car design thread

Worked with Otto at GM. Great guy. Image Unavailable, Please Login
Otto is on the right with Kip Wasenko in the center.

 

No that is Dick Finnigan, GM Brazil/Holden

 

https://driventowrite.com/2025/05/13/never-a-dull-moment-part-14/#more-127287


Never A Dull Moment — Part 14
Aerodynamics and Proportions.

GM Wind Tunnel. Source: One Man’s Blog


In 1980, GM opened what was then the world’s largest automotive wind tunnel. It was state of the art and the corporation was committed to improving vehicle aerodynamics with the goal of better fuel economy results. Finally, the art and science of automotive aerodynamics would become a valuable design tool.

Introduced in 1982, the Audi 5000 (Audi 100/ 200 series in Europe) became a beacon of light as a personal design icon. The flush glass and sleek profile, along with the overall look, were to my eyes, design perfection. Meanwhile in Dearborn, Michigan, the Ford Design Team led by Jack Telnack was embracing the Euro-aerodynamic look as a design/ sales strategy. Their goal was to break away from the North American design vocabulary that was then being used by GM, Ford and Chrysler. I thought the Audi may have been an influence at Ford as well.

1982 Audi 5000. Source: Curbside Classic


The 1983 Thunderbird was the first example, followed by the 1984 Lincoln MK VII. A dramatic departure from previous Ford designs, Ford was going all-in on aero as a design philosophy and the aero designs of Ford products were to be the catalyst that would change the course of automotive design in North America forever. Overnight, everything changed in the design studios, and in addition, the Lincoln would be the first car in North America to utilize composite headlamps, suddenly freeing up front-end design solutions.

Image Unavailable, Please Login
1983 Ford Thunderbird. Source: guideautoweb
Interestingly, the GM/ Chrysler response to the new Ford designs were mixed at best. The ‘bar of soap’, ‘jellybean’ school of design wasn’t exactly embraced by Ford’s competitors, to put it mildly. While the General Motors wind tunnel was working around the clock, the ‘aero look’ put forth by Ford would meet with some resistance at GM and Chrysler. Design management wasn’t convinced that customers would embrace the soft design vocabulary as shown by Ford; however the 1985 Ford Taurus would go on to prove beyond doubt the public’s acceptance of the aero look. A change in GM Design management later in the decade would ultimately champion the aero look on GM cars.

Image Unavailable, Please Login
1984 Cadillac Fleetwood Deville. Source: Notacias.coches
Meanwhile in the Cadillac Studio, we had completed the Cimarron, accepted the Allanté outcome and were getting the newly downsized DeVille FWD cars ready for the market. The 1984 DeVille had aircraft inspired door construction and was distinctive, albeit a major departure from previous large Cadillacs. And to hedge their bets, Cadillac decided to continue selling the older RWD Fleetwood Brougham for those customers so inclined, fuel prices be damned.

The next products in the queue for revision were the Eldorado/ Seville for 1986. If I thought the previous Cadillacs had been controversial, I hadn’t seen anything yet. With the threat of higher gasoline prices and threats of availability, the corporation decided to double down and really shrink the new Eldo/ Sevilles. Taking 16” out of the previous E/K body cars would prove to be a bad bet, as the cars would be almost identical in size to the GM N bodies — the Pontiac Grand Am, Buick Skylark and Olds Calais. Proportion, proportion, proportion — the designer’s mantra: This was going to become the elephant in the room and of course, fuel prices didn’t increase and follow these prognostications. Armageddon hadn’t happened. So much for that strategy.

Image Unavailable, Please Login
Pontiac Grand Am. Source: GM Photographic
The GM N-bodies from 1982.

As the industry design vocabulary in some segments was making the transition from linear/ square to a softer/ aero execution, GM decided to continue on the existing design path rather than embrace aero completely. GM Design was convinced that aero results could be achieved without the ‘jellybean’ look and were still sceptical that the buying public was ready yet.

Image Unavailable, Please Login
1977 ‘Full-sized’ Cadillac Eldorado. Source: Automobile-catalog
The real issue however would be the proportions of the proposed architecture for the Eldo/ Seville. While the new cars would have similar interior volumes to that of their predecessors, the exterior dimensions would prove to be a non-starter for traditional buyers. After all, Cadillacs were known for their generous size. Without that as a differentiator, what did they have? The decision was slated to utilize the ‘formal’ look GM had popularized on previous cars like the original 1976 Seville. However, the N bodies also embraced that same appearance. Lookalike cars anyone?

This might be a good time to call a timeout and address the elephant in the room. How did those decisions get made? Who made them? Why? How important is/ was design?

During the 1980’s, automotive design was in a transformative state, to say the least. Downsizing, fuel prices, safety, government regulations, a recession, foreign competition, and on and on and on. Ford upset the design order that had been so successful at GM for so many years. Suddenly GM and Chrysler were marching to a different design drummer and the question was, were the customers ready for such a transformation in design?

1980 Cadillac Seville. Source: GM Photographic


The manufacture, building and selling of automobiles is a multibillion dollar enterprise and it’s not for the faint of heart. Decisions made have a drastic downstream effect and can make or bankrupt an enterprise. Jobs are created or lost on the decisions of the buying public. Design had become a strategic tool, beginning with Harley Earl at GM, and it became an integral part of the GM corporate business strategy going forward. Success or failure could ride on design, and as the Edsel and later the Pontiac Aztek would prove, design had a larger influence on success in the marketplace than many would admit to.

My personal opinion was and continues to be very clear. Automobiles look the way they do because SOMEONE wants them to look that way. Cars don’t fall out of the studio’s ceiling looking the way they do; someone wanted them to look that way. There are no accidents in design execution. Solutions are developed over time by talented, dedicated professionals who are being compensated for their design judgement. Politics can enter into the mix, along with egos and occasionally poor judgement or execution. But the fundamental design is a team effort developed over time to various constraints and compromises. When the team gets it right, all is well with the world and sales follow.

‘Right-sized’ Cadillac Eldorado from 1979. Source: GM Photographic

In this context, we return to GM Design and the design strategy surrounding the ’86 Eldorado/ Seville. In the case of the Seville, the ’86 would replace the ‘Bustleback’ Seville from earlier in the decade and the Eldorado would follow the successfully rightsized ’79 edition. The question of a strategic design direction was developed by the Design Staff, the marketing division, sales, manufacturing, product planning, engineering and a host of additional inputs; but the bulk of the design brief regarding appearance was in the hands of the Design Center.

Conceptually, where should the design go? How small was too small? Would Cadillac customers embrace the Aero/ Euro look of what Ford was doing? These would prove to be no small decisions and many sleepless nights accompanied where and how to establish a design direction for such important cars in the Cadillac portfolio.

Ultimately this program would come close to destroying the Cadillac Division and completely alienating it’s customer base. How could so much talent and so many smart individuals get it so wrong?

 

A local collector ordered one. Be interesting to see it in the metal.