A lot of times, you can tell the approximate age of a car just by hearing a description of its mechanical specification. Oversized V8, three-speed automatic, and drum brakes? You’re talking ’60s. Transverse overhead-cam V6 driving the front wheels through a manual? 1990s-2000s, and probably Japanese. If I told you, without showing you photos of them, that today’s cars both had flathead straight 8s, six-volt electrical systems, and primitive automatic transmissions, you’d probably be able to guess they were from the early 1950s.
Yesterday we looked at two little cars in my least favorite color. The Pontiac Sunfire sold before most of you even got to see the ad, but my description, and its far lower price, was enough to give it an easy win. That Dodge Shadow would be a decent deal for the same $1,500 as the Pontiac, but for two grand more, it was hard to swallow.
I guess I’d reluctantly agree. I really like Shadows, but that one has too many questions for too much money. The Pontiac really is the better deal here. Personally, I’d rather combine the best attributes of both cars, and hold out for a Dodge Shadow convertible with a manual. Preferably not red.
A lot of automotive components from the late 1940s and early ’50s were holdovers from before World War II. Automakers rushed to create modern styling for the post-war era, but mechanical design lagged behind. Both of today’s cars use engines that date back to the 1920s and ’30s. They both, however, have state-of-the-art (for the time) transmission designs, semi-automatic in one case and fully automatic in the other, that addressed Americans’ increasing desire to not shift gears unless they absolutely had to. Let’s take a closer look.
1950 Chrysler New Yorker – $3,999
Engine/drivetrain: 324 cubic inch flathead inline-8, four-speed semi-automatic, RWD
Location: Plymouth, MI
Odometer reading: 70,000 miles (but odometer is broken)
Operational status: Runs and drives well
There is a point in any history right before everything changes, when the old stuff seems just fine, until you get your first look at something new. Think of hard rock music right before Nirvana released Nevermind, or action movies just before The Matrix. You didn’t know you needed them until they arrived, and suddenly the stuff that came before felt stale and unsatisfying. The 1950 Chrysler New Yorker is the last of its breed; a year after this car was built the straight-8 would give way to a Hemi V8, and two years after that, the flat-glass split windshield would be replaced by a one-piece curved wraparound unit. And just a few years after that, cars wouldn’t look, or drive, like this at all.
Chrysler’s flathead engines came in four, six, and eight cylinder varieties, and powered everything from cars to combines to tanks over the years. 1950 was the final year for the eight-cylinder, making only 135 horsepower but gobs of torque. It drives the rear axle through a “Presto-Matic” transmission, a truly weird two-speed semi-automatic with a low and high range, for a total of four forward gears. The way I understand it, you selected low or high gear with the lever, let the clutch out, and then the transmission would shift between underdrive and direct drive automatically, based on speed. For normal driving, you left it in high gear, but you could shift to low when it was needed. It’s another one of those bizarre setups I’d love to try driving someday, if I got the chance, just to see what it’s like. This one’s engine and transmission have just been rebuilt, and it runs and drives well.
Most of the interior has been restored, and it looks pretty good. I see bare metal on the passenger’s side door, so that door panel is either missing or was removed to be redone. The center cap on the steering wheel also appears to be missing. But that dashboard, the final gasp of Streamline Moderne before the Jet Age took over, is magnificent.
It was repainted a few years ago, in the original color, and looks nice and shiny. The hubcaps are included, but the bumpers are MIA. But I kind of like it without them, if I’m honest. The seller says this car “never was rusty,” and that the underside is nice and clean. I wish they’d included a couple pictures to verify that.
1952 Packard 200 – $6,500
Engine/drivetrain: 288 cubic inch flathead inline-8, two-speed automatic, RWD
Location: Estacada, OR
Odometer reading: 94,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives, but needs new rear brakes
The history of the automotive industry in the US is riddled with startups, mergers, acquisitions, and bankruptcies. Small companies merge to become big ones, big companies buy up new small ones, and before you know it, there are only a handful left. Packard was never a really big company, but it was a well-respected one, especially in the upper end of the market. Sadly, its purchase of Studebaker turned out to be a really terrible idea, and the brand wouldn’t see the end of the 1950s.
Packard hung on to its straight 8 longer than other companies, all the way through the 1954 model year. In 1955, it was replaced with an all-new overhead-valve V8, which was only in production for two years. The straight 8 was an anachronism even in 1952 when this car was built, but it was also kind of Packard’s signature. The 200 model was Packard’s entry-level model, with a smaller 288 cubic inch engine. This one is equipped with an “Ultramatic” transmission, Packard’s own design. It’s a two-speed transmission with a torque converter that usually operates in high gear only, but can be shifted to low gear for climbing hills – or, you know, out-accelerating a box turtle. This one runs and drives, and is currently registered. It has had a bunch of work done, but the seller says it still needs new rear brakes.
This is the only photo we get of the interior. The seller says it’s in fair condition, and the front seat needs reupholstering. It has a couple of wool blankets thrown over the seat right now, a time-honored way of covering up the seats in an old car. Hopefully the blankets are included, so you can put off the upholstery job for a while.
This one was repainted back in the ’70s, and it seems to be holding up well. Again, the pictures aren’t great or numerous. It’s a three-owner car, with all the original paperwork, which is uncommon to get with a car this old. I bet it would make an interesting read.
There aren’t many cars like these left, which is probably good, because there aren’t many buyers interested in them left either. They’re relics, but interesting relics, and not all that expensive. If you’ve ever wanted to experience a postwar car, either one of these would be an affordable way to do it, and then sell on to another curious party when you’re done with it. Which one catches your eye?
I’m astonished cars from this era in this good shape are for sale for this price. Sure, you’ll have to parachute into Havana for replacement parts. But $6500 for a reasonably nice Packard (which I voted for)? Daaaaaamn.
I think the Chrysler looks like it is in better shape and I really like that dash, plus for just over half the price that is a pre-1960 car I could actually see myself owning. Generally I am more of a Jet Age guy, but that dash is absolutely gorgeous.
Normally, I’d vote for the Packard… but that’s not a great Packard. It doesn’t have the good Packard automatic that came later, it looks rougher, and it cost 2.5G’s more. Fer cryin’ out loud, it has a smaller straight eight than the Chrysler (!!). That ain’t right – and is symptomatic of why Packard was in trouble. The down-contented value cars were a good move in the Depression, but postwar they diluted Packard’s brand.
Chrysler and the great dash for the win.
I love both of these, but gotta go Packard. Wow, that is such a beautiful car, especially in that light blue. These are very unique and you don’t see them very often. I’ll fix the brakes, then cruise in style
Some days we ask for a ‘Both’ option, today I’d take an ‘Either’ option as either one of these would be fun to bang around in but I wouldn’t want both in my driveway.
Chrysler, partly because of that bygone era windshield. I’ll grant that the bumpers would be a headache. But, better price seals the deal.
I like the idea of owning a Packard but I just like the Chrysler better.
I was just thinking of heading over to Estacada today, so I guess I’ll vote Packard.
Chrysler is probably the better deal if the repair shop is being honest. looks like they are trying to recoup costs from a lien or something. That being said I like the Packard better in almost every way. I would probably still go that route, but either option for the money is probably easy entry into the classic car world.
Tough choice. I went Packard cos it’s a nicer colour
The Packard has nice styling and is in pretty good shape, but that deep blue on the Chrysler keeps pulling me in.
Packard for me as I don’t like how that Chrysler is missing stuff.
Wow!! Both are just plain cool. I voted for the New Yorker. That is a hell of a lot of cool for the money. Not that the Packard is a bad deal at $6,500, though. Even that car has a very high cool:dollars ratio. Underappreciated classics are great.
Definitely a both day for me.
I’m going Packard for the completeness of the car but honestly, mostly for the looks. I like lower look of the Packard coupe more than the more upright look of the Chrysler sedan. I also like the color. Call me superficial today.
Straight 8 Packard with the Ultramatic – that might be the smoothest powertrain combo ever invented.
I’m normally a manual transmission guy, but I’ve been kind of obsessed with the Ultramatic ever since I learned about them – it’s a lock up torque converter automatic, in the 40’s and 50s!
Smooth, economical, luxurious, built like a bank vault… I’d love to be a Packard owner someday.
Good timing on the older stuff today, Mark! On my way in to work this morning I saw a couple of custom oldies, the first was a early to mid-50’s coupe, Merc or Ford I think. The second was an early 30’s coupe, looking very ZZ Top Eliminator, but no stripes. Unfortunately, they were going the other way on the highway so I didn’t get much of a chance to ogle.
Out of these two, the Capri Blue Packard Coupe just draws my attention more. The New Yorker would be cool to try out, too. Tough choice but going Packard.
The Packard seems to be in better shape, and getting the Chrysler up to that same shape will cost more time and effort than just buying the Packard.
That’s the only reason I voted for that one. Otherwise, 4 doors are more useful than 2 doors.
The eyes are in the wrong place on the Packard.
They look like they’re Cookie Monster eyes though, so I say they get a pass.
Packard, as I have always loved the design.
Both of these seem like really reasonable choices. I had no idea getting into a pretty nice classic of this era was so affordable.
The post-war cars got overshadowed by the jet styling and rapidly increasing power of the following generation. I find the older cars more interesting though as the industry had to switch from war production back to consumer products.
It is a pretty steady trend. Nostalgia drives up prices when the people that were 20 +/- when there were new hit their 50’s and want to relive their youth. Then they come crashing back down when those people with a direct connection to the car die.
60’s cars are next for this trend and prices are already dropping outside of very desirable cars. On the other hand 80’s cars are on the way up as my generation is buying up the IROC Camaros of our youth.
Going Packard as it seems more complete. You will NEVER find bumpers for the New Yorker, I suspect that’s why they are still missing. Plus, Cars eyes!