There’s some basis to the notion that automotive evolution has slowed down, or is converging. Strip apart just about any of the ubiquitous fwd sedans that dominate the sales charts, and they look awfully alike under the skin: body structure, engine-transmission configuration, suspension, brakes, steering, safety features, emission controls, etc. So where did they all originate? Let’s tear this best-selling Camry apart, and try to pinpoint the first use of all of its main features and systems. I’ll start with the main ones, but we’ll keep adding others as you identify them and their source. (Update: I’ll create a substantially revised version of this piece incorporating all the comments/additions. The open-source Origins of the Modern Car)
Body Structure: The monocoque/unibody was first employed by the 1922 Lancia Lambda. It dramatically lowered the car compared to the tall body-on-frame cars of the time, as well as making it a light and rigid structure.But the Lambda was an open car, and its body construction more resembled that of a boat.
The Citroen Traction Avant of 1934 arguably had the first true unibody. Chrysler’s 1934 Airflow is considered more of a BOF-unibody hybrid.
MacPherson Strut Suspension: MacPherson struts have come to totally dominate front suspension, thanks to their low cost. Earle S. MacPherson developed the struts for the still-born Chevrolet Cadet, but left GM for Ford in 1947 after the Cadet was cancelled. The French-built Ford Vedette of 1949 ( looking like a baby Mercury) had the first production struts. Like most things, MacPherson’s struts weren’t all-new, having been inspired by Fiat designs from the 1920s.
The Camry also uses a strut-type rear suspension, fulfilling MacPhersosn’s original design configuration for the Cadet, which also used struts front and rear.
Four-valve DOHC engine: Peugeot’s L76 engine of 1912 was the first to utilize these two common hallmarks of modern engines. But this configuration was mostly the realm of racing and sports cars.
The 1973 Triumph Dolomite Sprint was the first “mass-produced” car with a four-valve DOHC head, although these weren’t exactly mass-ively common.
For that, one would need to look to Toyota’s legendary 4A-GE 1600 cc four of 1984, which also pioneered T-VIS, an early version of variable intake.
image: allpar
Electronic Fuel Injection: Bendix’ Electrojector (1957-1958), utilizing the latest in transistor elctronic circuitry, was set to premier in the 1957 Rambler Rebel. But difficulties in the system reacting quickly enough to its sensors caused driveability and there were serious reliability issues. It did find its way under the hood of thirty-five 1958 Chrysler products, all but one of which was converted to carburetors after similar issues bedeviled them. There’s one 1958 DeSoto still extant with a running Electrojector, in case anyone thinks the whole thing was a conspiracy theory.
Bendix sold it patents to Bosch, which spent the next decade making it work. The 1967 VW 1600 was the first production vehicle with the results of its labors. More than a few of those were converted to carbs too, but by their owners who failed to bone up on the L-Jetronic’s not all-that complicated mysteries.
Emission Controls: Catalytic converters go back some, but the key breakthrough was the three-way feedback catalytic converter, using an oxygen sensor (Lambda sond). Volvo introduced it on their 1977 MY 240, but the technology was by Bosch. Saab also introduced the technology about the same time. It quickly became the basis for substantially cleaner exhausts, as well as endless CELs, thanks to failing oxygen sensors.
Transverse front engine: Not just any transverse engine configuration, as DKW had that back in the twenties, and the BMC Mini had a version with the transmission in the sump. But the Autobianchi Primula of 1964 pioneered the configuration found in essentially all transverse fwd cars: the transmission in-line with the engine, and power then reversed back to the offset differential, with unequal-length drive shafts, thus inventing torque-steer.
Automatic Transmission: This one is both easy and hard. Oldsmobile’s 1940 Hydramatic was undoubtedly the first modern automatic, but it used a fluid coupling, not a torque convertor. There were many variations on this and the one and two-speed torque-convertor slush-boxes, but perhaps the first automatics to incorporate both the torque convertor and multiple modern gears were Borg Warner’s two different 1951 transmissions; the three-speed Fordomatic and the more complex Detroit Gear unit used by Studebaker. Chrysler’s 1956 Torqueflite, utilizing the simpler and efficient Simpson gear set, set the pattern for subsequent development.
So who had the first modern (more than two-speed) automatic in a transverse inline-with-engine configuration fwd car? The 1975 Golf/Rabbit? Or?
Rack and Pinion Steering: The basic concept goes back to some steam engines in the 19th Century. As to the first usage in an automobile, the trail gets a bit fuzzy. There’s some reference to BMW in the thirties, but the 1934 Citroen TA did have it, and until someone proves that wrong, it gets another nod.
Electric Power Steering: We can thank the oddly-shaped 1988 Suzuki Cervo for taking so much joy out of steering, although the latest (and best) versions of EPS is getting better.
Disc Brakes: Fredrick Lanchester’s patent for a disc brakes was granted in 1902, but not much really became of them due to numerous difficulties. The Crosley Hot Shot had caliper discs in the front, but were highly problematic, and most were swapped out.
The 1953 Jaguar C-Type was the first successful application of the caliper disc brake, and proved itself convincingly at the 1953 24 Hours of Le Mans.
Seat Belts: The first standard three-point belts were installed in the 1959 Volvo 122 (Amazon). The driving gloves were optional, though.
Anti-Lock Braking: (ABS, from the German Antiblockiersystem) There were numerous predecessors to the definitive four-wheel production system introduced on the Mercedes S-Class in 1978. Chrysler’s Sure Brake operated on all four wheels, but had only three channels (both rear wheels controlled by the same modulator), or were rear-wheel only (Lincoln, others), or dead-end technology. Mercedes’ system used the induction wheel sensors and four-channel system that became the basis of all modern braking control systems, including traction control and ESP/ESC. Might as well lump them together, as they’re all off-shoots of that technology.
Air Bag: One of several technologies that were first developed in the US and perfected by Mercedes or other foreign companies. GM sold some 10,000 1974- 1976 cars with airbags, but in addition to their high cost, there were concerns about the risk of injury from their deployment, especially after some deaths as a result of that. GM’s air bags were designed to be used as a supplement to lap belts, as those airbag-equipped cars came specifically only with lap belts.
Mercedes’ key development was to design the second generation air bags to be specifically used in conjunction with shoulder belts, and to develop a pre-tensioning mechanism to the belts, thus reducing the likelihood of injuries from the rapidly inflating air bag. Mercedes introduced its SRS system them on the 1981 W126 S Class, and expanded their use across their passenger car line by 1985. The 1987 Porsche 944 turbo was the first car to have both driver and passenger car airbags as standard equipment.
Steel-belted Radial Tires: Invented by the Michelin Man in 1946, of course! Actually, an American, Arthur Savage, patented the radial tire in 1915, but it was never commercialized, and the patents expired.
So that covers at least some of the basic essentials to make a Camry what it is. Of course, there are countless other technologies too, from rear-view mirrors (1911 Marmon Wasp, above), interval wipers, back-up lights, etc. Never mind all the electronics. How about the first solid-state radio? Heater? Air conditioner? Add them in the comments, along with a picture (preferably), and we’ll create the mother of all cars, literally.
1968 DeSoto? Who knew?
The Camry and its competitors don’t use the torsion-beam rear suspension; rather they have fully independent rear suspension. You did say low-end cars, though, which is correct for them.
I had a ’75 Rabbit by the way — nice car, when it ran!
I just time-warped the DeSoto 10 years older. Good catch!
I must have had the Corolla on my brain. I will have to fix that!
And of course, one of the MOST important inventions– the intermittent windshield wiper– was invented by an American (even if the auto companies DID steal his idea and tried not to pay him royalties!) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1054588/
The Chyrsler version of the Bendix adaptive brake system was 4 wheel albeit a 4 sensor/3 channel system as shown in this post here at “home” https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/1950-chrysler-crown-imperial-four-wheel-disc-brakes-standard-but-not-like-modern-discs/ It used the current standard variable reluctance pickup sensing a toothed reluctor for it’s sensors. The only significant difference from today’s systems is that it’s modulators were vacuum powered rather than by a motor. The International Harvester real wheel only version of the Bendix Anit-Skid brake system from 1971 did use a device similar to a bicycle light generator operating on a rubber ring bonded to a drum that fit inside of the brake drum to provide it’s AC speed signal.
Thanks! You beat me to it.
I’ve modified the text somewhat, but still give the final credit to Mercedes for actually putting into mass production the type of four-channel system that is fundamentally still used today. It appears the Chrysler system controlled the rear wheels jointly with a single modulator.
Yes the Chrysler system like a number of systems to this day was a 3 channel system.
The early MB sytems were also 3-channel. They had a ring and sensor mounted on the rear differential.
There was also the Dunlop Maxaret anti-lock system (think I got that right) on the Jensen Interceptor FF in 1967, although that was completely different in operation from ABS
The modern Camry has fully independent strut rear suspension. I can’t think of a current mid-size car with torsion beam rear suspension. Torsion beam is still popular in compacts, subcompacts and minivans.
210delray beat me to it!
I’d argue the new North American Jetta is now a midsize and it uses a beam, and Nissan was using beams until recently on their midsizey stuff.
The funny thing about the Nissan torque beam suspension is when they went to that from a true IRS they touted that it was to improve handling since it didn’t experience camber change like a strut style IRS. Pretty slick marketing speak for “we cut costs to improve our margin”.
The Nissan beam suspension was not torsion beam. It’s more like a “dead axle,” a non-driving version of the “live axle” rear suspension also going extinct in modern cars (last time I checked, Hindustan Ambassador, Toyota Crown Comfort (the JDM taxi) and Ford Mustang are the only RWD cars still in production with a live axle)
The 2nd gen FWD Maxima had a simplified variation of Watt’s linkage. It had 2 links and one sliding joint.
The classic VW “torsion beam” is semi-independent. The twist in the torsion beam allows independent movement of the rear wheels. It acts like a large diameter anti-roll bar.
Jetta is bigger than ever, but it’s not competing against Camry. Passat is.
Toyota is rather alone in sticking with the simple strut rear suspension for the mid-size Camry. Everyone else has gone to some multi-link type arrangement.
I see were feeling all TTAC again aren’t we…..
GM offered factory airbags for both driver and passenger for 3 years, 1974,75 and 76, for all full size Oldsmobile, Buicks and Cadillacs (except wagons, convertibles and Cadlillac limousines) A decade before Mercedes Benz,(first new Benz I ever recall seing with an airbag was a 1984, they didn’t just “build a fleet of them for testing”
Buick also offered traction control as an option from 1971-1974
Chevrolet had fuel injection in 1957, and unlike Chrysler, they didn’t have to buy the cars back or convert them, they still offered fuel injection through 1965 on the Corvette, but there was no mention of that.
Wheres air conditioning, wait, was the skipped because you possibly would have had to say something positive about GM there too, although you could just have used Packard as an example, though they did offer it in 1939-40, they did not offer it again until the 50’s and when they did, it was a GM unit.
Trip Computer, although some claim that the Aston Martin Lagonda was the first car with a digital dash and a trip computer in 1976, but since they only make like 8 cars that year and most of them set themselves on fire I would nominate the 1978 Cadillac Seville with the optional trip monitor as the first production car with a trip computer.
I think he was referring to electronic FI systems. Mechanical FI systems have been around forever.
The Camry (and all modern cars) have electronic fuel injection systems, not mechanical, right? Bosch did build a mechanical FI for the German Gutbrod in 1952 though. And Stu Hilborn had one earlier, but it was not suitable for regular street use.
I’ve amended the text regarding the air bags. But in the end, Mercedes did the final development work that it took to make the system acceptable and safer.
I skipped a/c as well as other technologies only so that you could accuse me of being all TTACcy again. Or, as I said in the text, because this was a work in progress, and will be updated as additions and corrections come in via the comments. Thanks for yours!
The GM air bag system was acceptable and fully safe it just cost way too much ~$800, in relation to the car, to have broad acceptance.
yeah, I have no info about it killing anybody either.
You think it really was such a hot idea for GM to delete the shoulder belts? There were seven deaths in GM airbag-equipped cars, but I’m not going to get into a debate as to whether the fact that there weren’t shoulder belts with pre-tensioners had an impact on them.
I’m not denigrating the GM airbags; just pointing out that it was not the final evolution of a good idea.
Let’s just say that the Mercedes refinement of combining them with shoulder belts and pre-tensioners to avoid unnecessary additional exposure to the air-bags concussive rapid inflation did become the final system that everyone adopted, GM included.
Keep in mind that the big government selling point on airbags back in 1974 was, “With airbags you don’t have to wear seatbelts anymore.” No, I’m not kidding. I was following this quite closely at the time as the iron foundry I worked for made a ductile iron piece for an airbag system for one of the Detroit 3. Resistance to seat belts was (relatively) huge back in the 70’s, so the government lied regarding airbags in an effort to push their adoption.
Its really hard to believe Lap belts were even legal for front seats by then
I agree with you. And who was first with power seats, windows, mirrors, antennas, RDS-radio, Head-up display, CruiseControl, and so on? Almost all of the comfortequipment in todays cars is from the USA.
And GM’s airbags wasn’t tiny small “Euro-bags”, it was big airbags and it also had som small knee protection as well.
Minor correction: TorqueFlite actually didn’t appear until into the 1956 model year, and then I believe only on Imperials and 300Bs. If the criterion is “fully automatic transmission with more than two forward speeds,” it was preceded by the Borg-Warner-developed Fordomatic/Merc-o-matic and similar Borg-Warner DG around 1951. (The Fordomatic can be confusing because Ford later offered a two-speed transmission of the same name, but the pre-’58 models had three speeds, albeit with Ravigneaux gearsets, rather than Simpson.)
That’s what my memory was steering me too. But didn’t the DG/Studebaker version also have a direct drive component too? Which made it more advanced/efficient, but more expensive?
I knew the earlier Fordomatic had three speeds, but like all early BW units, it started in second, unless one selected Low, right? So was the later two-speed Fordomatic a substantially different unit than the earlier one?
I think the later two-speed FordoMatic used in the Falcon and Comet was a different, cheaper unit, more comparable to Powerglide, but I’ve never studied in any great detail. But yeah, the early DG and Fordomatic started in second unless you manually selected Low.
Computer-Controlled Fuel Injection: Remember the stalling, dieseling, failure-prone, power-starved, fuel-gulping carbureted engines of the 1970s? In the 1980s engines got a lot better, thanks to microprocessor chips.
A major milestone was reached in 1980 when Motorola introduced the first engine computer with microprocessor control, the EEC III module, which is now the standard approach. This integrated all powertrain sub-systems into a single control module.
The brain of every engine built today is a microprocessor, which controls electronic fuel injection, ignition timing, and often variable cam timing too. Its senses include crankshaft position, throttle position, temperatures of the coolant, catalyst and outside air, exhaust oxygen content, and lots of other things.
Ford introduced EEC III with centralized fuel injection (CFI) in their 302 V-8s. Many 1980 Fords, Mercurys and Lincolns came with EEC III that year, and it was standard on this otherwise antiquated Continental Mark VI.
Here’s a nice picture of 1984’s EEC IV module.
While the EECIII is one of the first mass produced “modern” EFI systems tied with Cadillac’s second EFI system known as “Digital Fuel injection”, both contained elements of the modern EFI system with the O2 sensor, short and long term fuel trims, and OBD. However the nod again goes to Cadillac with the 1975 introduction of their Bendix EFI. It actually produced low emissions unlike the original Bosch EFI that required 6.0% CO to idle worth a darn so it actually was dirtier than a properly tuned carb.
Electronic, yes, like the Bosch D-Jetronic, but not computerized. They had a few basic hardwired functions, nothing like the capabilities the microprocessor brought to engine control.
In fact, the modern ECU does so much more than fuel injection, I would change the title to Computer Engine Control.
Caddy introduced a digital processor to the FI system in 78.
Yes, digital but hardwired, not a computer. It’s hard to imagine today but in the 1970s there were quite a few pre-computer digital controls. The key distinction being a computer runs instructions out of a memory, so a lot more capability and specificity is possible at low cost. EEC III had an 8-bit Motorola microprocessor similar to the early home computers.
I was under the impression that disk brakes and seat belts were airplane technology that was adapted to automobiles after WWII.
The four valve dohc engine was used in Indianapolis 500 race cars from the 1930s to the 1970s. Offenhauser derived the design from the Peugeot that won the Indy race in 1913. At the time European and Japanese companies adopted the layout, the Peugot was ancient history, but they would have known about the Offenhauser.
Fuel injection was originally developed for diesels, and in WWII it was adapted for airplanes. After WWII it was adapted to dragsters (Hillborn), and by the mid-50s MB and corvette were using it. It was all mechanically controlled in that era, but the electronic control is not fundamental to the device. Electronic control eventually allowed fi to be cheap enough to kill off carburetors completely.
We have disagreed previously about the fundamental role of the Mini in popularizing traverse engined front drive as the primary architecture for small sedans world wide. I will make my case this way. The Mini was the successful first post WWII car with that layout. It attracted hordes of imitators. Many of them refined the Mini design. I regard the details of the transmission layout as just that. Details. Before the Mini, everybody wanted to make a better VW Bug, and may OEMs tried. After the Mini, VW deep-sixed the Bug and built traverse engined front drive cars, as did everybody else.
4 valve heads were used on the WW2 R R Merlin aero-engine, but the valves were driven by single camshafts and were not inclined ( no hemi head ).
The Minis main achievment was space utilization rather than front drive one required the other but untill the gearbox became seperated front drive was not poplular due to the sheer unreliability of the BMC layout
Keep this up and the record for comments is probably going to fall.
I think it just did.
Ahem, electric start, anyone? Hand cranking (or push starting) a European four-valve DOHC is no fun. First by GM/Cadillac, via Delco, along with electric lighting, generator, and the whole shebang. Also, key-start by Chrysler (I think). Earlier cars (including a very nice ’47 Chevy I’ve seen) used a weird foot pedal switch.
Super great idea, Paul, good stuff!
The car on the left must be the one with Anti-Block Braking, from the looks of those blocks.
I always thought it was `Anti-lock Braking System’, but I could be wrong. 🙂
Yes, My German is showing again. ABS stands for Antiblockiersystem, which is why I wrote “Anti-Blocking Brakes”.
This one borders on the ridiculous, but according to Wikipedia, Cadillac offered the first steel roof!
Windscreen wipers! The horrible vacuum powered ones. By Tri-Continental, NY.
I was going to mention the Autobianchi Primula myself – and it’s close second rival, the Simca 100/1201 that came out in 1967.
The Primula was also almost one of the first hatchbacks sold and as you said, heralded in the now common FWD layout with a separate transaxle. The Primula also heralded in 4 wheel disc brakes (not common AT ALL in a car at this price point). The car DID have rack and pinion steering, though the gearbox shifter was on the column.
The Simca was a derivative of that same design, though it utilized a fully independent suspension utilizing double wishbone in the rear and a Chrysler style torsion beam unit up front. The Simca was also the first TRUE hatchback in that not only did it have a liftgate, but the rear seat actually folded down. So technically, the Simca was the first or one of the first true hatchbacks sold anywhere. Also, Simca canted the engine 30 Degrees to lower the hood and most FWD cars still do this to this day.
The gestation of the FWD car we know today which brought all the technologies we know well was the Fiat 128. It had the FWD layout of its cousin, the Primula but incorporated OHC motors of 1.1 and 1.3L displacement, McPherson Strut suspension, radial tires, front wheel disc brakes, transverse mounted with separate transaxle though it only came in 2 and 4 door sedans, a sport coupe and a 3 door wagon called the Familiare. But the Yugoslavian built Zastava 101 took the 128 sedan and modified it into a notchback hatchback, similar in shape to the Simca and it had the fold down rear seat, but contained all the mechanical bits from the 128. The Zaztava Koral was the smaller FWD variant, based on Fiat’s smaller 127, which became the basis for the Yugo GV et-al sold here.
So a little bit more info on the FWD technology that I wrote last spring for my own online journal.
The Hillman Imp of 1963 had a lift-up rear window accessing a luggage area & fold-down rear seat (split-fold in the 1966 coupe models), even if it was not a proper hatchback it was a step along the way.
Yes, you are quite right, but in terms of it being what we know today as a hatchback, the Simca is it for the rear window was not easy to get to thanks to the trunk.
Here is a photo I snagged from Aroline.
The trunk is only a bit over a foot long so not a huge issue. It is easier to load large/heavy items by tipping the passenger seat forward (the whole seat not just the backrest) and loading via the door. I know of a gent who used one for his tv repair business in the 60’s-70’s and those tv’s weren’t small.
Hadn’t seen that photo before, nice!
Austin A40 Farina had an opening back in 61 and folding rear seat.
Not sure whether this was an absolute first but the 1971 BMW 1600/1800/2000/2000 tii touring (hatchback version of the 02 series) combined a *split* folding rear seat with a large hatch.
Crank triggered ignition a major component of truly modern ignition systems goes to Lincoln and the Versailles with the EEC-II computer controlled timing, despite being fueled by a carb.
First to ditch the archaic distributor was GM’s Buick division in 1985.
First to ditch the distributor in modern ECU-driven cars, but don’t forget the fifties DKWs and Saabs.
come on man its the 21st century ,and cars still have wheels and drive along on the ground..i mean come on ..wheres repulserlift technoligy like in star wars,cars with seamless energy ..where are the flying cars that float,hover and fly,like blade runner spinner cars,,lol ..we were promised all of this by the 21st century,lol
Inconsequential, all of these… What’s *really* important is which car was the first to utilize rust-proofing that actually worked?
(c:
That may well have been the Audi 100 C3 (5000 to you ‘mericans) launched in August 1982 who was one of the first if not the first mass-produced cars to have a fully galvanized body.
Austin Australia were galvanising 1800s in the late 60s
For what it’s worth, I believe Lincoln offered the first remote garage door opener sometime in the late 70s.
Not to forget- the English invented rust and the Italians perfected it.
Back in 1913 Cadillac brought forth the modern ignition system with electric starter as we know it today with a distributor, starter, coil and spark plugs and a generator to keep the battery charged.
It was all due to a death with a Cadillac that begat this technology. In 1912, a woman driving her caddy stalled on a bridge and could not crank the engine herself so she waited until a Samaritan came along and tried to crank it, but in doing so, she forgot to retard the spark and it backfired, bringing the crank back around, hitting the man in the face so they waited until 2 men came along, one tried to save the injured man, but he died, the other vowed NOT to let this happen and went on to develop the electric starter, name, Kettering.
The electric starter and subsequent electrical system was first introduced the following year and within a few short years most cars had it, including the Model T.
For the record, Charles Kettering, of Dayton Engineering Laboratories Co. (DELCO), filed the patent in 1911. His insight was you can run an electric motor at much higher voltage and current for a short time that it can stand continuously. Along similar lines five years earlier he replaced the hand crank with a motor on an NCR cash register. (Dayton was a hotbed of innovation 100 years ago, like the Bay Area in our time.)
Cadillac picked it up and showed it at the 1912 Detroit Auto Show. GM bought out DELCO in 1920 and Kettering began his long and storied career as head of GM Research.
Your right, I was going off memory of what I knew of the story, much the same as what you wrote but was too lazy to look it back up though.
It’s a great story.
Here’s a few more:
-Modern control layout (position of steering wheel, foot pedals, and gearshift) – Cadillac, but popularized by Austin who then infected Japan and Germany with it. There was a good “Top Gear” segment presented by James May on this.
-Stamped steel auto bodies – Dodge, this quickly became the dominant design for car body work, and arguably led to a reduction in the number of automakers as the barrier to entry was much higher when expensive presses had to be capitalized.
-Four wheel Hydraulic Brakes – Invented by Lougheed, but developed an popularized by Chrysler.
…….”original Bosch EFI that required 6% CO to idle worth a darn and was dirtier than a properly tuned carb?”
And what car would have required this 6% setting? My 1974 CIS still works exceptionally well at the factory spec of 2-3%.
The adage “invention is the product of the momentum of technology” implies that rarely does an innovation spring from the mind of a single person or organization. Yet without Edward G. Budd the car of today may not have come about. Budd was THE pioneer of stamped steel, welded carbodies (as opposed to “composite” wood-steel carbodies), that among other things, were rigid enough to keep window glass from rattling anoyingly in closed car bodies. When Budd began supplying all-steel carbodies to the Dodge Brothers in 1914, open or touring cars ruled the day since they didn’t have glass windows other than windshields. But by 1921 all-steel closed cars began to outsell open cars. Closed cars could be driven comfortably all year round. That changed automotive manufacture from a seasonal business to one that operated year round. Andre Citroen began his association with Budd in 1923. Budd supplied Citroen with tools, steel and training to build all-steel carbodies. Citroen was not a car guy, he was a production guy. Citroen’s car production went from 30-50 units a day to 400-500 units a day using Budd methods and tools. Although never articulated by Andre Citroen, Edward Budd was highly instrumental in the development of the Traction Avant.
Very important point. All these comments will be incorporated in an updated version. Thanks.
This is great, I never knew about the Budd/Citroen connection. Budd also patented a method of welding stainless steel, an essential technique for the construction of the classic American streamlined passenger train. And Budd passenger cars had disc brakes, starting in the 30s IIRC.
Not just any streamlined passenger train, but *the* Pioneer Zephyr! Of course, there were others that Budd had nothing to do with, like UP’s duralumin M-10000, to say nothing of Milwaukee’s legendary steam-powered Hiawatha, but the Zephyr is most etched in public memory.
Budd also had a show car, which he probably pitched to AMC as a personal soprts car or such. This was *before* the Mustang. Of course, AMC being AMC, it came to nought.
Too bad Budd Steel is now a part of Krupp ubermensch Steel.
There are a few innovations that lead to high quality, affordable main stream cars:
I think Cadillac gets credit for the first car made entirely out of standardized interchangeable parts – which led to the slogan “The Standard of the World”
Ford developed mass production techniques that led to cars that middle class people could actually afford.
Toyota observed the production techniques used by Ford, and combined them with the ideas of W. Edwards Demming to come up with the “Toyota Production System” that led to huge increases in the quality of affordable mass produced cars.
Great article, and excellent comments – Thanks!
Ford influenced more than Toyota. The Germans and Russians benefited from his manufacturing model as well.
Standardised Interchangeable Parts was the creed of the `American System of Manufacturing’. It began with firearms production at Springfield. This method was so intensely associated with American concerns that it got the aforementioned name. Cars hadn’t been popularised then. Cadillac simply applied the American System to car manufacture. In retrospect, it is impossible to think of any other way to do it, but Cadillac did it first. In contrast is the `English System’ based on highly skilled artisans and craftsmen, as practiced by British RR (and old American luxury makes) till its end. Ford (and FIAT) took the system to its logical zenith. Toyota applied Deming’s methods of quality control to the system, with great results.
If I recall correctly, Eli Whitney’s Colt revolver was the first use of standardized interchangeable parts to simplify mass production – haven’t got time to check with Google right now though.
Ford of course took standardized parts and mass production to the next level.
Although the “Toyota Production System” is arguably largely based on American ideas from Ford, Demming, and the grocery store, Toyota gets credit for developing and applying this system.
Again, I don’t have time to double check the facts, but I remember an interesting story about the origins of the “Toyota Production System”. Apparently Mr. Toyoda, his son, and his chief Engineer visited a Ford plant in the ’50s, and were struck by the amount of waste in the operation – material stacked to the ceiling, people running all over, etc. When they went for a break, they were inspired by the efficiency of the pop machine – there was always one, and only one, bottle of pop available for you to take when you bought a drink. They then thought about the grocery store – it couldn’t have too much food in inventory, because unlike car parts, food that wasn’t sold quickly would spoil. On the other hand, if the grocery store didn’t have enough food in stock, customers would walk away empty handed and the store wouldn’t make a sale.
First solid-state car radio? It is surprisingly hard to track down. Motorola built an all-transistor car radio in 1956, to demonstrate their new power transistors, but I can’t Google up any photos or model numbers.
So I think the honor goes to Delco again, specifically the 1958 Oldsmobile, which could be ordered with a strange “Trans-Portable” radio. Dials on the dash like usual, but you could pull the radio out and use it as a portable. That must be a super collector’s item today. Found this picture in the always invaluable Old Car Manual Project.
The Corvette had a Transistorized radio in 1956. I’m guessing it was a Motorola unit though and not a Delco.
Yes, I saw that about the Corvette and can’t quite get to ground on it. During the transition from tubes to transistors, “transistorized” car radios had some of each, like the “New Deluxe Radio” next to it. The ’58 Olds brochure clearly says “transistors completely replaced by tubes”, so that’s for sure. Regardless I think Delco was first in a production car.
Looks like we’re both wrong.. Chrysler and Philco had the first solid state car radio in the U.S in 1955.
“Chrysler Corporation and Philco broke the news in 1955 of a startling new development in car radios. Phenomenal surface-barrier transistors resulted in a radio that did not heat up and that had no tubes”
That’s quite a commercial, but I didn’t see a radio, did you? I checked some Imperial brochures without finding it as an option.
But the ’57 Imperial did offer a record player. Special records only for the player, didn’t catch on. But I think it does qualify as the first car music player. Long before the 8-track.
Hiway HiFi!!
There were all kinds of crazy things coming out of Chrysler in those days, here are three more that are likely on the subject Camry today:
Crusie control, 1958:
http://www.imperialclub.com/Articles/58AutoPilot/index.htm
Auto dimming mirrors, with vacuum tube and relay inside:
http://www.ch300imp.com/mirrormatic_1959.htm
EL Dashlights:
http://automotivemileposts.com/imperial1960panelescent.html
The Chrysler “Highway HiFi” was introduced as an option for 1956 model year Chrysler Corporation vehicles. The system used special 7 inch records and were played on a phonograph developed by CBS Labs. The 16 2/3 rpm records provided 45 minutes of music and were available for purchase from Chrysler Corporation dealers. This would be the first sound system with which the owner could control the music being played, so long as the owner was satisfied with the choices offered by Columbia Records. The unit was optional for the 1956-58 model years.
In 1959, the system was replaced by an RCA system that played standard 45 rpm records. This system was offered only in 1960-61.
There’s a good argument for open standards in there – I’ll bet someone with a working ’56 – ’58 HIghway HiFi would have few, if any records for it, while anyone with a ’60 or ’61 unit would have plenty of selection.
As for the first car radio, that honor goes to Galvin Manufacturing of Chicago. In 1930 they introduced the “Motorola” 5T71 car radio, which could be installed in most cars. Motor car + Victrola = Motorola, get it?
There’s a direct line connecting that 1930 Motorola car radio through their 1940 battlefield Handie-Talkie, their 1973 invention of the first handheld cellular telephone, EEC III’s Motorola microprocessor in 1980, to the Motorola smartphone in my pocket. Which, to close a circle, is my primary car radio (internet and podcasts) as well as traffic reporter and nav system.
Nice slide show on this at Technology Review.
Slightly off topic, but why does the Camry in the photo have an Avalon badge on the front quarter panel (and the license plate says Avalon too)? I’m guessing it’s a JDM car since the steering wheel is on the right. Just curious.
Aurion; high end version of the Camry made for Australia and some other Asian markets. Just keeping you on your toes!
Got it, thanks.
Made in Australia at Altona Melbourne
Here’s a video with the Olds Trans-Portable: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d36TVk1hNOw
I’m surprised there hasn’t been mention of the Cadillac V8-6-4 yet. Cylinder deactivation almost seems like old hat now.
Ford had an early version of an “active” suspension in the 87-88 Turbo Coupe and 89-95 Super Coupe.
One important note about strut style suspension the name McPherson gets thrown around a lot but it technically describes a very specific steering suspension. If it’s on the rear of a car it’s not a McPherson strut. If the control arm if not located for and aft by a sway bar it’s not a McPherson strut. The last car I’m aware of being sold in the US is the first gen Escort/Tempaz.
According to Wikipedia, the McPherson strut can be used on both the front and back wheels, most commonly the front whereby it also provided the mounting point for the front wheels and uses a Kingpin as part of the steering linkage.
The design of the strut allows it to be used as a pivot point for the wheel to turn so you can steer the car but it Could also be used in the back as I said as well.
The basic design is that it’s a strut with a coil and wheel hub mounting all in one unit, which makes it a popular choice for lower priced cars. It’s main drawbacks are limited adjustments for camber and it does not allow a lot of vertical movement of the wheel without altering camber and has higher NVH characteristics than say a double wishbone suspension.
And it’s often more expensive to replace since it’s one large unit instead of simply a shock absorber that you can replace by itself.
In the French-speaking world, they distinguish between McPherson and pseudo-McPherson. The latter typically refers to a setup where you have a (single) wishbone instead of a control arm with the result that the sway bar is no longer used for steering. This would square with Eric’s version.
They are just lumping them all together like so many people (and car companies do). The thing that differentiates McPherson’s strut suspension from Chapman’s original strut suspension, and what earned the patent is the addition of that steering bearing in the upper mount, the use of a single link with a ball joint at it’s attachment to the steering knuckle, and the incorporation of that sway bar for the for and aft location. The engineering spec that GM was said to have given McPherson was to design a front suspension with the lowest possible number of parts and the lowest possible cost.
The strut style suspension shown in the article is a straight Chapman design with multiple lower links to provide both fore and aft location as well as prevent pivoting of the assembly with no location duties carried by a sway bar.
Edit: The Omni used a coil over similar to a Chapman strut in the rear. Withdrawn.
In regards to the Simca as the first hatchback, Kaiser made a car whose seat and trunklid folded and rear window lifted in the early fifties. It was called the Traveller/ Vagabond. And hydrulic brakes were invented (IIRC) by the Duesenberg brothers, who pioneered their use on their model A, while Chrysler introduced them to the broader market.
The National Academy of Engineering has an automotive timeline that confirms that Duesy was first with hydraulic brakes. It has quite a few interesting firsts, including the fact that cruise control was invented by a blind man.
http://www.greatachievements.org/?id=3880
Wikipedia confirms that man was Ralph Teetor, longtime president of Perfect Circle, and cruise control first appeared in the ’58 Imperial.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cruise_control
Interesting that you should have chosen that pic of Duncan Hamilton/Tony Rolt driving Jag C type (#18) in the 1953 24 hrs le Mans. Tony Rolt went on to work with Ferguson and was involved with 4wd development (including the viscous coupling method found in, yes you guessed, syncro Vanagons)
alistair
Excuse me Paul but I think now we need a post about which cars/manufacturers were the last to use various things. Last pushrod engines in mass production, last carburated engine, last car with manual brakes, last car with a crank starter, ect…
Great idea Edu, I think you should get cracking on it!
Last pushrod engine? Why? They’re still being made…
I was thinking just the same. Last non-hydraulic brakes. Last without a standard heater. Or a standard radio. Last vent windows. Last split windshield. Last floor-button starter. Last car (not truck) with a chrome bumper. Last flathead. Last three-on-the-tree. Last front drum brakes. Last vacuum-powered wipers. Last car with a front bench seat?
Last without a gas gauge: ’61 VW.
I think the last car with a chrome bumper was the ’96 Fleetwood. The Caprice and Roadmaster made do with plastic bumper covers.
Last vent windows were on pickup trucks, then Ford brought them back in the 1980’s as an option for a few years.
To me, there’s someting wrong with a big, beautiful box panther coupe with vent vindows and fixed rear glass, but I liked those anyway!
VW offered them as an option in the latter 80’s as well.
The Trabant never had a standard gas gauge, up until 1990. It may also be the last two-stroke car in production
Paul, do you think we need to draw a line? Like Trabant, that wasn’t available in the “West” so I don’t think it’s useful to count it. Lots of primitive rides are still made in some parts of the world, but not sold in the so-called developed world. I wouldn’t want to say just USA – we have a global curbside here. Can we say US/Canada+Australia/NZ+Japan+EU/Norway/Switzerland…..? EU meaning at the time of production, not now, how the heck can we just say you know…???
Well that’s an interesting point. However, the Trabant was available in many western European countries through the 60s. I know a decent number went to the Netherlands, Iceland, Austria, and others.
On the gas gauge point there were cars like the Goggomobile T250, which ended production in 69 and didn’t have a gauge (at least in the early 60s).
Sadly the pushrod engines are still amongst us. I think American automakers are the ones still actively developing it, as opposed to just producing older engines that they’ve licensed from other makes.
Last carbureted engines sold in the US:
In a passenger car sold to the public: 1990 Oldsmobile Custom Cruiser and Buick Estate Wagon, 1990 Honda Prelude 2.0 S
In a police car: 1991 Ford Crown Vic
In an SUV: 1991 Jeep Grand Wagoneer
In a pickup truck: 1994 Isuzu
(from Wikipedia)
Elsewhere in the world, carbureted cars were sold a little longer.
Did they not keep the carburettor in the Civic a little longer? They did in Australia for a year or two, I’d guess that Lada sold the last carby car here.
There is nothing inherently sad about retaining ‘obsolete’ technology. Pushrod engines can be made more compact, and easier to add VVT to. And no-one ought put the ‘Modern’ Independent-suspended Jeep Liberty as being in the same league as the supposedly obsolete Jeep Cherokee which preceded it, as the five-link front suspension of the latter was and is ideal for its application. So I think that what makes a great engineer or critic is the understanding that there can be more than one solution to a problem, and what is best is not always how the winds are blowing at the time. Just look at the Bristol Fighter and its engineering….
Well said. Technologies never die completely. There are always cases where the old way is the best way. Pushrods and front suspensions being two very good examples. Every good engineer understands that. It’s what makes all this so interesting!
I always felt that OHV was the later, more robust, more modern design, while OHC was a complex older design that was only made feasible through better materials and preventive maintenance, though I could be wrong about the timelines. OHV was probably invented by Buick or Chevrolet (the men), while OHC had been in existence earlier (like the Peugeot). Dunno why OHC is perceived more `modern’.
I think the Trabant had the transverse setup before the Autobianchi. It came out in 57, the two-cylinder is inline with the transmission, and a differential on the back. The only difference is there is no torque anyway so torque-steer isn’t a problem!
The photo is my Trabant without the engine tin, differential is in the back under the leaf spring.
Wow. I’m fascinated by this car. That’s a rear engine? Trabant deserves a full CC, without the usual Commie-bashing to go around. A simple, robust, honest piece of engineering.
It’s front engine, front wheel-drive. They do get a lot of bashing, mostly because they were built up until the 90s almost unchanged. But if you look at them when they were designed, and for their original intended lifetime (1957-1969) they were pretty innovative cars
The Trabant is just a development of the pre-war DKW, which first had a transverse engine fwd in the twenties! https://www.curbsideclassic.com/curbside-classics-european/curbside-classic-1958-dkw-sonderklasse-36-f94-the-proto-audi/
But the old DKW setup was not transmission in line with the engine. The transmission was in front of the engine. Like in this brochure photo for the P70 (it was behind the engine in the P70 but the same unit). The Trabant however was inline, the same setup (minus number of stokes and cylinders) as the Autobianchi.
This photo shows the Trabant setup.
This is interesting! Paul, do we need to dethrone the Primula?
I believe nobody mentioned power locks. Wikipedia credits a 1914 Scripps-Booth for first introducing them, the 1956 Packard for popularizing them and the much maligned 1982 Renault Fuego for the first remote control application.
My first encounter with power locks was in a Mercedes W123 station wagon sometime around 1980. The combined efforts of my brother and myself (then aged 6 or thereabouts) promptly disabled the system. My father who had to explain this to the owner was not amused.
What about alloy wheels? The first street applications seem to have been on Italian exotics (Ferrari and the like), trickling down to Alfa Romeo and Fiat before being adopted by Mercedes and BMW around 1968. Among the latter, I believe the BMW E9 Coupe (1968 2800 CS) was the first to have them as standard equipment, albeit with chrome hubcaps.
Another ubiquitous feature: Power windows. Introduced by Packard in 1940 for its 180 series according to Wikipedia. As for manual crank windows, these were apparently first produced in 1928 by a Max Brose and sold to Daimler-Benz, Volkswagen, Borgward and Lloyd according to wikipedia.de.
First three-speed full automatic: 1905 Sturtevant. I did a halfway animated description of it here:
http://polistrasmill.blogspot.com/2014/09/coulda-hada-automatic-in-1905.html
Also, seat belts were clearly familiar in 1934. Note the casual use of a lap belt in this Airflow stunt clip:
About the first modern automatic transmission. (by ‘modern’, I of course mean one that used an actual torque converter as opposed to the straight fluid coupling used in the GM Hydramatics), you forgot about Packard and their Ultramatic, first offered as a 199 dollar option on their top of the line 1949 Senior models and made optional across the full Packard model line for 1950. It was also the first automatic transmission to be developed entirely in house by a single car manufacturer, with no outside assistance. And the later (and actually the last) Ultramatics – used on the 1955 and ’56 Packards even had a lock-up mechanism built into the torque converter for greatly increased efficiency – a feature not available on GM, Ford and Chrysler automatics until sometime in the 1980’s.