OK, guys, just shoot me now........... I LIKE this car! Image Unavailable, Please Login Its like a 1967 Panamera, only better! Coach doors....... Road & Track cover car back in the day.....Troutman & Barnes, if I remember correctly?
From Deans Garage Who Designed the 1949 Ford? January 13, 20221 CommentFord, Jim Farrell Image Unavailable, Please Login Who Designed the 1949 Ford? By Jim and Cheryl Farrell There’s probably more controversy today about where the design of the 1949 Ford came from than ever before. Designers George Walker, Richard Caleal, Bob Bourke, and Bob Koto have all, at one time or another, claimed some credit for it. Others claim the design came from an unused or discarded Studebaker design. Bourke believed he designed the spinner grille for the ‘’49 Ford based on similar spinner grilles he had previously designed of Studebaker proposals. Ford photographs seemed to have solved that issue of the grille design, and now it’s generally accepted that Joe Oros came up with the spinner grille on the ’49 Ford. Almost everything else is still up in the air with the multiple claims as to who designed what features on the car. Hopefully, time will tell us more. Here’s the short story of how the design of the ’49 Ford came about. Henry Ford II was young and inexperienced, so a seasoned GM executive named Ernie Breech was hired to teach Henry the car business. Bob Gregorie, then the head of the Ford Design Department, had already designed the two ’49 Ford proposals Ford planned to market. When Breech first got to Ford, he didn’t think the smaller Ford car would make money, so he arranged for its sale to Ford of France. The larger of Gregorie’s Ford proposals Breech thought was too big to be profitable, so he proposed a contest between Gregorie and Breech’s friend George Walker to design new ’49 Ford proposals. Whoever’s car was chosen would become the new ’49 Ford. The small Walker proposal was designed by Caleal, Koto (maybe) and Bourke (maybe), but Walker’s full-sized clay model for the contest itself was designed mainly by Walker employees Joe Oros and Elwood Engel, loosely following the small model Caleal, maybe Koto and maybe Bourke had designed. The Walker proposal as built beat out Gregorie’s proposal to become the ’49 Ford, and subsequently Gregorie resigned. It has been often said that the ’49 Ford was the car that saved Ford. Overstatement or not, the ’49 Ford was almost all-new (except for the flathead V-8 engine) from the ground up. Production for the 1949 model year came to 1,118,308 cars, and earned Ford a $77 million profit. It beat out Chevrolet sales for 1949 by about 100,000 cars. The ’49 Ford also helped solidify young Henry and Breech as the leaders at Ford. The photos were taken by Ford photographers during the design contest. They were located in what was then called the Ford Industrial Archives. (Now called the Ford Archives.) Many have never before been published. The photographer started with the armatures upon when each full-sized proposal was started. Unfortunately, the photos end before Ford designer Gil Spear productionized (and modified) the ’49 Ford made by Oros and Engel. Photos: Ford Design Development of both Gregorie and Walker Models Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
TESLA STARTS TO HAVE STYLING UPDATES Just when i published this article congratulating Tesla for not changing the styling every year Editorial: Planned Obsolescence – Trying to Break Free JANUARY 13, 2022 Image Unavailable, Please Login Tesla Model S I read Tesla owners are not bummed out by this. They no longer feel the pressure of not-bring-able-to-afford-the-new model. No heat on them for driving a car so old because hey, that old Tesla looks like a 2022 Model S. Harley Earl must be reaching a high rotational speed in his grave because he had American consumers feeling wretched when they were seen in last year’s car. Showing up at work in a three year old car meant you were no longer an achiever at work or maybe in life itself. Elon Musk changed all that. Part of it is due to his chief designer, Franz von Holzhausen, who believes in a design philosophy called minimalism where you begat a plain form and don’t purposely add any details, gee-gaws, frippery and what-not to distinguish a given new car from the now-dreaded Last Year’s Model. So what we have now in many Tesla owners are adherents to that new philosophy; that being manipulated by changes in styling is a pointless waste of money. These enlightened car owners have other things to send their money on. And irony of ironies, Earl never imagined cars would someday receive up-dates from their maker through something called The Internet. An 11 year old Tesla might have received dozens of updates, so its owner is not reminded he has an “old” car because it’s got the latest software app. I could compare the operating philosophy of car design back then to women’s fashions. One day the skirts would be below the knee and then there was the mini-skirt and then the mu-mu and…well you get the idea. It was change for the sake of change. Women are still throwing out perfectly good clothes to have the latest fashion. I don’t think my comments will deter anyone. You go, girl! But back to cars, the Tesla design philosophy has created new territory by breaking free of the my-tailfin-is-taller philosophy. Instead Elon and Franz concentrate on the newest models (I should mention Elon has a side hustle, building rocket ships with as many as 27 engines…) I was congratulating GM only a couple of years ago for ditching the front engined Corvette to mid-engine but now, with my new penchant for minimalism I’m looking at the old front engined ones as better styled, less change for the sake of change. True the new Corvette probably corners a tenth of G better than the front engined one but who’s driving at the limit of g-force anyway? In sum, I think I’ve almost cured now, Harley Earl and his imitation Rockettes (dancing girls at Radio City Music Hall) no longer can make me think I’ve got to own the latest, the newest of the new. It will be interesting to see if Detroit adopts this philosophy. Which is counter to everything they’ve ever preached (and I was one of the preachers, at two different ad agencies…) I try to apply the minimalist philosophy to other aspects of life, like the choice of a leather jacket. I’ve got a bomber jacket, of the style worn by WWII military aviators. Mine’s a four pocket. There are hundreds of men’s leather jacket styles hatched since the war but hey this design can’t be improved (except for materials, mine’s exceedingly soft). I think Franz and Elon would approve….soooo minimalist. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------END=================================== I come across this article pointing out recent updates. Headlights and taillights in Model S and interiors. But at least they are not going all Harley Earl on us (tho I miss Earl's Dagmars...) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Look at this Toyota concept axle to windshield ratio. Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login https://www.thedrive.com/news/43888/toyota-gt3-race-car-concept-has-a-giant-wing-could-run-on-hydrogen
hard not to like a link that features 6 Alfa Tipo 33s - 5 Stunning Vintage Alfa Romeo Concept Cars - YouTube
Wonder if Tjaarada ever worked for Ford? The de Tomaso Mangusta seemed to be exclusively Italian at the time, but the Pantera seemed to be mostly Ford and sold at Mercury dealers. IIRC, the common denominator was that both vehicles had Ford Cleveland engines. Maybe there was some joint venture agreement covering the Pantera for the 1970s?
Peek-a-b00 headlights and robbers wearing face masks! LOL! Image Unavailable, Please Login https://**********.com/2022/01/design-bmw-concept-xm.html
You didn't know it at the time, but some documentary filmmakers captured your reaction to that design for posterity. Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login I think you captured the essence of the sword quite well. All the best, Andrew.
The 2022 Ford Mondeo is a very handsome car! Designed, built, and sold only in China. Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login What was this? Image Unavailable, Please Login Some kind of clay model "stretch" version of the final design? A limo version? Image Unavailable, Please Login https://www.motor1.com/photo/6418923/2022-ford-mondeo-china-debut/
Peter Brock on the Birth of the Spoiler https://classicmotorsports.com/articles/peter-brock-birth-spoiler/?fbclid=IwAR0HLo9ZaHYjKPUV4Xj7cytgH7Yl5nc4pdkMsmGdHtJFM1bAIrqNNLf6JRA Story by Peter Brock • Photograph Courtesy the Author It seems difficult to understand why people are still so interested in the origins and concept of a 50-year-old racing car, but fascination in the aerodynamic details of my design for the Daytona Cobra Coupe continues unabated. There are books on the subject where I explain how its unique shape was derived from an obscure pre-WWII paper written by some very bright Germans. But what’s most ironic is that the car’s most advanced component, a driver-controlled wing for downforce, was never utilized. The inspiration for that rear wing came long after that paper was published. In 1963, my good friend Richie Ginther returned briefly from Italy and related a discovery he’d been involved with that changed racing forever. He’d been hired on as a test driver for Ferrari, and his goal was to eventually drive in Formula 1, following in the footsteps of his friend Dan Gurney. One of Ginther’s first responsibilities was to develop a new mid-engined sports racer that was being prepped for Le Mans. Testing took place on the tiny local circuit within walking distance of the center of Modena. Locals would often come out to watch when they heard the distinctive V12s fire up. In France, the Auto Club d’Ouest officials in charge of establishing special rules for the famed circuit were more than slightly concerned about the ever-increasing speeds being reached on the 3.7-mile ligne droite des Hunaudières, a two-lane country highway better known to us Americans as the Mulsanne Straight. A horrendous crash on the circuit’s front straight in 1955 had almost turned world opinion against all racing, so the ACO’s main focus was on somehow reducing top speeds to increase spectator safety. One strategy was to disallow the low racing windscreens of previous years. A new rule mandated an increase in frontal area, requiring high windscreens like those used on production cars in an attempt to increase drag and reduce velocity. In testing, the Ferrari’s new windscreen reduced speed as expected, but it was also causing Ginther some discomfort behind the wheel. Air flowing over the higher screen created a low-pressure area in the cockpit, which tended to suck exhaust fumes from the rear of the car back into the driver’s area. Ginther had been a helicopter mechanic in Vietnam, so he had some understanding of basic aerodynamics. To counter the reverse flow of fumes, he suggested that his mechanics fashion a small, 4-inch-high aluminum “fence” across the rear of his car. This was done in a matter of minutes, and Ginther again ventured out to see if the problem had been solved. It had, but the added “fence” also had an unexpected result: It allowed him to lap almost 2 seconds quicker! At the time, no one realized the significance of attaching this simple strip of aluminum. But it actually marked the beginning use of downforce as opposed to just minimizing aero drag, which had been the goal of designers since the discovery of wind resistance. The addition of this rear “spoiler” was at first simply a curiosity questioned by the French officials and members of other teams. Ferrari mechanics answered their inquiries with casual off-hand comments that it was merely a device to prevent exhaust fumes from getting drawn back into the cockpit. Speed secrets don’t last long in racing. Others suffering flow reversals from the higher windscreens soon copied Ginther’s exhaust fume spoiler and discovered the additional speed, traction and stability gained by attaching the simple device. Naturally, this additional rear downforce created a reactive loss of traction at the front, so it wasn’t long before Ginther had fashioned a compensating front air dam to regain lost steering sensitivity. Not surprisingly, adding front and rear spoilers soon became a simple, generally accepted way to balance a race car’s adhesion at speed. So the ACO’s original intention to limit speed was negated by chance—and by Ginther’s clever innovation! Image Unavailable, Please Login
Pininfarina Is Charging Ahead on U.S. Soil and Opens Two New Showrooms Home > News > U-turn 18 Jan 2022, 23:13 UTC · by Tudor Serban Image Unavailable, Please Login They say the beauty is in the eye of the beholder but, when it comes to Pininfarina, most people agree that it is one of the best design studios in the world, which is one reason why Ferrari chose to do business with it. But now Pininfarina evolved into a hypercar maker. Image Unavailable, Please Login 10 photos Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login After a troubled period when the Italian company traded hands, it found financial stability inside the Indian consortium Mahindra Group. The new owner didn't consider just using the famous name, like Ford did with Ghia, but turned it into an electric hypercar brand. The first production vehicle is the Battista Anniversario, which was unveiled at the 2021 Monterey Car Week. Needless to say, all five examples offered there were sold instantly despite their hefty, seven-figure price. With increased demand and interest in the electric, exclusive hypercar, Pininfarina decided to open new locations in North America. Apart from one showroom in Calgary, Canada, the carmaker has other eight sites in the U.S. Its latest locations are in Lake Bluff, Illinois, just north of Chicago, and Orange County, California. Per Svantesson, Chief Executive Officer, Automobili Pininfarina, said, "California is home to many of our existing and future clients, with many already pioneering the adoption of pure-electric, zero emission cars of all kinds. Battista now sets a new benchmark for the desirability and performance offered by an electric car. With our new partner location in Chicago, we have established an important brand presence between the US east and west coasts." The pure-electric Battista hyper GT is the most powerful Italian car ever made. It offers a four-motor drivetrain that provides 1,873 hp (1,900 ps) and a 1,696 lb-ft (2,300 Nm) of torque. It can sprint from zero to 60 mph (0-97 kph) in less than 2 seconds, which is similar to what Rimac Nevera can. Moreover, the 0 to 186 mph (0-300 kph) takes less than 12 seconds, and it can do that while boasting a 311 miles (500 km) maximum range.
I always find it curious when designers come up with a directional wheel design, in this case a clockwise pattern, and then use the same wheel on both sides of the car. Clockwise is correct for the passenger side, but the driver's side should be counter clockwise to reflect the forward motion of the car.
The industry has a term for this. It is called "complexity," meaning how many variations of the same part would be required on a vehicle. In the clockwise rotating wheel case you cited, 2 wheels would be required in a perfect world, a left side and a right side. For the parts department, it is easiest to stock only 1 variety of wheel, and let the public worry about its perceived direction of rotation.
The Origins of Ford’s Retractable Hardtop January 20, 20223 CommentsFord, Jim Farrell Image Unavailable, Please Login The Origins of Ford’s Retractable Hardtop By Jim and Cheryl Farrell Gil Spear was not only a good artist, he had the ability to understand and resolve complex engineering issues. He was easy going but also had a mischievous sense of humor. On the way to work one morning in late 1948 he pulled up along side someone driving a new ’49 Buick Riviera, one of GM’s first hardtop-convertibles. Spear thought calling the car a hardtop-convertible was false advertising, so he insisted the driver put the top down. The other driver got a perplexed expression on his face, the light turned green, and Spear drove away chuckling to himself. By the time he arrived at work that morning, Spear thought he could design a car with a roof that actually retracted. His first design was a car with a top that slid back over the deck lid, with the backlight parked over the rear license plate. Over the next few months, Spear came up with several different methods for collapsing the roof over the top of the deck lid, and he actually built a 1/8-sized model of it. To try to interest management in his Roof-O-Matic idea, Spear made a top that could actually be retracted over the deck lid of the 1/8 model by means of a wind-up paper clip—and he made up a booklet with all the methods he could think of for making a real retracting roof. Soon, the Ford brothers and the head of Ford Division, Lewis Crusoe, were winding and unwinding the paper clip and then studying his booklet. In the meantime, assistant design manager Gene Bordinat convinced Spear he had a better chance of selling his Roof-O-Matic concept to management if the top could be folded down inside the trunk and not on top of it. The next thing Spear new, Earle MacPherson stopped by, read the booklet, became enthused, assigned a production number to the project—and on the spot authorized Spear to build a 3/8-sized clay model with a working Roof-O-Matic. Because Spear thought Ford Division was most likely to actually produce a Roof-O-Matic, he drew up plans for a Ford Roof-O-Matic, but the 3/8 sized clay model he designed as a flashy concept car that would appeal to all divisions. When the 3/8-model was begun, Spear named it the Syrtis. Although the name “Syrtis” refers an area of the moon or a place in the Sahara Desert, Spear picked the name as the most unusual one he could think of so people would ask about it. It worked. Spear was assisted with the design of the Syrtis by designers Jim Huggins, George Krispinsky, and Ben Kroll. The clay modelers were Larry Wilson and Michell Rukat, and the studio engineer was George Martin. Howard Fifield from the metal shop made the metal top for the 3/8-sized model. The shops also rigged up a small electric motor that ran the top into the trunk and back up again. The 3/8-sized model was finished in June 1952. At first there were no plans to make the Syrtis public—until a photographer included a photo of the 1/8-sized model—paper clip and all—in a book for Ford’s 50th anniversary. The cat was out of the bag and a press release soon followed. Jim Huggins was soon recruited by Chrysler, and a retractible concept car he designed there was supposedly built at Ghia. It was said to be with the Norseman when the Andrea Doria sank while bringing the cars back from Italy. Bill Ford wanted the retractible concept for the Continental Mark II program he was just starting. Benson Ford also wanted it for the XM-800 Mercury concept car, which was supposed to be the prototype for a new Mercury model named the Monterey. Ford’s board of directors backed Bill, and that led to a Continental Mark II retractible prototype called the Mechanical Prototype (MP) # 5. After MP#5 was successfully completed, it was decided a production Mark II retractible was not in the cards. But a retractible model called the Ford Skyliner was produced from 1957-59. In 1953, when it was decided to build a Mark II retractible, the Syrtis 3/8-sized model was moved to the location where the Mark II retractible being built. Sometime in 1956–57, Spear got a call from Fifield, who was in tears. Fifield told Spear the Syrtis was being busted up out on the loading dock. Spear got there just in time to see a pile of rubble that used to be the Syrtis, but he never found out who ordered it destroyed. The XM-800 concept car was built, but it wasn’t a retractible, and it never became a new Mercury model. Instead, it was replaced by the Edsel—and we all know how that turned out. Photos: Ford Design Gil Spear’s Presentation and Sytris Model Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
