Harry P. Posted July 23, 2012 Posted July 23, 2012 http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2012/07/22/ungrateful-children-cars-that-killed-their-manufacturers/?intcmp=features
Danno Posted July 23, 2012 Posted July 23, 2012 They're all available down at Melendez Brothers Motors! Watch for their annual Mothers Day and Fathers Day Specials!
Guest Johnny Posted July 23, 2012 Posted July 23, 2012 (edited) But yet there are diehard Aztek lovers out there that will be ready to fight if you cut on their......... what ever it is! I personally love the Packard Hawk! BTW Packard was killed long before the merge with Studebaker. It just was dying a slow death due to mismanagement and the collaboration between the Big Three who were trying to kill all competitors off after WWII. Edited July 23, 2012 by Johnny
sjordan2 Posted July 23, 2012 Posted July 23, 2012 (edited) In terms of REAL death... Jean Bugatti, son of Ettore, was killed on 11 August 1939 at the age of 30 while testing a Bugatti Type 57 tank-bodied race car near the Molsheim factory. "30-year-old Jean Bugatti was killed when he lost control of his vehicle and crashed into a tree while trying to avoid a drunken bicyclist, who had gotten onto the track through a hole in a treefence. He is interred in the Bugatti family plot at the municipal cemetery in Dorlisheim. There is a monument to him at the site of his accident." One of your recent Auto ID vintage cars also killed its co-founder on a test drive -- the 3-wheeler you posted. And though it's not a car per se, there's this news item from 2010... Segway Founder Dies in Segway Accident Jimi Heselden, the owner of the Segway company, died on Sunday after he rode a Segway off a cliff at his estate in Britain. His death appears to be an accident—police say they do not believe it to be suspicious. “A Segway-style vehicle was recovered,” said a police spokesman. Heselden bought the Segway company in December 2009. He was ranked 195th on the Sunday Times’ list of rich Britons, and had recently given some $15 million to charity. Edited July 23, 2012 by sjordan2
ZTony8 Posted July 23, 2012 Posted July 23, 2012 (edited) Packard died for many reasons though the bullet to the head was the ill fated merger of Packard with Studebaker.A smart idea on paper,the complete merger(which would have also included Nash and Hudson)was an attempt to set up a corporation with a lineup similar to General Motors(Nash/Rambler on the low end,Studebaker and Hudson in the middle,and Packard at the top).The big problem was that,for years, Studebaker had been giving rather generous concessions to the unions to keep the production lines moving and was in a bad financial state because of that policy.Packard merged with Studebaker only to find out later(because of the lack of due dilligence prior to the merger on the part of Packard)the depth of Studebaker's financial woes. BTW-Pontiac had killed of IT'S parent,the Oakland,back in about 1930.In the mid 1920s GM had set up junior divisions of it makes(except for Chevrolet)-Pontiac for Oakland,Viking for Oldsmobile,Marquette for Buick,and LaSalle for Cadillac.It was an ill-timed,unnecessary,move predicated on an expansion of Alfred Sloan's idea of "a car for purse and purpose".Sales were never strong for the Viking and Marquette(helped by the onset of the Great Depression)and they died after only a few model years.The LaSalle lived until 1940 when it became the Cadillac Model 61.The Pontiac,obviously,enjoyed the most success,staying alive for 83 model years. Edited July 23, 2012 by ZTony8
espo Posted July 23, 2012 Posted July 23, 2012 I have to agree with Tony with an exception on Pontiac and " Generous Motors ". While Pontiac over used the plastic body clading in later years the devision was killed off instead of Buick. In China, where Buick was one of the most desirable American makes, GM had to save " Face " by keeping Buick and killing Pontiac instead. It seems GM sold more Buicks in China than Pontiac and Buick together in the US. They couldn't kill Buick in the US and still hold their premium statis in China. Now the Holden cars from Au. ( they are truly great cars ) is sending the G8 replacement as a Chevrolet SS. Now if we could just get the El Camino ( Monaro Ute ) I would trade my '05 GTO for one of those. If you are just looking around on the net, try GM's web site and look at their Holden division.
Harry P. Posted July 23, 2012 Author Posted July 23, 2012 Packard merged with Studebaker only to find out later(because of the lack of due dilligence prior to the merger on the part of Packard)the depth of Studebaker's financial woes. Yeah, that's pretty much the story that I have read. Packard just didn't do their homework, and they were dragged to their death by the merger. The last "Packard" was a joke. Looks like they took a Studebaker and a few cheesy JC Whitney "customizing" accessories and called it a "Packard!" What an embarrassing end to a prestigious brand.
Danno Posted July 23, 2012 Posted July 23, 2012 The last "Packard" was a joke. Looks like they took a Studebaker and a few cheesy JC Whitney "customizing" accessories and called it a "Packard!" What an embarrassing end to a prestigious brand. Two observations: 1) J.C. Whitney outlasted Studepackard. Long live cheesy. 2) Actually, the 'Glass Guppy GT wasn't so bad looking as it was pathetic that they slathered the Packard name on it. Had it just been called a Stude, it might have been better received. Call it a Packard, and it was instantly ugly.
Longbox55 Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 Something that wasn't mentioned about Pontiac, Pontiac had in fact killed it's original parent, Oakland! Back in the late '20s, all the GM makes (exept Chevrolet) had what they called a "companion brand". Buick had the Marquette, Oldsmocile had the Viking, Oakland had Pontiac, and Cadillac had LaSalle. The idea was to have a vehicle available that was a step down in pricing from the parent brand, as well as being an "in between" price point to entice customers to step up if they were considering a lower priced brand (the Viking is an exeption, as it was placed as a step up from Oldsmobile). So a Pontiac was intended to attract Cherolet buyers, Viking to get Oakland buyers, etc. Bear in mind, this was back when GM advocated a stategy of buyers "stepping up" as they became more affluent Start them in a Chevrolet, work themup to a Cadillac. The Viking and the Marquette didn't last too long. LaSalle lasted the longest, and Poniac replaced its parent Oakland in 1933
zenrat Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 ... Now if we could just get the El Camino ( Monaro Ute )... Commodore Ute. Or were you thinking of the Malloo? At least Holden can export - the current Commodore was designed from the get go to be GMs global Rear Wheel Drive platform. When Ford Australia sat down and designed their latest iteration of the RWD Falcon platform someone somewhere (i'm betting it was not someone here) decided that it was not neccessary for it to be capable of being built in Left Hand Drive form. Export sales are therefore limited to former British Colonies and Japan. The Falcon name may live on but it'll be screwed to a FWD vehicle assembled locally from parts shipped in. Ford Australia are doomed to become a vehicle assembler rather than manufacturer and Holden will have won (so some silver lining then...) .
Qwit Pushin Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 (edited) As has been stated by many of you, at least two of those on the list were already on the ropes. I'm surprised the Oldsmobile Aurora didn't head the list. Oldsmobile trying to go head-to-head with Lexus and the like, huge mistake. What puzzles me, though is that GM chose to let go of the oldest marque in their stable. Personally, I'd have let go of Buick before Oldsmobile. Edited July 25, 2012 by Qwit Pushin
Mike Kucaba Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 The Studebaker/Packard merger was referred to as "two drunks trying to help each other across the street"
MrObsessive Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 That Packard Hawk wasn't so bad IMO................ And not too difficult a conversion from AMT's '53 Stude if one is so inclined...........
Mike Kucaba Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 I agree Bill, but it's kinda like a shapely woman.... The rearview is stunning,but the front ......
Deathgoblin Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 Is it me, or does the nose of the Packard Hawk look like a Simpsons character? Got to see one at the Packard museum. They're as weird looking close up.
Art Anderson Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 The Studebaker/Packard merger was referred to as "two drunks trying to help each other across the street" More like the blind leading the blind.
Art Anderson Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 Something that wasn't mentioned about Pontiac, Pontiac had in fact killed it's original parent, Oakland! Back in the late '20s, all the GM makes (exept Chevrolet) had what they called a "companion brand". Buick had the Marquette, Oldsmocile had the Viking, Oakland had Pontiac, and Cadillac had LaSalle. The idea was to have a vehicle available that was a step down in pricing from the parent brand, as well as being an "in between" price point to entice customers to step up if they were considering a lower priced brand (the Viking is an exeption, as it was placed as a step up from Oldsmobile). So a Pontiac was intended to attract Cherolet buyers, Viking to get Oakland buyers, etc. Bear in mind, this was back when GM advocated a stategy of buyers "stepping up" as they became more affluent Start them in a Chevrolet, work themup to a Cadillac. The Viking and the Marquette didn't last too long. LaSalle lasted the longest, and Poniac replaced its parent Oakland in 1933 In 1931, Chevrolet did have a junior marque: Mercury. Art
Chuck Most Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 Since the article will NOT load for me... would somebody tell me if the Hudson Jet is on there? Because when it comes to 'cars that killed their parents', that's the first thing I think of, even though Hudson's death didn't really come along until about a half decade later.
Harry P. Posted July 25, 2012 Author Posted July 25, 2012 It's only 5 companies. Nobody said it was a comprehensive list...
Longbox55 Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 In 1931, Chevrolet did have a junior marque: Mercury. Art I was going to mention the Mercury, Art, but I've seen some conflicting information as the whether it was truly a junior marque to Chevrolet or only the base model car. I've seen it listed both ways.
Modelmartin Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2012/07/22/ungrateful-children-cars-that-killed-their-manufacturers/?intcmp=features You have got to lay off of the Faux Noise, Harry! It will make your brain bleed. My entry in this category would be the Henry J. Kaiser spent their whole budget on it when they should have been putting a V8 in the full size line. A footnote. Studebaker helped preside over Pierce-Arrow's death also. They merged in the early 30s but separated a few years later. They were doomed ebven before the merger, though.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now