Packard styling took an exuberant turn in 1952 with a luxury sports car called the Pan American, but it never saw production.
The Pan American did not originate as a Packard project. The flamboyant two-seater was hatched at The Henney Motor Company of Freeport, Illinois, official supplier of Packard-based hearses and ambulances. Henney had acquired the services of talented designer Richard Arbib, and though it was well out of character for Henney or Packard, Henney management liked Arbib’s proposal for a long, low two-place roadster, a “sports car’ in the American interpretation. A prototype was approved and work was underway in the fall of 1951, in time for unveilings at the auto shows of 1952.
The construction photo above (that’s Arbib behind the wheel) Illustrates how the Pan American was created from a production 1951 Packard 250 Convertible: using an aggressive West Coast customizing technique called “sectioning.” A horizontal ribbon about four inches wide was removed through the entire length of the body, with the cut lines staggered along the crowns of the front fenders, doors, and quarter panels. This neatly corrected an awkward aspect, arguably, of John Reinhart’s original 1951 Packard design, a thin greenhouse perched on a thick body due to packaging compromises. Reinhart himself called the stock proportions “high-waisted.”
Modifications further included channeling the body over the frame, a chopped windshield, a continental tire kit to lengthen the lines, a broad hood scoop, and a metal tonneau cover over the former rear passenger area. The production rear-quarter trim gadgets (“sea shells” or “bottle openers,” Packard folk call them) were also removed. Overall height was a mere 53 inches. But under its extensively modified skin, the Pan American was a nearly stock Packard 250 powered by a 327 CID Thunderbolt straight eight with a four-barrel carb and 175 hp matched to an Ultramatic transmission.
The Pan American debuted in March of 1952 at the New York International Motor Sports Show among the Ferraris and Pegasos, where it won an award for most outstanding design, above. (Arbib was among the judges, but we assume he didn’t vote in his own behalf.) Later that year at publishing mogul Pete Petersen’s Motorama in Los Angeles, it was the star attraction and won another award (lead photo at top of page.) “Featuring Packard’s fabulous new dream car, the Pan American,” the program cover proclaimed.
Invigorated by the reception, Henney and Packard produced five more Pan Americans (reportedly) to measure consumer demand. But the prototype had cost $10,000 to build and the projected list price was in the $18,000 range, when the most expensive Packard model then in production was $7,100. It simply wasn’t feasible to proceed any further. Three Pan Americans are known to exist today. That includes the original prototype, which was later modified by Packard executive Ed McCauley with 1955 styling features and is now in the collection of the Detroit Historical Society.
Though it never went to production, the Pan American was by no means a failure. Arbib’s dream car was the direct inspiration for the 1953 Packard Caribbean, a more conventional but still fabulous luxury convertible. Caribbean designer Richard Teague, later design VP at American Motors, considered the Pan American the best work Arbib ever did. The Pan American also encouraged Packard to proceed with the 1954 Panther Daytona, a smaller fiberglass sports car also built in very limited numbers—four.
Were the Caribbeans modified by Henney up to 1954?
The 1953-54 Caribbeans were modified by Mitchell-Bentley. Henney had nothing to do with them.
I think it was attractive from most angles. I don’t like the long extensions needed on most cars for the continental kit. I’m also not a fan of the early ’50s Packard grille treatment. I think this compares well with the Buick Skylark as an American “sports car”. I have a fondness for Packard and wish they had hit on the magic formula to continue but all of Cadillac’s competitors have ended up as shadows of their former glory. This despite some really bad Cadillacs in the ’70s to ’90s.
But Cadillac had GM’s finances, and the competitors did not.
That’s before people had the Yankees to similarly complain about.
Ahhhh. Well? If you’re going to repeat my history of the Pan Americans article that was published several years ago in “The Packard Cormorant,” please, at least be fair and say so. The very least you can do is MENTION the Packard Club and “The Packard Cormorant” magazine… and the author of the history.
Likewise if you are going to post photos that I personally took decades to find and preserve and identify… why not give credit where credit is due? And what are the primary sources of the information and photos provided in this online piece?????
I realize this is the internet… where the notion of writer’s rights has been tossed in the wind as communism melts in under the guise of “free information.” But aside from the copyrights, as a writer and artist, one of the most insulting, despicable and dastardly things one can do is to take credit for someone else’s work. Or make it appear that way to the general public. Or genericize the history or make it anonymous. WHO IS “MCG”?????
If you’re going to disrespect the history and pirate info and photos, let’s at least get the number of cars surviving right. “Henney and Packard produced five more Pan Americans (reportedly)…”. REPORTEDLY WHERE and by whom?
WHO says that “three Pan Americans are known to exist today…”????? The history that appeared in the Packard Club “The Packard Cormorant” magazine clearly indicated more than that number. Two are in museums. One is owned by Packard collector, Ralph Marano. Another is owned by a personal friend, John Hodgman. This is not “reportedly”… this is a fact. So how did the number get reduced to three?
The Packard Club, “The Packard Cormorant” magazine and the author of the Pan American history (which, by the way won a high award from Society of Automotive Historians) deserve recognition here. Even it is grudging acknowledgement.
A “Snidely Whiplash” thing has been done here and it is NOT nice.
I didn’t use any of your work or photos in this story, and I am satisfied with the result.
Of course you are “satisfied”… pirates are usually “satisfied” with their “results.” Especially since all they had to do was lift the information pics etc. from somebody else and take credit! Then sit back and act as if all this just fell out of the sky.
You didn’t mention the work… and you did not credit the sources of the information and figures given… and the photos posted. Side-stepping these things just shows where your true talents and ethics reside. Journalism 101 says things about such practices… but you apparently don’t know these facts.
Dear Mr. Dixon:
Well, gee. I don’t know you and you don’t know me, so I don’t quite understand the liberties you are taking here. We did have one encounter before, and you were abusive and unprofessional then, too. I was sent your book for review but I was unable to recommend it, and I don’t write negative book reviews.
The Pan American was covered when new, and many articles have been written since. As a result, there are a number of primary and secondary sources available. I don’t take the Packard Cormorant as I’m not a club member, and I’ve never seen your story. I don’t know how PR photos produced 73 years ago have become your personal property in your opinion, but that’s not how it works. As long as you are polite, you are welcome to write me anytime.