Re: Packard Motor Company returns...sorta...

Aardwolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> Nate Nagel wrote:
> 
> > Aardwolf wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Ennui Society wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >>Does Bugatti Veynon 16.4 count as ugly "relaunched" marquee? It looked
> > >>pretty exotic.
> > >>
> > >>I think DaimlerChrysler doesn't do excellent job with Maybach marquee
> > >>which is none other than spiffy version of old S-Class chassis. Had they
> > >>  redone the car in its own design rather than borrowing from
> > >>Mercedes-Benz, I might change my thoughts.
> > >>
> > >>Pity about the redesigned Avanti on GM F-body chassis. They ought to
> > >>stick with original Studebaker Avanti with some updates proposed by
> > >>Raymond Loewy.
> > >
> > >
> > > I should have clarified that.  What I meant by "relaunched marque" was the idea 
> > > that
> > > some outfit someplace would buy the name of a long-dead company, cobble together 
> > > some
> > > half-assed homebuilt product using bits and pieces that were already available 
> > > and sell
> > > it to rich poseurs with no sense of style simply because it's "exclusive".  
> > > Bugatti
> > > doesn't count, it was supposed to be exotic, and a competent product.  Maybach 
> > > doesn't
> > > count either, it also is a serious product, actually built by an auto 
> > > manufacturer.
> > > Avanti most certainly does count, it's just a Firebird chassis with a needlessly 
> > > large
> > > pile of money sitting on it in vaguely Avanti-shaped form.  A refined and stylish
> > > luxury automobile?  You're driving a friggin' Trans Am!
> > >
> > > --Aardwolf.
> > >
> >
> > The original Studebaker Avanti was not particularly refined either,
> > luxury pretensions notwithstanding.  That doesn't mean that they aren't
> > a kick in the ass to drive though or that I don't want one badly...
> >
> > nate
> 
> But it was a serious, bona-fide automobile from a real manufacturer.  And it had 
> some pretty
> sophisticated tricks for the early '60s--disc brakes and a rear stabilizer bar for 
> instance.
> Not to mention real, bona fide style, right down to the detailing.  They managed to 
> get a
> pretty large amount of power out of 304 cubic inches, too, even if almost no cars 
> were ever
> ordered with those particular engines. (FWIW, I actually like the looks of the last
> Hawks

Yuck! (aardwolf likes old guy cars... aardwolf likes old guy cars...
:P)

Well, the fact that *some* people like them I guess is success enough,
I'm sure not everyone likes '54 Commander Starliners either (although
I suspect those people of lacking souls)

> --either those or the '55 Speedsters were the best looking ones, as far as I'm
> concerned.)
>

I'll agree with you there, so long as you graft a '54 nose on it.  The
dash and instruments of a Speedster could be a model for "how to lay
out a plain yet elegant and functional instrument panel."  Right up
there with the early Porsche 911 IMHO.  And besides, I've got a thing
for leather seats.

nate