Traveling long distances in an old car is a unique combination of exhilaration, hyper-awareness, and stress. I made several long trips in my former 1963 Ford Galaxie, one of which covered six states, with only one instance of having a bad outcome. This lived experience offers some insight into the variety of thoughts Peter was likely experiencing while driving his 1935 Chrysler Airflow back to his home.
However, his Chrysler is 28 years older than was my Ford and parts for his Chrysler are not going to be as easily sourced. Peter’s trip surpassed any of mine, as he was traveling through at least nine states (depending upon his route), plus he was also visiting two countries with his quite rare Airflow.
When Walter P. Chrysler, pictured here, incorporated his namesake company in 1925, he also hired three people who had worked together at both Studebaker and Willys-Overland. Carl Breer, Owen Skelton, and Fred Zeder were quite a formidable group. Breer had been fascinated with the rising speed and power of automobiles, which led to studying aerodynamics.
The study of aerodynamics was quite new at the time, with many preconceived notions about what helped a car cut neatly through the air proving to be counter to what was being discovered by Breer. The old assertion about cars being more aerodynamic when going backwards came from the research conducted by Breer, Skelton, and Zeder. They found this was indeed the case with various cars from the late 1920s and early 1930s.
Breer’s work with Skelton and Zeder (who specialized in powertrains and marketing, respectively) led to the design of a then unconventional automobile in which the cabin and engine were moved forward and passengers sat within the frame, not on top of it.
The result was the 1934 Airflow.
Chrysler wasn’t the only make within Chrysler Corporation to adopt the Airflow styling. DeSoto jumped in with both feet, as all their 1934 cars were Airflows. In contrast, Chrysler had still maintained the Chrysler 6 line, whose appearance wasn’t a radical departure from the 1933 models.
For comparison, here is a 1933 Chrysler.
With this being a 1934 Chrysler 6.
Perhaps Chrysler was hedging its bets better than was DeSoto. A wise move, as DeSoto sales dropped 45% for 1934. The traditional appearing Chryslers outsold the Airflows by roughly 2.5 to 1 with less than 8,000 Airflows being produced for 1934.
The loud declaration of the market compelled Chrysler to update the Airflow’s frontal styling for 1935. The hope was to make something more traditional appearing and not continue to alienate the market. It didn’t help.
Despite all the marketing literature (some of which can be found here), testimonials, and deliveries to notable persons such as the Japanese Royal Family, the Airflow was a sales disaster.
As Breer would later correctly state, the Airflow was a car ahead of its time. While so many of the traits found in 1934 Airflow did not resonate with buyers, these traits were later reintroduced into automotive construction, which we see today. Aerodyamics, a cab forward layout, and a unibody? Chrysler did it in 1934.
Sugary drinks have so much flak thrown their way. Were it not for my affinity for them, I never would have stopped at this gas station where this Airflow was prepping for the next stage of its journey.
Pulling in, my coworker and I were viewing the Airflow from approximately this angle and distance. There are glimmers of split-window Volkswagen in this view, at least to those who have infinitely more exposure to VW’s than mid-Depression era Chryslers. We both remarked about the resemblance, but I pointed out how this black beauty was simply too large. I suspected it of being an Airflow, but was in disbelief, particularly with it being a two-door. But the badge on the fender skirt and the wheels gave it away.
Prioritizing curiosity over thirst, I walked across the lot. Striking up a brief conversation with Peter, the owner, netted me a nice amount of information. He was also surprised I knew what he was driving.
Peter told me he had just attended the annual Airflow convention in Springfield, Illinois, and was driving back home. Home is the San Francisco Bay Area, approximately 2,100 miles from Springfield.
Peter had driven his Airflow to the annual meet in 2024, which was held in Ontario, somewhere around Toronto. In turn, Peter had left the Airflow there to be repainted, and he had flown to Toronto a few days prior to our meeting to retrieve his Chrysler for his trip to the Airflow gathering in Springfield.
In other words, his car had been driven very little for a year.
Springfield is 700 miles from Toronto, so his total trip was approximately 2,800 miles.
Chrysler had two trim levels for the two-door Airflow in 1935, a base Airflow 8 and the Imperial Airflow 8. The base two-door saw a mere 72 examples produced whereas the Imperial two-door had 200 copies. Based upon Peter’s keychain, which said “Imperial,” I’m going to hazard a guess his is the relatively more common Imperial Airflow 8.
Peter was on the phone and trying to determine directions while I took these pictures. Given where Peter started, in relation to where he was at and where he was headed, I suspect he had another stop along the way as he was not on the most direct route.
With its flathead straight-eight, an overdrive transmission, plus advertisements from the 1930s extolling the remarkable fuel mileage being realized by owners of the highly aerodynamic Airflow, Peter had a car that lent itself nicely to exploring the United States and Canada, regardless of year traveled.
Peter likely had a great journey and let’s hope he made it home without any undue challenges. It is cars like this Airflow that really (re?)ignite a desire to travel long distances in old cars.
Found June 2025
Auxvasse, Missouri
Related Reading
Changing Winds – The 1934 to 1937 Airflow by Aaron Severson / Ate Up With Motor
An 1100 Mile Road Trip in a 1963 Ford Galaxie by me
A Trip To Nashville in My Galaxie by me
Wow, what a great catch! With a great story to go with it. I have seen a couple of Airflows in my life, but both were at shows.
I recall reading once that one reason 1934 was such a bad sales year for the Airflow was that the launch was delayed and there were early manufacturing hiccups. But it was mostly the depression and the car itself.
A delay in production doesn’t surprise me. I would imagine there were distinct growing pains with manufacturing the Airflow, then add in its (for the time) look and a depression as you stated and its easy to see why this didn’t fly out of showrooms. I did see when researching this how Chrysler employed 15 people for production of the seats. Not sure if that was typical or not, but even the seats in these are quite different than in other cars of the time.
A few days ago I stumbled upon a CC about a 1960 Chrysler I wrote in 2018 or 2019. It was a car I found in two different states, 48 hours apart in sightings. It was part of a tour and I mentioned having also seen a 1935 Chrysler Airflow two-door…what are the odds of finding two, two-door 1935 Airflows moving under their own power in current times?
This is a candidate for CC of the year isn’t it? A great looking example of a rare variant of a very interesting classic and CC, being used by a clearly enthusiastic and friendly owner who is taking good care of it and using it and enjoying it.
It is only through reading CC features like this that I (stuck here on a little island off Europe) realised that the Airflow was not just a style exercise but included the cab forward, passengers within the frame packaging etc. Almost America’s Traction Avant in some ways?
And, yes, there is a bit of Beetle in there or vice versa
While I don’t want to pat myself on the back (doing so is tacky), I have to admit this was quite the find. Seven months later I’m still amazed I saw it. It’s enough reason to drink more Pepsi.
Indeed the Airflow was the whole package. The engine was moved forward, it was profoundly stout (period advertising showed one going over a cliff, then being started up and driven off), and somebody drove one coast to coast and averaged 18 mpg – quite good for such a car during those times. It was indeed ahead of its time.
I’m loving the glassine paint job here .
I’ve only ever seen a few two door Airflows .
-Nate
The paint truly did look like black glass.
I loved this. And since you mentioned a coworker in this piece, I also like that you made this spotting and had this interview while otherwise on the job. This is totally something I would have done.
In perhaps one of the weirdest examples of the CC Effect that I have yet experienced, my 1:32 scale Chrysler Airflow diecast (mine is a ’36) arrived in the mail just yesterday. I do not look at what other authors have scheduled when scheduling my own essays weeks in advance. I did not breathe a word to anyone that I was buying a mini Airflow.
I love that the cab forward Chryslers of the ’90s were in essence sort of a repeat of the Airflow idea – complete with radical styling, but which was wholly embraced by the buying public. Everything I remember reading about the Airflow recently tracks with what you’ve written.
Back in 2019, I got up close to a Chrysler Airflow at the Revs Museum in Naples, Florida. I remember having a very emotional reaction to that car. It was simply ahead of its time.
Thank you for this!
Thank you.
Well, the coworker was technically my assistant, so perhaps there was some degree of influence in sticking around. Plus, I’m at the point in my career where I’m not so concerned about wandering away for a few minutes. I am what has been coined within the organization as being “bulletproof”. I have been retirement eligible for 18 months.
The Airflow has always attracted me. While I didn’t emphasize it much, Peter asked if I knew what he was driving and was amazed when I answered it correctly. I just like them, although it being a two-door did throw me.
I’d like to take that for a 2800 mile trip. With its overdrive transmission, I’m sure it rolls along quite happily at close-to-modern speeds.
Yes, Chrysler should have put a conventional prowed front end on it from the beginning. That’s what Lincoln did with its aerodynamic Zephyr, and it was well accepted.
The Airflow was the first American production car to seat six reasonably comfortable, as its seats were significantly wider and the rear seat was not hemmed in by the rear wheel housings.
More than a small part of me was wishing I could drive that Airflow back to San Francisco for Peter. The interior room, even on this two-door, was truly amazing. It was so far ahead of its contemporaries.
That’s a great find! Those cars were ahead of their time.
Obviously they failed because of their styling – but was there anything that could have been done? I wonder. I think maybe if they put the headlights on the fenders. The rest of the car looks pretty good, but the “face”, the public just wasn’t going for it.
A bit more tweaking of the front would have certainly helped with sales. The front of the ’34 has a certain droopy-eyed look to it.
Thanks, Jason! Best curbside finding in a long time! (No offense meant to others).
My dad was 14 when the Airflows came out. I asked him one time why they failed. “They were ugly,” is all he said, with an implied “Why, are you stupid?” added on the end. Yet he was an early US buyer (1955) and big fan of the VW Beetle and the Porsche 356. Go figure.
Perhaps his philosophy changed in the intervening 20 years? That said, I do get what he was saying.
Who knew there was enough interest in Chrysler Airflows to have an annual meeting? I found the subject car on line at the 2024 meeting, held in London, Ontario.
Cool!
London is closer to Windsor than it is to Toronto. The drive from T.O. to London is about 2.5 hours.
Thanks for finding this. I was having trouble finding pictures from their 2024 meet. Other years were no problem, was ’24 was.
Isn’t London close to where Ford has/had a plant?
The photo I found was on Zukerberg’s site. I don’t know of a Ford plant down that way, their big operation here is in Oakville, which is near to me in Mississauga, and what used to be a short hop from Toronto. That hop is longer now due to all day rush hour traffic.
Near London is the GM operation in Ingersoll, where they used to build SUVs. When that was discontinued, they built the Brightdrop van there, but that has been shelved due to low sales.
What a catch! It looks like Peter just drove it out of a museum and there to the minimart…particularly with that fantastic paint job. I wonder if he gave the car a good wash at the end of each travel day. I’ve seen a few of these in museums, but never out in the world.
Given there is a sizable car museum with lots of ’30s iron about 10 miles south of where I found this Chrysler, my first thought was it indeed came from a museum. Never would I have guessed its story.
Incredible! An Airflow would be an amazing sight anywhere, but at a Mid Missouri Casey’s?? Wow.
I looked up the annual Airflow meet in Ontario, and it seems that there were 17 Airflows, many (or most?) driven great distances. Must be an interesting group of enthusiasts.
Indeed. I suppose I need to stop at Casey’s more often…or not; there is generally something interesting at Casey’s, but of the more low-brow type of interesting.
If 17 Airflows are still being driven, that is likely a goodly portion of surviving examples.
What a beautiful car! I would love to have that machine.
It was an amazing sight and for my cheapie camera, I’m pumped about how well the pictures turned out.
What a car, I remember learning about these when I was a kid, helped me decide when I was choosing a favourite car maker.
Love the wings on the fender skirts.
Interesting it has blackwall tires, an image check online shows plenty of period shots with blackwalls, where current owners seem to prefer whitewalls.
A wonderful find and a great story. Thank you Jason.
Their price was probably a big factor in hampering appeal.
I’ve been fascinated by Airflows ever since I first heard about them as a little boy. There was an elderly gentleman in our neighborhood who loved to regale us kids—seven or eight years old at the time—with stories of Airflows, Zephyrs, Packards, Pierce-Arrows, and Studebakers. He always described the Airflow as the most advanced car of its era, though at that age I had no way of knowing just how true that was.
Since then, I’ve managed to see several Airflows in person (thank you, Gilmore Collection), though I’ve still never encountered one out in the wild. So congratulations to you, Jason, for having the sharp eye and curiosity to capture these great photos.
I often wish I could take an unhurried cross-country trip in a vintage car. I’ve done several leisurely drives around Ohio, Michigan, and Indiana using state routes instead of the Interstates, and I’ve never once been disappointed by the sights or the places I’ve discovered along the way. America the beautiful, indeed.
Late in commenting as usual, but what a wonderful vehicle. I have never seen an Airflow outside of a museum or car show.
As for stories about long trips in old cars, the one that impressed me the most is the 3 Oceans trip in a Tatra T87. The trip was made by John Long and also started in Toronto. The first leg was to Nova Scotia and back, sort of a shake down run (Atlantic Ocean). The second was to Vancouver (ocean #2, Pacific), and then north with a second T87 to the Arctic Ocean, and then returning to Toronto. John’s car was actually displayed at Pebble Beach a few years later, followed by his T77.
There are a couple of articles available on-line, one at Hagerty and another on Jalopnik, although the full story is no longer available on Jalopnik.
https://www.hagerty.com/media/car-profiles/three-oceans-two-tatras-one-trip-of-a-lifetime/
https://www.jalopnik.com/by-tatra-across-america-5849498/
The photographs are notable as he is also a fan of antique cameras and the pictures on the Dempster Highway were taken with an antique wide angle camera.