Packard's was different. i am pleased to tell the story of the failed Packard touch-button. In 1955 Packard and Studebacker hastely merged (like hudson and nash, but worse). For 1955 Packard renued the lineup with Richard Teague's "Cathedral Taillights" and "speedy look" (i suppose a rip-off of Exener's forward look). The new Packards had powerful 350 hp V8s and, standard on the Caribbean convertible and the "touch-button Ultramatic drive" a 52$ opition for the Patrician and the "hundred-series" (200, 250, 400 etc). The V8 was delicate and Packard wouldn't rectify it's errors. The "Ultramatic drive touch-button" was confused by many, incuding @MrAnnoyingDude, with the very good hidraulic and cable operated Chrysler "Torque-flight" push-button (2nd to last picture). The Packard "Ultramatic drive touch-button" was electrically operated basically by a modified starter motor and had "P" position (Many contemporary transmissions didn't have it). The problems arose because the engines were extremely torquey and the electrical sistem was undersized, so when a car was starting on a hill, punching "D" from "P" (or any other gear) a circuit bracker would brake (similarly to what edsels would do, but those were not electrical). The external element consisted in a rod coming uot of the steering column that housed the metal buttons.
This has to be the most That is true. I haven't settled on using it yet, although I am much interested. Maybe as an option...? --- Post updated --- Thank you for the very detailed explanation! Since it seems rather primitive, I see it on a car that is struggling to look futuristic - I think I'll adopt the steering column one as an option for the shifters.
For the looks i would definitly go the Packard way as it's clearly an afterthought, while the buicks and Chryslers had it integrated in the dash. Keep in mind that the "push-button Ultramatic Drive" was a 2 speed dual range transmission, basically you had a selectable low gear (1st) and a top gear (2nd) (the "H" and "L" on the selector) with a locking torque converter in between (in 1955!!). It didn't feel like a dynaflow, but the 1955-56 rendition of the Ultramatic Drive feels like a low revving cvt (the best of my abilities to explain it) Packards of the era were struggling to not be seen as we see Buick today, but had incredibly innovative features, such as alloominum (hi americans) transmission chassis designed by John DeLorean (yes that one), locking torque converters, adopted by competiotion decades later and didn't use cables in the mechanism like Chrysler did (althought i admit they should have)
It looks great but the rod should be a bit thicker, 1950s technology required heavy metal switches. The pod itself looks really good, mabye smooth the edges as it's near your knee when you drive. as for the interior the upper part of the dash could be padded, using mabye the seat center texture
I hope this looks a little better. I will do the seat textures, and the seats are definitely a viable option.
I'm not sure whether that's a good idea on a 1953 car from the low-priced field. But it could be a way for Gavril to cheaply gain a competitive edge. --- Post updated --- I also think the interior should be changed up. For example, here's 1951, the last year of B-Body Pontiacs, vs B-Body Oldsmobile and Buick:
it could be a high priced option. like the fluidomatic for the Falcon --- Post updated --- I agree. have a Packard 200 interior (low mid sedan from 1951). You could also consider a different horn ring
I also think the interior should be changed up. For example, here's 1951, the last year of B-Body Pontiacs, vs B-Body O The Packard was noticeably above Gavril's low-price position, and the Packard interior already looks like the Special one.
The 200 was a low priced model (no heater, 4.7 l straight 8 engine with 130 hp), the Burnside compares to a 250 (with a 5.4 straight 8 enfine and 150hp and more options as standard). The image i provided has some interior optionals: chrome things near the gauges, more padding on the dash and this particular 200 has a ultramatic drive automatic, so you're right: this particular one compares to a burnside interior. Then if we want to get on the Clipper (as a brand) debate it's another story
A new interior is a must-have in the end, although I have no idea if I can manage to model such complicated parts. Given that I have an overwhelming number of reference pics, tho, I could give it a try
mabye the conventional automatic version could have the gear indicator attached to the wheel, like buicks
I decieded to start work on the dashboard. I feel like this (half a day's worth) could be a good base.
As of now the dash looks like this; basically I just deleted the two gauges on either side and left the speedometer.
