Project Nightingale Concept by Rolls-Royce

In mid-April 2026, Rolls-Royce announced a program of limited-production specialty cars for presumably discriminating buyers.  A roadster concept car was revealed.

In principle, I rather like the idea.  It harkens back to the 1920s and 1930s when luxury cars were given special bodies -- usually one-off custom designs.

Rolls-Royce's public relations web presentation includes the following:

"Still in its concept phase, Project Nightingale’s aesthetic is grounded in the belief that the most exquisite design emerges from precision, where function and form are inseparable.

Project Nightingale also draws inspiration from Rolls-Royce's red-badged 'EX' experimental prototypes of the 1920s — particularly 16EX and 17EX — some of the rarest
and most desirable motor cars in Rolls-Royce’s history.

These foundations informed Project Nightingale's three core principles."

"Coachbuild Collection unites a true coachbuilt motor car and an extraordinary multi-year programme of experiences.

The clients invited to join this remarkable programme have a special affinity with the brand.  As collectors of one-of-a-kind opportunities, they will be granted rare access to the innermost design studios within Rolls-Royce and gather for events in the world’s most desirable destinations."

"As the most exclusive division of Bespoke, Coachbuild is the automotive equivalent of haute couture. The invitation-only service offers individuals of extraordinary achievement, culture, and vision to craft an entirely original motor car — and stake claim in the marque’s legendary history."

That said, let's take a look at the associated concept car, along with my commentary.  I need to note that it's electricity-powered (or intended to be so, if that car isn't functional).  I think that is not a good idea, given the problems inherent with that technology.  But seriously rich buyers might not mind, because they would have other, more practical cars available.

Photos below are via Rolls-Royce, colors adjusted my me.

Gallery

The grille is similar to Rolls grilles of the past decade or so.  The vertical lights on the fender fronts are in the spirit of current Cadillac and Kia designs -- not unique.

The profile is in the same spirit as recent Roll sedans.  Note the "suicide" door hinging.

For some reason (Teslas?), electric car styling by many carmakers tends to be simpler than styling of conventionally-powered equivalents.  Same story here.

Concept cars often lack bumpers because those could interfere with the intended visual concepts presented.  This car does have bumpers, but they seem too puny for everyday protection.  A front bumper that's a bit more forward of the grille might work.

But the tapered rear bodywork seems at some risk, given the bumper seen here.

Cockpit view.  Instrumentation is hard to detect.  Maybe it's all in an electronic screen that's not activated in this image.

Renault Dauphine Walkaround

In the late 1950s, Americans became more accepting of small (by our standards) foreign cars.  British sports cars were appearing in noticeable numbers by the early '50s in Washington State, where I grew up.  By mid-decade, Volkswagen Beetles were on the scene, later supported by clever advertising.  So other marques decided to enter that expanding, potentially huge, automobile market.

One such entry was Renault, at the time owned by the French government.  Its car was the Dauphine, produced 1956-1967.  At first, Dauphines sold fairly well, buyers perhaps thinking they were a more modern, and therefore better, car than the VW.  Sadly for Renault, Dauphines proved to be under-powered and unreliable under American driving conditions and sales collapsed.  They sold better elsewhere, hence the long production run.

I wrote about the Dauphine here.  The post includes some French publicity photos.

The first link above notes that Dauphine's styling was derived from that of the Renault Frégate, produced 1950-1961.  Comparative side-views are presented below, along with a Dauphine walkaround set.

Gallery

Renault Frégate - photo via zorblogauto
Frégates had the conventional engine-front, drive wheels rear, layout.  The wheelbase was 110.2 inches (2800 mm).

1959 Renault Dauphine - BaT Auctions photo
The Dauphine's wheelbase was 89.3 inches (2267 mm), its motor and driving wheels at the rear, á la VW Beetle.  Aside from the backlight window and some door cut-lines, the passenger compartment closely resembles that of the Frégate.  Perhaps some components were shared.

1962 Renault Dauphine - Bilweb Auctions photo set
A rather awkward-looking design, not uncommon for Renault.

The side air intake for the radiator aligns with the aft door cutline, a useful simplification.

Additional air vents are at the rear.

The engine hood has some sculpting, and the profiles of those air vents have curved shaping.  I think that such a small car would have justified a slightly narrower, more rectangular, shape for the vents, relating better to the aft hood cutline.

By today's standards, the car seems too narrow.  But more width would have required more weight and more engine power, lifting the car from its intended market segment.

The passenger compartment greenhouse seems bulky due to its heavy window framing.  But that was probably the best Renault could do in terms of sheet metal forming at the time the Frégate was developed (late 1940s).

The lack of a front radiator grille made for a bland design -- a limitation of today's electricity-powered cars.

Like the rear engine compartment hood, the frontal trunk lid has some central sculpting.  The bumper is shaped to conform to maximal European license plate shapes.

Dashboard view.

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.

Lincoln's Rare 1942 Convertibles: Basic and Continental

The 7 December 1941 Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor triggered the entry of the United States into World War 2.  Domestic automobile production ceased before the following March, making model year 1942 a drastically shortened one.  For example, Ford Motor Company's Lincoln built only 327 convertible coupes, 191 of which were basic Lincoln-Zephyrs, the remaining 136 were classic Lincoln Continentals.

Today's post compares the Zephyr and Continental convertibles.   The Wikipedia entry for Lincoln-Zephyr is here, that for the Continental is here.

Both models were built on 125 inch (3175 mm) wheelbases, but Continental's proportions differed, as can be seen in the Gallery.  The Zephyr convertible's list price was $2150, Continental's was $3000.  So the Continental was 40 percent more expensive than the Zephyr alternative.  Put another way, a Zephyr convertible could be had for 72 percent of the price of a Continental.

Lincoln-Zephyrs, launched for model year 1936, were redesigned for 1940, and the '40 design was given a significant facelift for 1942.  When car production resumed after the war ended, 1942 styling was retained until the 1949 redesign.  With one major exception: grille bars were completely revised, making '42 Lincolns distinctive as well as rare.  I wrote about the 1942 Lincoln facelift here.

The Lincoln-Zephyr images are via BaT Auctions.  Lincoln Continental photos are from Mecum Auctions -- likely the same car, but via publicity for different auctions.

Gallery

1942 Lincoln-Zephyr Convertible Coupe
Showing the new, wide, grille design promoted by Ford's styling chief Bob Gregorie, who later felt that it made the rest of the car seem a bit diminished (see my link above).

1942 Lincoln Continental Cabriolet
The Continental is lower, but doesn't seem much different from the Zephyr at first glance from this perspective.

Now differences show up.  A minor instance: the door and lower body sides flow over the running board, a very early-1940s American thing.  The Continental's running boards are tucked in below the doors and body sides: no flow.

The Continental's passenger compartment is shifted aft of the Zephyr's.  The result is a long hood and longer front fenders.  The hood and beltline are slightly lower, creating a more elegant appearance.

Greatest differences are at the rear.  Here we find a rounded trunk lid related to previous Zephyr practice, and contrasting the new, more angular front.  The rear fenders were redesigned for 1942, largely in the form of the raised tail light assemblies.  This is another contrast that seems a trifle odd given its juxtaposition with the nearby trunk.

Rear fenders are shared with the Zephyr, but the rest of the car's back end is standard Continental design.

Ferrari Luce: Electric Sedan for 2027

Ferrari's recently announced Luce electric sedan (Wikipedia entry here) has generated a lot of controversy.  Criticism centers on the idea that its styling is bland, not at all Ferrari-like.  Some observers thought the car could ruin the brand's reputation.

This post is my initial take on the Luce (Italian for "light," though there are some other connotations).

I need to state that I've never been much of a Ferrari fan.  I respect the brand.  But like other exotic, expensive, high-performance brands, I can't seem to relate to it.  My favorite Ferrari models from a styling standpoint are almost entirely from the 1950s.

Perhaps that might make my analysis more objective than that from a Ferrari true believer.  Well, I hope so, though I too have biases.

One complaint regarding Luce styling is that the designers,  Jony Ive and Marc Newsome, are basically industrial designers lacking automobile design experience.  Newsome did design the odd, toy-like 1999 Ford 021C concept car, but that's all, aside from the Luce.  Ive is best known for his work at Apple.  This lack of experience does not guarantee failure, though designs by industry outsiders have tended to be unsatisfactory.

Luce styling follows the general electric vehicle (EV) theme characterized by simple forms lacking sculpting and decorative brightwork.  Nothing intrinsically wrong with that, given the styling fashion in recent decades for complicated details on wind tunnel formed basic shapes.

One complaint (that I share) is that Ferraris should not be EVs.  Ferrari, at its core, is V-12.

Another deviation from the Ferrari norm is that the Luce is a four-door, four-seat sedan.  That in itself potentially means that its design could not be Ferrari-like because Ferrari has been a sedan-free brand.  As it happened, Ferrari did start building four-door, four-seat cars in 2023.  The model is called the Purosangue (Italian for "pureblood").  Its Wikipedia entry is here.

Ferrari.com's Purosangue page stated (as of June, 2026):

"The Ferrari Purosangue is the first ever four-door, four-seater car in Ferrari’s history, but models with two rear seats have played a significant role in the company’s strategy since the very beginning.  Now, in the culmination of 75 years of leading-edge research, Ferrari has created a unique car and the encapsulation of the Prancing Horse’s DNA, where performance, driving pleasure and comfort coexist in perfect harmony.  And that’s why this new model was called Ferrari Purosangue – Italian for thoroughbred."

So a brief comparison with the Luce follows at the end of the Gallery below, where images are via Ferrari.

Gallery

EVs often seem odd because they lack the radiator-grille car-face mouth required by conventionally powered cars.  Here, the black areas above and below the front bumper strike band mimic conventional air intakes.  There's little inherently wrong with the design aside from not evoking Ferrari's image.  The basic fault is that the shape is too soft.  Were the sculpting enhanced even moderately, the design would be improved, its themes (such as they are) enhanced.

I'm guessing that the black thing abaft of the front wheel opening is an opening to exhaust hot air from the front wheel brake.  Rear styling is simple.  I notice no chrome trim whatsoever.

Simple, flowing shapes.  But even the red paint and yellow fender crest do not make this a convincing Ferrari.  Put some Auto Union linked rings at the front, and this could be a nice, sporty Audi EV.

As mentioned, sedans are traditionally foreign to Ferrari, which might be a subtle factor in the criticism leveled against the design -- basic proportions are not of the sports car or GT sort.  It's hard to see here, but the aft cutline of the rear side door drops vertically from a point slightly abaft of the leading edge of the C-pillar.

2023 Ferrari Purosangue
Here is Ferrari's other 4-door, 4-seat model.  Its wheelbase is only 2.2 inches (57 mm) longer than the Luce's, so side-view comparisons are fair.  I could easily be wrong, but the Luce appears to be based on a basic body structure similar to the Purosangue's.  Note the side window upper profile, the B-pillars.  Clearly major proportional differences, due to the V-12 motor up front on the Purosangue, creating an aggressive, Ferrari-like stance.  But the need to economize tooling costs might have led to the noted similarities.