Vintage Ad: What Is It? Mark IV? Rolls?
– Posted on April 13, 2023
-
-
-
American Brands: GM 
American Brands: Ford 
American Brands: Chrysler 
American Brands: AMC, Jeep and All Others 
Automotive Histories and Misc. 
Asian Brands 
UK Brands 
Australian Brands 
European Brands 
Cars Of A Lifetime & Auto-Biography 
Buses 
Trucks, Pickups and Vans 
Design 
Trains, Planes & Ships 
Motorcycles, Trikes, Bicycles 
Engines, Transmissions and other Tech 
Tractors, Lawn Mowers, Off-Road Equipment 
RVs, Motorhomes, Trailers, Campers
Dressup kits for VWs they look awful up close, I just wonder was anyone fooled into thinking Rolls Royce had a rear engine car.
Some were relatively well finished, a lot were most definitely not, and .. they look pretty terrible to my eyes regardless.
In the 80s and 90s there were also Willys coupe and 40 ford inspired ones.. the Ford one actually looked relatively decent though, if coupled with the sedan delivery van body that it originally came with
I do also recall a few of these abominations coming out of the woodwork when Volkswagen was talking about buying rolls Royce in the early 00s(?) Trying to capitalise on the media attention.
This addition for vw reminds me of the pick-up, small & big suv of today with their ever higher and threatening grille only serving to put a thicker plastic cladding above an engine still nestled in the same height .In this Beetle it had at least the advantage of increasing the cargo.
Dad had a couple of nice used Beetles when he was driving approximately 100 miles a day for his work commute back in the mid 70’s. VWs with similar customizations would occasionally catch his eye, although his favorite was the one that imitated the ‘40 Ford. (I found out several years later this was because of a ‘39 Ford he had during basic training in the late 1940s. Apparently that thing ran like a rocket.) He never pulled the trigger on the VW conversion, though.
The Rolls ones in the lead photo look a little more elaborate than I remember, particularly the dual headlights. I could be mistaken, but did some of the Rolls conversions use single headlights? (Possibly to avoid wiring issues?) Also, the conversions I remember didn’t use the optional rear fender kits.
This is a VW Mini Rolls conversion, which I mentioned in a previous post. Not a fan of small cars, I did think this was a great way to upgrade the BUG! 👍 😎
Well, I looked up the patent number and it was granted, not just applied for, in 1966 to two guys from Florida. Just a design patent of course, not a utility patent, for “the ornamental design of an auxiliary automobile hood”. One of the existing patents cited was from John Tjaarda in 1934, I think for Briggs but records are scant. The 1961 Volkswagen brochure and automobile are also cited.
https://image-ppubs.uspto.gov/dirsearch-public/print/downloadPdf/D208540
I love the term “Auxiliary Automobile Hood”!
The patent is helpful in understanding the history of this endeavor – the two men who applied for the patent owned a company that made fiberglass camper conversions for vans and pickups (sold under the name “Cam-Pact”), so they did have some experience in custom bodywork.
The large array of options is rather shocking.
Hmm I prefer the Model H103 with the horizontal lights. I see one of the 1940 Ford-like hoods for sale occasionally, and have briefly considered getting one as a joke, but where would I put it when the joke’s over?
They are not exactly priced as a joke these days either. Same with the air cooled MG replicas.
I ran an independent vintage car repair and restoration shop, and one of the makes we specialized included Rolls-Royce [and Bentley]. As a member of the Rolls-Royce Owner’s Club I go to know Cal West, who ran the Technical department of Rolls-Royce North America [RRNA].
While looking at a photo album of my shop, displayed on a table at my Hershey AACA flea market booths, Cal saw a photo taken inside the shop showing one of the fiberglass fake Rolls VW hoods hanging on a wall. He said the early advertising for these accessory pieces showed the VW cars equipped with factory Rolls-Royce spare parts like the headlight units from a Silver Shadow, and the Flying Lady mascot. Some even had a real R-R grill badge. The Grill was actually a fiberglass unit, most were painted silver, but it could be ordered with a vacuum-deposited chrome coating.
He said RRNA’s legal department came down hard & heavy on the company, and to settle the case they had to modify both the grill shape, badges, and turn over to RRNA all cast metal reproduction hood mascots. Subsequent advertising no longer showed any obvious claims or connections to Rolls-Royce by either print or visual images. One of my mentors was Bruce Duncan, who ran the service department for one of the largest Rolls-Royce dealerships in America. Bruce once told me RRNA’s legal department had more employees than the warranty division, because so many people used the company’s name and logos without permission..
The granted US patent did not show a grill shell that was anywhere near the grill you see in the photos, and Cal said the court found the fake grill was a blatant rip-off of the actual Rolls-Royce design that is well-protected by numerous world-wide patents.
Concerning the ’39-40 Ford hood design, that was a different situation, as the company only offered a fiberglass hood that had been designed to accept a licensed reproduction Ford grill shell. Had the company only offered a fiberglass hood designed to accept a genuine Rolls-Royce grill assembly, RRNA would not have been able to claim it’s a fake. Of course the problem was, a new Silver Shadow grill assembly back then was around $3500, while the Ford repro grill was only about $35.
Today, it’s possible to legally own and display a VW with the Rolls-Royce hood and even genuine R-R parts. However it IS illegal to change the title to indicate the make is Rolls-Royce, or sell, advertise, or claim the car is a Rolls-Royce.
Same as taking a Datsun Z-car and turning it into a pseudo Ferrari. This is legal, as long as the title continues as a Datsun/Nissan and the car is not sold or offered as a Ferrari. That said, I have heard that Ferrari does sic their legal dogs on owners with Z-cars that display Ferrari badging.
Beetles were so ubiquitous in the ’70s that customizing them in silly ways seemed to make sense. I’m not sure exactly why it seemed to make sense, but it did. I think a good R-R hood added some luggage space, although probably at a cost to highway fuel economy. If you were the sort of person to comply with the 55 mph speed limit, it probably didn’t matter much anyway. I think that many VW people were trying to be individuals by buying the same car that everyone else trying to be individuals bought. Some of them then tried to stand out by changing their Beetles, often in the same manner that they’d seen in an advertisement or on the road.
My German side asks, “To what purpose does this RR grille serve?”
“Does it make the owner feel as though they are driving a RR?”
“Is this supposed to be some type of amusement ride?”
“The hood severely impacts the forward visibility of those objects within 15 feet ahead!”
“Does the engine compartment need to have the space that the Continental deck lid offers?”
“What if someone believes that it is a RR – would they be irritated when they discover otherwise?”
“These visual attachments add weight to the VW and impacts its performance, doesn’t it?”
“Frankly, this should simply not be done, even if done humorously.”
It increases available trunk space and likely would actually lighten the car (if both hood and grille are plastic and/or light aluminum or pot metal which would, at least theoretically, reduce fuel consumption in low-speed situations like city traffic.
Susan Sontag said, “Camp is a vision of the world in terms of style — but a particular kind of style. It is the love of the exaggerated, the ‘off,’ of things-being-what-they-are-not.”
https://monoskop.org/images/5/59/Sontag_Susan_1964_Notes_on_Camp.pdf
I’ve wondered in the past, why fender skirts never became a ‘thing’ on the VW Beetle. They add a cheap touch of elegance, and don’t look tacky. Even if they aren’t original to the brand. Especially, attractive on convertibles.
They sort of were, for a period anyway in the 50s and 60s, occasionally see them on restored cars, were very popular with the “resto cal” Scene too, enough that someone started making reproduction ones at one point, they seem to be a marmite type of thing with VW owners overall though.
A similar situation exits for Citroen 2CVs but as far as I know they only emulate the Traction Avant. I have never actually seen one, only photos. My feeling is that if you want a TA, buy one, don’t mess up a 2CV.
Those fiberglass hoods weighed _far_ more than the thin sheet metal ones they replaced and no one ever devised a method to hold them open so loading the trunk was a b*tch .
I’ve never seen the quad headlights before .
Before the 70’d folks had all manner of weird accessories for VW’s .
I like those skirts ! .
Long ago I had a nice pair of original FOXCRAFT VW Beetle skirts .
I ran them on my 1953 ‘Zwitter’ split window Bug until my son wanted them for his 1963 # 117 Hot Rod .
-Nate
While none would be mistake for a Rolls, the red convertible top center has a hint of Triumph Mayflower. I’ve also seen 1940 Ford front ends but the only really successful conversions are Baja Bugs and the modern hot rod look, both of which modify the original rather than hide it
I think they’re cute. Not cute as in I would want to own one, but cute as in it’s fun to see something different on the road, even if I wouldn’t want to own or drive it. A little like New Beetles.
IP law is certainly not something I’m knowledgeable on, but I believe there have been successful defenses where the repros were so absurd that no sane person would likely believe them to be anything more than satire. I could see that argument here.