(first posted 6/16/2015) NOBODY LIKES to look under-endowed in the locker room, and no car likes to look puny in the showroom. A full lunch-box matters: whatever the body-style or design theme, a car must look confident and potent.
In design circles anthropomorphism of cars is rife. This has its foundation in cars replacing the horse, cars uniformly described as having a face, shoulders, body, a tail, and stance. It has since distended to adjectives such as ‘sexy’ and ‘muscular’ being used. Even unapologetically euphemistic terms such as ‘thrusting gesture’ are said in all seriousness.
Looking at cars such as the Jaguar E-Type and McLaren-Mercedes SLR, another type of equine comparison is inevitable, and the obsession with length is mirrored in the distance between the dashboard and the axle. The more the better, traditionally, and it is why Audi spent so much money moving the front wheels of the A5 forward, even though it is basically front-wheel-drive.
Historically cars had all the length they wanted. Cylinders were often in straight-alignment necessitating a long hood to cover them all, the 1933 24-litre Napier-Railton a shining example.
Cars such as the Bugatti Royale even used an open cabin to falsify the impression of distance from grille to B-pillar, rather than A-pillar. Yet it was only a measurement: simplistic surfacing ensured a mechanical character devoid of today’s naturalism.
That came later, almost accidentally, when Mercedes had to tilt the engine in the 300SL Gullwing, thereby creating the eponymous twin-peaks. One ensured clearance to the engine, the other aesthetic balance (unlike the more ballsy W196 300SLR Uhlenhaut Coupe, which had a long cigar rolled to one side of the hood to accommodate the air-filter).
The other source for surface development on hoods stems from the legacy of pre-integrated-bodied cars. As fenders grew more elaborate and engines larger, these volumes began to merge, as seen on the awesome Cord 812. This DNA is still visible today: see the creases running from the base of the A-pillar to the corners of the grille, with fender flats outboard.
The 1979 Cadillac Coupe DeVille is a good example of this, while similarly the Volvo XC90 uses a tall centre section on the hood to dilute the mass of the cabin.
While American cars had flourished under this new thing called ‘automotive design’, which consolidated themes from a breadth of influences, European products were much more obliging to strict industrial design. The success of Giorgio Giugiaro with the first Volkswagen Golf and Fiat Panda left a taste for clean, rational designs that focused on clever combinations of straight lines with flat surfaces. Sticking a large proboscis on your car did not occur to him.
That was left to muscle cars, notorious for stuffing socks down their fronts for a greater impression of potency. One of my favourites is the Pontiac Trans-Am. A hole for the carbs is one thing, but hell, it had an eagle painted on it too. The Dodge Charger also features a neat detail, integrating the indicator repeater within the hood relief. Today, voyeurs might be tempted by the fenestrated Callaway Camaro to offer a better glimpse of your package. And for those who like to let it all hang out, a Morgan three-wheeler wears the family jewels on the outside.
The Chevrolet Camaro takes this one stage further, and tips the whole laundry basket into its Jocks. Its bulge is obscene, and dominates this automotive lothario. The fact that it is the hood that delivers all the semantics is down to a couple of things: that metal presses were relatively low pressure back then, and sheet metal thicker, making it impossible to achieve the kind of definition on the rest of the car. Secondly, styling was still in the slipstream of futurism founded over a decade before, where wheels played second fiddle to fuselage-like body volumes. That is, until the Oldsmobile Toronado came along.
Suddenly car design language had a new addition to its vocabulary: prominent arches. Such is the strength of this concept that bulging hoods were no longer prerequisite to expressing power. It is a tool we still see in Audi design today, where the hood even on RS models remains stock while fenders are exaggerated to remind of the Quattro heritage. A message is nothing without a messenger.
For years Audi had incredible technology (Procon-ten, five-cylinder turbos, four-wheel drive), but it wasn’t until they nailed the stance of the cars that they could begin their escalation to the premiership. You could almost pinpoint that moment to the first A4, when concentric arches shrouded big wheels pushed as wide as possible. With such square-shouldered, straight-backed confidence, one could at last believe in the message of the advanced technology being espoused. Audi has locked horns with Mercedes and BMW ever since.
Time for a brief antithesis: allow me to introduce the Fiat Multipla. It may seem contrary but as a point of interest I feel it worth mentioning. This oddball moment of brilliance is a Europe-only MPV that sat six people, three in two rows. All aforementioned examples exaggerate potency; the Fiat is unique in deliberately shrink-wrapping the hood around the engine to make it seem as small as possible. Call it Freudian, but it leaves a rather matronly bosom above it. This trick emphasises the size of the cabin and leaves virility to be proven by children filling the seats.
Though not every car will end up like a Multipla, pressure today to build a lighter car with a bigger interior inevitably means that the hood gets smaller as engines do too. The power bulge as a stand-alone feature is becoming rather out-dated. Having a lump on your hood that says power is as a styling tool what a grunt is to conversation. Branding, competition and the explosion of new markets means that cars have to cater to so many more tastes, and design has moved from colloquialisms to becoming multi-linguists. More words are needed to appeal to more people, words like pride, quality, heritage, trust, speed, personal, fun, exclusive are regular additions to the strategic lexicon, and as proportions conform, it falls on surfaces to be able to articulate them. That extra square yard ahead of you might just have the last word.
I have found it interesting that designers in the U.S. spent the whole postwar period up to the mid 60s trying to run away from the Power Bulge, preferring flat hoods, or some even with a center indentation. That changed by the late 6os.
And the Toronado’s fender flairs have been perennials ever since. I can tell you from experience, those things can be nasty to try to replicate properly with Bondo and the like, but they remain. It has been the rarity over the last 50 years that lacks them.
Sometimes, the bulge is all about function rather than form, such as this 57 Golden Hawk that required some additional clearance for the supercharger and it’s plumbing.
It occurs to me that the 92 Crown Victoria did without a power bulge. Perhaps this is one reason that the car always looked a little weak-chested, with the center section of the hood sunken. Somehow, the 60 Ford pulled that look off a little better.
That’s a good point–I always thought the sunken center section of the hood was a little unusual, but never really looked at it that way. In the ’98 refresh they inverted it, restoring a modest bulge along with the raised grille.
And speaking of grilles, I’ll just say again how much better the ’92 looks without a traditional grille, rather than the tacked-on affectation it was stuck with for the rest of the generation.
They were also trying to get away from the (future) Citroenesque 1953 front end without spending money on any new sheet metal except the hood.
I was looking at the bolt-on bulge atop the hood that was only on the supercharged cars. But you are correct about the Hawk front end in general.
It always strikes me as strange that the tallest hoods correlate with the lowest engines. In the ’20s when cars looked like locomotives, engines were low inline flatheads placed down behind the axle. The upper half of the ‘engine room’ was pure air except for the carb.
After 1935 engines started to climb forward and upward, and got taller with OHV and then OHC.
Also after 1935, hoods started to drop. Result: bulge needed.
Way back in time tall engine hoods were to fair in the tall radiators required for thermo syphon water circulation nothing to do with engine height whatsoever.
… and then there are the times when power bulges lie. My ’07 outback has a pair lifted directly from the 300 SL. My mind never made that connection before Robert’s article. I like them, but in the Subaru’s case, they aren’t true to the hardware underneath. Flat fours seldom need extra hood clearance!
Are they there to add strength to the panel, or could it be that Subaru used them to retain a conventional appearance over an unconventional drivetrain?
> Are they there to add strength to the panel, or could it be that Subaru used them to retain a conventional appearance over an unconventional drivetrain?
I would say probably both answers are true.
Regarding cars with “prominent” wheel arches, the Toronado didn’t really start this trend IMO. Buicks had been using full radiused wheel arches on some models since the mid-50’s to make them look more like sports cars or racing cars. Buick adopted the look across all models for 1956.
An interesting take on the Fiat Multipla, but when I look at it, I keep seeing a 1st gen Dodge Neon with a minivan greenhouse grafted on top.
In your paragraph on the Camaro, it sounds like you’re referring to the 1st gen Camaro, but the picture you show is of a brand new Camaro. If you want to talk about the new Camaro shown, heck the power bulge has a window in it to show off the goods!
I always enjoy reading Richard’s pieces, as he can explain an easy looking but complex and skilful craft into something manageable for the layman. Thanks.
One trend that is also around now is what you might call the buttress bonnet – the classic example may be the Ford Fiesta – with raised bonnet edges flaring into the more sharply raked A pillars
Yeah my Citroen has vestiges of that flowing the bonnet into the A pillars but its 17 years old so hardly a new trend.
I went out with a car painter who did a bit of moonlighting by fitting nasty fibreglass power bulges and scoops to Marinas,Cortinas and even a Land Crab in the late 70s just after leaving University.
Two guys were on the beach. Both had average looks and builds but the girls on the beach showed one guy all kinds of attention and the other guy none. The guy not getting noticed ask his friend his secret. He said “Tomorrow when you come here put a potato down in your swim trunks. It drives the girls wild.”The next day he did just that. The problem was that instead of being ignored, the girls looked at him with disgust. Later on, he saw his friend on the beach. He said ” I did what you told me and the girls all look at me disgusted. What am I doing wrong?” His friend replied “Why you damn fool, you’re supposed to put the potato in the front!”
Fascinating article, thank you Robert. As well as Europe, we here in New Zealand were also blessed with the Multipla – still a few around, and they’re certainly quite unique…the non-conformist in me loves them; the aesthete shudders slightly…
My favourite power bulge bonnet of all time is that fitted to the XA-XC Ford Falcons from 1972-79. Whether the standard version or the be-nostrilled GT version, the shape and size are perfection!
The be-nostriled version is strongly reminiscent of the ram air hood fitted to the ’71 to ’73 Mustang Mach 1. (as well as the Boss 351)
XB my all time favourite Falcon owned a few 6 and V8 only one with nostrils a 74 Fairmont GS wagon.
Here’s the power bulge on an MG TD hood. The outside of the panel is on the top, the inside on the bottom, in case you’re inspired to make your own. This bulge clears the generator and first appeared on the TA in 1936 and didn’t disappear until MG faired the headlights into the fender on the TF in 1953.
The prominent wheel arches are what I call vestigial fenders.
“NOBODY LIKES to look under-endowed in the locker room, ”
if by “NOBODY” you mean “insecure teenaged douchebags.”
I don’t live in Multiplaland, but I do know that Fiat realized their enormous mistake and had a do-over. It came out OK. I just saw my first one in England last month. Those huge bulgy windows were really enough without the worse front bit ever on any car. It’s worse than the original Bangle Butt.
Except that the facelift version seems to have stolen its nose styling from a 2001 Accord. Or, if you think it a better match, a 1st-gen Chevy Aveo. (which draws upon said Accord.)
It’s less offensive but it’s a little incongruous.
Yes, the facelift front end of the Multipla is too squared off and normal for the rest of the googly car. They seemed to be trying too hard to normalize the thing, although it was a clever save. Overall, I’m disappointed by the move even in Europe away from the people mover models toward less efficient SUV-like shapes, although I do enjoy being able to drive over the occasional street curb and never worrying about scraping the curb at the front of a parking space with my Forester.
I’m scratching my head with this article. Most of the cars illustrated were not very bulgey at all, at least not in the power bulge sense.
Really. A ’79 Caddy Coupe DeVille has a power bulge? Who knew?
It seems like the title of the story is mismatched with the text of the story.
Get me rewrite! Stat!
Exactly what I was about to post!
My eyes glassed over with the “revelation” that Toronado had the first radiused wheel openings, but I wasn’t absorbing much anyway.
He didn’t say “radiused wheel openings”. He said “Suddenly car design language had a new addition to its vocabulary: prominent arches.” Those “prominent arches” are the fender flares that extend very prominently to the sides, away from the main fender surface. Can you show me prior examples of that? The Toronado is widely considered a pioneer with that design feature.
BTW, the author is a professional European automobile designer. So laugh all you want, but you’re just showing your ignorance. It’s a very knowledgeable and sophisticated article, obviously well over the heads of some of our commenters.
I guess the site is not accepting specific pointed replies today?
Really. A ’79 Caddy Coupe DeVille has a power bulge? Who knew?
You obviously weren’t able to follow the meaning of this author’s text. BTW, he’s a professional European car designer. How about a re-read? Maybe you’ll get it the second time.
Teslas don’t particularly need a hood, yet they have them, with storage inside. I’m curious to see what happens with the design of the electric cars that no longer have to hide big coherent engines once taste and design catch up.
I originaly did not use a “power bulge” on my TC-3 but finally cut the hood for a 3″ air cleaner. I used an 83 Mustang GT hood scoop which ironically didn’t need it for clearance but just for looks.
Powerbulge #1
Maybe there’s a Thunderbird V8 under that hood.
Maybe there’s a Big Job V8 under THAT hood?
Lol
Don’t forget the double-bulge MGC – a major extension to accommodate the 3-litre six, plus a smaller one for the carburetors
Love me a good Power Bulge, couldn’t resist putting an XR8 bonnet (hood) on my standard model Falcon ute.
Edit, well it is down under, its right side up if you click it.
I’m a little biased since this was the favorite car that I have ever owned, but the offset power bulge on the DSM trio is just perfect!
The 1993-1997 Chrysler LH sedans’ “Cab Forward” design enlarged the greenhouse and made the hood smaller, but they still retained the “hood bulge.” In these cars, the low hood did make the bulge necessary to clear the engine, in addition to the intake plenum being contoured “to fit.”