably well for a tank, just don’t be in a hurry. What’s the rush?
Ask the PERSON that owns(ed) one, if still alive, that is.
I confess that I’ve never driven a column shift manual. I’ve had a manual shift car most of my adult life but always floor mount.
A car like this might force me to find out if old dogs can learn new tricks.
Easy-peasy. Just think of that “H” pattern parellel to you when on the floor as perpendicular to you on the column. Works every time and you’ll shift like a pro in a flash!
And the column shift was supposed to be an upgrade from when all cars had the shifter on the floor. That was a selling point. Really, if the linkage is in good condition, the column shift was and is safer. Why, because you hardly have to take your hand off the steering wheel to shift. The “sporty” floor shifters came back again later.
Years ago we were looking at a used Saab 96 at the local Chevy dealer with a 4 speed on the column. The test drive started with a RTFM moment to find out how to get into reverse, so the classic H was vertical instead of horizontal. (You have to pull the shifter out, away from the column to move to reverse.) It was quite a change from the 4 speed, plus high/low, plus engage front axle (3 levers on the floor) in the Land Rover we were escaping out of.
What most learners find challenging about operating a manually shifted vehicle is coordinating accelerator and clutch movements. Having driven cars fitted with floor-mount gearshifts, you’re not a learner. So you’d find adapting to a column-mounted lever effortless, for it utilizes the same H-pattern as the floor-mounted lever that you’re used to. The sole difference is that the H-pattern of a column-shifted car is oriented sideways instead of front-to-back.
Lovely Packard, BTW.
If you know how to drive a floor mounted manual, you will have no trouble with a column shift. Piece of cake.
What a beautiful Packard!!! I want it!!! These Station Sedans are rare as hens teeth, and I’m sure would draw a crowd at any show and Cars and Coffee for sure. I’m with Howard, I’ve heard 3 – on – the – tree since I was a kid, but never really liked it. 3 speed on the column suits me just fine. Once again BOTH Curvette AND Michelle have hit it out if the park with with the Cream Puff. Thank you!!!
I’ve never driven a floor-shift centre console manual, only column-shift 1930s/1940s types, which are easy to drive, and floor-shifters from the 1930s with tall shifting levers. I HATE SPORTS CARS!!! — and sport-influenced cars. And hot rods.And I’ve always loved Packards.
Harrison, You definitely need to experience a drive with a two stick tri (5X3) or quad (5X4) set up!!! They are very easy after you get used to them..
Again Howard and Driveinstile have hit the nail on the head!!!! What a fabulous classic!! It is sort of a toss up on the prices trending down. The man who is investing / dealing in classic cars is taking a beating. BUT on the other hand a man interested in the classic car hobby, with a smaller checkbook, can enter with a car like this and enjoy the sensation of operating a rare vehicle.
Prewar Packards were stately and sleek and at the top of the pecking order.
This era of Packard styling was just wrong, especially the front end. Wider and lower and sleek was the ticket (Buick, Cadillac, Lincoln, Imperial), and these were the exact opposite. Just frumpy all over the place.
Probably a good reason why Packard did not survive. Even as they evolved, with the ’51s and later, they never really caught up. The big 3 stayed a step ahead, every year.
The 1951 Packard was way ahead of The Big Three in styling — except for their not seeing the coming popularity of the hardtop convertible. Packard had the flattest and least raised of hoods and tallest of raised front fenders. Other than Ford in 1949, and Kaiser (to a degree) in 1947, Packard was first to shed the down-slanting rear fenders and trunk., The 1948-1950 Packards attempted to squeeze three more years out of their pre-war design; and losing the sleekness of the fabulous prewar Clipper, these Packards looked instantly dowdy, shedding any hint of ELEGANCE, although they were about the finest cars on the road at the time, and wonderfully easy and smooth to drive. Behind the wheel, you instantly knew that you were piloting a PACKARD, well above the level of anything else on the road. But unfortunately, parked in your driveway, it looked like an average mid-priced make already “old” when brand-new. It was “safe” in the sense of traditional later 1940s pre-war-based styling, most ineffeciently translating outside size into interior space. The nose, attempting to lose that late 1930s tall grille, whilst retaining the classic and unique trademark Packard shape in the context of more modern proportion, merely came-off looking like the face of a parakeet. Then they ran that essentially passe 1948 model virtually unchanged through 1950! The drastically up-dated all-new 1951 Packard simply came too late.
Yep, styling sells cars. The ’49-1950 Packards were a sales disaster.
The ’51 Packards were a huge improvement, and even hinted at the ’55s from all the others. But by then, they were playing catch up. Never enough money to keep up.
I like this car. Especially the wood-lined trunk area. Seems to make all of the car brighter. That is one thing I like about most cars from the ’50s back: they all seem to look happy and innocent, unlike modern cars with mostly black interiors and angry looking headlights and exteriors.
You sure nailed it on the angry looking noses, Like a neon witch doctor mask, Can’t you see them dancing around a spit impaling a missionary being slow roasted over a fire or boiling in a huge iron pot? Very scary when closing in your rear view mirror.
It’s in Olympia,Washington,by the way.
I’m 51 and I would love to have another 3 speed on the column. Had a 62 Falcon and a 67 C10 and both were a blast to drive.
Will J, You are a mere KID! My CHILDREN are older than you are — and by quite a bit! That puts your remarks about the 1951 Mercury in context. And you never know: you just might FIND that 1968 Pontiac one day!
I’m gonna go to oriellys for some parts once I get it in drive.
This reminds me of the old but cheap rolls royce for ownership experience without the luxury.
Maybe a Packard club should do a group buy and share the joy and pain.
Like a lot of other folks commenting here; I think different is good. You won’t mistake this gem for anything else but what it is: a rare, beautiful post war car that sadly represents the beginning of independent automobile manufacturers getting squeezed out by the big three. The styling really speaks to me partially because of nostalgia and also my eclectic taste in automotive design. I would love to see this car get passed on to a new caretaker who will drive it around and take it to shows so people like me can enjoy it. The fact that this car has a manual transmission with a column shifter only enhances its appeal for me. Unfortunately, many of us who would have jumped on this not so long ago are now reluctant to purchase a vehicle like this that is steadily decreasing in value mostly due to actuarial reality. But GLWTS.
I have one. It’s like driving a nice old pickup truck. It can even handle the highway as long as you don’t intend on passing anyone.
. I saw one of these a fellow owned back in 1970 .# 2 condition which he wanted $2,000.00 for her. Talk about inflation. I would not mind owning this car as they are very rare. Yes in comparison to other wagons at the time the rear gate opening was smaller.Packard was trying to be competitive but this car was expensive . I do not remember leather seats but more of a vinyl material. Some restorers go with leather, a nice touch! I owned a ’50 standard eight with unltramatic drive(1st automatic for Packard) They had one of the best engineering teams in the industry but alas cadillac beat them in styling. Also, much issues with the ceo’s and they Packard waited too long for the V-8, and more modern styling in ’55. Alas, a great quality company and independent who bit the dust. Would love to own this car as americana history!
The 1955 was based on the 1951, which was well ahead of its time.
Dear Uncle Bernie had a 53 DeSoto, shift on column. Loved that car!
To me these are easily the equal of the ’41-’42 Chrysler Town and Country clamshell wagons, only a handful of which had ‘8s. And the price is about 1/5 the price of those MoPars when they are up for sale at all.
For that kind of money I would want a rebuilt engine, tranny and OD. Pass.