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.

Streamlined 1934 Four-Door Rolls-Royce

It seemed like "streamlined" car designs were popping up everywhere around 1934.  Probably the most famous was the '34 Chrysler Corporation Airflow line that had actual wind tunnel input regarding shaping.   Also wind tunnel shaped were the new 1934 Tatra 77s from Czechoslovakia.

Other streamlined cars were "streamlined" in little more than name only.  Today's post considers a spectacular custom-bodied 1934 Rolls-Royce whose general features were in line with streamlining as practiced in England at that time.  I posted about such designs here, and some examples are pictured below.

The featured car is a 1934 Rolls-Royce Phantom II Continental Streamlined Saloon.  It was auctioned a while ago by Gooding, Internet link here.   It notes:

"1934 Olympia Motor Show Car

"Stunning One-Off Streamlined Coachwork by Park Ward Ltd.

"One of Just 281 Phantom II Continentals Built

"Multiple Pebble Beach Concours d’Elegance Awards"

Gallery photos of it are via Gooding.

Gallery

1934 MG PA Airline Coupe - car-for sale photo
Here are some other English "streamlined" cars pictured to put the Rolls design into context.  "Airline" was a term used in the UK during the 1930s that usually meant a car with a production front end and a rear shaped in an aerodynamic motif.  True aerodynamic efficiency required a wind tunnel tested front.

Triumph Gloria Flow Free - at 1934 motor show
This Triumph was longer that the MG show above, so the body shape is more graceful.  The slanted windshield was slightly more aerodynamically efficient than a vertical windshield would have been.  As best I can tell, most Airline type cars were two-door sedans or coupés -- body types better suited than four-door sedans (saloons).

1935 Talbot Airline Saloon - car-for-sale photo
That said, here is an example of an Airline saloon.  Note that the passenger compartment is "close coupled" -- short, so again suitable for 1934-vintage "streamlining."

1934 Rolls-Royce Phantom II Continental Streamlined Saloon by Park Ward - Gooding Auction photos
Now for the Rolls-Royce.  Not close-coupled.  Six-light (window) arrangement.  The front fenders (wings) are a curious combination of a cycle-fender with a tapered extension linked to the running board.  Otherwise, the front end is what one would expect to see on a Rolls-Royce of that vintage.

The fastback profile with the thick D-pillar area and trunk (boot) provides a touch of bulkiness.  But the aft side windows and skillful shaping by Park Ward minimize that.  The thrusting front related to the axle line and cycle-fender treatment act as a counterpoise to the rear.  Aside from those odd extensions to the fenders, this is excellent styling for its time.

The car looks sleek in the quarter-view.  The lack of bumpers helps the design's purity.

Overhead view showing tapered shaping that's in line with what tunnel testing would have suggested.  Note that the rear fender forms echo those from up front.

Another overhead view.  Yes, I could nit-pick more details, but the design is so impressive that I won't bother.

Triumph Renown-Type Saloons

The car pictured above is a Triumph Renown-type car.  There were three series, the 1800, the 2000 and the Renown, but for convenience, I'll just use the term "Renown" in this post.  Some background can be found here.

Renown-type Triumphs were in production 1946-1954, with 15,491 made.  The wheelbase was 108 inches (2,743 mm) for the 1800s, 2000s and Renowns, and 111 inches (2,819 mm) for TDC and limousine versions.

The design is decidedly pre- World War 2, with fancy British coachbuilder style Razor Edge shaping.  For 1949 Triumph introduced the smaller Mayflower, also with Razor Edge features.  Mayflowers were ugly, as I posted here.

On the Renown, Razor Edge didn't work well either, though the car wasn't as ugly as the Mayflower.

Images below are of cars listed for sale.

Gallery

1954 Triumph Renown
General Motors introduced futuristic Oldsmobiles, Buicks and Cadillacs with panoramic (wraparound) windshields for the 1954 model year.

Some sort of character line running front to rear just below the beltline would have reduced some of the visual stubbiness.

Note that the trunk (boot) lid has two handles.

1954 Triumph Renown
The passenger compartment greenhouse is tall, the windows large.  Some coachbuilt British cars had these features earlier, but the general fashion for airy tops didn't kick in until the 1960s and later.

A less-distorted view of the Renown's aft end.

Interiors were upscale, in line with the vintage Razor Edge exteriors.  Plenty of woodwork on and near the dashboard.

And a leathery, British-style interior.  My guess is that the class of the interior was what convinced people to buy Renowns, not so much the exterior styling.

Triumph 1930s Dolomite Roadster

The Triumph Motor Company went into receivership in July 1939.  Then World War 2 intervened, soon halting car production.  In 1940 the Triumph works were destroyed by German bombing.  The Standard Motor Car Company acquired the Triumph name along with a few assets in 1944, leading to the postwar TR sports cars many of us are aware of.

Triumph's last major gasp while independent was the Dolomite line (Wikipedia entry here).  Technically, the line appeared in 1934, but consisted of only three cars.  Main production was 1937-1939, with a few leftovers sold in 1940.  There was a range of Dolomite types, including coupés, roadsters, drop-head coupés and even saloons (sedans).  Today's post features the Dolomite Roadster, or Roadster-Coupé, as it has also been called.

As for styling, Dolomites featured a flashy grille theme that was briefly in fashion in the USA around 1936, and was far from typical English design conservatism.  I posted "Triumph Dolomites Wearing a Hudson Fencer's Mask" here.  The grille design was by Walter Belgrove.

Gallery

1938 Triumph Dolomite Roadster - Brightwells Auction photos
Yes, it does remind one of a 1936 Hudson.


Behind the seat is what appears to be a high, generous-size trunk (boot), but isn't.  Note the arrow design of the hood air vents -- suggesting speed, I suppose, even though Dolomites could not reach 80 miles (130 km) per hour.


But the hight is what was needed for a rumble seat (dickey, in the UK).  Note the open fold-down dickey step abaft of the door.  Not very welcoming for women wearing dresses in those days.

1939 Triumph Dolomite Roadster - car-for-sale photos
Front end.  The grille design too complex for the space allowed for it.


The dashboard, cockpit and dickey seat.

All Dolomites were built on 110-inch (2794 mm) wheelbases.  A more serious sports car would have had a shorter wheelbase and no dickey seat -- therefore a shorter trunk zone.  Other British sporty cars such as the postwar Sunbeam Alpine had similarly inappropriate proportions due to being based on saloon chassis'.

The spare tire sits behind the dickey seat.  As best I can tell, trunk access is either via it or the dickey seat, there being no other obvious cutlines.

1938 Triumph Dolomite Roadster-Coupe - Bonhams Auctions photo

Here's a view of a Dolomite Roadster with its top attached -- not raised.

Triumph TR2 and TR3

By the mid-1950s, British sports cars were selling well in the USA.  As I recall it, the price/prestige hierarchy in ascending order was: MG, Triumph, Austin-Healey, Jaguar.

Triumph's first model was the TR2 produced 1953-1955, followed by the TR3 (1955-1962).  I previously wrote about the TR2 in 2014.  Today's post provides more analytical detail.

I never liked the styling of those cars, and was pleased when the redesigned (by Giovanni Michelotti) TR4 emerged in the early 1960s.  Even so, TR2s and 3s were popular thanks to their peppy performance.

In the images below I try to show why I wasn't a TR2/3 fan.

Gallery

1952 MG TD - car-for-sale photo
This was the most popular imported British sports car when the TR2 was designed by Walter Belgrove.  The roadster style featuring cut-down doors was sometimes seen on pre- World War 2 cars, but was mostly found on MG T-series sports cars from 1936 through 1955.

1954 Triumph TR2 - car-for-sale photo
TR2s also had cut-down doors, and the cut was more drastic than on MGs.  So drastic that TR2/3s seemed to be almost chopped in two.  Compare the low-points of the beltlines on this car and the one above to their cowling heights.  The ratio of this cut length to the cowling distance from the lower body edge on the MG is around one-third, whereas on the TR2 it's about one-half.  The rear fender's leading curve pushes close to the cut.  This and the trunk (boot) creates a massive element adjoining the deepest part of the cut, emphasizing the effect of the body being essentially separated front and rear parts.  That is, seemingly "chopped in two."

1953c. Triumph TR2 - publicity photo
Another styling problem is the frontal design, especially the radiator opening where the grille is a grid mounted far inboard.  I suppose functionality purists might defend this, but I think it's ugly.  Those bug-eye headlight assemblies don't enhance the car's appearance either, but were probably inescapable given the front fenderline curve and American headlight height regulations.

1954 Triumph TR2 - car-for-sale photo set
Now for a brief walkaround.  The top edge of the cut-down door is slightly padded, providing an armrest for the driver.  Disregarding that "functionality," a higher front fenderline or beltline would have improved the car's looks.

A final look at TR2 front end styling.

1959 Triumph TR3 - BaT Auctions photo
The TR3 front was mildly facelifted from the TR2.  The conventionally-placed grille is an improvement aided by slight reshaping of its sheetmetal framing.  This should have been used on TR2s.  I suspect it wasn't because the TR2 was a marketing gamble and its front was cheaper to build.

Gallery of English "Airline" Designs

Around the mid-1930s there was a British styling fad known as the "Airline" body.  Typically, these cars were two-door coupés or saloons (sedans) with rounded rear profiles that suggested streamlining.   Given that front ends were normally strictly stock and aerodynamically messy, those rear ends did little or nothing to improve aerodynamic efficiency.  That said, they are interesting to look at, and serve as counterbalances to normal, conservative British car design examples from before, say, the 1950s.

I discussed Airline design using a particularly nicely-styled example here.

The cars shown in profile below are arranged in ascending price-prestige order.  Exceptions are the final two, which are of special interest.

Gallery

c.1933 Hillman Aero Minx 2-3 Seat Saloon - unknown photo source
A tiny car based on a popular model.  Besides the rounded profile, there are no running boards.

1935 Hillman Aero Minx Cresta Saloon - car-for-sale photo
This four-passenger version has a "pillarless" window arrangement that resembles post- World War 2 "hardtop convertible" styling.  Except the after side window does not roll down, being in effect part of the body structure.

1936 MG PB Airline Coupé - Sussex Sports Cars photo
A two-passenger Airline.

1937 Talbot 10 "Airline" Sport Saloon - Anglia Car Auctions photo
Another "pilarless" Airline.

1935 SS1 20HP Airline Coupé - Bonhams Auctions photo
SS was the predecessor of the Jaguar, whose brand-name appeared on what had been SS cars during 1935, but apparently after this one was built.  A four-passenger car, but with a normal B-pillar.

1935 Rolls-Royce 2-Door Airline Coupé by Barker - Jonathan Wood Restorations photo
A very attractive Airline design.  Note the fashionable drooping beltline also seen on the Minx Cresta and SS1 above.  In each instance, the beltline curve is abaft of the door, as is the roof curve..

Triumph Gloria Flow-free - at 1934 motor show
This is the design I featured in the post linked above.

1935 Talbot 105 Airline 4-Door Saloon - car-for-sale photo
A dramatic design with four doors, not the usual Airline two-doors.

Triumph's 1800/2000 Roadster: Not a Total Failure

Standard Motor Company's managing director Captain John Black supplied motors to Jaguar and its predecessor SS Cars since the beginning, and for a short while after World War 2.  By the end of the 1930s it was clear that Jaguar was becoming more a competitor than a client.  So Standard bought the ruins of the Triumph firm in 1944 with the idea of using the brand with its sporting image to provide sporty cars to help compete with Jaguar in that market segment.

The German bombing of Coventry, England in 1940 destroyed Triumph's facilities along with much else in the city.  So postwar Triumphs had to start from scratch, using motors and other material from Standard.

Besides a sedan (saloon), a Triumph sports car line was planned -- what became the Triumph Roadster, the subject of this post.

Postwar United Kingdom was in a bad way economically, and the socialist government rationed carmaking materials based on the cars' export potential, so as to bring home (especially) U.S. dollars.  Black clearly had his eye on the export market when the Roadster was developed.  Yet the production Roadster was far more English than American.

Given that Triumph 1800 Roadster production started in 1946, the ability of the American market to absorb English sports cars was unknown.  As it happened, the MG TC that entered production in 1945, sold well, despite having right-hand steering along with many prewar English details carried over from the TA and TB models.  This was unknown in 1945 while the Roadster was under development; in retrospect Black's gamble was reasonable despite the low sales of British sports cars in the USA prewar.

What the Roadster was likely not, was intended competition for the famous Jaguar XK120 sports car that did not enter production until 1948.  Perhaps car industry scuttlebutt gave Standard hints of the coming XK, but by the time it was introduced, the Roadster was on its way out.

Nevertheless, it's interesting to compare the two cars because they were in the same general market segment.

Production: 4,501 Roadsters made 1946-1949; XK120s (1948-1954),  open 7,606, drop-head 1,767 -- total 9,373 (fixed-head Jaguars not counted because Triumph did not use that body style).  On a per- production year basis: Triumph 1,125, and XK120 1,339.  Not a large difference considering the reputations of the two cars.

The link above notes that the Roadster was wide, providing three-abreast seating that required a non-sporty steering column-mounted gear shift lever.  This contributed to the Roadster's chunky overall appearance.  But note: its wheelbase was 100 inches (2540 mm), width 64 inches (1626 mm), and the XK120s wheelbase was 102 inches (2591 mm, width 61.5 inches (1562 mm).   Not great differences.   Where the Jagiar shined was its performance due to its new, powerful inline-six cylinder engine that made it one of the fastest production cars in the world at the time.  Meanwhile, Triumph Roadster top speeds were less than 80 miles per hour (about 130 KPH).

In many ways, the Triumph 1800 and 2000 Roadsters were attractive cars in the late-1930s context.  They were styled by Frank Callaby.

Gallery

1948 Triumph 2000 Roadster - HandH Auctions photos
Front fenders are bulbous.  I've always been fond of grilles being set at or behind the front axle line (I blame that on 1936 Cord 810s).

The trunk zone is large, heavy-looking.

That's because it houses what the British call a "dickey" seat ("rumble seat" in Yank talk).  Prewar Triumph Dolomite roadsters had this feature, and it was carried over to this design.  There's even a raisable windscreen, something seldom or never seen on 1920s and '30s American cars.  The spare tire is mounted on the after lid.  I'm not sure where luggage space might be.

Profile view with the dickey open.

1949 Triumph 2000 Roadster - HandH Auctions
General view with the top raised.  Though the front fenders are large, the engine compartment is narrow -- an interesting contrast.

1948 Triumph 1800 Roadster - for-sale-car photos
Now for a scaled-down walkaround.  The supports for those wonderfully-large English headlights are a bit crude-looking.

A nice, low look.  The wide, flat windshield has three wipers.

That high aft area spoils the design.

The front fenders look fine from this perspective.  I don't consider their shape a defect, though their size might be.

That dickey seat is the real problem.  It wasn't something most potential American buyers wanted or needed.  It added to the price of the car, something that usually hinders sales volumes.  The lack of trunk space was another item Americans wouldn't much like.  As for styling, lower, more tapered rear fenders echoing the front fender shape, along with a trunk lid profile to essentially match, would have made the Roadster a much more attractive and successful car.