Regarding Cadillac's Mid-1950s Side Trim Revisions

A while ago I posted "Cadillac Side Trim Theme: 1948-1959" dealing with theme continuity and evolution over a decade of model years.  Today, I treat that in more detail.

The theme had to do with faux air intakes at the forward edge of the rear fender zone.  At one point, the design took an odd twist -- the subject of this post -- and how it evolved in following model years.

Details are in the image captions below.

Gallery

1950 Cadillac 62 - car-for sale photo
In the earlier post I noted: "Cadillacs were redesigned for the 1950 model year.  They were big, long cars which was why they were able to carry the vertical element where the rear fender begins.  The usual styling approach was and is to emphasize horizontality in order to make a car look longer and lower than if it were unadorned.  Another interesting detail in that vertical element is that it is a fake air intake -- something that became something of a styling fad two years later on hoods and sides of the redesigned 1952 Ford Motor Company line.  For some reason, the public and car buff press didn't make a big deal of Caddie's faux scoops at the time."

1954 Cadillac 62 - BaT Auctions photo
Cadillacs were redesigned for 1954.  The side trim theme is essentially that found on the '50 Cadillac.  A curious carryover is the design of the passenger compartment greenhouse if the windshield is ignored.  Taller windows, but compare the details around its aft end.  Yet another instance of General Motors' tooling carryover?

1955 Cadillac 62 - BaT Auctions
The next model year side trim was revised.  The horizontal chrome strip was connected to the vertical "air intake" and the latter eliminated below the junction.  I never liked this change from the time I first saw it back in my high school days.  To me, it's a lazy, so-what? detail.  Yet it was continued for 1956.  Apparently it didn't bother Cadillac buyers.

1956 Cadillac 62 - car-for-sale photo
For '56 stylists added that spear shape on the rear fender area.  It served to distract attention from the L-shaped trim.  Also, the latter's vertical part was made bolder, somewhat divorcing it from the slender, horizontal part.

1957 Cadillac 62 - photo via Hemmings
Cadillacs were redesigned again for 1957.  The spear shape is longer, bolder.  And the vertical element is now below it, a better solution.  Moreover, the pretense of being an air intake is gone.  It was finally eliminated in the 1959 redesign.

1950 Cadillac 62 - Barrett-Jackson Auctions photo
Here and below are images showing the side trim on hardtop convertibles bodies.

1954 Cadillac 62 - Barrett-Jackson

1955 Cadillac 62 - car-for-sale photo

1956 Cadillac 62- car-for-sale photo

1957 Cadillac 62 - car-for-sale photo

First-Generation American Panoramic Windshields

General Motors usually set the styling theme pace for American carmakers from the late 1920s through the 1960s.  Of course there were exceptions.  Other firms sometimes introduced features before GM -- an example is placing headlights in front fenders.  And GM sometimes designed cars that didn't sell well -- the late 1950s, for example.

One styling feature that briefly dominated American design was the panoramic (or "wraparound" as we usually termed it in those days) windshield.  It was a pet project of GM's design supremo Harley Earl.  They first appeared 1950-51 on the LeSabre and XP-300 "dream cars."  Model year 1953 saw them on Cadillac Eldorado and Oldsmobile Fiesta convertibles.  And for 1954, Oldsmobiles, Buicks and Cadillacs were redesigned with panoramic windshields.

Model year 1955 saw most models from the other carmakers sporting such windshields, although it took until 1956 for a few other brands to catch up.  Some models such as Studebaker coupes and Nash Metropolitans never went panoramic.

Not all brands from each manufacturer are shown below.  Only examples of each new windshield design are presented in the interest of keeping this post from becoming too long.  The only major omission is the 1956 Lincoln whose windshield was similar to other vertical A-pillar designs.

Gallery

1954 Cadillac Coupe de Ville - BaT Auctions photos
Here is GM's C-body version.

Windshield is tall and framed by A-pillars that are essentially vertical.

1954 Oldsmobile Super 88 - RM Sotheby's photos
GM B-body windshield.

Also tall, but the A-pillar slants forward.

1955 Chevrolet Bel Air - car-for-sale photos
C-body cars were redesigned for 1955.

A-pillars are essentially vertical, a common solution.

1955 Ford Customline - car-for-sale photos
Fords were massively facelifted for 1955.  Roofs were flatter and windshields became panoramic, but not as high as the GM versions.

Again, a vertical A-pillar.

1957 Continental Mark II - car-for-sale photos
The Mark II appeared for model year 1956.  Its panoramic windshield is unlike the others shown here.  It does not intrude into the roofline.

A-pillars slant to the rear.

1955 DeSoto Firedome - Barrett-Jackson photos
Windshields used for Chryslers and DeSotos.  Not as tall as General Motor's versions.

The main difference was the aft-slanting A-pillar.  Same sort of pillar as before, but anchored farther aft.  This gave Chrysler cars a more conventional appearance and seems to have reduced or eliminated the distortion found on GM cars.  In 1956 my father test-drove Oldsmobiles and Chevrolets, experiencing annoying distortion.  So he bought a DeSoto instead.

1955 Dodge Coronet - GAA Auction photos
The panoramic on CHhysler Corporation's entry brands.  Its upper frame is aligned with the upper side window framing.

Another aft-slanting A-pillar.

1955 Packard 400 - Daniel Schmitt photos
Packard's strong '55 facelift included a panoramic windshield.

It's pretty much like the GM vertical A-pillar designs.

1955 Studebaker Champion - car-for-sale photos
Studebaker added panoramics partway in to the 1955 model year.

Similar to Chrysler's solution.

1955 Nash Ambassador - photo via Hemmings
Another facelift, but not as strong as Ford's or Packard's -- changes were at the front end, plus the windshield.

1955 Nash Ambassador - car-for-sale photo
Again, a largely vertical A-pillar

1956 Nash Rambler - car-for-sale photos
Rambler was redesigned for 1956, so its panoramic windshield was probably intrinsic to the styling.

From this photo, the pillar is vertical.  But back in the day, I always felt that the A-pillar tilted slightly aft.

1991-96 Chevrolet Caprice Sedan

Because of the 1973 Yom Kippur War and the gasoline shortage it caused, also Federal regulations related to fuel economy, by the late 1970s American "standard size" car models were becoming smaller.  So by the late 1990s, Chevrolet's new Caprice sedans struck me as being almost too large.   Their wheelbase was 115.9 inches (2944 mm) and their length 214.1 inches (5438 mm).  That length was in line with most standard American cars of the 1950-1975 period.

Other B-body cars of that generation at General Motors were the Buick Roadmaster with the same wheelbase, and the longer Cadillac Fleetwood, both higher-priced than the $16,500-$18,500 Caprice (respectively around $23,000 and $34,000).

Ford launched its competing Crown Victoria for the 1992 model year.  That car was almost the same size as the Caprice, and it had similar styling features.  Interestingly, at that time I didn't consider Crown Vics as heavy-looking as Caprices.  A likely reason why can be found in the photo captions below.

Gallery

1991 Chevrolet Caprice Classic - via Car and Driver
Long passenger compartment greenhouse and comparatively short hood and trunk lid.  Also, six windows.

1992 Buick Roadmaster - car-for-sale photo
The Buick version had four windows, a large C-pillar zone, and a less-tapered aft roof profile.

1993 Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham - car-for-sale photo
The wheelbase is 121.5 inches (3086 mm), length 225 inches (5715 mm).  That permitted a more formal greenhouse design.

1992 Ford Crown Victoria - Mecum Auctions photo
The Ford Crown Victoria  is surprisingly similar to the Caprice shown in the image below.  Greenhouses have six windows.  Doors and door post angles are similar.  Ditto frontal profiles and side trim.  I suppose basic dimensions and passenger packaging factors played a part in this similarity, along with wind tunnel test results.  Still, I have to wonder if there wasn't a whiff of industrial espionage going on during development of both designs.

1993 Chevrolet Caprice Classic - BaT Auctions photos
Note how the roof profile flows onto the trunk area.  I think this fairly small detail caused me to consider the design to seem "heavy," despite that huge amount of glass area.

A clean, though not exciting, design as seen from the front quarter.

The roofline flow seen from a normal viewing perspective.  Note how high the trunk lid is and how the flow relates to it.  Some visual heaviness is found here.

High quarter view.  The backlight window is huge -- larger than necessary.  The whole rear area seems heavy-looking, unlike the more conventional Crown Victoria.

What American Cars Had the Tallest 1950s Tail Fins?

I remember Chrysler Corporation publicity that tried to make a functional case for tail fins by presenting images of a Convair jet fighter (either the XF-92 or F-102) and a Gold Cup racing hydroplane, each having triangular vertical tails.

While there indeed might have been enhanced vehicle stability at high speeds due to tail fins, from a practical standpoint, they were mostly a styling gimmick.  I should add that one justification I saw in a car hobbyist magazine when tail fins were new, was that stylists could alter their shapes from one model year to the next to freshen a design.  That indeed happened.

I discussed early tail fins here, including Chrysler Corporation's 1956 models that were a transition from 1955 not-fins to the 1957 redesign that included fins as a prominant, basic feature.

As for the fin fad, it rapidly faded during the early 1960s.

Just for fun, the present post poses the question: Which American cars had the tallest tail fins when the fashion was at its height?

Gallery

1957 Chrysler Saratoga - possible car-for-sale photo
Chryslers and DeSotos had the simple fin design shown here for model year 1957.  The corporation's Plymouths and Dodges featured more elaborate designs.  The high point of the fin appears to be a short, but noticeable, distance above the cowling at the base of the windshield.  (Note that the lower edge of the body is essentially parallel to the lower frame of the image, the car being nose-heavy.)

1958 Studebaker Commander Starlight - car-for-sale photos
An example of another brand's tail fins.  These seem to be a little lower than Chrysler's, though still prominent.

1959 Cadillac Coupe DeVille - car-for-sale photos
There is a Cadillac, the brand that introduced decorative tail fins on its new 1948 design.  The fins seen here are clearly taller than Chrysler's.

1957 Chrysler Saratoga - Barrett-Jackson Auctions photo
Now for some rear-quarter views.  This looks like the Saratoga in the photo above.  The fins appear higher  from this perspective than from the  side view.

Again, the Studebaker's fins are shorter than the Chrysler's.

While the Caddy's fins are clearly the tallest.

1959 Cadillac Eldorado Biarritz - Broad Arrow Auctions photo
Side view of Cadillac fins on a convertible.  In recent years, they have become a cult-object, epitomizing the excesses of 1950s American styling.  That aside, they strike me as being ridiculous, a last-gasp of Harley Earl's declining abilities as GM's styling vice president before he reached mandatory retirement age.

Cadillac's First Tail Fins: 1948-1949

This 1948 Cadillac 62 Convertible car-for-sale photo was used in another post, provoking me to think about those famous, initial tail fins.  They were A Big Deal when they appeared.  A seriously different fender feature.

I was in elementary school then.  Aware of cars and brands, but unsophisticated.  I remember being impressed by a green fastback '48 or '49 Cadillac owned by a doctor who lived up the street from us.  And I recall the add-on tail fins one could buy at an auto parts store for attaching onto one's non-Cadillac. 

Those Cadillac tail fins proved to be a marketing success, even though some important folks in management didn't like what they saw on styling models.  On the other hand, reports I've read suggest that the stylists themselves liked the fins concept since the prewar days when some were taken to the nearby Army Air Corps Selfridge Field to view new P-38 fighters with twin vertical stabilizers.

The Book "Cadillacs of the Forties" by Roy A. Schneider (1976) mentions (p.124) some visual advantages claimed for the tail fins:

"Technically, raising the height or ends of the rear fenders had the visual effect of lowering the upper portion of the body.  Another advantage incumbent to the finned fender was a car that looked longer in  front three-quarter view.  This was true because the full rear fender stayed in sight from any viewing position.  Cars with traditional rear fenders that curved inward toward the rear bumper appeared shorter than they actually were because the lines of the rear fenders tended to fade away when viewed from frontal angles."

I don't buy the cases Schneider makes, though they make logical sense.  In the first place, those early Caddy fins were too small, too short to make the rest of the car seem lower.  Note that their tops were well below of the car's beltline.  Later, larger, higher tail fins could perform that visual trick to a some degree.  As for the other point, one viewing a car from a front quarter, body length is a lesser consideration than front end design.  Length is best appreciated from side-views, where 1948-49 tail fins made the designs slightly shorter visually because they halt the eye as it sweeps from front to rear.

I suppose my problem with early Cadillac tail fins is that they strike me as being too small.  They seem oddly insignificant.  A visual "So what?"  No doubt the profusion of much larger fins, especially on Chrysler Corporation cars starting in 1957, altered my perspective on the matter.

Why were they so successful from a marketing/branding standpoint?  Placing those fins on Cadillacs, GM's luxury/prestige brand, conveyed prestige to the design.  I wonder how they would have been accepted by the car-buying public if they were first given to, say, Pontiacs.

Let's take a further look at fins on various other 1948-49 Cadillac body types.

Gallery

1949 Cadillac 60 Special 4-door sedan - Mecum Auctions photos
Sixty-Specials had longer wheelbases than basic Cadillacs.  On these larger bodies, the fins seem more insignificant.

Here they appear odd.  What are they doing there?

1948 Cadillac 62 4-door sedan - car-for-sale photos
This is the basic 1948 Cadillac.  The trunk profile curves downward enough that the fin acquires a small degree of dominance in side-view.

The chrome strips below the tail lights were found only on 1948 Cadillac model 62s.

1948 Cadillac 62 Club Coupe - RM Sotheby's Auctions photos
Now for the fastback design.

The tail fins seem to work a bit better here because the simplicity of the rest of the rear sets them off, giving them more prominence than otherwise.

1949 Cadillac 62 Coupe de Ville - car-for-sale photos
A high, more squared-off trunk lid offering more capacity was introduced during the 1949 model year.

The tail fins also seem to work better on hardtop coupes than on four-door sedans.  But their perky shape still strikes me as being a bit silly.