The 1949 American Luxury Car Scene: Which to Buy?

The post- World War 2 "seller's market" was ending, and American carmakers were launching new designs at the end of the 1940s.

Just for fun, let's pretend it's 1949 and that we're shopping for a 4-door sedan in the luxury market sector.  Also, that our main selection criterion is styling.  Pictured below are examples of the cars competing for our money.

Gallery

1949 Cadillac 62 - car-for-sale photos
Cadillacs got redesigned bodies for the 1948 model year.  The main styling change for '49 was a new, bolder grille design.  Cadillac shared its basic body with Buick Supers and Roadmasters as well as Oldsmobile 98s.  Under the hood was a totally new V-8 motor.

1949 Chrysler New Yorker - factory photo
Redesigned Chryslers didn't appear in showrooms until partway into the 1949 model year.  The basic body was shared by all four Chrysler divisions.  New Yorkers featured a longer hood and front end than lesser brands such as Dodge and Plymouth.

1949 Lincoln Cosmopolitan - Barrett-Jackson Auctions photos
The Cosmopolitans body was shared with no other Ford Motors Company cars -- not even a lower-priced Lincoln line (that used the same body as Mercurys).  The design here is rather massive, influenced to some degree by prewar concepts of "streamlining."

1948 Packard Custom Eight - car-for-sale photos
I don't have good images of 1949 Packard Custom Eights, but the 1948 version looked essentially the same.  Unlike the postwar designs pictured above, 1948-1950 Packards were heavily facelifted Packard Clippers whose styling first appeared in 1941.  Aside from convertibles, 1949 Packards have tended to be little appreciated for their looks.  The Custom Eight was the top of Packard's line -- other Packards being sub-luxury.

1949 Cadillac 62
Ah, the famous Cadillac tail fins in their original form!  From today's perspective, they don't seem like much.  But in 1949-1950 they were marketing magic -- one could even buy aftermarket fins to attach to your Chevrolet.

1949 Chrysler New Yorker - car-for-sale photo
Chrysler's design is often characterized as "boxy."  Practical, in a number of ways including passenger comfort, but not graceful or exciting.  Country Club parking lot valets would give New Yorkers a yawn while waiting for the next Cadillac to show up.

1949 Lincoln Cosmopolitan
Not a bad design, but it had to wait until its 1951 facelift for it to reach its limited potential.

1948 Packard Custom Eight
What ruined the facelift of 1947 Clippers was the new fenderline.  It gave the car awkwardly massive sides that did not match well with the passenger compartment greenhouse.
Which car would I have bought, given its styling?  Cadillac, of course.  Not an exceptional design.  But competently done, as Harley Earl's designs usually were in those days.  The competing designs all had defects that tended to negate any positive styling features.

Citroën DS 19 Walkaround

The article "The Citroën DS 19: Why It's the Ultimate Classic Car" in the Wall Street Journal's 1 May 2015 issue, has the subhead "The Citroën DS is technically unsurpassed, completely inimitable, has a great back story and is the most beautiful car of all time, writes Dan Neil."  Dan Neil was the Journal's automobile columnist.

Me?  I remember when I first read about the DS 19, probably in Road&Track, my go-to car magazine in those days, I thought the design was weird.  Okay, I was young then.  Inexperienced.  But nowadays?   I still do not like the DS 19 design.

The Wikipedia entry on the DS is here.  In 2013 I posted "Flaminio Bertoni of Citroën: Not a Bertone," link here.  Bertoni was in charge of Citroën styling when the DS was designed.  His Wikipedia entry in English is here, while the more comprehanesive French version is here.

In that post I wrote:

"The DS is harder for me to pin down.   I can appreciate it intellectually, but was never fond of the styling.   The defects are related to what stylists call the "greenhouse," the windows-and-roof area.  To me, it always seemed too spindly, insubstantial -- that due to the thin door posts.   At a more general level, this wispy upper area contrasted too greatly with the rather thick, heavy lower body, thereby destroying unity of the whole.  The brake lights at the rear of the roof also struck me as being too contrived a solution to a fairly minor potential problem."

Putting brake lights high is a potential safety factor.  For many years here in the States car regulations require a supplemental brake light mounted high.  But are they actually brake lights as I thought when writing that earlier post?  An image below shows the lenses as amber color -- so more likely, they're turn-indicator lights.  Regardless of function, it's just that their design on the DS looks tacked-on, not integral, as you'll see below.

As for that wispy, insubstantial greenhouse mentioned in the quotation above, indeed the structure seems to be sketchy.  There's an image below dealing with that.

Gallery images of a 1958 Citroën DS 19 are via Bring a Trailer Auctions.

Gallery

The contrast between the greenhouse and lower body is evident here.  The latter is proportionally low, especially for the 1950s.  Side sculpting amounts to a crease: no chrome aside from the trim on the rocker panel, and that was absent from many early DS 19s.  The front fenders are high, probably due to headlight height regulations.  They quickly fade away on the front doors.

I don't have a source for this phantom view.  Note that the roof support pillars are topped by a metal ring.  The roof itself, according to a DS 19 brochure: "reinforced plastic roof confers strength and rigidity."  I do not know if DS 19s were rollover-tested before regular production was launched.  But I suspect that they would not meet current safety standards.

Bertoni's preliminary sketches indicate that he was interested in creating a somewhat airfoil-like profile.  Subject, of course, to engineering and packaging considerations.  I suppose the front fenders have a peak located above the front axle line, but it's a pretty subtle peak.  A little more curve would be nice.

Like the Citroën Traction-avants, the roofline and beltlines fall off towards the rear -- a French thing for many years.  Also perhaps an airfoil suggestion.

The lower rear end detailing is cluttered, unlike most of the rest of the car.

Note how the roof-mounted turn-indicator light seems tacked-on, not integral.  The conical housing is the main problem here.

The beltline blends into the rear fender profile.  That large C-pillar is necessary for the transition to the curved backlight window.  Though a six-window scheme also could have worked. 

Frontal design, unlike the rear, is simple.

The most commented-on item when DS 19s first appeared was the one-spoke steering wheel.

Four-Door British "Airline" Sedans

I posted "Gallery of English 'Airline' Designs" here, presenting examples of fastback (or at least rounded) aft end profiles applied to basic 1930s production cars.   The idea was that those less-angular rear ends offered streamlining -- improved aerodynamic efficiency.  In practice, since old-style front ends were essentially retained, such improvement was probably minimal.  Basically, it was a styling fad.

The majority of British "Airline" cars were two-door models, though I did discuss the 4-door 1935 Clémont-Talbot 105 Airline Saloon here, and the 1938 Riley 16/4 2.5-litre Kestrel Blue Streak Six-Light here.

Today's post presents a larger collection of four-door Airline designs.

Gallery

1936 Riley Kestrel Six-Light Saloon - HandH Auctions photo
Given the need for rear doors and headroom for back-seat passengers, 4-door Airlines were seldom as sleek as many of the 2-door variety.  That said, another factor was wheelbase; short-wheelbase 2-door Airlines also lacked sleekness.  Rileys were sporty cars, hence the long hood seen here.  But the passenger compartment was fairly compact and set aft, so the car's profile is smoothly curved, but not what I consider sleek.  The term "six-light" is the British version of "six-window" in American.

1938c. Standard Flying Twenty - publicity image
Mid-1930s 4-door British and French sedans tended to feature beltlines that fell off towards the rear.  Details varied, as can be seen in the image collection here.  The only exception is the Rover shown three images below.

1935 Talbot (British) Airline Saloon - car-for-sale photo
As mentioned above, I dealt with this car in a previous post.  Back seat headroom seems limited, but results in the sleekest profile shown.

1937 British Salmson by Whittingham & Mitchell - publicity image
Another British offshoot of a French brand.  This is the one side view I could find. This car has the most vertical aft profile of the set pictured here.

1934 Rover Speed 14 Streamline "Coupé" - Bonhams photo
Marketed as a "Coupé, the body type is what I would call a close-coupled sedan.  The reason for that curious "coupé" designation was that Rover also offered a 14 Streamline Saloon.  It had a boxier body than the Coupé's, but at least featured a rounded aft profile.  Details: this car is a "four-light," whereas the saloon was a "six-light."

1935 Bentley 3.5 Litre Aerodynamic Saloon by Rippon Brothers - Bonhams
Another "four-light" design.  Falling-off beltline yields a large rear-door window.  The aft profile is a subtle S-curve, adding a touch more sleekness.

1934 Rolls-Royce Phantom II Continental Streamlined Saloon by Park Ward - Gooding photo
Long wheelbase, considerable sleekness on this early (1934) Airline-type design.  Magnificent.  I wrote about it here.

1955 Packard 400 Hardtop Coupe Walkaround

Packards were restyled for model year 1951, allowing "pillarless" hardtop coupes to be added to the line.   Through model year 1954 they were based on Packard's shorter 122-inch (3099 mm) wheelbase.   For 1955, the Packard line was massively facelifted.  Clipper hardtops retained that wheelbase, but a hardtop line was added to the longer, 127-inch (3226 mm) wheelbase used on the more luxurious Cavalier and Patrician 4-door sedans.

Those longer hardtops were called Packard 400s (Wikipedia entry here).  This might have been somewhat confusing because, for model years 1951-52, the label 400 was applied only to Packard's top-of-the-line sedan, not to hardtops.

Those 1955 400 hardtop coupes were impressive cars.  So is the set of images below of a '55 Packard 400 hardtop coupe listed for sale.  They were found on Hemmings web site.

Gallery

1953 Packard Mayfair - car-for-sale photo
An earlier hardtop coupe based on the shorter wheelbase.  The design below was a massive facelift.

1955 Packard 400 photo set
In order to keep up with American car styling fashions, the main structural difference was the panoramic (wraparound) windshield.  The front end was restyled with a less-massive grille.  The rear fender has a more squared-off leading edge.  Plus the wide, ribbed chrome swath from the front wheel opening to the rear fender.  Result: a new personality for Packard.

The rear fender is pretty massive, but that chrome swath and two-tone paint scheme distracts the eye from it.

Taillight housings were called "cathedral" by some observers.  A better solution than seen on 1951-54 senior Packards.

The shapely trunk lid was retained.

Fenestration is conventional early 1950s American.  Unchanged from previous Packards: looks good.

A handsome design by styling director Dick Teague who later led American Motors' styling.

The upper side chrome strip blends into the upper grille frame.  Headlights assemblies also relate to that.  Very professional touches.

Headlight housings also have that cathedral touch.  The upper grille frame and hood sculpting are modernized versions of traditional Packard themes.

Dashboard / instrument panel.  I find this the least-successful feature.  The brightwork looks like it could cause annoying light reflections.  That V or checkmark at the right helps fill space, but seems silly.  I would have simply extended the lower frame from the center to the right edge.  And used a different, non-reflecting material.

1961 Dodge Dart Seneca Sedan Walkaround

My post "Dodge's Odd 1961 Facelift" featured hardtop coupes.  Now I'm following up with a walkaround of a 1961 Dodge Dart Seneca sedan.  I selected this base-model Dart because it has almost no ornamentation.  That lets us see the basic body shaping better.

In the post linked above, I noted:

"It seems that Chrysler Corporation's sales were not going well.  The highly successful 1957 line with its prominent tailfin theme was becoming stale in the eyes of potential buyers.  The corporation's 1960 line was based on unit-body construction, replacing traditional body-on-frame assembly.  This made drastic facelifting more difficult and costly than before."

The facelift involved the front end (hood, front fenders, gille, headlight assemblies, etc.) and rear (revised tailfins, trunk lid, etc.).  The passenger compartment zone was essentially untouched, as it was most affected by expensive-to-retool unit body construction.

The basic body was shared with various Chrysler models, and an example is provided below.

Gallery

1962 Chrysler Newport - Mecum Auctions photo
Model year 1962 saw the disappearance of tailfins on most Chrysler Corporation cars.  This image shows the basic body's design essentially at its best for 4-door sedans following the cleanup of the styling shown in the walkaround below.

1961 Dodge Dart Seneca - car-for-sale photo set.
Yes, that paint color (or something close to it) was available for Dodges in 1961.  As I mentioned in the post linked above, "But that taut, hood / front fender shaping for 1960 was reduced to a flabby frontal theme for '61.  The front fender line is soft, having no character.  The concave grille also lacks character, though 1962 Plymouths featured similar shaping.  Those little horizontal slots along the upper and lower framing of the Dodge grille might be echoes of similar shapes on early 1950s Dodge grilles -- though that link's probably way too subtle for most folks, I suspect."

1961 was still a tailfin model year for Chrysler Corporation.  In the previous post, I noted: "Besides the flabby front end, we find that the tailfin profile has been reversed, the high point being forward instead of aft.  That reduces the fin's prominence.  But now the fin seems odd because it has no aerodynamic stability functionality.  It's simply an odd shape."

The trunk lid folds under in conjunction with the after ends of the tailfins.

Tail lights are set low, squeezed between the fold mentioned above and the bumper.

Side from the end pieces, the rear bumper doesn't seem to offer much protection for the sheet metal.

In summary, the front end seems too soft and the fin seems unnecessary.

A better view of those slots that remind me of early-1950s Dodge grilles.

A visually busy dashboard.  Egonomically, there seems to be too many similar buttons and dials placed too closely together. 

1949 Small Lincoln in Context

For model years 1949-1951 Ford Motor Company's Lincoln brand featured two separate body platforms. Topping the Lincoln line was the Cosmopolitan series that I wrote about here.  The lesser Lincoln, which had no modifying name, shared the body of Ford's mid-range Mercury brand.  It's the subject of today's post, and its Wikipedia entry is here.

For model years 1949 and 1951, the smaller Lincoln slightly out-sold the Cosmopolitans.  And for 1950, their sales advantage was larger.  Cosmopolitans had comparatively strong sales despite being priced around 20 percent more than the basic Lincolns.  That suggests that those basic, EL-type Lincolns might have been perceived as being simply fancy Mercurys -- which to some degree they were.  Or as an inexpensive means of buying a real Lincoln -- also likely true.

There are far more online images of Cosmopolitans than small Lincolns, another reflection of how the latter were perceived: few have been preserved.  But I found enough photos for the Gallery below.

Unless noted, images below are of for-sale cars.

Gallery

1949 Lincoln
Introductory view.  All images here are of four-door sedans for comparative purposes.

1949 Lincoln
Side view.  Compare to the Mercury image below.

1949 Mercury
Seen from the side, Mercurys and small Lincolns are nearly identical.  The most visible difference is the placement of the long chrome strip.  

1949 Lincoln
Rear-quarter view.  Compare to the Lincoln Cosmopolitan image below.

1949 Lincoln Cosmopolitan
Although bodies are different, both Lincoln types shared the same taillight and trunk handle designs.

1949 Lincoln - factory photo
Comparing front end designs ...

1949 Lincoln Cosmopolitan - factory photo
Despite the different bodies, frontal designs appear to be identical.

1950 Lincoln
Mercurys and small Lincolns had rear ends facelifted for 1951
in the same manner.  Here are comparative images.

1951 Lincoln
The backlight window is enlarged and reshaped.  Rear fenders are lengthened to provide more of a "squared-off" side profile, anticipating the boxy 1952 redesign.

1951 Mercury Coupe
Not a 4-door sedan, but it's the aft end treatment that matters.  The bumpers differ, but the placement of other features such as the trunk lid latch and tail light assemblies are the same, saving Ford some tooling costs.