Early 1950s Chrysler Imperials

Chrysler's Imperial line never settled into a marketplace groove.  For many years, it was simply a Chrysler model, albeit at the top of the line.  At other times it was a separate marque.  In terms of styling, some model years the main exterior difference between a Chrysler Imperial and a New Yorker or Saratoga was its model nameplate -- at other times the cars were visually distinctive.

This post deals with Chrysler Imperials during the first half of the 1950s.  During those five model years their appearance evolved from near-identical to distinctive, this largely driven by the plan to make Imperial a separate Chrysler Corporation division for 1955.

Gallery

Chryslers for 1950.  The upper photo shows a Chrysler Imperial sedan, the lower one a Chrysler New Yorker hardtop.  Their trim is identical in almost every respect.

All Chrysler Corporations cars shared the same body platform for 1949-1952, and for model year 1951 their hood prows were all rounded off.  It was at this point that Imperials became visually distinctive compared to other Chryslers.  The 1951 Chrysler Imperial in the upper photo has a different grille than the Windsor in the lower image.  Also, it lacks a chromed spear over the front fender and door. Plus, the rear fender rock guard has a different shape.  The Windsor photo is a common one on the internet ... no obvious source.  It is possible that the car is a 1952 model, as changes between '51 and '52 were minimal, perhaps related to Korean War induced shortages.

These are a 1952 Chrysler Imperial and a 1952 Chrysler Saratoga (for sale photo).  As mentioned in the previous caption, 1951 and 1952 models looked nearly the same.

The entire Chrysler Corporation line was redesigned for 1953, Chryslers and DeSotos sharing one body, Plymouths and Dodges another.  The Imperial in the first photo appears to have retained the front end from 1952, starting at the cowl, changing only the hood ornament.  The comparison car in the lower image is a 1953 Chrysler New Yorker Newport.

Chrysler Imperials for 1954 were given a new grille plus mid-fender side trim extending abaft of the wheel openings onto the front doors.  The lower image is a publicity photo (cropped) showing a 1954 Chrysler New Yorker Newport hardtop that also got a new grille and side trim.

Richard Howard Stout's Fascinating Article on 1950 GM B and C Bodies

A magazine I truly loved, especially when Michael Lamm edited it, was Special-Interest Autos, published by the Hemmings organization.   Here on the Hemmings web site is a complete index of SIA articles, some of which have links, and other do not.

Those that are linked are where the Hemmings Daily posts SIA Flashbacks.  This is a fine feature since SIA is long gone, yet its content is often pure gold for automobile history buffs.  One article yet to appear on the Internet is from SIA #39 titled "Body Politics" by Richard Howard Stout.  The title seems a bit misleading because it goes into great detail regarding how General Motors B and C body elements in the early 1950s could be arranged and rearranged to yield designs with different impacts.  I found this fascinating, and I think it should be of great interest to readers of this blog.  Especially helpful are the fine illustrations by Harry Bradley.

By the mid-1950s Stout was working at Ford Motor Company and created presentation material largely like that in the article.  It opened management eyes to ways of making better use of body resources.  A byproduct of this revelation (that's what it was) was aiding people who were pushing a concept that resulted in the Edsel brand.

A big problem for me is that, even though the article appeared more than 40 years ago, it is surely still under copyright.  Yet due to its importance (as I see it) I'll risk presenting scans of it below in the hope that Hemmings will see fit to post their own, better scans on their site in the near future.

Be aware that if Hemmings asks me to delete this post, I will do so.

The images below can be enlarged, but the scan quality is such that the text can be hard to read in places.

Gallery

2017 Honda Civic: Return (to the USA) of the Hatchback

For some reasons, hatchback (or five-door) cars have never sold well in America.  That feature never bothered me, having owned a 1973 Volkswagen Dasher and a 1984 Civic Hatchback, so I have trouble understanding why it bothered many other car buyers.

Nowadays, crossover SUVs seem to be the hottest market segment in the US, which implies that lift-up back doors are acceptable.  Perhaps for that reason and possibly because Honda Civics share the same platform worldwide, Honda is now importing Civic Hatchbacks from England.  That last detail makes economic sense.  Hatchbacks sell well in Europe, so the production line in Swindon is justified for that reason alone, and additional production sold in American becomes icing on the cake, even if sales here are not huge.

And what of its styling?

Gallery

The Civic Hatch in this photo has an aggressive design.  Note the black spokes on the wheels and the low-profile tires.  Then there are those apparent air scoops below the headlights.  And of course there is plenty of the current fashion for overdone, angular detailing on body panels and ornamentation.

Zig-zag angularity is especially evident in the zone that includes the C-pillar and taillight assembly.  Three distinct angular features here are (1) the sheet metal at the rear of the side window ensemble, (2) the leading part of the taillight assembly, and (3) the rear door aft cut line.  All snuggled together along with a door handle and fuel access door to heighten the clutter.

Rear over-decoration is evident in this view.  Honda stylists made a strong effort in the area of line-continuation, something almost always helpful in tying design elements together visually.  Here the pains they took are overwhelmed by the number of elements they had to deal with.  There is simply too much happening. It's too intense.  Changes of visual pace are needed here.  A place to start might be to disassociate the busy aero-bar running across the backlight from the taillight assemblies.

The front view reveals that those massive air intakes below the headlights, such as can be found on high-performance cars, are bogus.  They actually are largely flat panels with raised areas that mimic grilles.  If you look closely at the left-hand panel you will see what seems to be a small hole to the right of the running light -- so a little air might get through.  The sweep of the headlight assemblies and connecting material is yet another example of an automobile industry styling fad.

The rear has what are supposed to be massive air outlets styled similarly to the faux intakes up front.  This photo clearly shows that they are purely decorative, not at all functional.  Form follows fad, it seems.

Chrysler Sebring and Dodge Avenger: Last Pairing

Chrysler Sebring and Dodge Avenger were model names assigned to American compact-type cars during the period 1995-2014.   They shared platforms to some degree 1995-2000 and totally for their last versions: 2007-2010 for the Sebring and 2008-2014 for the Avenger.  For more details on their histories, click here for the Sebring and here for the Avenger.

Despite the sports car racing suggestion the word "Sebring" offers and the dramatic tone of the word "Avenger," neither brand amounted to much more than ordinary transportation in the versions featured in this post.  (An earlier Sebring model was popular because it was a convertible, something hard to find in its day.)

The 2007-10 Sebring and 2008-14 Avenger are interesting due to the considerable effort expended in making the sedans different even though they shared the same basic unit body.  The Avenger sold reasonably well, averaging some 75,000 units per model year.  The Sebring's quirky styling was probably the reason its sales were less, about 58,000 per year and on a much shorter production run, though price might have been a consideration.

Gallery

Front 3/4 views, the Sebring in silver, the Avenger in red.  Similarities include the shape of the roofs and windshields, the door cuts lines, hood slopes, and front overhang.  The Dodge has large lips on its wheel openings, not to mention expected grille differences.  The Sebring's sides are comparatively flat.  An odd feature is the inverse ribbing on its hood.

The identical door cut lines are clearly visible in these two photos.  The Avenger has a distinct rear fender whereas the Sebring's fender line rises relentlessly towards the rear.  For some reason its rear overhang (and trunk space) is less than the Avenger's.  The Avenger's side window profile is more conventional and thereby perhaps more pleasing than the Sebring's more harsh, faux- Euro-functional version.

Seen from the rear, the Avenger's larger trunk is obvious.  And, as suggested in the previous caption, the Sebring seems like a modernized version of 1930 theory-dictated styling.  The problem centers on the sheet metal in the C-pillar area.  Its curve that echoes the roof profile does not work well with the stubby trunk.

Complete Re-Designs ... or Major Facelifts?

Sharp-eyed reader "emjayjay" questioned in a comment to this post my assertion that 2011 Chrysler 300s were a facelift of the 300 series introduced for the 2005 model year.  I responded that I hadn't noticed that the 2011 model was a new design at the time, though a current Wikipedia entry notes that it was.  Troubled, I thought it worthwhile to delve further into the matter of 2011 Chryslers as well as another facelift controversy -- the 1955 Ford (and by extension, Mercury, that I won't deal with here because both brands had similar basic bodies that were updated in a similar way for 1955).  This post is my present take on the matter of facelifts that are so major that they seem to be complete redesigns.

Chrysler line 1939:

A couple of years ago I posted about the 1939 Chrysler Corporation models that (aside from Plymouth) appeared to be a redesign but seemed to me to probably be a major facelift.  I haven't changed my position on that, so you might link to that post, treating it as an introduction or companion piece to the present one.

Ford 1955:

For many years I thought that 1955 Fords were new designs: they certainly looked different from 1954 models.  But in recent years I've noticed some claims that the '55s were actually major facelifts.  For example, the current Wikipedia entry states (as of when the current post was drafted) that "The American Ford line of cars gained a new body for 1955 to keep up with surging Chevrolet, although it remained similar to the 1952 Ford underneath."  But the How Stuff Works site states: "Retaining the 1952-54 shell, the 1955 Ford was completely reskinned, emerging colorful if chromey, with a rakish look of motion and a modestly wrapped windshield."

Sort of a toss-up here, so I present images and an analysis below.

Chrysler 300 2011:

Now for the 2011 Chrysler controversy.

Motor Trend magazine published this "First Test" of the 2011 300 that reads more like a Chrysler press release than a critical evaluation.  It implies that the car is a new design.

Car and Driver magazine, on the other hand, held that the 300 was actually a facelifted 2005 model.  Here it stated: "Chrysler had to deal with that whole bankruptcy thing, and so the 2011 300 received more of a thorough face lift than the total overhaul for which it was due."  And here it added: "And as much as the 300 might have looked like Chrysler’s chef-d’oeuvre in 2004, the company couldn’t just sit back and let it be. For 2011, the 300 receives a refresh rather than the redesign for which it is due, but the update addresses the most important things."

In addition, Consumer Reports asserts here that "Chrysler's flagship, the 300C, is muscular and luxurious. An extensive freshening has made this cruiser a lot more competitive than before."

And finally, Popular Mechanics' review mentioned: "With ambitious refinement targets (the Lexus LS460 among them), the new Chrysler 300 required all-new sheet metal and suspension components."

These items tend to confirm my memory that 2011 300s were facelifed 2005s.  Certainly their appearance suggested that.

Let's look at some photos.

Gallery

First is a "for sale" photo of a 1954 4-door Ford followed by a Barrett-Jackson photo of a 1956 Ford 4-door that has post-market wheels ('56 Fords were lightly facelifted '55s).  The window shapes aside from the wraparound windshield on the '55 are the same, as are the door cut lines, door handle locations, and the beltline.  The front door forward cut line distance from the wheel hub confirms that the cowling is in the same position -- a key indicator of continuity.  Also, the 1955's wheelbase is essentially the same as the '54's (0.5 inches longer, a little more than one centimeter).

These views of two-door Fords help confirm that 1955 Fords were heavily facelifted 1954s.

Here are side views of a 2008 Chrysler 300 (top) and a 2011 model, the '08 being essentially the same as the 2005 version.  Again, the cowling positions, door cut lines, aft window shapes, and gas filler doors are essentially the same.  Aside from all the new sheet metal, the main difference related to body structure has to do with the windshield.  The 2005-2010 Chrysler 300s had a fairly narrow windshield in the spirit of 1948 Hudsons.  A major problem was that this reduced visibility for the driver.  For example, sometimes stoplights would be obscured.  I know this because I owned a 2005 300.  So for 2011 the windshield was enlarged and its slope increased so as to improve visibility and aerodynamic efficiency.  Note that the windshields on both cars shown here are based on the same cowling position.  The differences are in the merger of the windshield and the roof and in the shape of the front window.

For the purposes of this blog, I consider continuity of body structural elements (cowlings, door posts, etc.) as the key factor dictating that any appearance changes from model year to model year can be considered facelifts, whether minor or major.  Therefore, until I learn otherwise from body engineers, the 1939 Dodges, DeSotos and Chryslers, and 1955 Fords and Mercurys, and 2011 Chryslers (and Dodges using the same body) -- represent major facelifts and not new designs.

Up Close: 1936 Bugatti Type 57SC Atlantic

Above is the cover of a 1956 Trend Books, Inc. paperback publication.  Trend Books was part of R.E. Petersen's growing automobile-interest empire that began with Hot Rod magazine and added Motor Trend magazine a few years later, hence the word "Trend."  The writer, Robert J. Gottlieb, was a Los Angeles area attorney who had a popular monthly column in Motor Trend devoted to "classic" cars as defined by the Classic Car Club of America in those days (definitions have evolved since then).

I strongly suspect that the car featured on the cover, a Bugatti Type 57SC Atlantic, was unknown to most American car fans under age 30 or 35 in 1956.  It must have been a revelation (though the same photo, cropped and in smudgy black and white, was buried near the end of a 1953 paperback from Petersen: "Classic Cars and Antiques").  More background on Atlantics, including an explanation for all those visible rivets and details of the three surviving cars, can be found here.

I have viewed both surviving 57SC cars ("C" designated the supercharged version).  One was at Pebble Beach where Ralph Lauren displayed his car.  Ralph stood near it dressed in a natty dark blue blazer.  A few years later I saw Ralph at Pebble helping his crew push his Alfa Romeo 8C 2900 to a different location.  Ralph is a real car mensch.

The car on the cover pictured above, now meticulously restored, will be on view until 13 January 2018 at the Petersen Automotive Museum in Los Angeles along with a host of other Bugattis (details here).

The extremely rare and extremely valuable 1936 Atlantic is owned by Peter Mullin and others in the form of an organization named Atlantic LLC.  It normally resides in the Mullin Automotive Museum (its web page dealing with the Atlantic is here).

As for the Atlantic's design, I cannot call it beautiful.  Instead, I find it astonishing ... in a highly positive sense.  Other descriptive words I can easily apply to it are exciting, dramatic, and fascinating.

Below are photos I took of it at the Petersen museum earlier this year.

Gallery

Side view.  The diver's head position is about 3/4 of the distance from the front to the rear and the firewall/cowling is about halfway between the ends.  The radiator/grille is classically positioned close to the front axle line.

High-end French cars in the 1930s usually were right-hand drive even though in France cars drove on the right sides of streets and roads.  The flanges and rivets were needed because the bodywork metal alloy could not be welded.

Note the contrast between the teardrop fender and the sharp-edged hood.

At least one Atlantic -- perhaps Ralph's -- had a front bumper for a while.  The grille is not a classic Bugatti horseshoe: other Type 57s also featured the pointed bottom profile seen here.

The Atlantic's dramatic sculpted forms are most evident towards the rear.

The museum's lighting was quirky, as is often the case.  However, it worked to my advantage here.

From the other side.  The dramatic integrative sculpting of the fenders and trunk is offset and perhaps heightened by the riveted flange extending over the top of the car.  Designing an attractive/practical rear bumper would have been impossible even for Jean Bugatti in 1935 or 36.  However, one Atlantic had a crude, temporary rear bumper for a while, apparently to make it street-legal.

Aft view.  The rounded trunk lid was functional.  Its latch is by the bottom edge.

Detail of the trunk latch.  Very simple to open or close.  Using two fingers grasping the little arms extending from the U-shaped bracket, the bracket is lifted from one notch on the flange/spine and dropped into the other notch close by on the other side of the flange's cut.

Chrysler's 2003 Airflite Concept

The 2003 Airflite concept car from Chrysler was not a thinly disguised version of a future production model.  But a number of its styling details did appear on Chrysler products.

Wikipedia's take on the Airflite is here, and here is a link whose text strikes me as being taken directly from a Chrysler press release.

The Airflite was a four-door sedan without a full-height B-pillar.  In America 1955-1976, we called them "four-door hardtops," "pillarless sedans," "hardtop sedans" and perhaps a few other titles.  But they did poorly in roll-over tests and disappeared from production lines nearly 30 years before the Airflite.  So to that degree, the Airflite was car-show jazz.

Gallery

General view of the Airflite.  I think the wheels are a little too large -- yet another show car feature.

The front end "smile" theme, including the inverse ribbing effect on the hood was picked up by the Chrysler Crossfire and Chrysler Sebring pictured in some images below.

This side view shows the low, long greenhouse.  It's long because it transitions into a fastback.  It also makes the front end seem stubbier than it is.  The Airflite is actually a five-door or hatchback car: note the roof cut line at the C-pillar.

The hatchback cuts are clearly seen in this rear view.  The opening is wide at fender-top level, but narrow at the rear.  Potential buyers of a production Airflite might consider this a demerit.

The side sculpting also carried over to some degree on the Crossfire and Sebring.  The pointed rear of the window profile can be considered logical design, but it bothers me for a reason that I can't yet explain.  In any case, it isn't functional in terms of the rear door cutline and the roll-down window's aft edge.

The fastback aspect.  The roof treatment works best from this point of view.  Note the crease in the backlight glass, part of a crease extending over the roof down to the rear strike panel.  It's one feature I like.

The Chrysler Crossfire appeared about the same time as the Airflite, so it's a slight stretch to claim that the Airflite "predicted" the Crossfire.  Both cars have essentially the same windshield.  The hood and "face" have similar detailing.

The Crossfire also has fastback styling, but all its details differ from the Airflite's.

The 2007-2010 Chrysler Sebring used several Airflite features.  Like the Crossfire, the it has the Airflite facial theme.  Side sculpting is from the Airflite, as is the general treatment of the greenhouse.  However, the Sebring has a slight notchback, and this does not integrate well with the C-pillar area design.  The sense it provides me is that the car seems more industrial than automotive, something that applies to the Airflite as well.