Autos of Never-were

[Mr. 'H']

I think the Blackhawk is a really cool car EXCEPT, the car they based it on, the famous Y Job, sported the actual original iconic toothy Buick Grill. In 2000 they chose instead to recycle the 1939 creepy mustache grill. It's because of this grill that I can't look at a 1939 Buick without wincing.

Agreed!

 

[Baron Kurtz]

Were I designing a fantasy car, whatever it became, it would be based on this. Probably soft top.

bk

 

[Talbot]

I'm not sure I could improve on this...

 

[Mav]

I have a 2004 PT Cruiser but I am not a fan of the HHR.

The PT Cruiser is a damned good car, and out of the new "retro" models out there, probably one of the best. My wife drives the '06 convertible w/ turbo, and I borrow it for overnighters (salesman), as my Tundra sucks too much gas for long hauls. To me, that comes as close to a retro- fantasy machine that there is.
Although I wish I had my '66 Impala back.
Never driven the HHR. It's got a good look, but a mechanic buddy says they're an engineering nightmare.

 

[SkullCowboy]

Something along the lines of a 1940 Lincoln Zephyr 3W coupe.

 

[Widebrim]

How about a whole auto corporation? I call it “Independent Motors” and it’s a fictional merger of Nash, Hudson, Studebaker, and Packard. Packard is at the top, competing with Cadillac, Continental, and Imperial; Clipper is right below, going up against Buicks and Chryslers; next is Studebaker, matched with Oldsmobile, Mercury, and DeSoto; Hudson is the “excitement” line, and targets the same market as Pontiac and Dodge; and at the bottom is Nash, building cars in the Chevrolet/Ford/Plymouth segment.

-Dave

Dave, I like that idea! Yet, we have to remember when happened when Packard did merge with Studebaker (Packardbakers) and Hudson with Nash (Hashes)... So each marque would definitely have to be semi-independent. (And don't allow Clipper to do what it did to Packard in the '50s.)

 

[David Conwill]

I like the GM system from that era, with shared platforms (A-body, B-body, C-body, etc.), but with powertrain engineering left to the seperate divisions. Thus, we could end up with Nash and Stude sharing a body, but the Nash using its OHV 6 and the Stude running the V8 it debuted in '51.

I think Clipper was actually the right thing for Packard, just too late. The company devalued the brand to survive the Depression, and in the status-conscious '50s, people couldn't stop equating it with Buick.

They should have scaled big Packard production in the early '30s, and started making the Clipper then, instead of the 120. In fact, that's sort of when I envision Independent Motors starting, as the independents banded together to survive.

-Dave

 

[Widebrim]

I like the GM system from that era, with shared platforms (A-body, B-body, C-body, etc.), but with powertrain engineering left to the seperate divisions. Thus, we could end up with Nash and Stude sharing a body, but the Nash using its OHV 6 and the Stude running the V8 it debuted in '51.

I think Clipper was actually the right thing for Packard, just too late. The company devalued the brand to survive the Depression, and in the status-conscious '50s, people couldn't stop equating it with Buick.

They should have scaled big Packard production in the early '30s, and started making the Clipper then, instead of the 120. In fact, that's sort of when I envision Independent Motors starting, as the independents banded together to survive.

-Dave

Well offtopic, as I'm sure you know, in the 1950s Clipper (and 200) sales cut into 400 and 300 sales, as people decided that they could have a "Packard" at a lower price.

 

[Thunderbolt]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Chevrolet_SSR.jpg

How about if we took the SSR, got rid of the bed and replaced it with an extended roofline and a trunk (or boot). Top it off with chrome bumpers and white wall tires and we're set!

 

[Thunderbolt]

.

Just stumbled on this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retro#Retro_cars retro inspired concept cars. My favorates are the Buick Nighthawk and the Ford Fortynine.

 

[57plymouth]

I had a PT Loser for 4 years. It was the GT (turbo) model that had to have premium or it would ping like mad. It also got 21 mpg. Not really impressed. I sold it 400 miles before the first scheduled timing belt replacement. I read the shop manual and it said to lift the engine out 6 inches. Not worth my effort, so I sold it.

BUT...

If I could have any car, any time, any amount of money...

I'd keep what I have.

 

[David Conwill]

I'd keep what I have.

Hey, is that a '57 Plymouth?

Very cool, I love the Forward Look cars. I'm especially fond of the '59 Dodge, and particularly as the Lancer convertible or hardtop; or a station wagon (the latter of which would be great for hauling the family down Route 66 or to the National Parks towing an Airstream, as I intend to do someday).

-Dave

 

[Feraud]

What Price Perfection? The $80,000 Army JeepBy NORMAN MAYERSOHN
EVEN in Midtown Manhattan, where blocklong Hummer limos barely rate a second glance and six-figure supercars rarely draw more than a yawn, an Icon CJ3B attracts a knot of curious admirers. This, despite its no-gloss finish, bling-free wheels and an interior totally lacking in luxury appointments (a good thing, actually, as there is hardly a distinction between its interior and exterior).

Instead, the Icon snarled the flow of pedestrians on a city sidewalk earlier this month using nothing more than the macaroni-and-cheese familiarity of its shape: the unmistakable profile of a vintage Army jeep, complete with period design elements like a fold-down windshield and cutaways that serve as portals in place of hinged doors.

True, the neoclassic jeep is as recognizably American as a Coke bottle or a pair of Levis, a shape that Arthur Drexler of the Museum of Modern Art said 60 years ago embodied “the combined appeal of an intelligent dog and a perfect gadget.” But it was in the details that hard-to-distract New Yorkers found a reason — and a moment — to linger.

Headlights with the multiple facets of a housefly’s eye; seats at once both spartan and exotic; impossibly long shock absorbers wrapped with coil springs: all are clues that this is a different sort of creation, nothing like the 4x4’s that rolled down the assembly line of a Willys plant in the early ’50s.

Instead, the CJ3B is the realized dream of Jonathan Ward, the 40-year-old owner of Icon and a transplanted New Yorker who propagates bespoke S.U.V.’s from his Los Angeles atelier. The goal of Icon, he says, is to “revisit vehicles from our collective past that make us smile in a modern context.”

Mr. Ward’s company has been cloning Toyota’s FJ series, a line of S.U.V.’s introduced in the 1960s, for the last four years. Now Icon is casting a wider net, reaching beyond the cult of followers who paid as much as $180,000 for a custom-built FJ — they start at $105,000, Mr. Ward said — with a model based on the Jeep CJ3B introduced in 1953.

The Icon CJ3B will start around $80,000. While that luxury-car price tag may seem high for a vehicle that lacks even a head unit for an audio system, Mr. Ward does not need a large market: only about 60 FJs have been sold so far. And in any case, the price is beside the point for the customers he envisions. These would be idealists and design purists like himself who, when making any acquisition, seek out the finest.

Mr. Ward refers to Icon as a restoration business, but that does not begin to describe the effort behind his products or the makeup of the finished vehicles. Each one starts with an actual vintage truck, which donates a handful of parts (and an identity that makes it possible to license the completed project).

But it is mostly new. The CJ3B’s frame is made in Washington and much of the body sheet metal is stamped in the Philippines. The engine is a 4-cylinder General Motors Ecotec that produces 210 horsepower. The axles are modified versions of the units in today’s Jeep Rubicon; most of the driveline comes from well-established industry suppliers.

All of the modern components make the Icon a more reliable, repairable vehicle than any restoration of a 50-year-old could be — and a more usable off-roader than a straight replica of the original Willys would be. Gone are trouble spots from the original design like the leaf springs (which can limit the wheel travel needed to negotiate rough terrain), a balky choke cable (electronic fuel injection assures quick starting) and weak drum brakes (there are discs at all four corners).

Still, a list of improvements does not reveal the whole story. That lies in the telling of how those bits and pieces were chosen and procured, which is a direct reflection of Mr. Ward’s character — or, some would say, his obsession for perfection in all details.

Describing himself as a “bit of a technical geek,” Mr. Ward enthusiastically leaps into a briefing of what it took to make the CJ. Calling on skills developed as a stage actor, he detailed the process of machining the billet aluminum dashboard knobs, procuring a NASA-grade LED reverse light and protecting every body panel in a durable military-grade powder-coat finish. Ask about the soft top and you receive a deep technical briefing on what it takes to find the world’s best zippers, strongest snaps and most durable fabrics.

The CJ3B is available in Old School and New School versions, which vary in the design of their rollover bars, suspensions and tire size. Further variations are sure to follow. But the restless mind of Mr. Ward is already plotting out other automotive icons — can’t avoid the word — to replicate. Next up could be a Ford Bronco or a battery-powered Volkswagen Thing.

Whatever his next “inspired by” product is, Mr. Ward said, it will be made to last, not a disposable consumer item. “Something already in our culture,” he said, “and not made for a short shelf life.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/27/automobiles/collectibles/27ICON.html?hp

 

[57plymouth]

I was looking at the Icon site as a direct from another forum I read.

$80,000 to $100,000 for a Jeep is KRAZEE!!

Don't get me wrong, I drive a Jeep every day. I would be a liar if I said I drive my Plymouth daily, I just don't. I really like my Jeep, but there is NO WAY I'd pay that kind of money, or invest that much modifying, or put that much into a scratchbuilt Jeep.

My daily driver Jeep went from non-running derelict to dependable air conditioned comfort for $950. That includes five tires, painting, transmission, and a bunch of accessories. It's a long way from retro...

 

[davestlouis]

I think Jeeps are inherently retro, whatever that's worth.

 

[Katzenjammer]

Well, if we're strictly in wish-list land, I'd love my own 1938 Phantom Corsair. Standing next to the thing is like looking up at the Sistine Chapel ceiling.

 

[AtomicEraTom]

GM doesn't make a good car RWD platform anymore, so I guess I'd build a Ford on the (almost deceased) Panther Platform (I'm a Proud Crown Victoria Driver)

And I'd probably just throw this body right on that modern platform for a reliable driver.

What can I say? I love grocery getters!

 

[Feraud]

Well, if we're strictly in wish-list land, I'd love my own 1938 Phantom Corsair. Standing next to the thing is like looking up at the Sistine Chapel ceiling.

That is one gorgeous vehicle!

 

[Mr Vim]

It looks like you need to drive it wearing a mask and fighting crime... and I see nothing wrong with that. I would get in the car... and want to go out and fight crime.

Spectacular.

And I wish to high heaven that Holden mass prodcued that car... MAN I WANT THAT CAR!