Car design is harder than I had thought... help please

This Monte picture is the correct one. John mentioned the tire to fender clearance. This is more about the amount of space between the outside surface of the tire when pointed straight ahead to the fender. Fisher Body had a real issue with ensuring that there was all sorts of clearance for chains and lots of manufacturing tolerance. Try to visualize a cross section of this body in the front fender area and then where the tires sit. Look at the door to the window body and then where the seats are. Grotesque surfaces and why the designers cringed but 1.5 mil sales. 1.5 mil, that is monster money for the corporation on what is a modified Chevelle (A body) platform. $$$$$ profit.

The other car you show is the Chrysler Cordoba. My opinion on this one is different from yours. Maybe not an all time greatest but a really good iteration for the Monte/Grand Prix/Cordoba/Cougar/Thunderbird market segment.

Jeff

 

there was huge unnecesary clearances on cars of that era, makes for fitting mags & new tires fun, along with some lowering (bell spindles do well)

i don't dislike the cordoba (unlike the later ones) but just not quite as good as the monte IMO ...they sure where boats in that era

here's a good vid i found with some designers discussing the attributes of the new bentley continental coupe (not just an ad fluff) ...seen it up close, and does look great IMO ...still some very german (audi) touch in the exterior design, but i do like it

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKFhJS4ceuE&feature=relmfu[/ame]

 

Kip said the 2 Rotor was himself & Dick Finegan........along with Mr. Mitchell of course

 

Those cars were done in Studio X in the basement and not the regular Production Studio. It was Mitchell's way of doing projects out of the limelight and away from curious eyes,both within Design,and outside the Design Center.

Have not heard any stories about trying to productionize or resurrect the 4 Rotor.It's usually on display at the Heritage Center,or on the Corvette Show Circuit.By the time they made all the provisions for safety,etc,I doubt that much of the original intent would be left........but,maybe the basic theme itself. 40 year old theme.....I don't think so.

 

You aren't kidding about investment numbers.Today the number is between $1-1.5 Billion to bring a car into production with a new architecture,drivelines,etc. Those kinds of numbers certainly call for some rational decision making


The fender vent & surrounding sheetmetal was a manufacturing triumph for the team.The stamping guys said there was no way that shape could be formed without tearing the metal,and we were adamant that there HAD to be a hole in the fender to let heat escape,otherwise it was just decoration.We went around and around for almost a year working with the stamping engineers to get that to happen.In the end,they did it,and were so proud .
When the car was shown at the '07 NAIAS,at the end of a very long day,there was a large entourage of executives from a well known German car company.At the head of the pack was the well known CEO.So he stopped at the CTS display,while we were standing in the background,and proceeded to tell his minions in German (I was with a German PR guy that was translating for me) that there was no way that fender could be sheetmetal,that it had to be plastic. Of course,I chuckled at the time. The group left and about 15 minutes later,another group of German engineers came by and in their most stealthy way traced the vent with a piece of paper. Made my day !
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

John,

What I meant to convey was that within the last couple of years there have been articles written that claim that the 4-rotor was to be the next Corvettte, mid engine and all, back in the day. The stories are saying that the project was killed for GM funding reasons. In all of my time back then, and even from Mark, no one was ever saying that the 4-rotor or its rework into the Aerovette was ever anything but a show car.

Jeff

 

I think the 4 Rotor was always the poster child for doing a mid-engined Vette till the Indy Vette came into being.But I personally never heard that there was any serious consideration for production.There was always that glimmer of hope that a mid-engined Vette would eventually happen,and the 4 Rotor/AeroVette was carrying that torch for awhile. But I never saw any serious proposals,solid or otherwise,that would lead one to believe it might happen. But the rumors are rampant today that one is in the works.Ask T. Peters

 

Thank you for confirming "real history" on the 4-rotor. Mark did say one time way back that GM had been concerned with the Pantera and that would have allowed a mid engine solution to be go through. When the Pantera sales were not as expected it quieted the calls for a mid engined Corvette. Later when the 928 Porsche came along that gave more credence to the "stay front engined" crowd.

If the powers that be let Tom Peters design like he is capable of then the next generation can be spectacular and again a trend setter. His Corvette Indy still has to rank as one of the greats. Even his California studio front engine version was far better than the C5. Guess all of the bad screwball politics that have gone on have at least left Tom stay with one of the great studios. What besides Corvette and Camaro does he have?

Jeff

 

+1

He is also responsible for full size trucks

 

You were correct.......Style Auto #36,sadly the last one
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

added this to the "Design Library" today..............we'll see if he nailed it!
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Yes, want a report on this one.

Jeff

 

OK 2 hours later...............save your $$$ Very disappointed.
It's as bad as the Car Design Europe book was that i posted earlier in this thread.Screw me once.. shame on you.....screw me twice...shame on me !!!
The book to have is still the Lamm/Holls book.
This thing is a waste of paper.It'll make a good paperweight I guess.

 

Was Kip part of the Chevy Monza original rotary prototype? Mark said that the side window and vertical vents came from the GM design and that Pf used that for the 365 GTC/4. Pf built the Monza prototype for GM.

Can Kip or anyone else confirm if this is true?

Jeff

 

I always liked the 2-rotor. It may make sense because I also like the Dino because of the smaller tighter package.

Although Mitchell directed the design by Kip on the 2-rotor I have read stories where Mitchell did not like the car; not worth of being a Corvette. Too small, not a big enough motor, a modified Porsche platform. Was this displeasure apparent at the time in the studio, a reflection upon how special the 4-rotor turned out to be or a rewriting of history?

Jeff

 

That's a great question,only because I head it the other way aeound,that Mitchell had copied the 365 GTC/4 for the Monza.Since the 365 GTC/4 came out in '71 and the Monza came out in '74.............coincidence??

i'll ask the usual suspects

 

I'll check into that as well

 

looks very lancia montecarlo in this pictures iteration
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Sorry this took so long to answer,but I kept forgetting to respond,it was so long ago

Got paired up with Bill Porter judging "Design Icons" at the Eyes on Design Concours.Bill is a veritable "walking encyclopedia" regarding Automotive Design History since he's been teaching it so long at various Design Schools.I asked him about the "W" Buick front ends and he confirmed that the culprit was D. Holls. Dave used "artistic license" on most of his clay model proposals.He made them lower,sometimes wider,sometimes longer,just so he could "sell" the designs.Then once reality set in,he would gradually bring them back to where they were really supposed to be.That practice pretty much ended in the '60's,however.

I was never known to "cheat" any of our models ....

If they don't catch you,then it ain't cheatin'. Smokey Yunick?

 

Harry told the story that he would be standing with the other designers in the viewing area and realizing that the Buicks looked to be wider and that he knew his studio's model was to the maximum width. He asks one of the others how this could be and then he got the knowing comment that the Buick group was cheating and that it would be getting modified to reality after the show.

Didn't realize that had all been under Holls. Am surprised that Mitchell and his #2 were allowing that to be so blatant.

Jeff

 

Holls wasn't the only one that would "enhance" the look of their clay models.At some point everyone might fudge a little. Dave was just the most brazen. Certainly Mitchell himself wasn't above making the models look as good as possible. You just had to know when & how to use artistic license. The engineers got into the habit of carrying tapemeasures just to make sure one studio wasn't cheating at the expense of the others.

My experience at Ford wasn't that much different

Kind of like show cars. One makes them look as good as possible,and then when it's time to get serious,it's time to get serious. Until then,however,wow the viewer whenever possible.

 

any of your students in this? lots of interesting entrys being made!

http://www.cardesigncontest.com/gm/

the CDN link
http://www.cardesignnews.com/site/home/display/store4/item261024/

...for full time design students currently enrolled
(only )

 

here's finalists of part 1 of the opel (euro) parallel run contest

http://www.cardesigncontest.com/ov/results2.php

 

The students I had last Semester all graduated except for one,and she is doing a summer internship at Mercedes Benz this summer.

Some of the students that will be in my Fall class may be involved in this competition,but I won't know who if any until classes start. It's very difficult for the graduating Seniors to do these competitions because they are very focused on,getting jobs,graduating,putting their portfolios together,and taking my Senior Class. Probably in that order

But this is a great opportunity for Juniors,and 1st semester Seniors to get some great experience & recognition.