In 1953, a young car designer named Richard A. Teague introduced himself to the automotive world with the Packard Balboa.
Richard A. Teague is best known to car enthusiasts as the vice president of design at American Motors from 1964 to 1983. However, Teague actually began his styling career at General Motors, where he worked in the Olds and Cadillac studios. He then moved to Packard in 1952, where he was appointed chief stylist under Edward Macauley, director of styling. There, Packard’s new president, James Nance, handed Teague a choice assignment: to design a hardtop roof with a single requirement: It had to be different.
Teague’s response was what he called a Canopy Top, featuring an extended C-pillar with a reversed back angle, while a generous overhang at the rear shielded the almost vertical backlite from sun, rain, and snow. (Variations on this theme would later appear on the Packard Predictor, 1958 Lincolns, and Mercury Breezeways.) According to one magazine at the time, Teague’s novel roof design was known at Packard as Project Rooftop. A show car was prepared based on the limited-edition 1953 Carribbean convertible, then just starting production. The custom hardtop’s name was the Balboa-X, later shortened to simply Balboa.
In Packard’s official account, the custom steel top and other changes on the Balboa were done in-house, while Mitchell & Bentley in Ionia, Michigan handled the trim work. However, according to Leon Dixon in his informative book Creative Industries of Detroit, the roof panel and other modifications were actually performed by Creative, the Motor City’s leading prototype builder. That’s not surprising. it’s common for the Detroit automakers to farm out this type of work to specialized fabricators, and then fail to credit them. The supplier gets the lucrative work and the client takes the glory.
Along with the unique roof, special touches included embroidered upholstery and a continental spare tire. The paint was standard Packard Ivory below the beltline and a custom maroon color on the top. Introduced alongside the Carribbean in the spring of 1953, the Balboa was a hit on the show car circuit—so much so that it was given some 1954 model year updates and displayed for another year.
Below are Packard head of engineering Bill Graves (left) and styling chief Edward McAuley, where they may be performing a bit of pantomime. According to the Packard press materials the rear glass could be electrically raised and lowered, but as time ran short, the hardware was never designed or installed so the glass was stationary. Once the Balboa was retired it was acquired by Teague, then passed through a succession of private owners, and it still survives today in fine condition. There’s a second Balboa, too. Don Mitchell of Mitchell-Bentley liked the car so much he had another Caribbean converted into a Balboa, and it’s still around as well.
The Balboa looks a little too baroque to my eyes. I think Teague’s design of the 1955-56 Packards was the most handsome look of the mid-50s. Chrysler’s Million Dollar Look cars of the period were also great style designs. Detroit was firing on all cylinders back then and even the more-pedestrian Chevies and Fords were cleanly styled too. Studebaker was losing the plot by the mid-50s having peaked in 1953.
Knew of the car, although not much detail about it. Thanks for filling in the blanks. Packard’s design department was definitely working overtime on interesting designs as the company was swirling down the drain. Then again, that’s the best way to cover up the unpleasant reality.
Well, they got what they wanted. It’s different for sure. It would have looked better had it had a flowing wrap around glass. The tunnel section is too deep, the way the roofline drops you know it had to limit visibility. A wrap around glass on the same angle as the tunnel would have been different, and sporty looking too. But we all know how Teague and his out of the box designs worked at AMC, too. Gremlin or Pacer anyone?
Thanks for mentioning my “Creative Industries of Detroit” book.
Three points however:
1.) Whether or not Packard mentioned Creative Industries in the building and development of Balboa, the car was engineered, fabricated and constructed by Creative. While Mitchell-Bentley received credit (or took credit for) Balboa, all that M-B actually did was interior trim, paint and final assembly. Frankly, Creative did almost all of M-B’s engineering work for Packard, GM (as on Buick Caballero and Olds Fiesta wagons) and others.
2.) The Balboa roof appeared again on Packard Predictor (this time with a working power rear window). It definitely did not appear on “1958 Lincoln” but in fact was the main distinguishing design/feature difference between 1958-60 Continental and Lincoln. The roof appeared on 1958 Continental Mark III, 1959 Continental Mark IV and 1960 Continental Mark V (yesss FoMoCo re-used these names years later). And yes, Mercury got a lot of mileage out of re-naming this design as a “Breezeway Window” in the 1960s. But it all came from Packard.
I have personally owned several of the 1958-60 Continentals and over the years have witnessed the repeated and unfortunate blurring of identities for this period. At the time of introduction (1958) Continental was considered to be a separate line from “Lincoln” just as 1955-56 Clipper was from Packard. A Continental was a Continental. A Lincoln was a Lincoln. One wouldn’t call a 1956 Packard Caribbean a “Clipper.” Same thing– only moreso (Clippers at least came with “Packard” names on most of them). Continentals didn’t say “Lincoln” on them during this period.
The 1958 Continental Mark III was to be the successor to Continental Mark II (also not a “Lincoln” as often called today). The 1958-60 Continentals had different grilles, different tail lights, different hood ornaments, different wheel covers, different interior appointments and a completely different roof from a 1958-60 Lincoln. People today (even serious historians) seem to have forgotten these facts.
The term, “Lincoln Continental” (commonly uttered today) sneaked in during the 1960 model year when FoMoCo was massaging away the pain of the failed Continental Division of 1956-57. And easing the market into the combined name of 1961-on.
3.) As for design critiques or analysis of Balboa, I point out that to 1950s eyes, this design was considered wild and even futuristic. Not some panicked stop-gap or cover-up. No matter what people of today (not the intended audience) may believe are shortcomings, etc. I remind everyone that Balboa won several awards– including one from “CARS” magazine. Look it up. We can’t realistically apply today’s thinking and tastes to a special one-off car of the early 1950s. Not fair. And not realistic.
PHOTOS…
The photo with Bill Graves and Ed Macauley appearing to chat about Balboa’s rear window was taken at the Detroit Institute of Art (dare I mention). Again, reflecting the high esteem that Balboa was held. But I have always found it odd (even sad) that the car’s actual designer, Richard Teague was not in any of the press photos.
By the way… the real Packard Balboa was only recently displayed (March 2024) at Amelia Island Concours d’Elegance. My chair sat just to the left rear of the Balboa. Of course I took pics even though I’ve seen Balboa numerous times over the years.
I’d seen pictures of the ‘Balboa’ but didn’t know its history of background. This is a nice, informative article of this design exercise from Packard.
Leon Dixon’s book, “Creative Industries of Detroit”, is a ‘must read’ for an in depth look into the design and protype construction of Packard’s and other makes. As I recall, Mercury’s “Breezeway Window” was introduced on the 1957 “Turnpike Cruiser” — a reversed slant, retractable rear window — not the 1960’s as suggested in the article. I find that, too often, today’s taste are used to gauge yesterday’s styling cues and designs— this, as Leon Dixon says, is very unfair and not , in the least —reasonable.
Thanks to Jim for the kind comments on the “Creative Industries of Detroit” book.
As far as Mercury’s so-called “Breezeway” window clarification is certainly needed. Sales brochures for 1957 referred to the power-retractable rear window as part of what Mercury called “Breezeway ventilation system.” This ventilation system also included two air inlet vents (notorious for leaking water) at the upper corners of the huge windshield.
But since Jim took us here… the real introduction of the Mercury power retractable rear window was not 1957– as so many insist upon saying today. And the Mercury Turnpike Cruiser (the production line of 1957-58– not the concept car) certainly did not have a reverse slant. It was a more forward-leaning, almost vertical pane. In fact the entire window assembly was more of a forward-leaning, wrap-around than “reverse slant.”
Even the 1957 Turnpike Cruiser convertible had a very unusual wrap-around rear plastic window (again… borrowed from what would have been a factory feature on the Detroit-made Packard Caribbean that never reached production).
Look at the rear window closely on 1957 Mercury Turnpike Cruiser. And look at the rear window on the 1957 Mercury Turnpike Cruiser convertible. Just no “rear slant.” Yesss… the sheet metal alone on the 1957 TC did mimic Packard Predictor’s roof… and Balboa’s roof too. But no reverse-slant on the Mercury rear window until the 1960s.
The real introduction of Mercury’s power retractable was in fact a very forward slant and came about in 1956. I know this car very, very well. I knew it from when it was new and displayed around Detroit and Chicago. XM Turnpike Cruiser was shown at the auto show right down the aisle from Packard Predictor. And also built by Ghia in Italy. And in more recent times a friend of mine owned the XM Turnpike Cruiser in Southern California for many years.
So. The introduction of Mercury’s power retractable rear window came on the 1956 Mercury XM Turnpike Cruiser concept car– successor to the earlier Mercury XM-800 (built by Creative Industries).
The 1957 production model of Turnpike Cruiser was inspired by the features and styling of the 1956 XM Turnpike Cruiser concept car.
And none of the Mercury Turnpike Cruiser rear windows whether concept car or production car came with “reverse-slant rear windows” no matter how many modern stories claim so. Look at the cars– of which a lot are still around. You can see for yourself.
The 1957-58 Mercury Turnpike Cruiser rear window came from the 1956 Mercury XM-Turnpike Cruiser concept car. The reverse-slant power retractable rear window that inspired and 1958-60 Continental came from Packard Balboa and Packard Predictor.
And lest I forget to mention… the fully-restored XM Turnpike Cruiser concept car was displayed at this year’s Amelia Island Concours d’Elegance. I sat near it on the field and viewed the car up close and personal. Of course I took lots of photos.
Leon Dixon
Late in 1955, Alex Tremulis, then head of Ford’s Advanced Styling Studio, gave a tour of his studio to HF(II) and his entourage. The cross-over between the Continental and the Balboa is pretty evident. Here’s his direct quote to Ford’s execs: “Gentlemen, on your right we have for your inspection several design themes. You will notice that on this panel we have covered several phases of design. As an example, we have several sketches here that are highly suggestive of a continental type of car. Another interesting car here, known as the Ventura, is worthy of your attention as this design clearly shows a parallel in the thinking that led the Packard Styling Section to the development of their Balboa Sedan.”