Renault's Conventional Post-War Frégate

The Renault Frégate (1952-1960) was the Régie's first post- World War 2 mid-market sedan.  It followed the small, rear-engine 4CV that I discussed here.

Background on the Frégate is here.  It seems that Renault was working on a rear-motor car larger than the 4CV, but the project was wisely abandoned and the conventional Frégate was initiated in 1949.  That meant Renault stylists were aware of the post-war 1948 Oldsmobile, 1949 Chevrolet and Chrysler line fender designs, and created their version.

The result was a bland, 1949-vintage design that was slightly behind the times when the first production models were announced for the 1952 model year.  Even so, the Frégate's styling was more advanced than the competing Peugeot 203 that I wrote about here.  But it was only on par with Ford SAF's Vedette that debuted in the spring of 1950 and which made use of the 1949 Mercury's design theme.

Gallery

These are publicity photos of 1951 pre-production Frégates.  The most noticeable differences from 1952 models are the shape of the bumpers and grille bar details.  Both of these images came from the same photo shoot: note the windows in the background.

The Frégate as seen from on high.  Again, the same car in both images.  I like the long hood, though front overhang is a bit long for its era, but common in modern front-drive times.  Frégate's layout was conventional front-engine, rear drive.

Another publicity photo of a 1952 Frégate.  The negative aspect of the long hood is a passenger compartment that seems a bit cramped despite Renault's claim that six passengers could be accommodated (see previous image).

For 1955, Frégate added the Amiral line shown here.  The grille was redesigned and a chromed stone guard was added to the rear fender.

The American baroque two-tone paint scheme disease struck the Frégate by 1958.  Yet another What Were They Thinking? moment.

Tesla Model X: Crossover SUV of Sorts

Tesla Motors, something of a cult car maker, finally got its new all-electric so-called "crossover SUV" Model X into production late in 2015.  I question the term "crossover SUV" for the Model X for the same reasons I wondered about the Honda Crossfit, Mercedes GKE Coupe and BMW X4 that I discussed here.

Sales of the Model X were slow during the first quarter of 2016, the company blaming suppliers for production problems, though extremely high prices also might have been a factor.  To date, I have only seen one Model X.

Like Tesla's Model S, the firm's primary product, the Model X features clean styling that carries over many Model S details on a taller body.  Model X fails to some degree because its aerodynamically curved roofline reduces potential carrying capacity.  A greater failure has to do with its gull-wing rear doors -- an impractical feature that happens to be related to those supplier problems noted above.

Gallery

Comparison photo of the Model S and Model X.  The X is so skillfully designed that it does not seem very bulky, even though it is so when compared to the low, slinky S.

Front view showing that the Model X lacks the faux-grille slapped on the front of the S.

At least Tesla has ignored the fad of wildly-sculpted body panels.

The Model X is graceful in profile, but this means it cannot carry tall objects or cannot hold large piles of luggage and other items that my wife insists she absolutely needs when we take long trips.

Here is a view of the infamous gull-wing doors as opened.  They are a fad for certain low-production sports cars attempting to bask in the glow of Mercedes-Benz 300 SL coupes of the 1950s.  The Model X gull-wings are the rear doors only, front doors being conventionally front-hinged.  I suppose the intention was that gull-wing doors at the rear would be helpful for loading cargo when the rear seats were folded down.  My experience with loading SUVs is that this would make little difference, hardly justifying the additional cost and complexity of that kind of door.

Fastback SUVs: Honda Gives Up, Germans Try It

I have no problem with creative thinking in the automobile industry.  Of course, many creative car concepts aren't very successful.   Consider crossover SUVs with fastback styling.

The SUV (Sport-Utility Vehicle) in its crossover (sedan-based, as opposed to truck-based) form is essentially a Station Wagon (or Break, as it is called in some countries).  Moreover, it is a station wagon with a tall body where the driver and passengers are higher off the road than would be the case in a standard sedan or conventional station wagon.  But a fastback body profile negates the station wagon aspect of the accepted SUV concept, a potentially risky marketing move.

Honda's fastback crossover SUV Crosstour (first marketed as a Honda Accord) was launched in the USA for the 2010 model year and withdrawn from the market after the 2015 model year due to poor sales.  Presumably what potential buyers were seeing was a fat sedan with less carrying capacity than an equivalent SUV.

I should mention that in practice, SUV luggage areas are seldom loaded to the point where rear-view vision is obstructed.  That suggests that the Crosstour was probably as practical a hauler as a conventional SUV -- most of the time.  But not all of the time, and that might have been the design factor that reduced potential sales.

Even though it was known that the Crosstour was not a market success, for some reason BMW designed and launched its X4, a slightly smaller version of the Crosstour for the 2015 model year as did Mercedes with its GLE Coupe.  The Honda and BMW have about the same wheelbase -- 110.1 inches (2797 mm) for the Crosstour and 110.6 inches (2810 mm) for the X4, while the GLE is longer at 114.8 inches (1916 mm).  But the Crosstour's length was 195.8 inches (4973 mm) compared to the X4s 183.9 inches (4671 mm), a difference of about a foot (30 cm).  The GLE's length is nearly that of the Crosstour, 192.6 inches (4892mm).

It will be interesting to find out if the X4 and GLE Coupe do better in the American market than the Crosstour did.  So far, I have seen few of these on the streets and highways.

Gallery

Seen from the front, the X4 (central image) is stubbier, less graceful then the Crosstour (upper image).  The relationship of the GLE Coupe (lower image) to the Crosstour is similar.

Profile views show that the Crosstour has greater hauling capacity than the X4 thanks to its greater rear overhang.  The GLE also has short rear overhang and, considering the relationship of the rear doors to the wheel openings, less trunk room when the rear seatback is upright.

All of these cars seem more like four-door hatchback (5-door) sedans than crossover SUVs of any kind.

Additional comparative views of the storage zones of the Crosstour and X4.

Peugeot's 1940 10 CV Prototype

France entered World War 2 in September 1939, but some automobile makers continued development of future models despite the diversion of resources and manpower to the war effort.  The drôle de guerre along the northeastern French frontier lasted until 10 May 1940 when Germany launched its offensive.  By 22 June, France had surrendered.

During at least part of 1940 Peugeot was working on revisions to its line and had a 10 CV (tax horsepower rating) model in prototype stage.  Images of the car and background information are from Automobilia hors-série No. 26, Toutes les voitures françaises 1940-46, les années sans salon by René Bellu.

Gallery

1939 Peugeot 402
An example prewar Fuseau Sochaux styling that was becoming dated at the end of the 1930s.

1940 Peugeot 10 CV prototype - front 3/4 view
This design is less streamlined than the car shown in the previous photo.  The passenger compartment has been squared up and the windshield is flat rather than V'd.  The front end design is suggestive of 1939 Hudsons.

1940 Peugeot 10 CV prototype - side
The enlarged glass area is evident here.

1940 Peugeot 10 CV prototype - rear 3/4 view
The trunk has a tacked-on appearance.  All things considered, this design would have been out of fashion had it entered production in 1942 or 1943.

1949 (ca.) Peugeot 203
Here is what Peugeot actually used as a post-war design.  The flat windshield is a hold-over from the prototype, but side windows are smaller.  The front with its lengthened fenders seems inspired by 1942 model year American styling.

Angled Four-Eyed American Cars

Quad headlights, despite whatever technological improvements they embodied, had a negative impact on automobile aesthetics -- something I've always believed.  The reason is that the front of a car is its face.  Insects and a few other creatures excepted, we expect to see only two eyes, not one or four or more.  Four eyes or headlights seems unnatural.

Quads began appearing on some 1957 model U.S. cars and were common by the following model year.

A reader reminded me in an email that some quad headlights were arranged in a slanted manner rather than being placed vertically or side-by-side, and thought that might be a good subject for a blog post.  He was right, and this is that post.

Gallery

1958 Chevrolet Corvette
I think the quad-headlight facelift of 1957 Corvettes was a design-destroying event.  The side-by-side positioning seen here is the most common quad arrangement.

1956 Lincoln - Mecum Auctions photo
Let's now follow Lincoln headlights for model years 1956-1960.  The 1956 Lincoln in the above photo has conventional headlights.

1957 Lincoln
Lincolns were given a major -- unsuccessful -- facelift for 1957.  Quad headlights were introduced, and stylists gave them a stacked arrangement.

1958 Lincoln - Auctions America photo
1958 saw a complete redesign for Lincoln that resulted in a huge, unitary body.  Stylists apparently decided that side-by-side and stacked quad headlights were not very creative solutions to the four-headlight problem.  Their solution was to place them at an angle with the uppermost lights closest to the body's edge.

1959 Lincoln - Mecum Auctions photo
The 1959 facelift retained the angled arrangement, but include the headlights in the grille ensemble.

1960 Lincoln - Barrett-Jackson photo
1960 was the last year for this Lincoln body and the front end was lightly facelifted.  Redesigned 1961 Lincolns got side-by-side headlights.

1959 Buick - auction photo
Buick used slanted headlights only on its 1959 line.  This design is busy, but more successful than the others shown here thanks to the chromed strip along the front of the hood that continues along the sides of the car.

1961 Chrysler Newport - Barrett-Jackson photo
Chrysler went to angled headlight for 1961 and 1962.  Unlike the 1959 Buick, this design is uncluttered.  But the slanted lights created some unfortunate fussiness in the form of the oddly-shaped parking lights.

1961 DeSoto - RM Auctions photo
1961 was the last model year for DeSotos, and few were built.  The bumper, headlight positioning and parking lights are the same as that for the Chrysler in the previous photo.  The overall front ensemble is an ugly mess largely due to the odd upper grille element.  What a sad way for a fine brand to die.

1962 Chrysler Newport - sales photo
The main front-end change from 1961 is the grille detailing, though the headlight assemblies have darker background panels.  A more important change is the elimination of tail fins.

1962 Dodge Polara - Barrett-Jackson photo
Dodge stylists got "creative" with angled headlights for the 1962 Polara model, pulling an Old Switcheroo by having the highest headlights inbound and the lower ones at body's edge.

1963 Dodge Polara - Auctions America photo
The following year Polaras went to the conventional angle arrangement.

Thus more or less ended the American romance for slanted quad headlights.

Mondeo: Ford's 1990s International Car

Ford Motor Company is no stranger to the concept of the "international car," where the same basic automobile is built and sold in several countries.  The first instance was the Model T, a purely American vehicle that was assembled in a dozen countries in the 1920s.

In recent decades, automobile makers have tried to spread reimbursement of large development costs by designing and engineering car platforms for manufacture and sale on more than one continent.  This concept seems simple in the abstract, but often proves difficult in execution.  One source of problems is differing tastes of buyers in different countries.  For example, North American buyers tend to prefer larger vehicles than do European buyers.  Nevertheless, automotive firms continue to pursue the Holy Grail of the "world car."

A 1990s Ford effort in that direction was the Mondeo, intended for both Europe and North America.  Information on the first-generation Modeo (1993-1996 pre-facelift, 1997-2000 post-facelift), the subject of this post, can be found here.

The Mondeo sold well in Europe.  I drove one over much of Britain and Ireland around 15 years ago and thought it was a nice car, especially when cruising along motorways.

Unfortunately for Ford, the American version introduced for 1995 in the form of the Ford Contour and Mercury Mystique never sold well -- usually less than 100,000 per year.  The above link mentions a habitability problem related to the firewall shape, but I think styling was a factor as well.

Gallery

First-Series Ford Mondeo
This Mondeo has German license plates and is a five-door or hatchback model.  This is evident due to the large backlight and small "bustleback" lip aft of the glass.

First-Series Ford Mondeo - 1995
A British Modeo, showing the front design.  It seems to be a four-door sedan.

First-Series Ford Mondeo
Rear view of a German Mondeo hatchback.  The large, convex backlight provides a substantial appearance lacking on four-door versions.

1995 Ford Contour
The Contour's hood and front differ from the Modeo.  The soft appearance was surely chosen to relate the Contour to Ford's second-generation Taurus.

1995 Mercury Mystique
The Mercury version of the Mondeo featured a crisper-looking front.

1995 Ford Contour - sales photo
My problem with Contour and Mystique styling centers on the C-pillar which is both thin and soft-looking.  Too feeble for a roof support from a visual standpoint.

1999 Mercury Mystique
The C-pillar from a different viewing angle.  The first time I saw an American Mondeo version, this feature bothered me.  It bothers me to this day.  A slight straightening of the sides of the backlight sheetmetal perimeter would have improved the design.  Alas, Ford seemed intent on rounded styling details in those days.

Sensational Studebaker Avanti

I find it interesting that many highly regarded automobile designs were on cars that sold in comparatively small numbers.  Examples include: Cords --  L-29s and 810/812s alike; 1940-41 Lincoln Continentals; and BMW 507s.  High price was an important sales-related factor for the cars just mentioned.  And it needs mentioning that a nicely-styled mass-market car often doesn't strike observers as being "special" because they are seen everywhere.

The 1963-vintage Studebaker Avanti (details here) was an outstanding design that only amounted to about 4,600 being built.  It was not a luxury car but, according to this source, its price was a bit more than that of a Chevrolet Corvette sports car.  Not cheap.  The Avanti was essentially a "roll of the dice" for a failing company, a situation akin to the birth of the Cord 810, for example.  Sales suffered because of problems resulted from its being rushed into production, another declining-enterprise symptom.

I wrote about the Avanti here, focusing on two photos I took of a new one in 1963.  Those photos are included below (but here I adjusted the contrast and sharpness slightly).  I mentioned that I would get around to analyzing Avanti styling later.  Well, now it's "later" and my comments are in the image captions below.

Gallery

Advertising photo.  I've mentioned in my car styling book that, a few details aside, the Avanti could pass as a new car today.  Its bumpers would not pass government standards for impact resistance, for instance.   Vent windows on the doors are another archaic feature.  And the windshield would have to have a steeper rake to improve aerodynamic efficiency.

This is reputed to be Raymond Loewy's personal supercharged Avanti when placed on sale a few years ago.  The photo shows the rake of the body and the haunches over the rear wheel opening that provide a sense of power.  The side crease aligns with the front and rear bumpers, helping to tie the otherwise curvy design together and provide an element of stiffness.  This view also suggests that a modern highly-sloped windshield would spoil the design: the hood would be stubbier and the passenger cabin would seem heavier.  However, a 45-degree slope would probably work well.

Barrett-Jackson auction-related photo showing the rear aspect of the Avanti.  The shapes of the major elements blend with one another in a nice flowing manner.  The main flaw is the tacked-on backup lights that don't relate to the nearby tail lights.  And I don't think the wheels shown here are stock, by the way.

Avanti seen in Baltimore, May 1963.  Note the shapes of the wheel openings as seen here and, especially, in the side view above.  They serve to enhance the raked effect that's both actual (the lower edge of the car isn't parallel to the ground) and in the design massing (the high point of the car is above the leading edge of the C-pillar).  Round openings would make the car seem a bit more static.

Front view of the Baltimore car.  No conventional grille ... instead, an early version of a low-level air intake.  The fender fronts, the central crease on the hood and the asymmetrically placed raised feature in front of the steering wheel provide elements of firmness contrasting an otherwise curvy design.  It's not easy to see in any of these images, but the body is pulled inwards around the doors "Coke bottle" fashion, akin to "area ruled" fuselages for trans-sonic jet fighters.