Once upon a time, luxury car manufacturers like Rolls Royce only built the chassis, and the buyer would either select from a number of coach builders who already had designs for that particular car, or order a completely unique body. This all started to change in the late thirties, and accelerated after the war. But when RR switched over to unibody construction for their main car line, the 1965 Silver Shadow, that ended true custom coachwork. Unless of course, one was willing to use the limo-oriented Phantom VI chassis, which still had an old-school frame. One wealthy Swiss client decided in 1971 that he wanted to re-live the golden era with a unique RR drop-head, and commissioned Pietro Frua to design and build it. It took almost three years, and the result is less than perfect, but quite spectacular.
I can’t find exact dimensions for this yacht, but it’s big, and long, and tall (update: 23 feet long). It was commissioned in 1971 by an H.E. Consul Simon van Kempen (suitable name, no?), and the chassis was sent to the Garage de’l Athinee in Geneva, where it was completely hand built according to Frua’s design. At one point, the original front end was deemed by the patron to be too tall, and completely started over. There’s a very fascinating detailed account of its construction here.
If the Frua’s proportions seem a bit odd, keep in mind that this is what most Phantom VIs looked like: tall, narrow, and long.
That really comes across in a view of the Frua from the front. Needs a bit of “wide-tracking” too. But what an imposing car. And van Kempen drove it for twenty years or more. Got status?
Here’s a rear view. OK, you Clue Sleuths; from what car did Frua borrow those taillights?
Dashboard: true to the word.
Just the thing to take on a sightseeing excursion in the Swiss Alps. On second thought, some of the tighter hairpin curves in Stelvio Pass and such might be a bit of a challenge.
Strictly speaking, the van Kempen Frua wasn’t the very last RR custom drophead, as the basic design was re created in a four door version that was started in 1977 and not finished until 1992, well after Frua died. It was originally conceived of a Sedanca DeVille, but was modified into a full drophead. But it’s more of a parade/show off/collector-mobile, than the daily-driver two-door. That era really did end with van Kempen’s car.
Looks like an oversized Fiat with a chrome grill. :/
Wow. Even in the context of the early 1970′s, that’s hideous.
From the side, it is absolutely stunning. From any other angle, not so much.
Wow! It’s insane, but in a good way. That convertible top boot doubles as a car cover for your Mini.
Hey Paul, headline typo “Dropehead”. Unless the wealthy client was a “Ropehead”.
I seriously doubt it. Swiss ropehead: an oxymoron?
hmmmm,its kinda fabulas isnt it
I like it. Definitely need the wide whitewalls for the full effect. I wonder what the Frua version cost in ’73. A regular Rolls probably around $ 30K. I’d guess in the $ 50K range. Only for the rich and famous, in an era when a Cadillac cost $ 7-10K.
Love the 70′s mint green. The white roof and WWW’s with the white (or biscuit) interior really contrasts nicely. The elderly patriarch in the town where I grew up had a (74?) XJ12 in the same shade. About 20 years ago, I can recall his fueling up one day, and the pump attendant basically kissing his A–.
I would guess it cost several times that. This project took two years of continual work by the shop. No way to compare it to an assembly-line built Silver Shadow.
$50K would be the deductible on collision insurance.
Damn, nice to be rich…
Looks great from certain angles, although the ridiculously narrow track makes it look silly head-on. Too bad, because aside from that and a few minor details, I love it – and I’m definitely not the world’s biggest Rolls’ fan.
Taillights look like W108 Benz pieces, although I have a feeling they’re not!
I didn’t bother to look for dimensions of this convertible, but the standard limousine is 2010mm / 79.1″ wide with front track width of only 1546mm / 60.9″ and rear 1626mm / 64″. The height alters your perspective when used to ‘normal’ cars too – 1750mm / 68.9″. Likewise the height of the 8.90S x 15 tires – taller than most CUV’s today.
I expect the Frua car is significantly wider than standard. Also note how tight the wheel arch openings are – even at static ride height there needs to be some ‘freeboard’ to allow the wheels to turn.
Having said that I don’t think it hurts for this car to exist in the world, you just need to be in the frame of mind of the Thunderbirds FAB1 or think of it as the ultimate Camargue. That last shot in the snow is stunning, partly because it minimises the ridiculous length
It looks like someone gave Chuck Barris two days to cobble together Britt Reid’s daytime ride for the old “Green Hornet” TV show.
“Drive away, Kato!”
Frua was truly inspired …. by the prior appearance of this, that is …
Ha! What’s the date of that?
I’ve never been a huge fan of Frua, although he did some nice work on the Glas coupes and a few other things.
Lady Penelope’s FAB 1 first appeared in 1965. The Wikipedia entry notes that two full-sized replicas were built, the first on a Bedford bus chassis, and the second — after protests from Rolls-Royce — on a Silver Spirit base adapted to handle the double steering.
I’m afraid I missed that show. Too bad!
The replica is fab indeed.
Presumably the same type of Bedford bus featured in the Italian Job movie
THUNDERBIRDS ARE GO!
F.A.B., Father!
Ha, exactly what I was thinking!
I like it. That last photo is great, and captures the future-modern front really well. Not often I can actually say I like a RR for the design.
Ah Im not the only one who’d seen that grille treatment before awesum beast but shouldve had wider tyres on it.
… oh, and by the Citroen SM’s taillights
We have a winner!
Wow–great call! Just as I was about to definitively post “Peugeot 604″. Other than a Maserati Merak I’ve never seen any other car use SM parts.
Those are Citroen SM taillights. I had only a vague idea that led me to look at Peugeots, then Mercedes. Then I thought, what else was in Frua’s shop? Web says an SM-based concept car.
Aargh!!!!! Posted while I posted!
This ark is nauseating. “Beaten by hand” holding ugly stick. I had to go look at that pretty Peugeot 504 to restore calm.
Think of it as a Swiss-Italian Bugazzi.
Either that or Les “Superfly” Dunham once had a branch office in Geneva.
Seriously: TWENTY-THREE FEET long? On a TWO-door? When even the record-holding production four-door — the ludicrous 1958-60 Lincolns — still stopped short of the 20-ft mark? Just look at that rear overhang: “Honey, does this designer coachwork make my butt look like Liechtenstein?”
This car’s only possible rival for megalomaniacal excess:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ajc0VDbxpdE
Looks like 3 people worked on it, one for the front end, one for the back end and one for everything else and no one was allowed to see the others work until it was finished.
riddiculas ,ostentatious..but ultimately completely fabulas,we will never see the likes of cars like this again..and the world is a poorer place for it.
Cruela de Ville would approve, but she would want more fur and leather in the interior…….
Dalmationhyde upholstery is definitely in order.
Great post, Paul! Where did you get the pics of the green RR?
I stumbled unto it while doing a google image search for something totally different; serendipity. But if you google 1973 RR Frua, several links come up. I got the pics from two or three sites; on being an ad for the car when it was for sale a few years back.
I’ve long been fascinated by this car. How can you start with a Rolls Royce, send it to a coachbuilder (whose SOLE PURPOSE IN LIFE IS TO MAKE BEAUTIFUL CARS) throw so much money at it, and end up with something so ill-proportioned? It’s a much greater sin than when someone takes a regular vehicle and splatters it with bling.
I just don’t get it. It should’ve been magnificent.
I still think rectangular headlights on a Rolls-Royce look ridiculous and cartoonish, even today, but especially in 1973.
A Rolls Royce Brougham, if there was ever one…
The main problem with the dimensions is that they used a Phantom which is a 7 passenger limousine, like the kind the Queen rides around it, so yeah, it suffers from that big framed car with a regular style car body on it, imagine and Eldorado based on a Fleetwood hearse commercial chassis.
You know a car is big when Americans are saying it’s too big! Ref. Alexander of Hollywood’s comment above.
@cfclark – rectangular headlights were modern styling back in the early 70′s, and I don’t think that round headlights would work with the overall style of the front end of this car. As to whether that style actually works, that’s another question, but it is certainly ‘of its time’.
Impressive feat, but ooohhh that front! The bumper guards can’t possibly have been meant to be angled like that – in contrast to the negative-cambered wheels (is that a Rolls chassis or a Twin-I-Beam Ford truck?)
And then there’s the (Fiat 130 coupe?) headlights, so much potential for ’70s showcar cool, squandered by the disharmony between the strictly rectangular chrome outlines and the slightly bowed-out openings.
I am r, w & a to buy a car like this: The burgendy one with the following comment:
If the Frua’s proportions seem a bit odd, keep in mind that this is what most Phantom VIs looked like: tall, narrow, and long.