Out of the Future (1954)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 22 лис 2016
- detroithistorical.pastperfecto...
2015.011.048
Black and white 16mm film containing the Studebaker-Packard Corporation promotional film "Out of the Future" produced by A.J. Henderson Associates, Incorporated. The film concerns Packard's Torsion-Level Ride suspension system which uses torsion bar springs in place of coil or leaf springs on its 1955 cars.
The film's host talks about the technology from an office set, and provides narration over demonstrations of the design. In some point-of-view shots, a "Ride-Meter" is shown to illustrate how smooth the suspension is.
Who here came from jay’s Caribbean video?
I am! My ‘58 Volkswagen Beetle has torsion bar suspension, but I wasn’t quite understanding exactly how the Packard system works just by watching Jay’s video. This Packard torsion system is leaps ahead of Volkswagen’s.
Me Too!
I watched Jay's video a couple of days ago and this popped into my recommendations.
Yep, a great supplement to Jay's video. Initially I didn't understand that there was a second set of torsion bars that connected to the leveling motor. Also, I somehow got the idea (my fault totally for the misunderstanding) that the main bars crossed each other.
yeah, you'd think if wasn't going to explain anything he'd at least be funny.
This is a brilliant commercial. Encourages scientific and technical literacy. Today, every idiot thinks that a 2.5 ton SUV is cool for some magical reason.
You realize he's showing you a 2.5 ton car, right?
@@kwb377 he can't possibly mean me! my 1999 Toyota Land Cruiser is only 2.6 tons....way different than those 2.5 ton suckers!
@@kwb377 You missed the point: what was stressed was NOT the 2,5 tons but the SUV part
The Packard was elegant, SUV's compete among themselves in arrogant looks
This was movie made for dealers.
If only such a car was in production today. With such pride in engineering I am sure Packard would be well ahead of other production cars made currently. In 1956 they improved the system. As a young child I remember sleeping stretched out on the rear seat and experiencing a floating sensation as if riding on air. I also remember having fun in our garage by sitting on the rear bumper to make the leveling system turn on (I once got in trouble because the battery ran down.) One of the improvements that came in '56 was a switch that allowed the driver to turn the leveling off when parked, to prevent such occurrences.
The automatic leveling system was introduced in 1955
Yes, ours was a gray '55 Patrician in '56 there was an added switch to turn off leveling. The Twin Ultramatic was another engineering marvel with a choice of smooth acceleration or flash lightning getaways
Unfortunately pride in engineering can also bankrupt a company.
Mushrooms will do that.
Citroen did that. Packard was outdated already in the 50's it was an old people car.
My grandparents had senior Packards and we had a Caribbean...fondly remembered.
My father had a Packard. Unfortunately, my mother wrecked it before I was born.
@@scotmatheson1109 Sad
Looks like the Packard Proving Grounds in Shelby Township, MI. Wonderful, historic place.
I'm installing a Ride-O-Meter in my car.
First I ever found out about it was in the early 1970's when a girl I knew whose father was a 1955 -56 Packard collector stopped by with one of her dad's cars. We were talking and sat down on the rear bumper and suddenly it raised up and that's when she explained about the self leveling system.
Of course, we are all wondering if this girl caused anything else to raise up.
That suspension sure is amazing in effect, it's such a strange feeling the first time you experience it. I got my '56 Packard 400 not long ago and it took me a bit to get used to it.
When this car's a rockin' don't come a knockin'!
Oh wait, it can't rock thanks to the magic of Torsion-Level ride. Great video. It answers some questions I've had for a while.
A car ahead of its time. I would love to experience sitting in that car. Too bad Packard did not survive.
GM shot it down.
The closest suspensions to how the Packards operate made thereafter were the Hydro-Pneumatic systems used on British leyland and Citroen vehicles. I had a 1966 Morris 1800 with that suspension. I could drive quickly over speed bumps and would also not notice side wind, except for the noise the wind would make, as well as how it slowed the vehicle down a bit
That suspension reminds me so much of Lincolns air ride suspension of the 1980s and 90s! Amazing!
Nothing at all like it. This uses torsion bars instead of air bags.
There has never been another system like it.
Citroen used a hydro-pneumatic suspension, but with age, the system tended to leak and hemorrhage the green light hydraulic oil that made it work.
Likewise, other makers used the air bag type suspensions that also went haywire when the hoses leaked.
Packard's system had relays and sensors to adjust the torsion bars to the load using the central leveling motor. The result was the best ride in the industry with the best handling in the industry. no other company has ever come close, regardless of price point.
Packard, the only true American luxury car. I love the 1955 Patrician the best out of all of the models Packard made.
It reminds me of the Citroën Traction 15-Six H unveiled in may 1954 with self-leveling Hydropneumatic suspension later standardized on the DS
I wrote almost the same things. I read the comments and many Americans don't have a clue theses car existed. I even read a comment that state "Khrushchev's Packard"
My dad and his two brothers; born between 1926 and 1930; were poor farm boys, but in their teens and early 20's, all three had fast Packards. They even raced them some; including on a frozen lake.
It’s no wonder that Packard rivaled Cadillac, Lincoln & Imperial in the luxury car category. If I had the money I’d take a Packard Caribbean convertible in ‘55 & ‘56 the ultimate luxury car!!!
He kept quiet about Citroen's DS model of the same year.
He did mention "some European cars" - having owned a French car, all I can say is....
Packard sold around 55,000 units in 1955, but 1956 sales were dismal. The last full sized Packard came off the Connor Avenue plant in June of 1956. "Packards" for 1957 & 1958 were produced at the Studebaker facility in South Bend, Indiana, and we're very carefully reskinned Studebakers. They were dismal failures, and no more Packards were ever produced.
Packardbakers
Krushchev's Packard is on display in a car museum somewhere in this country. Russians knew a good deal when they saw it. Packard was probably best designed car for the interstates in the 1950's
It's a GAZ chaïka. It doesn't have many things in common with a Packard. Exept from the front end. Oh and there wasn't many interstate in Soviet-Union in the 50's. Maybe you want to look it up.
Have heard reports that the 1950's Packards tended to be rattle traps as exhaust systems wore against the chasis despite promotional films insisting on how well thought out the rubber chasis mounts were positioned. The auto transmissions were full of bugs. I would think fat Packards were relatively trouble free driving on the interstates and highways but it is doubtful Packard ever reached the young executive they'd hoped to sell to, instead they were repeating themselves to an old, tired customer base in decline and packing in their Packard for the rest home. It was switching deck chairs on the Titanic. Shoot in foot technology killed Packard, with of without the V8. If they'd bought the rocket V8 from Olds along with the Cadillac hydromatic transmission and sold more high end luxury options, including "free airconditioning," and engineered a cruise control, they may have gotten further without blowing big bucks on crafting a doomed V8 along with a problematic one off transmission that was nearly impossible to service. They were digging a hole, not selling a customer.
@@z978ady I realize that GM sold Hydra-Matics to competitors, but I would doubt very much that they would sell superior engines to them. They did sell Chevrolet sixes and 283 V8s to Studebaker in the mid-60s, but Studebaker was a dying concern by that time. The Olds V8 was an advanced design for its day, and was instantly a hit with buyers. I just don't see GM selling them to Packard. GM was much more concerned with fighting off the Ford blitz of 1953, and incidentally killing off the independent makers as a result.
Unrewarded genius is a proverb. People continued to buy coil/leaf spring cars. '55-'56 had a lockup torque converter almost 20 years before the rest.
I'm sold. Where is the nearest Packard agency?
5610winston Take a time machine back to the 1950s
"Ask the Man Who Owns One" and he (or she) will point you in the right direction.
I believe it's across the street from the Tucker Dealership...
Many former Packard agencies are now Mercedes dealers. In the early 50’s Studebaker handled distribution for Mercedes in the US. When Packard and Studebaker merged they continued to handle Mercedes cars. As Packard then Studebaker disappeared the Mercedes franchise remained.
@@bill90405 Sixty years on, those dealerships have probably closed, recombined, and otherwise evaporated to the point it would be impossible to trace them.
It's curious I get a 1956 packard patrician and now I'm always recommended these videos
Speaking of "foreign cars", the 1949 Citroën 2CV had interlinked front and rear suspension. Although Citroën routinely used torsion bars, they did this one with coils and pull-rods.
Hahaha the scientific, finely calibrated, truth revealing, Ride-o-meter!
I wonder what - or who - is connected to that pointer?
Best part was his mustache. You got to love the 1950s.
Yes, followed closely by that cool necktie
Chrysler took the Torsion Bar concept for their cars in the late 50s.
Watching this in 2022. and I am wondering why there is nothing like that today?
Because it really didn't work very well by modern standards.
The '55-'56 Packmules were still using the dowdy 1951 body, cleverly refreshed by future AMC styling whiz Dick Teague. Packard had been going down the dumper since WWII, and George Romney finished them off by balking at the four marque AMC deal proposed by George Mason, thus forcing Packard to merge with another loser, Studebaker. The Packard V8 was a good (if heavy) engine, but that Ultramatic transmission was pretty much the Packard's Achilles heel. The torsion bar suspension came from Hudson.
Porsche created torsion bar suspension in the 1930s for their race cars. Citroen patented it for use on passenger cars some time later.
Great tie...My 64 Imperial LeBaron has torsion bars in front & leaf springs and rear stabilizer bars in back...I'm gonna have to get me a ride-o-meter to see how my Imperial stacks up-LOL Interesting vid...
The Chrysler's ride was stiff in comparison. That was the main turn off from people who had Lincolns and Cadillacs. Packard was able to keep a super soft ride because the front and rear torsion bars worked together. When the front suspension of this Packard compressed over a bump, it forced the rear torsion bar to add lift to the rear and vice versa so, the car would raise and lower, softly, keeping the car level at all times. When cornering, both torsion bars worked together in keeping the car from leaning while still maintaining a super smooth ride.
@@waynejohnson1304 I have never ridden in a Packard - I recall my late father saying he had one at one time...Are you a Packard guy Wayne? I have had 4 Imperials, 2 LeBaron and 2 Crowns. All 1964...My latest (and last LOL) is a Lebaron-just purchased a few months ago-still getting some mechanical things sorted out.
@@wam44 My mother had a 1957 Dodge Coronet 500 with the so-called "Torsion-Aire" ride. I owned a 1969 Imperial LeBaron with the same system. While I liked the front torsion bars on those cars, I didn't like the leaf springs in the rear because they were too stiff. Having written that, I was impressed with the way that my Imperial was at 110 MPH on the highway compared with Cadillac and Lincoln. I have had many Cadillacs over the years. The Torsion-Aire ride was nice if you didn't want a super soft ride but, were more concerned with high speed driving.
They were great on taking back roads at a good clip too but, in day-to-day city driving, they were a bit harsh with respect with pot holes or deep manhole covers. I found that with my Imperial, the faster I drove, the smoother it became but, then, I would have to worry about speeding tickets. It really wasn't a car that one could drive down the highway and just lay back and relax. The Packard was able to keep the softness, while at the same time, allow great stability going around corners. That is what impresses me the most with this kind of suspension. I think it should be brought back.
@@waynejohnson1304 Cool-thanks for elaborating-too bad I couldn't add rear to front torsion bars on the Imperial :-)
One of the causes of the firmer ride was the leaf springs internal friction increased as they wore due to corrosion and wearing out of the inter liners. Earlier cars had tin covers over the springs and some were oil filled.
Lexus LX470 with torsion bar suspension and automatic height control.
The LX470 front suspension has torsion bars, but is the setup that was common on 4X4 pickup trucks - the torsion bars are not interlinked to each other or to the rear suspension, and are not part of the self-leveling system.
I know this is a old vid...i would be nice to see the packard line brought back
And also in 1955 the Citroen DS19 was released which made this entire car seem like the outdated horse cart that it was and help usher in truly Modern cars, but not in America.
Chrysler Corporation had the same thing. Torsion bar suspensions.
Correct, hundreds of dollars per car, in an industry where dimes matter! What few realize about the system, is the car feels "glued" to the ground, for (besides the incomparable ride), the front wheel is pushing down on the rear wheel and vice-versa. It doesn't depend on the shocks to do the best that they can. As rather-weak shocks are utilized, there's minimal impact to the chassis & body. Also, the torsion bars last forever. Even the electrical portion of the system is incredibly simple.I only wish that Bill Allison's Son, could have an opportunity to ride in my 56 someday. (I'm "dreamin' here) Zero bangs, knocks, rattles and groans, and it rides like a train. All the cars but Jay's, that I've seen on you tube, are an insult to the highly-gifted designers, their legacies and their families. (You can tell I'm frustrated) Remains one of the two most elegant-vs-results (designs), that I've ever witnessed. The other has nothing to do with cars. Lastly: The last time we brought our car back to the original owner's family, we drove 690 miles in one day. Got home at 1 AM. The
disappointment was, that the drive was over, for that day. My Wife and I were as refreshed as if the trip didn't begin yet. See: 56 Packard 400 Car-of-the-Week, Old Cars Weekly.
1:56 the narrator has a black dot on his hand but is gone by 2:03 !
thanks i still don't get all of how it works but i like it. got more vids?
If you're specifically looking for more Packard promotional videos, you might be interested in this one: ua-cam.com/video/a_santjPCqw/v-deo.html
thanks helped with the hydraulic windows but not how the leveling bars works
ps. packards are so different from the cars i have so its new to me
Had a 1955 packard in the eighies
Dig that necktie! I wish I had one.
Has anyone else noticed that he is using a Chrysler promo model for his desk demonstration? Should he not have found a Packard model instead?
Not a Chrysler promo, it's a Cadillac, but not a very correct one. Actual 50 and later Cadillac's had one piece windshields.
If this suspension works so great, why isn't used on modern day cars, or was it too exspensive to manufacture today
As you saw when they loaded the trunk is this system sensitive to back and forwards leaning
Therefore will this system create serious nose dive on breaking and lift on acceleration, and as breakes and engines got more powerful this problem got more pronounced.
I WANT ONE.
And what happened to that suspension?
According to Bill Allison, at the Packard meet at Zimmerman's Automobile-o-rama in 1969 "It would have a manufacturers cost of $600 today"
He went on to explain a situation, where a famous manufacturer saved a dime per door latch, to show the importance of saving pennies per car.
BTW, What a quality person he was. Bill even hand scetched a diagram for me, on a paper bag I was carrying, to show why the car doesn't "dip" during braking.
@@williamlegall2988 wow interesting, so nobody did it after because it was expensive to manufacture? Because that idea for a suspension was very innovative
@@ManiaMusicChannel All cars use the basic idea of interconnection with a torsion bar, just usually only side to side and not front to back - to control roll in corners. There's a few manufacturers who still use the principle of front-back interconnection, but they use hydraulics or pneumatics to do it.
Why do you have what appears to be a Cadillac on your desk ?
Thought the same thing! One would think that they could have had a scale model PACKARD on the desk lol
That was a Chysler Imperial.
It's a metal toy model of a '50-'52 Cadillac...the competition. It was used to demonstrate how ordinary cars behave.
@@leathersf That's no Cadillac. There are no tailfin type humps on the rear. That's a Chrysler Imperial.
@@waynejohnson1304 It appears to be a tin toy from the early '50s, probably made in Japan. As was typical, they weren't about to make a payment to GM for the rights to make an identical copy, so they left some significant detail out to avoid legal problems. Almost all tin toys of that era are like that.
How the fuck does this show up right after jay said go look for it?
Well the Citroën 2CV did this much earlier and much better.
They should have called Citroen. They already did that in the 30's.
Didn't beat Citroen's DS though :)
Are these the same torsion bar suspensions that Chrysler cars had in the 50s and 60s?
No.
Chrysler used torsion bars on the front wheels and leaf springs at the rear. There was no spring connection from the front wheels to the rear, and no automatic leveling.
Chrysler's system was not too bad, but Packard's system was far more sophisticated, and has proved reasonably reliable (keep in mind, these cars are sixty-five years old.
My '73 Dodge Coronet bucked like an ill-at-ease bull over potholes and rough surfaces. I had several Nissan trucks made between 1984 and 2004 that had torsion/leaf springs that rode better than the Coronet (the 2005 and later Frontiers use front coils, and my 2013 rides and handles pretty well).
We will never know how the Packard system would have been refined through the years, but Chrysler pretty much stood pat from the 1957 model year introduction until they introduced a transverse torsion bar system on the Aspen/Volare models for 1976.
You might want to check out the Citroen ID and DS models' full hydraulic suspension, a triumphantly smooth ride with automatic leveling and adjustable ride height, but God help you if the hydraulic pump which also operated the brakes, power steering, and semiautomatic transmission. The spherical suspension units and hydraulic lines are notoriously prone to leaks, but anything that looks that futuristic (even today) can be forgiven for such mundane issues as unreliability.
Chrysler's front torsion bars were much shorter and did not work in unison with the rear suspension. The Chrysler's ride was stiff in comparison. That was the main turn off from people who had Lincolns and Cadillacs. Packard was able to keep a super soft ride because the front and rear torsion bars worked together. When the front suspension of this Packard compressed over a bump, it forced the rear torsion bar to add lift to the rear and vice versa so, the car would raise and lower, softly, keeping the car level at all times. When cornering, both torsion bars worked together in keeping the car from leaning while still maintaining a super smooth ride.
@@waynejohnson1304 Thanks for the information. I only knew about the torsion bars on Chrysler cars. 😁. If they kept the cars from “pitching “ no wonder I never saw one playing baseball ⚾️😏
Funny how old days luxury cars chase softness and ride comfort and now the German luxury cars all boast firm suspension & sharp handling even for SUVs. It’s just some U.S. roads now look more like plowed fields than autobahn…
If only that merger happened
Packard was innovative. It's too bad they went out of business.
Me!
Jay Leno brought me here
This system was ripe with problems the 1955 had all the electical componets on frame which were subject torain snow causing problems the 1956 packardchange it tothefender well on top dont remember exactly i had 1955and my dad had 1956s❤😮
My 56 (400) is one of the last left to ride and sound exactly as intended and is incredible. Unlike any of the Torsion-Level Packards shown on you-tube, which (except for Jay Leno's) ride and sound like cement-mixers. Heavy shocks prevent the interaction from working. Dual exhaust are rubbing somewhere on every one of them, including the rear bumper. Few things will make a car sound worse. Decades-old suspension bushings create all sorts of knocks, creeks and friction. Loose jack, spare and all sorts of other annoying noises, in the trunk, ashtray and glove box, accentuate every bump in the road. I could go on.and on. It's no wonder these cars have very little value. From what I see of them, and if I didn't know better, I wouldn't take one of these cars for free. Another annoying thing with ALL old cars
is the speedometer will be on its second or third trip around, with exceedingly-rare exception. One should look for worn or glazed finish on the steering wheel. Glazed and worn armrest as well.
American cars always had really soft suspension - compromising handling on corners with a lot of body roll. Looks like Packard made the suspension so ridiculously soft they had to add the electric motor levelling system so that Packards were not seen running around with the rear way too low because fat old Uncle Ben and his wife got in the back. But, the motor had to be made very slow to respond, otherwise it would wear itself out on the bumps. That meant it had to be activated all the time, so it had time to work before you started up and drove off. So the neighourhood kids flattened the battery trying it out while it was parked.... oh, well... You would think Packard would have given it a modicum of extra thought, and activated the electric leveling when the driver's door was opened. Or better yet, just use all independent progressive coil springs all round and a buffered sub-chassis as did Mercedes - far simpler, no electric motor to fail, you don't feel bumps, the handling is good, little pitching and lurching, and it works just fine.
Mercedes used hydro-pneumatic system licensed from Citroen for estate( wagons) and some S class cars. Today it’s called Airmatic.
The purpose of suspension is twofold: to reduce as much as possible the shock transmitted into the car by impact with road imperfections, and to provide deflection so that the wheels remain firmly on the ground. The limiting factor is always how much roll and pitch is allowed by a given system.
An all independent coil system does not work. Nobody manufactures one - the body roll that you criticize american cars for is much worse with a completely independent coil spring system, unless the springs have been made so stiff that they fail to fulfill either of the two purposes. This is why all cars with coil springs have their suspension horizontally interconnected with - of all things - torsion bars, be that separate units or on cheaper cars a twist beam design.
The Packard simply takes the principle of an anti-roll bar, turns it 90 degrees, and uses it as an anti-pitch bar. The electric motor exists only to tension the system in response to changing front-rear weight distribution.
This is simply a system that shows a superior understanding of suspension than you possess. The exact principle of front-rear interconnection to control pitch and allow for softer ride is understood by everyone - Rolls Royce, Citroen, even Mercedes - just not you.
@@kyle8952 : You got it right when you said the Packard system is an anti-pitch system, with an electric motor to respond to load distribution. That's what this video explained. But it has the disadvantages this video shows too.
You have no idea beyond that.
I have not citicised American cars for their soft ride. I merely stated the fact that American cars generally have a soft ride. This is a deliberate choice of American manufacturers since the 1930's. Go read Alfred Sloan's book, on how he built GM into the largest car maker - he states that the soft ride, and compromised handling was a deliberate choice, and briefly explains why.
Many upmarket cars such as Lexus (made by Toyota) are sold with softer suspension for USA, because that's what Americans want. Not because Toyota doesn't know how to design suspension, which is stiffer in their cars for other markets.
Lots and lots of cars were and are made with all-independent coil suspension. Go read the service manual for a heckflosse (fintail) Mercedes car - it's exactly as I described - progressive coils all round, all independent, buffered front sub-chassis exactly as I described. These are early 60's cars and very successful. I owned one.
My current car is a 15 year old GM Commodore (Australian-made equivalent of Chevrolet) - it too has progressive coils all round, all independent, no front/back coupling of any kind. It's handing and stability are nearly as good as that 1964 Mercedes. Ride is softer. It has no front-back interconnection and doesn't need it, as pitching is minimal due to a fairly long wheelbase.
Front-back interconnection was necessary on the first mass-produced car to have it - the Citroen 2CV, because of a combination of soft ride and a very short wheelbase, which would normally give excessive pitching. Given the design objectives, it works quite well. The most common car here with front-back interconnection was the BMC Mini - also a short wheelbase car. But it was not very good - you just felt all the bumps twice as much. It had a very hard suspension - apparently a designer choice.
What doesn't work so well is linear coils all round (ie not progressive) and I know of no car with such suspension. 1950's to 1970's American cars had progressive coils front, and leaf springs (which are inherently progressive) on the back - this too works very well, but not as well as the Hechflosse Mercedes system. I had over the years owned several Ford Falcons with this coil front/leaf back system. They all had a quirk - if you were cornering at moderate speed and the rear inside wheel hit a small bump, the car rear-end would jump sideways slightly. Apart from that handling and ride was much the same as any similar car.
@@kyle8952 : I did not criticise American cars generally for their soft ride - as it was a design choice to suit the market. But I did rubbish Packard for going overboard on an extremely soft ride. You see that extreme softness very clearly when the three chaps get in the back. On most large cars, such a load would drop the back by 50 mm at most. Going for such an extremely soft ride meant that dynamic pitching would be bad even on this large wheelbase car, so they had to fix it by front-back interconnection, and fix the static pitching problem with that by adding an electric motor and secondary torsion bars. Looks like it worked ok ride/handling wise, but it was not an elegant solution.
One does not normally drive on bad pitch-inducing test tracks. Nobody had speed bumps back then.
A dreadful mistake of Packard to buy off a lower standards Studebaker company.
Packard didn't buy Studebaker, it was the other way around and it turned out to be a mistake for Studebaker to have bought a dying brand of car that no one wanted.
@@reelreeler8778 Wrong!
Packard did buy off Studebaker which used falsified books to attract/lure potential buyers.
With all due respect, research facts.
@@jrmbusa It is truly incredible that a corporation such as Packard did not seem to do their due diligence during the run-up to that merger. Studebaker's books should have been a series of bright red skulls and crossbones, but I had never heard of falsified records before. Their location in Indiana wasn't helpful either. Their defense contracts were the best thing Studebaker had to offer in that deal.
@@arise2945 You're 100% right
I've never seen such a weird mustache
Тут явно не хватает рекламы Vault-Tec ))
Too much dreaming andtoo much poor managment over the years