[Like Part 1, this has been expanded and updated]
In the “streamlined decade” of the thirties, automotive aerodynamics was promoted as the great breakthrough to the modern high speed automobile, and to finally shed its horse-and-buggy roots. It was almost a religion, and its influence was almost universal. By the end of the thirties, highly streamlined automobile concepts were in every manufacturer’s styling studios, if not already rolling down the assembly line. The assumption was that the post-war era would be dominated by further developments on the air-splitting Tatra theme, like this 1947 Tucker Torpedo. But the reality turned out quite different, especially so in the US.
Raymond Loewy and his streamlined PRR S1
Before we move on, it’s essential to put the initial zeal for aerodynamics and streamlining into a larger context. Automotive streamlining was just a minor part of the most influential single design movement in history. The transformation of consumer and industrial products as well as the built environment from one that involved ornamentation, classical influences, and the exposure of the mechanical functioning (as in the traditional steam locomotive) to one where suddenly the exterior envelope was paramount was a paradigm-changing event.
SF Maritime Museum
The fact that it emerged during the great global Depression gave it a transformative potential; the public saw streamlining as a way to “move forward”, and everything from buildings,
delivery vans,
to toasters were caught up in the zeal. The Streamline Moderne movement had arrived.
The crowning glory of this movement was embodied in the 1939 New York World’s Fair, whose theme was Building the World of Tomorrow. And GM’s building was the zenith of the fair, especially its Futurama exhibit, which portrayed the world of 1960, with its fourteen-lane highways and giant streamlined apartment blocks. It’s hard to see from the pictures, but the thousands of moving miniaturized cars were perfectly streamlined, with tear-drop and finned tails straight from the Tatra 87.
Needless to say, the world of tomorrow shortly after 1939 was interrupted by a less optimistic world affair. The war certainly took some of the edge off a design movement that somehow saw its social influence exceeding its grasp, but a look at GM design prototypes from round 1946 shows clearly that the now-classic streamliner model was still the predominant influence.
The models shown above attempt to predict the evolution of GM styling, starting in the rear and advancing to the glass-domed, central-steering but still dorsal-finned Cadillac of 1960. Needless to say, the actual 1960 Cadillac turned out rather differently! Predicting the future is a bitch.
This more down-to-earth 1948 model year Cadillac concept clay (above) from 1945 or 1946 still shows a strong aerodynamic influence in its swept front and tapering rear. What caused the change in thinking that led to the actual design?
The 1948 Caddy is mostly acclaimed for giving birth to the rear fin. But those were minor compared to the more significant deviation from GM’s advanced designs: the decision to retain the classical long front hood/short rear deck proportions, and to highlight them with a bold grille. Even though the fastback coupe style was still available for a few more years, America’s love affair with streamlining was essentially over before it was ever really fully realized.
The Cadillac correctly predicted (or even more correctly, led) the coming decades of American car design, emphasizing classical proportions over aerodynamics. With ever more potent V8 engines and a steadily falling price of gas, who needed to cheat the wind with wimpy little pointed front ends, especially when the failure of the Airflow was still fresh in Detroit’s collective memory?
That’s not to suggest that the streamlined era and aerodynamics hadn’t already transformed the industry. The ’48 Caddy may have been the turning point away from the pursuit of aerodynamic ideals in the US, but other manufacturers, particularly the independents, adopted various degrees of its influence on design, to their eventual peril.
1947 Kaiser with Kaiser articulated bus
Among the first of the all new post-war cars, the 1947 Kaiser-Frazers reflected the new “pontoon” style, a pragmatic adaptation of streamlined design elements toned down to suit the more conservative American public as well as rationalize construction. Like GM and the other builders, dreams of rear engines or front-wheel drive evaporated in the face of their higher costs, and conventional construction ruled.
1951 Studebaker by paulvaranasi
The all-new 1947 Studebaker (1951 shown here by Paul Varanasi) also shows fairly muted but unmistakable aerodynamic influences on the styling trends of the era: the pontoon body, tarnished here by functionally unnecessary vestigial rear “fenders” and a bright accent line where the running board used to be. The Studebaker’s long tail is a vestige of rear-engined concepts that were mulled, but then discarded.
1952 Hudson by Laurence Jones
The 1948 Hudson was a bolder step, with its “step-down” frame and jelly-bean styling. It also shows the final break to the past by ditching any references to free-standing fenders.
1950 Nash Airlflyte by oldparkedcars.com
Nash took aerodynamics more seriously than the rest. Its all-new 1949 Airflyte design shows a fairly comprehensive adoption of the fundamental principles. But both Nash and Hudson soon paid a price for their aerodynamic designs: as taste quickly changed, including hard-top coupes and sedans, larger glass areas, and more rectilinear designs, their bodies were not as adaptable as those of the Big Three. Aggressive annual restyling cycles played a significant role in the demise of the independents during the fifties.
The 1948 Tucker Torpedo is still hailed by some as a direction the American industry could have taken but chose not to. It’s a viscerally exciting design, and certainly dramatically more aerodynamic than average. With its air-cooled rear engine and fastback, designer Alex Tremulis was clearly following the path that the Tatra T77 had trod fifteen years earlier, but with less conviction. That’s reflected in his choice to incorporate the tradition-evoking fenders that Tatra and even Frazier, Hudson and Nash had already tossed overboard.
While the Tucker’s Cd of about .30 to .37 (depending on whose numbers are being used) was excellent for the times, it still far from the T77′s .212. Public response to the Lincoln Zephyr prototypes made it clear that Americans were wary of rear-engined full-sized cars (with good reason). An interesting historical footnote it was, but as a design the Tucker was already looking a bit old-fashioned compared to what the Europeans were up to.
1946 (rear) and 1948 Wimille coupes by Roger Machado
While it’s quite likely that I’ve done the US immediate post-war aerodynamic era some injustice, it will be inevitable in regard to Europe. Due to very different circumstances in regard to fuel cost, economics, and a more progressive mind-set, the aerodynamic era of the thirties was only a preview of coming attractions. Much more than post-war Americans, Europeans saw genuine possibilities in the marriage of aerodynamics and small cars to create breakthroughs in performance, efficiency and affordability to first-time motorists clamoring for new cars. The mid-engined three-seat Wimille Coupe of 1948 (above) wasn’t exactly intended at the low end of the market, but it does give a clear picture of how the Europeans were pushing forward with aerodynamic design.
The Saab 92 prototype of 1947 (above) is actually more of a thirties/Tatra throwback, but its clarity of line and functionality thanks to a FWD arrangement make its delicious tail worth savoring one more time. Its Cd of .35 was excellent for a near-production car.
A more radical concept was the 1948 Panhard Dynavia. An extremely slippery (Cd .28) design based on the Panhard Dyna, which itself was a highly advanced small car utilizing a front boxer two-cylinder and FWD. But the practical limitations of such pointy tails (yes, that is the rear), not to mention passenger comfort (no AC), made this another unfulfilled slippery dream.
Even the smallest cars showed aerodynamic influence. This Isetta is a miniaturized rear-engined egg-shaped streamliner with a greenhouse resembling those advanced Cadillac concepts above.
In 1953, Alfa Romeo commissioned Touring to build open and closed sports racers with maximized aerodynamics. The resultant Disco Volante (flying saucer) coupe had a Cd of .26.
Alfa then had Bertone to build a series of coupes to push the aerodynamic envelope even further. The result was the BAT cars, of which the BAT 7 attained a Cd of .19. The early fifties was to see a renewed interest in aerodynamics in Europe, but the leadership now changed hands.
Whereas the Germans had been the early champions, and most of their early fifties cars showed strong aero influence, like the Porsche 356 and the DKWs and Auto Unions, influential Mercedes was taking a decidedly more upright and conservative stance with their passenger cars after their flirt with streamliners in the thirties.
Of course, their racing and sports cars still benefited from their extensive aerodynamic research and experience, like this 300 SLR with a pop-up wind brake over the rear deck.
Although Mercedes was (and still is) a dedicated adherent to the practice of integrating aerodynamics, like Detroit and other European makers, there were compelling reasons for a relative conservative and pragmatic approach with its passenger cars. The maximization of interior volume, trunk space and a traditional RWD layout did not favor extreme aerodynamic measures. And the prestige of the Mercedes radiator shell still carried a lot of weight.
In the early-mid fifties the Italians and especially the French were more ambitious, aerodynamically-speaking. The English? The pontoon form certainly was also embraced, as in the this Jaguar Mark 1 of 1955. As well as some of the more ambitious sports cars, coupes, and sedans.
But there was also a strong conservative British streak too, as in the the many very thirties-looking cars, including the very face of British cars in the US, the MG roadsters. As late as 1955, this MG TF still proudly carried the hallmarks of 1920’s design. Cars like the MG and others reinforce a stereotype of English cars of this period. That’s not completely representative, but then cars like this certainly just weren’t being made in Germany, France or Italy in the postwar years. Except for conscious retro-designs of course, which came into vogue only shortly after the demise of the TF.
With a Cd of .36, the Citroen DS was of course highly aerodynamic for a practical sedan in 1955. And that it bristled with other advanced technological design features is beyond this quick look at the “Goddess”. But it reaffirmed that aerodynamics could be successfully integrated in a new package, with FWD and little compromise in passenger space.
Given the front-end styling similarities of the 1953 Studebaker to the Citroen, this makes a good point of departure back to the USA. Both of these wind-cheating efforts show that the thirties have now been fully left behind, and that it was possible to integrate sound aerodynamic principles without having being stuck in the cab-forward long-tail streamliner mold. The Starliner Coupe’s Cd may have only been around .40, but it was the only serious effort of its kind in the US at the times and it was quickly adopted as a favorite for stock-bodied Bonnevile speed records.
Meanwhile, the industry’s idea of aerodynamics moved on to…fins, which were ludicrously promoted by their greatest exponent, Virgil Exner, to have beneficial effects on the stability of the car that was so blessed by them. Stability Control, 1957 style.
Of course, it wasn’t just 200 mph Studebakers that were in demand on the salt flats. Early hot rodders knew that aerodynamics is the key to puncturing the brick wall to higher speeds. After WW II, surplus auxiliary external aircraft fuel tanks (bellytanks) were available cheaply. This created on of the more brilliant adaptations, the Lakester.
Looking not unlike like the steam LSR vehicles built by Stanley and others at the turn of the century, a flathead-powered Lakester tearing across the flats is truly a time-warping and wind-splitting experience on several levels.
Undoubtedly, many other cars deserving of mention in this time period have been left out. In Part 3 we’ll take on the recent era, up to the present day.
Nice write up I think Jaguar with their D type were among the first to use a vetical fin actually fitted for high speed stability rather than looks The D with a tall axle could break 200mph the air brake on the Mercedes was in lieu of disc brakes Jag had them Merc didnt, but of course those 2 examples were thinly disguised racing cars but they did lend styling cue to their manufacturers road cars.
Alfa Romero should have sued Jaguar when they made the XKE.
Even Volkswagen appreciated the benefits of aerodynamics. Despite being heavier and wider, the ’55 Karmann Ghia had a higher top speed despite having an identical drivetrain as the Type 1. When equipped with a Judson supercharger they could bury the needle.
The judson supercharger in a stock beetle made the car terrifying. I had one in the 1300, 66 model, already a hot rod by vw standards. I did not own it long. The 69 dodge (think plymouth road runner clone) that I bought was absolutely boring after that. The top speed of the vw was pretty much unchanged but it got there way faster. Terrifyingly fast.
Sometimes I marvel that I ever got this old. BTW Paul, when you talk about the lack of acceptance of post war America to the aerodynamic changes, I remember comments made about my first car (47 Stude). They were not complimentary. “can’t tell if it’s going forward or reverse”.
When you think about the things that could have been!
Outstanding work, Paul. Several of those top-most photos are in the book about the streamliner era I referenced in Part 1.
It continues to amaze me of the work done in Europe – cars I have never seen and have never even heard of until “CC” came along! Sometimes the figuative rocks one lives under can be quite comfortable, I suppose.
Such a great series, Paul! Never saw the Wimille Coupe before, it looks more like 1960’s small cars than any of the better known ‘cars of the future’. Sure would like to know more about them.
Fuel efficiency was vital to impoverished post-war Europeans. Importing gas used up precious foreign exchange. They responded with these beautiful streamlined cars. Bella!
Over here cheap oil was gushing out of the ground. It’s no coincidence the Cadillac Ranch is in Texas.
Nice continue, but a coupl’o’problemos…
1) I believe the movement is called Streamline (not Streamline*d*) Modern*e* (maybe French)
2) > “…ditching any references to free-standing fenders. The Hudson was the” what? Please complete the sentence.
3) The putdown of English cars is harsh and unjust. It is one thing to feign ignorance, yet another to blatantly claim their design was stuck in the twenties. See for yourself this photo of a Morris Oxford Series III (source: Wikipedia) and see if its any less contemporary than 50s Mercedes-Benz. Ponton styling was a compromise between aerodynamics and interior space. Austin A30, A40, the revolutionary ’48 Morris Minor and its Oxford brethren, the magnificent aero Austin-Healey 100, and the Jaguar XK 120. The Cd for Jag and AH is a bit high, but their frontal area is very low, achieving the same aero effect, but with better downforce, coincidentally. Come on! Twenties?
Thanks, Copy Editor, it was getting a bit late last night….and the English suffered for it, sad to say. I will amend that to some extant right now.
Keep in mind, that this could go on almost endlessly. And my point about the Mercedes W180 was specifically that it too was pragmatic, like all the pontoon cars, not that it was any better. I’ll try to make it a bit more balanced. It really is a bit difficult, being stuck between a blog post and a book at midnight.
Triumph of the late 40s and Jaguar of the mid 50s are really opposite ends of the spectrum.
Only in a day’s work Dear
LeaderReader! Chalk one down to timezone mismatch. However, it now reads Sreamline. 😉Then again, the Triumph Mayflower is perhaps the only new small car with the `razor edge’ styling, that too an experiment in small cars that failed. Hardly representative, I’d say. More like a tiny footnote to Morris Minor.
> cars like this certainly just weren’t being made in Germany, France or Italy in the postwar years.
Oh boy. The Mayflower is stodgily (or conservatively, according to POV) styled, yes, but it is definitely wrong to say it was alone. This Rolls Royce design was being cloned by Mercedes-Benz, among others, with the 300 series. That design evoked prestige and respect when the King of West Germany rode in it. Even today, the Chinese are using that design for a formal limousine for weddings etc. So the British were not at all alone in this. It was a poor judgement on Triumph’s part, to offer the middle class person a mini-Roller. Some things are best enjoyed full size. As for France, there was nothing coming out of France in the immediate postwar years. The Renault 4CV is a Minor-like body with VW-like drivetrain, Peugeot 203 is again cribbing pre-war Chevy design, while the 2CV is a contraption, not a car, by these exacting standards. The most refreshing design is definitely ’53 Fiat 1100, followed by DS in ’55, but Britain had a car industry at that time with competitive models in every range, rather than the sporadic models of the French and Fiat, while Germany had Nothing(TM) in the economy range. VW wasn’t there yet, NSU and DKW were moribund with quirky designs, and Opel had pre-war designs like Olympia etc.
I don’t know where this `stereotype of English cars’ of the period comes from, but maybe a site like CC should do less to perpetuate it…right?
It comes from the strange theory that German cars were superior to English cars and the often perpetuated myth that the VW was the be all end all of reliability where in a lot of the world the VW was a penalty box with appalling road manners and short life mechanicals poor brakes bad electrics and hard to find expensive parts.
I need new glasses! Fixed.
Here’s where this stereotype really comes from: the attached picture is of a 1955 MG TF.
The MG was madly popular in the US, and undoubtedly the “stereotypical English sports car”. From the TC, which were brought home by GIs after the war, through the TF ten years later, this essentially 1920s-1930s automobile became the most public face of English cars in the US. Stereotype indeed.
Those MGs were hardly typical of 50s English cars though, the XPAG engine was used in the Wolseley 4/44 sedan but the rest of it was a relic of the 30s. The rest of the British car industry had left MG far behind even the MG Magnette used the 4/44 bodyshell and a 1500B engine a much more modern car than the ancient TF
But while MG were trying in vain to sell loads of upright TFs in the US in 1955, they were setting speed records with a streamliner, which resulted in the MGA of 1956.
The late 40s Jowett Javelin gives a better idea of the streamline ideas in England.
The important thing to remember about the TF is that it’s not what MG wanted to be doing at that point. They were keen to move on to a more modern design (which became the MGA), but BMC managing director Leonard Lord had already made a deal with Donald Healey to create the Austin-Healey 100, and wasn’t enthusiastic about investing in another sports car. As I understand it, it wasn’t until it became clear that the TF was really not going to be a commercial success — even in America — that BMC authorized the MGA. In that sense, the Austin-Healey or TR2 were more representative of where British cars were going at the time.
Paul does have a point here, the point being that the TF was brand poison. A car that sells so well past its best-before date that the company can’t or won’t risk short term loss by discontinuing it, but the car finally tarnishes the company’s reputation severely by giving the appearance of lack of innovation. This is one of the reasons why the planned obsolescence strategy works, because it gives the appearance of innovation at a pace more rapid than actually possible. The TF was brand poison not just for MG, however, but for the whole British Auto Industry, because USA was the world’s biggest car market, and domestic British sales were insufficient to sustain the huge industry that grew up from interbellum prosperity in the UK. I don’t think Mercedes-Benz or BMW can survive even now if the US is closed today, even though there are Japan and China to buy cars.
On a practical note, should this article be “An Illustrated History Of US Stereotypes”?
If the TF is shown on the basis that it was the face of MG in the US, should the Wimille Coupes or Panhard Dynavia be shown at all, considering they are unknown in the US?
Why not the Jowett Javelin, which was for all intents and purposes the Morris Minor done right, with Airflow influence? The `English Car’ stereotype tosh doesn’t exist outside the US, even if it exists there anymore.
Ooh, can we have a 1953 Jaguar XK120 coupe please?
Here’s the Moggy Oxford Series III pic:
A bit off topic, but the GM futurama exhibits looks like downtown Dubai. Or Beijing.
or Dallas
Hey, that’s the Salt2Salt Racing Stude. They’ve had quite an interesting history, although their website hasn’t been as detailed the past few years.
http://www.salt2salt.hutman.net/
Never seen a Disco Volante coupe before, maybe they should have laid that windshield back a bit !!
That Studebaker looks pretty sweet; it will be my midlife crisis car!
A very interesting piece. I had never thought much about how much American and European styling diverged in the late 1940s.
In the 15 seconds that I have thought about it, it seems that Harley Earl was never really in the forefront of streamlining. He certainly had some streamline elements, but always with a sturdy boldness about them. Chrysler had been streamline central in the mid 30s but lost the plot in the K. T. Keller years Of the majors, only Ford (in the 49 Mercurys and Lincolns) maintained any kind of streamlined elements, and those went away after the 49-51 models.
It seems that in the US, at least, Harley Earl’s vision of big, bold and modern turned us away from the smooth streamlined look of the 1930s.
I just remembered an interesting little side track in early 1940s streamline styling. Chrysler built the 1941 Newport and Thunderbolt. The Newport may be the only non-production car ever to pace the Indianapolis 500 race. Both of these cars were built in metal, I believe multiple units of each.
Here is the Thunderbolt
Yes, Nice indeed. So much ground to cover…
The Thunderbolt was one of the first retractable hardtops. I believe the late ’30s Peugeot 402 Eclipse was the very first one, and also a really sharp streamlined car. The headlights were actually hidden within the grillework.
If anybody is interested in viewing the Alfa Romeo BATs first-hand, they’re part of the collection and on display at the Blackhawk auto museum in Danville CA. Definitely worth a trip if you’re in the area. Some fabulous cars, and the displayed collection is small enough to not be exhausting. A few hours is plenty to look them over at leisure. Docent led tours are also available.
http://blackhawkcollection.com/index.cfm?action=pbexpo&control=1&tab=pbexpo
Being about Paul’s age, but growing up in America, my childhood ideas of automotive aesthetics were different, but not 180 degrees opposite. My favorite 1940s American car was the ’49 Ford for its total smooth sides and lack of garish chrome. Yet, I found the Hudson and Nash extremely ugly.
The ’53 Studebaker and ’55 Citroen DS were, and are, my 1950’s favorites. Too bad the Stude had terrible build quality and the DS a complex electro-hydraulic nightmare under that gorgeous body.
Dont try and defend Citroen by blaming American lack of maintenance. My auto shop teacher had been a Citroen technical rep in Canada. He drove a Chevy for a reason.
I saw Tucker: The Man and his Dream at the theater when it came out, and have loved Tuckers ever since. They’re really a beautiful design. I actually got to see a Tucker in person in ’89 when we went to the St. Ignace, MI car show for our summer vacation. It was a really sharp dark metallic green. Amazing to see one in person, especially since I was just a kid.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but the wheel covers on the Tucker in the first photo look an awful lot like they’re from a 1971 Olds Toronado.
You forgot two Soviet cars: the GAZ M20 also known as Pobeda, and the NAMI-013. The first one went into mass production in 1946, earlier than the Nash Airlflyte or the Standard Vanguard. The NAMI-013 was a teardrop-shaped rear engine car in the same vein as the famous VW Transporter.
The1948 Cadillac makes an interesting comparison with the R-type Bentley Continental of the 1950s.