1979 Chrysler New Yorker and Newport

Chrysler's Corporation-rescuing K-platform cars appeared in model year 1981.  At that time, Chrysler was in bad financial shape, its pre-K model portfolio out of synch with buyers' needs at a time when gasoline shortages and emergency engineering fixes due to new government regulations were creating chaos and uncertainty for product planners.  Today's post deals with new, full-size Chrysler models caught in this maelstrom and found wanting.

Featured are the 1979-1981 Chrysler New Yorker and Newport, both sharing the same basic body.  These transitional models did not sell well.  New Yorker production was 74,701 -- 54,640 in 1979.  Newport's pattern was similar: 75,402 overall and 60,404 the first year.

(Wheelbases of the brand's line-topping New Yorker model decreased from 124 inches (3150 mm) in 1978 to 118.5 inches (3010 mm) in 1979, reaching the low point of 103.3 inches (2624 mm) on 1983 K-platform versions.)

Regarding styling, these Chrysler designs carried over 1970s styling features such as angularity and tall passenger compartment greenhouses onto a shorter, yet still substantial, wheelbase noted above.

Gallery

1979 Chrysler Newport - factory publicity image
1970s rectangularity can be found on the front of this Newport.  The quad headlights are rectangular.  So are the turn-signal lights below them.  The grille framing is nearly so, while all the grille bars form rectangles.

1979 Chrysler New Yorker Fifth Avenue - factory publicity image
The more upscale New Yorker's front also is rectangular, but less obviously so.  In part, that's due to the hooded headlights.  The grille is in the same place as the Newport's, but the effect is a carryover of Chrysler's Imperial brand's grilles from 1974-75.  (The Imperial brand was on hiatus 1976-1980, so New Yorkers took over some of the glory.)

1979 Chrysler Newport - BaT Auctions photos
Very 1970s.  A clean design lacking character.  Note the vinyl covering the non-glass areas of the passenger compartment greenhouse.

1979 Chrysler New Yorker Fifth Avenue - Carlisle Auctions photos
The fussy greenhouse detailing adds a touch of "character" to the basic design, while detracting aesthetically.

Of course, I like long hoods.  Note the two-part glass in the after side window -- the forward pane retracts.

Here the two-part glazing divider is covered by vinyl that's only found at the after part of the greenhouse.  This padding creates an opera window effect, something found on a number of 1970s American cars.

More rectangles at the rear.

The vinyl also encroaches on the backlight window.

GM's 1986 Short-Wheelbase Upscale Sporty Coupes and a Seville

The title of this post is somewhat misleading because it ignores a large chunk of content.  There's a larger picture here, namely that General Motors did some downsizing of the featured models for the previous (before 1986) 1979 redesign.

What are those "Upscale Sporty Coupes" noted in the headline?  I'm referring to the 1966-67 generation of the Oldsmobile Toronado, Buick Riviera, and Cadillac Eldorado that shared the same body platform.  (Though this was not the case for 1971-1978 redesigns that had platform and wheelbase differences.)  I wrote about 1966-67 here in a post titled "A High Point in Platform-Based Brand Styling Variation."  As for the 1986 model year redesigns, I touched on that in my post "Sorta Sporting Siblings for 1986 by Cadillac, Oldsmobile and Buick" here.

My motivation for writing the present post was the fact that the 1986-generation Cadillac Seville sedan shared those coupes' new 108-inch (2743 mm) wheelbase.  (Previous-generation  coupes and Sevilles had a 114-inch (2896 mm) wheelbase, part of a GM-wide downsizing.  One result was lower sales levels for Seville.  Another was the 1992 Seville redesign using a longer wheelbase of 111 inches (2819 mm) that saw increased sales levels.

As for the coupes' futures, the Toronado was discontinued after its 1986-1992 model year run.  The Riviera also was dropped, but reappeared 1995-1999 on a 113.8-inch (2891 mm) wheelbase.  Eldorados were continued for model years 1992-2002, but with the 108-inch wheelbase.

Images below are left-side views of those models over the two design generations discussed above.  Plus a 1992 short-wheelbase Eldorado.  Unless noted, images are of for-sale cars.

Gallery

1979 Oldsmobile Toronado Brougham - photo via Hemmings
Door cutlines and passenger compartment profiles (including the blanked C/corner panels) are the same for all the '79 models.  Here the wheel openings are rounded, and the door sculpting aligns with fore (almost) and aft side sculpting. 

1979 Buick Riviera S
Side trim is relegated to rocker panels.  The fenderline subtly curves in homage to previous post-1962 Rivieras.

1979 Cadillac Eldorado Biarritz
Side sculpting is positioned about the same as on the Toronado.  Wheel openings are not round -- a carryover from earlier Eldorados.

1986 Oldsmobile Toronado Brougham
The reduced wheelbase yields a Toronado that does not seem like a Toronado.  Which is likely why sales were only around half those of the 1979 generation, resulting in the model being dropped from Oldsmobiles's portfolio.

1986 Buick Riviera - unidentified photo source
The fenderline barely hints at a flow.  Sales levels collapsed even more than Toronado's.

1986 Cadillac Eldorado - unidentified photo source
The long-established Eldorado image is contradicted by this small vehicle.  The styling of all three of these '86 generation coupes isn't bad, but not product market image-appropriate.  Here too, Eldorado sales were generally less than half of those of the 1979 generation.

1986 Cadillac Seville Elegant
Cadillac already had a seriously short 101.2-inch (3570 mm) wheelbase in its 1982+ entry-level Cimarron.  They did not sell well despite being priced about half that of Sevilles.  But the stubby 1986 generation Sevilles, like the Eldorados, sold about half as well as those of the previous (1980) generation.

1992 Cadillac Eldorado - BaT Auctions photo
Although General Motors and other American carmakers needed to downsize their products starting in the late 1970s, GM clearly overshot the reduction for its 1986 generation of upscale sporty cars, as production data reveal.  Yet for some reason the 1992 Cadillac Eldorado generation seems to be a heavily facelifted 1986-generation design.  Unsurprisingly, sales volumes remained in the same reduced range.

1938 Packard Eight (One-Twenty) and Its Competition

I wrote about Packard's initial (1935) model One-Twenty design here, stating:

"America's most popular luxury brand in the early 1930s was Packard.  By 1933 it was suffering from reduced sales so much that for model year 1935 it launched a model for the upper-middle price range, the One-Twenty.  It was a sales success, probably saving the company, which then continued on into the mid-1950s."

The 1935 inline eight cylinder 120 was Packard's entry-level line.  For 1937, the 6-cylinder Packard Six was introduced as the entry point.  Model year 1938 saw new bodies for those models.  The Packard Six retained its name, while the 120 became the Packard Eight.  (But the Eight became the One-Twenty again for 1939, and the Six was renamed Packard One-Ten for 1940.)

The Wikipedia entry for the One-Twenty is here.

By the late 1930s there were comparatively few remaining upscale American automobile brands.  The early 1930s saw the disappearance of Marmon, Franklin, and Stutz.  By 1938 Auburn, Cord, Duesenberg, and Reo were gone.  Other carmakers had rethought market placement of their models.  So the number of 1938 competitors for the Packard Eight is less than for the 1935 One-Twenty that I featured in the post linked above.

Unless noted, images below are of cars listed for sale on the Internet.

Gallery

1938 Packard Eight Touring Sedan
What we see here is mainline mid-late 1930s American sedan styling abaft of the cowling/A-pillar.  The hood/grille design is standard 1930s Packard, while the front fenders are generic mid-late 1930s.  The hood ornament is inappropriate for this restored car.

1938 LaSalle 50
Facelifted 1937 design.  Little character difference from the Eight on the after part of this body, though windows are larger and less-rounded.

1938 Buick Century Touring Sedan - Gallery Aaldering photo
The same can be said for this other General Motors model.

1938 Lincoln Zephyr
Zephyrs, launch for 1936, featured stronger "streamlining" shaping and details.  Front ends were facelifted for 1938.

1938 Chrysler Imperial Touring Sedan - Barrett-Jackson photo
Facelift of a 1937 design.

1938 Packard Eight Touring Sedan
Side-view comparison to the Buick Century.

1938 Buick Century Touring Sedan - Gallery Aaldering
By the late 1930s, GM was clearly the American styling leader, so the Packard Eight and Buick Century 4-door sedans resemble one another fairly closely.

1938 Packard Eight Touring Sedan
Note the two-pane backlight window and the shape of the trunk compared to the Buick below.

1938 Buick Century Touring Sedan - Gallery Aaldering
Also a two-pane backlight.  The trunk is larger, but in the same spirit.  Door hinge positions are virtually the same on both cars.
To summarize, Packard's 1938 redesign was in line with that of its strongest competition (Buick and LaSalle).  However, those brands received airier, crispier, passenger compartment greenhouse styling for 1939, making the Eight's/120's more rounded tops and windows a little old-fashioned.

1998 Ford Crown Victoria Facelift: From 6 to 4 Windows

Ford Motor Company launched new designs for Ford and Mercury on its body-on-frame, rear-wheel drive, senior sedans for model year 1992.  These were the Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis.

The Crown Victoria continued the six-window treatment found on the successful 1986 Ford Taurus, whereas the Grand Marquis had a four-window passenger compartment greenhouse.

In 1992 the base price for both cars was around $3800, even though Mercury was traditionally a more upscale brand than Ford.  And the models sold at around the same levels prior to their 1998 facelifts.  When preparations were made for the facelifts, Crown Victorias were given Grand Marquis 4-window greenhouses.  Post-facelift, Grand Marquis' consistently outsold Crown Victorias.

The only conclusion I can draw, lacking much information beyond the production numbers cited in the first two links above, is that Ford's economy move to reduce styling differences for production efficiencies likely disenchanted potential buyers who preferred a 6-window configuration.

For what little it's worth, I like the 4-widow design better than the 6-window version.

Gallery

1992 Ford Crown Victoria - factory photo
The redesigned Crown Victoria.  A cue carried over from the initial Taurus design is the "floating" Ford Blue Oval on the car's front.  Another, of course, is the six-window greenhouse.

1998 Ford Crown Victoria - factory photo
The four-window facelifted version.  The front features a new, prominent grille, and larger light assemblies.

1992 Ford Crown Victoria - car-for-sale photo

1998 Ford Crown Victoria - Cars and Bids Auctions photo
It's hard to see in this photo, but the side sculpting between the wheel openings seems unchanged.  Besides the greenhouse changes, the main differences are at the front and rear.  Lengths are essentially identical.

1992 Ford Crown Victoria - Mecum Auctions photo
The trunk lid and rear fender form curves slightly downwards while the tail light assemblies echo the framing of the frontal light assemblies.

1998 Ford Crown Victoria - factory photo
The trunk profile is raised and taillight assemblies feature a different theme while the license plate has moved from the bumper to the trunk lid..

1998 Mercury Grand Marquis - Cars and Bids Auctions
The equivalent Mercury has essentially the same tail lights.  Side sculpting is simpler.

1992 Mercury Grand Marquis - BaT Auctions photo
The original 4-window Grand Marquis styling.  Rear sculpting and tail lights are similar to the contemporary Crown Victoria.

Triumph Spitfire Walkaround

I discussed Triumph Spitfire styling in considerable detail here.  So today's post mainly offers more views of a first-generation Spitfire for your enjoyment.

Points I made in that post include:

"English sports cars were popular in America from the late 1940s through the 1960s and even a few years beyond.  They came in a variety of sizes, capabilities and price points, the latter including entry-level machines.  Up through the mid-1950s, the MG was considered entry-level.  But the marque began to creep upscale, so in the early 1960s the tiny Austin-Healey Sprite and MG Midget were introduced.  In 1965, Triumph, maker of standard size TR-series sports cars, brought its smaller Spitfire to the market."

"The hood (bonnet) is as low as the motor allows, in this case dropping below the fender line.  Front and rear fenderlines (wings) are distinct, with the latter represented by an upkick as well as a delimiting crease and bulge to the fore.  The grille area is nondescript, and the use of body paint on the windshield frame makes that item heavier and more old-fashioned looking than nececssary."

"All-in-all, a nice design for a car that was a little too small for its own good."

The Spitfire was styled by noted designer Giovanni Michelotti, who did a good deal of other work for Triumph.

Photos below of a 1964 Spitfire are via Bonhams.

Gallery

The front fenders and hood area are integral, pivoting from the bumper -- note the horizontal cutline aft of the front wheel opening.

I think Spitfires look best from the side.

Bumpers are massive, perhaps compensating for the gap between them.

I noted in my previous Spitfire post that the tail lights look tacked-on, perhaps being sourced from a different design.

The slanted crease at the front part of the rear fender is an unusual touch.  It marks the start of the puffed-out fender.  Yet it's distinctive and fairly subtle, Michelotti doing his professional job.

Not an impressive grille.  Perhaps because the lower front end is the hood-body pivot point, simplicity and possible weight considerations were in play.

A central instrument cluster as a low-cost necessity for left-side steering in North America, the Continent and elsewhere.  More expensive cars would have dashboard designs that "flipped" depending on market destination.

General Motors' 1950-Only C-Body Four-Door Fastback Sedan

"Fastback" designs where car roofs smoothly curved downwards toward the rear bumper were commonly found on American cars during the 1940s with some overlap at each end of that decade.  The last such fastbacks were 1952 model year Plymouth Concords and Chevrolet Fleetlines.  These were two-door models.  The last four-door fastbacks were 1951 Fleetline Chevrolets.

Those Chevrolet and Pontiac fastback models were built on General Motors' A-body platform.  GM also produced fastbacks on other platforms, the last of these being 1950 models using what I recently labeled the "lesser C-body."  These were variations of the GM C-body introduced for 1950 that were intended for use on Cadillacs and larger Buicks.

The so-called lesser version might also be called the "interim B-body."  It seems to have been called the B-body at GM at the time it was developed.  Yet it in practice served as a bridge between the previous B-body line and a new B-body introduced for 1951 and produced through 1953.  Most of those lesser or interim B-body cars appeared during the 1950 model year, followed by a few in 1951 and none thereafter, as best I can tell.

Cars using that temporary platform were Buick Specials (1950 model year only, and by far the most numerous produced), Cadillac model 61s (phased out during 1951), and Oldsmobile 98s for models years 1950 and 1951.  Fastback versions were offered for Buick and Oldsmobile, but not Cadillac.  And no fastbacks with that body were marketed for the 1951 model year.

General Motors' four-door fastback production for 1950 was 75,427 of which 73,035 were Buick Specials; only 1,778 were Olds 98s.

The Buick images below are of a for-sale car.  The Oldsmobile photos are via Mecum Auctions.

Gallery

1950 Buick Special Jetback 4-door sedan
1950 Buick grilles are famous (well, infamous for many observers) for those bars draping over the bumper.  I know they're kinda silly, but when I was a school-age kid I didn't mind them much.

Most '50 Specials had a fairly bold chrome bar along most of the side, positioned slightly above the rear wheel opening.  This entry-level model lacks it, but its appearance isn't degraded.

The backlight window is positioned high due to the effort to maximize trunk size.  Notchback designs were more practical in terms of both trunk capacity and driver rearward visibility, so they prevailed over fastbacks.

1950 Oldsmobile Ninety-Eight Town Sedan
The same basic car, of course, but with Olds 98 details.

This car is set lower to the ground than normal.

1958 Studebaker Silver Hawk Walkaround

Today's subject car is featured due to availability of a fine set of car-for-sale photos via Connors Motorcar Company.  The car itself might be described as a watered-down version of a classic design -- the 1953 Studebaker Starliner hardtop coupe created by Bob Bourke and his team under Raymond Loewy's direction.

I previously dealt with first-series Studebaker Hawks here.  Since then, many more good quality photo sets showing for-sale and auctioned cars have appeared on the Internet, including the one shown in the Gallery below.

The 1956 facelifted Studebaker coupes were given "Hawk" names.  This naming was revised for 1957 when the number of coupe models was reduced from four to two.  The newly named Golden Hawks were "hardtop" pillarless models, whereas Silver Hawks had B-pillars.  Those B-pillars made the overall design less pleasing, as will be explained below.

Wikipedia's take on the Silver Hawk is here.  Silver Hawks were marketed model years 1957-1959. Today's featured car is quite similar to the 1957 models, but its tail fin chrome accent is not as attractive as for 1959.  Sadly, available photos (as of October 2024) of '59 Silver Hawks lack the quality of the set shown below.

Thanks largely to their side trim, 1957-58 Silver Hawks were the least-attractive of all "Loewy coupes" aside from the unfortunate 1955 versions.  That said, they still were reasonably nice-looking cars.

Gallery

The most noteworthy feature of the 1956 Studebaker coupe facelift was the (then) unusual, seemingly old-fashioned tall grille opening.  The flanking openings echo the openings on 1953 Studebakers.

Thanks mostly to Chrysler Corporation, tail fins became the American styling fashion of the second half of the 1950s.  The mid-decade fad was wraparound (Panoramic) windshields, but fortunately, Studebaker coupes never received them.

Chrysler Corporation cars got modest tail fins on facelifted 1956 models, and imposing ones for their 1957 redesign.  Studebaker Hawks were in synch with Chrysler for 1957, as can be seen here.

The trunk lid redesign first appeared on 1956 Hawks.

Golden Hawks were given more attractive side and tail fin trim, as can be seen in the first link above.  The long chrome strip with the auxiliary strip along the fin shown here make logical sense, but not aesthetic sense.  The two-toning on the side of the fin emphasizes this; single-tone Silver Hawks looked somewhat better.

As for the effect of the B-pillar, its relation to the zone abaft of it is the problem.  Visual business is created.  That quarter-window plus C-pillar zone is narrow, and the B-pillar adds too much visual weight.  Which is why pillarless Hawks look more attractive.

Since I mentioned the 1959 Silver Hawk above, here is a photo (via Hagerty).  Note the better chrome treatment by the tail fin and elsewhere along the side.