(first posted 3/6/2015) It is said competition brings out the best in people. After our recent visit with a 1932 Ford (here), it seems only natural to examine and scrutinize the formidable competition from Chevrolet. Adversarial relationships begin with distinct events, and this is the oldest Chevrolet covered here so far. Here’s what happened.
Chevrolet was co-founded in 1911 by Swiss immigrant and race car driver Louis Chevrolet. Chevrolet would ultimately be a four-time driver in the Indianapolis 500 and, after leaving his namesake in 1915, founded Frontenac Motor Corporation, a supplier of race parts for Ford’s Model T.
Chevrolet’s business partner and co-founder was none other than William C. Durant, the man who would twice take control of General Motors and twice be ousted from the company.
source: www.wikipedia.org
Production began in 1912 with the Series C Classic Six. The Series C was quite upmarket at $2,150, and featured four doors (an unusual element at the time), a compressed air starter and a three-speed gearbox located in the rear axle. Sales of the Series C that year were 2,999; only two are known to still exist. All were powered by a 299 cubic inch (4.9 liter) T-head straight-six producing 40 horsepower.
A six-cylinder Series L followed, but the subsequent four-cylinder Series H (seen here as the Baby Grand) is what established Chevrolet as a formidable entrant in the low-price field. This was the first Chevrolet not equipped with a standard electric starter, and it was reflective of Chevrolet’s going downmarket.
The Series 490 from 1915 realized admirable success, propelling Chevrolet from somewhere below tenth in sales in 1915 to fifth place in 1916. By the time the Series 490 was phased out in 1922, over 785,000 had been sold. All were powered by an overhead valve 2.8 liter four producing 26 horsepower.
Not abandoning the higher priced market completely, Chevrolet offered the concurrent Series D for 1917 and 1918. The Series D has the distinction of possessing the first Chevrolet V8, an overhead valve power plant with 36 horsepower emanating from its 288 cubic inches. Chevrolet was purchased by General Motors in 1918.
Durant exited GM for the second and final time in 1920. Upon his departure GM performed an analysis of the Chevrolet brand.
After Chevrolet catapulted into being the fifth best-selling brand in the United States in 1916, it was in a distant second place to Ford in 1919 and 1920. Despite this highly enviable market position, the analysis recommended liquidating Chevrolet as the competition from Ford was viewed as too overwhelming. The conclusion was GM’s pouring resources into Chevrolet was futile as it had around 4% market share in contrast to Ford’s 60%.
This recommendation was an affront and challenge to Alfred Sloan, then assistant to GM President Pierre S. DuPont. Sloan viewed Chevrolet as being Ford’s primary competitor.
Alfred Sloan, a mechanical engineer, was a poster child for decentralized management. He believed key decisions should be made by those closest to the situation, as these decisions would be the best informed and in the best interests of the company. Sloan also knew such empowerment nearly guaranteed buy-in from employees as decisions had been theirs, not something handed down from above.
Sloan exercised the antithesis of Henry Ford’s centralized management. Ford was notorious for not warmly receiving the ideas of others; his relationship with son Edsel is proof. Henry Ford ruled, even if he had to hire people such as Harry Bennett to assist him. It’s little wonder Ford was in such disarray in Henry’s later days. This chaotic atmosphere likely contributed to Sloan’s confidence in the Chevrolet brand. Sloan saw and comprehended the very big picture; the goings-on at Ford were not sustainable.
Chevrolet did not aim directly for Ford during this period. A Chevrolet was usually a bit pricier, but unlike the Model T, Chevrolet presented itself as a fashionable means of transport, offering a variety of colors and the harder to quantify element of style. Of all the things the Model T was, colorful and stylish it was not.
Sloan originated the concept of having a tiered system of brands, allowing one to work upwards through a series of distinct nameplates as their means grew. Despite the dissolution of Pontiac and Oldsmobile, the Sloan system is still exists at General Motors.
A reinvigorated and highly focused Chevrolet began to seriously dig into Ford’s market share during the 1920s, overtaking it when Ford finally cancelled the Model T in 1927. Despite some leap-frogging of sales leadership from 1928 through 1930, by 1931 Chevrolet had solidly established itself as the top selling brand in the United States, outproducing Ford by 50% in the very economically depressed 1932 model year.
This significant sales difference is likely overlooked with the general excitement of Ford introducing its V8 that year and the number of Ford’s from this period that still exist. Despite the wave of products coming from Dearborn, Chevrolet wasn’t exactly sitting around twiddling their thumbs for 1932.
After having dumped their four-cylinder engine after 1928, the infamous Stovebolt Six (once a derogatory name, as it was originally marketed as the “Cast-Iron Wonder”) had a positive track record, with power output up a healthy 20% for 1932. Rated at 60 horsepower, it was only five horses behind Ford and, more importantly, did not have the substantial teething problems Ford had with its original flathead V8s.
During this time period, each model year bore a unique series name; for 1932 it was the Confederate, with our featured car being the Standard Coupe. In addition to the bump in power, wire wheels were in their second year of being standard equipment.
Styling greatly reflected the other GM lines, with several Cadillac-influenced cars and such body styles as the Landau Phaeton that were not offered by other GM divisions. This stylish approach worked wonders on the sales front and helped propel Chevrolet into being the sales heavyweight of the United States auto industry.
Unfortunately, all things come with a cost. The sales volume was the envy of everyone, yet the 1932 Chevrolet was starting to outpace its higher priced corporate brethren. The Confederate line was offered in 17 unique permutations; conversely, one rung up the ladder at Pontiac, the successor to Oakland upon its cancellation in 1931, there were only six body styles in each of two trim levels. When one climbed the ladder to Oldsmobile, Buick, and Cadillac the number of body and trim combinations kept increasing every step of the way, with Cadillac having 55 unique body/trim combinations for 1932.
Perhaps the cornucopia of body styles could be attributed to their being planned when the delightful excesses of the 1920s were still in full swing. Going forward to, say, 1934 shows Chevrolet having two trim levels and a total of 13 body styles. That same year Pontiac had one trim level with only seven body styles. As in 1932, the 1934 offerings increased when climbing the ladder to Oldsmobile, Buick, and Cadillac – which was up to 64 body/trim combinations.
The 1980s brought news of GM sharing styling among divisions, with many cars looking far too identical. However, this was ancient news, as General Motors had started the practice over a half-century prior with the Chevrolet Confederate being an early practitioner. Even GM management referred to these cars as being a “Baby Cadillac”. The only tangible difference was that Cadillac styling started to dribble onto the Chevrolet the following year instead of both being basted in the same styling pot. When any Tom, Dick, or Harry can buy an entry-level Chevrolet that mimics your crown jewel of Cadillac, it amplifies one at the diminution of the other.
Sloan’s Ladder developed micro-cracks very early on. The splintering that led to near fatality occurred much later.
Regardless, seeing this 1932 Chevrolet Confederate was an enriching experience, seen her itching to turn right onto old US 66. Proudly wearing Idaho plates, and parked near the United States Army’s Ft. Leonard Wood, it certainly appears someone found a very classy way to see the U.S.A.
Fabulous find! It is amazing how the 32 Chevy sold in much greater numbers, but they seem to have gone nearly extinct, while the Ford became permanently etched in history. It is interesting how the original Ford V8 was rated at 65 horsepower, only 5 more than this Chevy. The flathead V8 got a performance reputation early on, but was always right around the same power as the six cylinder competition from Chevy and Plymouth.
You are right about the Cadillac-aping styling. GM hit that note with Chevrolet early on, and almost from the beginning, Chevrolet’s stock-in-trade was beauty and style, which it delivered routinely. I note particularly the ventilation doors in the hood (thermostatically controlled?) which were certainly much more expensive to manufacture than the stamped louvers in Fords and most other lower priced cars.
Finally, you say that GM bought Chevrolet in 1918. I had understood that it was the other way around, that Durant’s Chevrolet bought General Motors, which allowed him to re-take control of the company for the second time. However, it has been a long time since I have read much on this subject, and my memory could be off.
Durant did use Chevrolet to regain control of GM. The DuPont family played a distinct role in this reversal as their voluminous acquisition of stock is how they were able to acquire GM prior to Durant’s second departure. What I was reading did not give tremendous clarity to these events, so I didn’t venture too far down that path.
These series of events are likely worthy of their own article.
Yeah, the early history of GM has a lot of interesting twists and turns. I, too, haven’t read about it in a while, but I’m pretty sure the du Ponts were eventually forced to divest due to anti-trust concerns.
Durant was a persistent man. He didn’t give up after losing control of GM twice. He tried a third time to build a multi-brand automotive empire, but between a maturing market, the onset of the Great Depression and Durant’s own shortcomings as a manger, Durant, Flint, Star, etc., never got traction in the market.
“You could have had a V8!” This tagline is still in use today, albeit for veggie power.
Some day I like to have rides with these famous engines by Ford and Chevrolet.
Currently I am reading a biography of Ford. What are the definite books on Durant and Sloan?
I found this to be a good book on Sloan & Durant. It was written by William Pelfrey and published in 2006. I’m sure there are other books out there about Sloan, Durant, and GM’s early days.
That was a good one; the only thing I didn’t like about it was how the author kept referring to the main “protagonists” by their first names…it was a little hokey.
I think I’ve mentioned it before, but every car person should read Lawrence Gustin’s biography on Billy Durant. Sloan’s book on management was “My Years with General Motors,” and it’s also worth a read, as is John DeLorean’s “On a Clear Day…”
I read it as a teenager years ago and found it fascinating. Time for a re-read, I think.
It’s amazing how much was accomplished by the swashbuckling entrepreneurs of 100 years ago. There’s no greater contrast between these pioneers and their more disciplined successors than the transition from Durant to Sloan, who more than anyone invented the modern corporation.
People like Durant, Ford and Edison probably couldn’t raise money from investors in today’s economy.
I believe a section of that book was presented by CC on the two stroke diesel engine. If it was all as good as that chapter you should give it a shot.
Thank you all for your suggestions on these books. I put them on my list.
I just checked Allpar, and discovered that the 1932 Plymouth PB was the final 4 cylinder Plymouth, which put out 65 horsepower, the same as the 1932 Ford V8. With the Plymouth’s Floating Power engine mounts, it would have been tremendously interesting to do a 3 way test of the Ford, the Chevy and the Plymouth, with their 8, 6 and 4 cylinder engines putting out almost the exact same amount of power and compare the driving characteristics.
I would suspect that the Chevy 6 would have been the smoothest and most pleasant of the three. Walter Chrysler would probably have agreed, as Plymouth was out with a 6 the following year.
1932 Fords weighed some 200-300 lbs less than comparable Chevys and Plymouths, hence the advantage in acceleration.
The ventilation doors are spring loaded to keep them in the closed position. Opening them caused the spring to lock in the open position.
As I recall from my old Rod & Custom magazines, restoring or hot rodding a 32 Chevy was much harder than a Ford due to the wood framing that Chevrolet still used. That probably has something to do with the rate of attrition on old Chevies. Ford was all steel by 32.
Very nice survivor there, looks a bit like a black eye with the sealed beam conversion and only one headlight brow.
Good story, and it’s nice to see a car from this era in this condition.
I think I remember reading that Louis himself was working on a Chevy shop floor when he died, having basically retained no wealth from his work. Imagine that happening to Jobs or Musk or Zuckerberg!
I have two more pre-war cars up my sleeve.
Must be a voluminous jacket. hehehe
Yes, it is! 🙂
Thanks. This is my vehicle! Greg
Good article,and one that was needed. Fine looking car,especially the Landau Convertible. Classy looking vehicle that kind of looks like a contemporary Cadillac.The fact that it is still running speaks volumes about its quality.
“Perhaps the cornucopia of body styles could be attributed to their being planned when the delightful excesses of the 1920s were still in full swing. ”
This is probably right. Even though Chevy beat Ford soundly in 1932, both brands’ sales were down substantially from where they had been in 1929. The Depression was obviously the major factor (’32 would turn out to be its bottoming out point). As a result, Chevy dropped several models/body styles at the end of the 1932 model year. It would make perfect sense that the 1931-32 lineup had been planned before the Depression hit, or at least before it became apparent how deep and long-lasting it was going to be.
The rise of Plymouth was probably a secondary factor in the declines experienced by Ford and Chevrolet in the early ’30s. Plymouth went from a startup brand in 1928 to almost 300K in 1933. At that point, the notion that Plymouth could catch Ford and Chevrolet must have seemed very realistic, although it ultimately never happened.
I’ve recently been working on a project to compile U.S. model year production statistics, starting with Chevrolet. The multitude of different body styles offered by automakers in this era, and the distinctions between them, have always been a bit of a mystery to me, but this project has given me the occasion to try to sort them all out in my head, primarily by studying the illustrations in the brochures at oldcarbrochures.com. There were a number of interesting transitions going on in this era:
–The decline and eventual disappearance of open-bodied models like Roadsters and Phaetons (last sold by Chevrolet in 1935)
–The coming and going of rumbleseat models (first sold by Chevrolet in 1927, last sold in 1938 after the next development made them obsolete)
–The movement from most coupes having a passenger compartment only large enough for a single row of seating — either no back seat at all, or a rumble seat for that purpose — to coupes universally having a passenger compartment large enough for an enclosed back seat (Chevy introduced a five-passenger coupe in 1931, dropped it after two years due to slow sales, then made a clean break to coupes with larger passenger compartments in 1939)
–The movement of sedans to trunkback models (Chevy’s first trunkback sedan was introduced in 1933; its trunkless sedan models were dropped after 1939)
“Durant exited GM for the second and final time in 1920. Upon his departure GM performed an analysis of the Chevrolet brand…After Chevrolet catapulted into being the fifth best-selling brand in the United States in 1916, it was in a distant second place to Ford in 1919 and 1920. Despite this highly enviable market position, the analysis recommended liquidating Chevrolet as the competition from Ford was viewed as too overwhelming. The conclusion was GM’s pouring resources into Chevrolet was futile as it had around 4% market share in contrast to Ford’s 60%.”
There was a bit of a hiccup in Chevrolet’s sales in the early 1920s. After a period of rapid growth, for a few years sales were stagnant at best. I’m not sure if this was a cause or an effect of the analysis discussed above (i.e., were the slow sales part of what soured GM management on Chevrolet, or were the slow sales due to the brand being neglected by uninterested GM brass?) Once Durant was gone, I guess Chevrolet may have found itself an orphan, with no one in GM management really having any interest in the brand. From what I understand, the Model 490 had also developed a reputation for poor quality, which may have also been a factor in GM management’s thinking.
Even against all of that backdrop, it still seems hard to believe GM considered eliminating Chevrolet just a few years before the brand developed into serious competition for Ford. It’s interesting to think about what may have happened if GM had actually gone through with axing Chevrolet. A few thoughts:
–With no competition from Chevrolet, Ford probably would have remained the dominant brand for far longer than it actually was.
–Plymouth may have filled some of the vacuum left by Chevrolet’s absence, and become larger than it actually did.
–I think GM would have had to get back into the low-priced space during the Great Depression, either by moving Pontiac downmarket or by creating a new brand. Either way, I don’t think the low-priced GM brand ever becomes quite as large or dominant as Chevrolet actually did. If it was an entirely new brand, it may not have had its own dealer network, similar to what Chrysler did with Plymouth.
–With a reduced presence in the low-priced market, GM as a whole doesn’t become quite as large or dominant as it actually did. Ford and Chrysler may remain closer in size to GM than they actually were, or there may be space for some of the independents to survive longer than they actually did.
The first twenty years of General Motors is a fascinating read. First off, the company started with Buick and a number of brands that are lost to history. All the lost brands were marques that had some feature(s) available that made them look viable at the time, but turned out to be wrong decisions.
Then there’s the integration of Chevrolet into a company that, by 1918, was essentially Buick, Oldsmobile, Oakland, Cadillac and GMC trucks (although I’m not absolutely certain that’s what they called it then – GMC was formed out of two or three other truck manufacturers). Yes, Chevrolet owned GM initially, although that was just a legality so Mr. Durant could get control of the corporation.
Cancel Chevrolet? Yes, they damned near did. The 1919-1920 Recession was very sharp and severe, probably could have been more properly called a Depression other than the country snapped out of it quickly. Memories of those days is what scared the auto industry so badly in 1944-45 as the war was winding down. Ford’s hold on the low price car was so strong at that time that there was a (shortsighted) attitude that nobody could compete with Ford, so why bother trying?
Keep in mind that the low price car is probably the most difficult market of all. The middle priced line, of which consisted of the vast majority of marques in American automotive history, allowed you a much better profit margin. Luxury cars were the most profitable of all, but were all to dependent on “style” and “status” to justify their prices. So to the conservative executive within GM, the easy way out would be to let Ford have the cheap market, and offer the Oakland as a good step up when you’re finally embarrassed being seen in a Model T.
Fortuantely, Alfred Sloan saw value in taking that Oakland strategy and putting a car in between it and the Model T, at a price closer to the T, but still with more status, style, and features. Thus ensuring that the Model T owner could dump that ugly, cheap, bucket of bolts a lot faster. Alfred Sloan understood one of the great truths of the universe:
Chevrolet is better than Ford. Period.
Something most forget (if they ever knew) is that a guy named Walter Chrysler ran Buick for several years. At one point, he quit when Durant took over the second time, and Durant rehired him at an astronomical salary in order to stay on. Chrysler finally decided that he could not take the wild life of working under Durant and quit again, this time as one of the richest men in America after selling his GM stock to Durant.
Very nicely written article of Chevrolet’s early history Jason. That Deluxe Convertible Landau Phaeton is a real looker, without the bulk of a larger Cadillac. I didn’t know it was possible to have a convertible, landau, and phaeton top all in one. As for the name “Confederate”, I don’t think it’s the most appropriate name for a car meant to appeal to such a wide audience of Americans, especially considering some in 1932 were probably alive during the Civil War era.
I think the Convertible Landau Phaeton was more-or-less just a convertible version of the 1931-32 “passenger compartment with enclosed back seat” coupe. It sold poorly and was one of the models that got axed in the purge at the end of the 1932 model year. I find the use of the “Phaeton” name to be confusing, because that’s what Chevrolet called its 4-door open-bodied cars; the Phaeton and Convertible Landau Phaeton don’t appear to me to have had much to do with one another.
The practice of having a different model name every year lasted from 1927 to 1933. The names were as follows:
1927 – Capitol
1928 – National
1929 – International
1930 – Universal
1931 – Independence
1932 – Confederate
1933 – Eagle
Midway through the 1933 model year, in response to Depression conditions, Chevrolet introduced a second, lower-priced series, which was called the Mercury. Around the same time, Chevy seems to have begun referring to the two series by the alternate names of “Standard” (lower) and “Master” (upper). For 1934, only the Standard and Master names continued, and the practice of new model names every year was abandoned.
And there’s a smaller “what if” – what if Chevrolet had kept using the Mercury name for their base model long enough for FoMoCo to have to pick another name for their new-for-1939 midprice line? (Or for that matter, kept using Eagle long enough for AMC to have to pick another name for the 1980 AWD adaptation of the Concord?)
A beautiful machine.
Chevy’s beating Ford in 1932 sales is one of those “who knew?” moments in automobile history, along with Louis Chevrolet quitting the company in disgust over Billy Durant’s decision to move downmarket almost 20 years earlier.
Petersen’s long out of print “Complete Chevrolet Book” told the story of Mr. Chevrolet’s protests over building lower-priced cars being answered by Durant’s reminder that Louis no longer owned the use of his name.
Of all the things Louis Chevrolet was, “businessman”, sadly, wasn’t one of them.
Amazing how popular culture can wrongly influence historical reality, isn’t it?
Throw another one at ya: The ’32-34 Ford wasn’t the ultimate ‘factory hot rod’ of its day. A Terraplane (made by Hudson, priced about the same) would eat its lunch on the street any day.
Compared to a Model A or B 4 banger the V8 would have appeared fast but they were not fast cars by any means
The story of GM (Alfred Sloan) and Henry Ford is fascinating and can be summed up simply: Ford was an engineer, and Sloan was a businessman. Sloan’s credo of “a car for every purse and purpose” and the annual model change was a far better long-range strategy than Henry Ford’s stubborn insistence that the Model T was all the automobile anyone would ever need and would last forever.
Not to mention Sloan’s promotion of GMAC. Easy credit will sell more cars than cash every time. “Why, you can have a much nicer car for only another $3 per month!”
Financial engineering was definitely part of the game. Ford’s 5-dollar day marked the beginnings of the ‘lower middle class’ and was a self-fulfilling prophecy in creating a wider market for his own product.
Yes the $5.00 day what they always fail to mention is you had to survive at Ford for 12 months to get it that wasnt the starting rate.
A small bit of….trivia? Chevrolet “…founded Frontenac a supplier of race parts to Ford Motor Company”. In the early 1960s, as a sort of Canadian “counterpart” to the Valiant Division of Chrysler, Ford of Canada launched (the short-lived) Frontenac.
Unless I have my historical reading wrong, the Canadian Frontenac was similar to the Ford Falcon?
Okay, back to sleep now.
Rudiger,
Ford was friends with Thomas Edison and probably figured, like Edison, that barring some kind of huge social shift there was as much need to re-invent the car….as there was to re-invent the light bulb, so to speak. I’m sure Edison never envisioned the myriad different light bulbs we have today as Ford never envisioned the need to update/improve “the perfect car”.
Thanks for a great write-up. As someone whose automotive education was defined by three major factors (in the early ’60’s): our family’s all-import ownership starting even before I was born, as well as two periods living in Europe before I was 8; the limited availability of car books at our public library, usually focusing on hot rods; and building many 1/25th scale AMT plastic model kits between about 1962 and 1971. Thus, although I could tell you the difference between a Wolseley Hornet and a Riley Elf at the age of 7, or Hispano-Suiza and Isotta Fraschini, my perception was there were only a handful of significant popular American cars before 1960: The Model T, Model A, ’32 flathead Ford, and ’49 Ford with IFS; ’55-’57 Chevy; and Chrysler Hemi. Plus exotics like Packard, Lincoln, Cadillac and of course Cord. The early GM was significant perhaps as a business case study, but not for its cars. In fact, I used to skim right by our library’s copy of Sloan’s book, looking for the latest edition of Automobile Quarterly. Maybe I’ll look for it now … thanks Jason for the education.
MPC made two 1-25th scale `32 Chevies.One was a `32 Roadster and the other was a `32 Panel Truck.Nice well detailed scale models that command high prices in collector`s circles today.
The convertible (not roadster) kit has been reissued several times; by MPC in the eighties as a hot rod only kit, and by AMT with the stock parts as well several times since. Unfortunately, the tool for the panel was butchered in the later sixties to make a ‘vampire van’ as a tie-in for some long-forgotten TV series.
Another series of model kits of the ’32 Chevy were by Hubley Toy Co. in Lancaster Pa. I have a 4 door phaeton, roadster and coupe. They also made a series of Ford Model A, T, and 3 Packards and 2 Duesenbergs. These model kits were later sold to Ertyl, who last issued them. The model kits all had diecast metal bodies, chassis’ fenders and engine blocks. All other more minor parts were plastic, and had reall rubber tires. I believe these all have collector value now too.
The “vampire van” was a tie in to the 1960’s soap opera, Dark Shadows, which had millions of fans between 1966-1971. The van itself had nothing to do with anything on the TV show which was just some ridiculous marketing of the sort that happened a lot in the 60’s and 70’s with various popular TV shows. A shame MPC chose to ruin ’32 Panel Truck for the tooling. The “vampire van” was reissued sometime in the last ten years or so.
Dark Shadows, on the other hand is anything but forgotten as its legions of fans both young and old are still quite fond of it. It ran in syndication in the 70’s and 80’s, picked up new fans on the Syfy channel in the 90’s and was rebooted in 1991 on NBC but lasted only one season thanks to the Gulf War news interruptions that made it impossible to actually see it. The whole 60’s soap opera is on DVD along with the ’91 reboot and the show can still be seen through various streaming services like Tubi and for awhile Amazon Prime. Conventions for the show have been held off and on since the 80’s.
Full disclosure: I’m one of those kids in the late 60’s early 70’s who “ran home from school” to watch the supernatural travails of the Collins family.
Great and well written story, and great find with the ’32 Chevy. The early auto industry, and perhaps especially General Motors, is a fascinating story that- if it isn’t already- should be required study in every business school. Times change, of course, but you can find parallels to some of today’s industries (e.g.- computers, dot-com), and better understand what went wrong with today’s GM (and perhaps several other companies). Perhaps one slight correction: pretty sure Sloan was an MIT educated electrical engineer, not mechanical.
Interesting story. I’ve also read that Louis Chevrolet died working on the GM shop floor, receiving no money for the use of his name. As for the Canadian Frontenac cars of the early ’60’s, I remember that my aunt and uncle had one as a second car. Here’s a link to a Globe and Mail story on them…
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-drive/reviews/classics/ford-frontenac-a-one-year-wonder/article4389492/
A nice-looking car and an interesting read on my overall favorite car company.
It would appear that the popularity of the ’32 Ford with the flathead V8 is due to the aura of “V8” over a plain old “straight 6”.
I smiled over Louis Chevrolet’s photo – he looks like the actor Terry Thomas!
Due to the significant “teething pains” of the ’32 Ford V-8, especially oil consumption, my grandfather never bought another Ford product his entire life and waited until ’65 to by another V-8, a Plymouth.
Lovely car, and thanks for the review of Chevy’s history.
You’ve made we want to find out more about the foundation of GM, and the competition to beat (Henry) Ford
Great piece. I’ve read the Ford epic by Lacey and Sloan’s book as well and there is such a sense of adventure (and chicanery) about this period of carmaking. It’s a lot like the digital boom (and the previous railway forays) and makes for such entertaining reading – a case in point being this article.
Henry Ford looks so demure and benevolent in the above portrait. The camera never lies?
This is what it’s all about. No agenda, no snark. Just, “Hey, look at that old car! Isn’t it cool?”
Nicely done Jason. Thanks.
Fantastic article, Jason – a Chevrolet Confederate… who knew? Probably lots of now-dead people, but not I. I’ve been meaning to get a copy of that Alfred Sloan book forever and was kicking myself as I read this for not having done so.
I wonder if it was called “Confederate” so they could sell them in the South.
Not really. Back in 1932, the term “Confederate” wasn’t automatically full of un-politically-correct-able-to-offend-certain-people-easily issues. And, given that the Civil War had only ended 67 years earlier, there were Confederate veterans still alive. And treated with honor by the country for their service. So it was a pleasant name with with to sell a car country-wide.
Today? A rather different matter.
Chevrolet’s use of model names has completely been forgotten, and Confederate is the only one still remembered because it falls into the “they wouldn’t dare do that nowadays”. How many products can you think of named Confederate? To the best of my knowledge, the only one out there was a rather crazy small-time motorcycle manufacturer. And they’re dealing in the one market where the name would still be acceptable.
I guess that there were worse names than Confederate. How about the Studebaker “Dictator”. Try using that name today!
” Valve In Head Means Ahead In Value ! ” .
Chevrolets had wood frames bodies , very cheaply done , they fell apart unlike Fords ‘A’ models , they also had wood frames bodies but vastly better construction .
-Nate
Disagree. I had a 32 Chevy in the early 70’s, a 40 year old car. All original wood body solid as a rock, no problems. Of course they had to be taken care of, like garaged when not on the road. The Fisher body quality was exemplary.
DuPont control definitely made GM what it is. DuPont started in chemicals and still does chemicals, but for a while they were an all-consuming holding company like Buffett.
Oddly, there was a DuPont car, more or less a hobby project by one of the DuPont heirs, superluxurious and fast, hand-crafted in Wilmington at a rate of 50 per year from 1919 to 1931. So DuPont served its personal friends at one end while profiting from mass sales at the other end.
Is it possible that ninety years ago people still knew what the word confederate means? They probably even understood the importance of the Articles of Confederation.
Good question, and I don’t have any relatives old enough back then still alive.
Tangent: I opened this link all ready to make the joke about the Studebaker Dictator, only to find out someone beat me to it. By five years.
Yes, the Dictator comparison has already been made. But think of all the other model names we could have had. The Ford Fascist. The Pontiac Terrorist. The Hudson Coup(e) d’Etat. The Chrysler Insurrection.
Well, we did get the AMC Rebel.
Hey, for the kind of person who really wants a Packard, the Patrician is just the name!
How much would have the sound of the engine have had for the Ford’s reputation? I’d personally much rather listen to the flathead V8 over the old Stovebolt!
What’s interesting about Chevy’s one-model-name-a-year era, the “model name” didn’t appear anywhere on the car’s external badging nor was it used in brochures and advertising which referred only to “The New Chevrolet.” It appeared only on shop manuals, parts lists and so on and was probably meant as a reference to make sure the guy at the parts counter knew what a customer had.
Very much enjoyed the comments from 2015 and today. Our family physician in The Bronx, Dr. Gold, at 2206 Valentine Avenue, was a newly practicing physician in 1932. His father bought a 1932 Standard Coupe for Dr. Gold to make house calls. I never saw that ar. I do remember his 1953 Buick two-door hardtop. Walter P. Chrysler did something tactical during The Great Depression. He decided that all dealers of Dodge, De Soto and Chrysler would now also sell Plymouth. Plymouth dealers were given the option of selecting another Chrysler brand to market as well. That certainly helped to propel Plymouth sales in 1933.
Having drove both 32 Chevy’s and Model A Fords in the 60’s, when both were considered old used cars, the Chevy was pure quality, smooth, quiet, solid, as opposed to the Ford that ran and felt like a tin can. A lot to do with the Fisher body and 6 cylinder’s as opposed to a 4 banger.