Showing posts with label Ford. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ford. Show all posts

Thursday, May 9, 2019


Next Step in Car Shopping

Advance to the Test Drive?

William Sundwick

This year’s Washington Auto Show was in April. Held later than last year, it began to push into 2020 model year marketing territory. Nevertheless, it provided a useful opportunity to further explore the 15 vehicles that had found a place in my Crossover Shopping spreadsheet for 2019. They were all there, under one big roof at the Walter Washington Convention Center.

Indeed, planning our Friday evening outing to the show forced a decision: which stands to visit among the 15 contestants? My boredom with the process, after three years, made it easy to cancel two manufacturers from our schedule, and my wife readily agreed; we wouldn’t bother with Hyundai or Mitsubishi.

That still left a heavy burden of covering seven other stands on two floors in less than four hours before the show closed at 10:00 P.M. (We literally forgot one important display, Nissan, despite our intentions).

What we learned from this year’s show allowed us to reduce our 15 original entrants to five finalists. Each of the five comes from a different manufacturer, so advancing to the test drive, step four of my systematic process of shopping for a new car, would require some time – visiting five different dealerships.

First, the eliminations from the original list of 15 – Hyundai primarily because the Santa Fe, although new for 2019, struggles to match competitors’ fuel economy ratings, and has nothing else to set it apart from them. Mitsubishi, I feel, is still a questionable investment for the future, with reviews panning its quality and reliability. Beyond those two makes, which didn’t even warrant our attention at the show, those we saw also allowed us to eliminate more.

Scratch everything from GM – Buick, Chevrolet, and GMC – mostly due to brand image for Buick and GMC (my wife is sensitive to what sits in our driveway, no trucks, no stodgy Buick), and size/style for the Chevy Equinox (it squeaks in on the low end of my threshold for cargo volume).

Going for style is probably shallow in a new car purchase, but two eliminations were primarily due to styling. Both the Equinox and new Toyota RAV4 were, in comparison to competitors, well … ugly! The Equinox’s bustled rear quarter combined with squarish roof line just rubbed me the wrong way, reminding me of a pop-up camper. And, the RAV4, while entirely new from last year, looks like (wait for it!) a Toyota. The previous generation RAV4 had a
pleasant appearance much like its hot-selling competitors, not so this new version. Often, over the years, Toyota styling has been disturbing, very angular, depending more than others on frivolous details and faux-aggressiveness – the new RAV4 fits that unfortunate mold perfectly. It also seemed to have a cheaper interior, practical perhaps, but lacking the upscale feel of many competitors.

I also had no problem eliminating some of the larger contenders. After seeing them at the show, both my wife and I decided we could do without the Ford Edge or Subaru Outback. Yes, they’re bigger than the Escape and Forester, respectively, but the Edge is significantly more expensive than the Escape for that extra room, and Outback comes in a bigger package than Forester, but with virtually the same cargo volume!


VW’s models went in the other direction. The eliminated entrant was the smaller Golf AllTrack wagon -- like Equinox, possibly too small. And, it’s certain to be discontinued (along with all Golf wagons) for 2020. Besides, the larger Tiguan seems to sell for about the same price.

Due to my inadvertent snub of Nissan, and difficulty in eliminating something I didn’t see, the five finalists have now become:
  •        Ford Escape (carry over for 2019, all new next year)
  •          Honda CR-V (solid contender, as always) 
  •          Nissan Rogue (can’t eliminate, although nothing exceptional save Hybrid fuel economy)
  •          Subaru Forester (very impressive new body, almost indistinguishable from last year – “don’t mess with success”)
  •          Volkswagen Tiguan (cars were locked in display! But, peering
    through windows and looking at stickers resulted in a thumbs-up)

Stickers on all five finalists are in the same ball park for comparably equipped models. But the Auto Show cannot convey any sense of drivability. Performance, handling, visibility can only be judged after a test drive at a dealership. These days, the usability of electronics, infotainment systems, safety features also can only be explored in a test drive.

Therefore, the test drive is the next step. It won’t happen until after the June visit of in-laws from California, however. My wife must be fully involved, and she is now concerned primarily with her sister and brother-in-law’s visit. Maybe we’ll take them along?

If it waits too late into the summer, we may be pushing up against the 2020 model year – resetting the cycle back to spreadsheet updates and research. There are multiple dealerships in Northern Virginia we might visit. For close-in Arlington, Falls Church, and Alexandria there is Koons, Jerry’s, and Ourisman Ford; Bill Page, Brown, and Landmark Honda; Passport Nissan; Beyer Subaru; and Alexandria VW. Tysons contributes Priority Nissan, Stohlman Subaru and VW. If we choose Fairfax or Springfield, we can hit Sheehy or Ted Britt Ford, Brown or Priority Nissan, Farrish or Sheehy Subaru, and Fairfax or Sheehy VW.


It’s not likely that we’ll need to drive more than one version of each of the five finalists – we’re not looking for any unusual combination of equipment, except possibly a Hybrid Rogue. So, choosing a map direction and hitting all the dealers in that vicinity might work. But it likely would require more than one afternoon, we could go twice or three times.

Is there an easier way to make our decision? The drive is the thing, it seems. Choices of color and equipment are reasonably uniform among all. Both my wife and I will be drivers, and both of us will be passengers. There will be one or two car seats in the rear. The driver will evaluate instrumentation, performance and handling, while the passenger evaluates electronics, general comfort, climate controls, and interior detailing. Only a test drive can afford this opportunity.

Since we intend to keep this car for more than ten years – as has been our habit for the last thirty years -- the answer to the question, “is there an easier way?” is emphatically no!






Sunday, March 31, 2019


Quest for the Perfect Car

Five Step Process for Car Shopping

William Sundwick

We buy a car approximately every five-to-seven years. In a two-car family, that means cars generally sit in our driveway for a minimum of 11 years. Maybe as many as 15 years.

So, car shopping is a big deal. It happens rarely and amounts to a major life event. Typically, it is attenuated over two or three years.

In my family, I play the role of car buff and market analyst. My wife takes the role of sensible consumer making a sizable investment in our future. Thus, we are now involved in year two of our quest for the perfect replacement for our 2007 Toyota Highlander Hybrid.

The old car still has some miles left in it (~86,000 now), so this quest could continue longer. But we both feel it is time to start thinking of a successor. We have visions of ever higher repair costs, and many small, unsightly dings and scrapes are now marring a body we no longer think deserves body shop treatment. The fabric interior is stained with accumulated grime and wear. We replaced a windshield at Safelite a few years ago with an inferior-spec non-polarized version.

Any new car we buy will have an updated audio system, with infotainment, more active safety measures, and heated leather seating. All constituting a significant upgrade – not to mention that it WILL BE NEW!

But, will we lose anything? To ensure that we don’t, I have created a spreadsheet (2019 is its third model year tab) detailing specs and review notes from the automotive press on all possible replacement candidates in the hottest segment of the auto market – compact two-row crossover/SUVs. This is the segment inhabited back in 2007 by our Highlander, and it is even more popular now, with more competitors.

There are 15 possible choices for the 2019 model year (down from 2018 and 2017 because of more stringent filtering). The threshold filters this year are measures of fuel economy, cargo volume, and price for the lowest acceptable level of equipment, based on manufacturers’ online “build-and-price” sites. Fuel economy must reach a minimum of 27 mpg highway by EPA estimate. Cargo volume with rear seat folded must exceed 63 cu. ft. And, pricing for what I’ve defined as “level 1” trim must be less than $40,000. Level 1 (as opposed to “level 2,” which is fully-equipped top-end trim) includes power driver’s seat, touch screen infotainment system, some active safety features (e.g., front collision warning, lane-change warning, active cruise control), and a rear cargo cover and storage net. These things make the car equivalent or superior to my 2007 Highlander.

The filtering has been refined over the last two years. We’re older now, more spoiled by amenities (preferring something closer to “level 2” trim), and our cargo carrying requirements may have diminished somewhat. Now we look at things like easy-to-find LATCH anchors for child car seats (grandchildren!), competitive price, and the newest active safety features unknown in the days of our ’07 Highlander.


Step One of our five step shopping process was to assess our current needs. It’s looking like we’ll go for a fancier, smaller, more economical vehicle with comfortable accommodation for growing families. But a big tax bill this year and Trump’s threatened tariffs on imported cars make us wary of purchase price, too. We have completed Step One.

Step Two was the follow-up. We looked at the market. What were the choices? This is where my “crossover shopping” spreadsheet became the tool. The 15 vehicles this year from Ford, GM, Honda, Hyundai, Mitsubishi, Nissan, Subaru, Toyota, and Volkswagen all meet my threshold requirements (which have changed each year). Each contender has certain strengths and weaknesses; the best in class fuel economy goes to the Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV, next best is the Toyota RAV4 Hybrid. Roomiest is also the Outlander (PHEV version), next roomiest is the new Subaru Forester. Lowest price for comparably equipped models, Ford Escape (unfortunately, made in Mexico, may be subject to those tariffs); next lowest, Honda CR-V (more domestic content than Ford!). Active safety features like blind spot monitoring, active cruise control, and automatic emergency braking are options on many entrants in this segment, but standard across the line on Honda CR-V, Nissan Rogue, and both Subarus, Forester and Outback. We are now poised to begin Step Three.

This step will determine which trade-offs are worthwhile. We may sacrifice less important things, like power passenger seat, or faster 0-60 mph acceleration (measured in tenths of a second). But things like accessibility of LATCH anchors may be more important – or the angle of opening for rear doors (there is variability here). Much of this detail information can be found in reviews, such as Car & Driver blog, or Edmunds, and are reflected in my spreadsheet. We will then visit dealerships (and the annual Washington Auto Show). Look and feel of the contenders will become the most important factor, things like dash layout, interior materials quality and finish, styling. 

Step Four will narrow the field to test-drive candidates. We will not test drive all 15 entries in the spreadsheet. We may not even visit dealerships representing all the manufacturers. Hyundai has relatively poor EPA ratings, whereas Mitsubishi and Toyota are at the top there, but lack other features -- reliability for Mitsubishi, rear seat passenger accessibility for Toyota RAV4.

The final decision constitutes Step Five. It will be made from a combination of impressions garnered in the first four steps. And, it may well be that the clincher is the personal touch from the salesperson at a specific dealership. Our last car purchase – a Chevy Volt – was ultimately decided based on the incredible knowledge of PHEV Voltec engineering, combined with personal charm, of the salesman we dealt with at Koons GM Corner Tysons (one Mark Gomez).

Other decisive factors include a business assessment of the manufacturer -- how long will Mitsubishi survive in U.S. market? How about ethics at VW or GM? (Scandals have affected both companies recently). The design of the manufacturer’s cars also conveys how badly they want me as a customer. In GM’s favor, they have three vehicles that meet all the requirements to be included in my spreadsheet, no other manufacturer has more than two. My wife has a much stronger aesthetic/social appreciation for what she wants in our driveway. That, more than strategic financial concerns, is why we have eliminated all the “luxury” brands from our potential candidates. Similarly, brand images might narrow the GM entrants to one – Chevy Equinox (eliminating both Buick and GMC). But that would mean two Chevrolets in our driveway. (What is this? Flint, Michigan, ca. 1965?)

Not a trivial matter, this final decision. It’s a car we may keep until we cease driving. The last car we own? What a weighty thought!




Wednesday, February 7, 2018


Car Shopping, 2018

The Washington Auto Show

William Sundwick

My biggest challenge of the Washington Auto Show was meeting up with my wife. She beat me there by over twenty minutes – Metro from Capitol Hill was faster than traffic from Northern Virginia during afternoon rush hour. The Walter E. Washington Convention Center is spread over two buildings and nearly six square blocks. Most of its entrances were closed. How could I get in? Which building?

Frantic texts trying to describe our respective locations in the cavernous complex resulted only in both of us simultaneously finding helpful staff to guide us to where the other had said they were! Eventually, after clarifying who was to remain stationary, we met. The problem seemed to be that both our descriptions made it seem like we were in the same place (ticket sales), when we were really in two different buildings.

Why Did We Come?

What business did we have at the 2018 Washington Auto Show, anyway? We weren’t exactly desperate for a new car – although, after eleven years, our 2007 Toyota Highlander is starting to look like it needs replacement. But, these days, 85,000 miles is nothing. The real reason we claim to be shopping is nothing more than my fetish for new cars and fascination with the vagaries of automobile marketing. Can’t kick the habit, no matter how hard I try!

Of course, there were the exotics and special interest cars on display – up on the third level of the Convention Center – good for some “Wow” exclamations, and photo-ops. Bentleys and Rolls-Royces, Ferraris, Lamborghinis, and McLarens. 


We had been informed by posters at the entrance, however, that neither Cadillac nor Mercedes were exhibiting this year. They must have calculated there were no sales to be gained from participation. Slightly mysterious, since BMW, Porsche and Audi were clearly visible, and those exotics on the third floor were also sponsored by authorized dealers.


Shopping for more mundane transportation needs was our excuse for attending, though. We saved the fun and photo-ops until the end.

The Research

Performing due diligence through online research is my job. Reducing my range of choices based on practicality is my wife’s job. Due diligence took the form of a spreadsheet based upon my research. We knew which market segment interested us (midsize crossovers), to which we added the somewhat meaningless requirement that whatever the replacement for our Highlander would be, it must have at least the same level of features it has. I quickly discovered, however, that NO midsize crossover sold in 2018 is as spartan as our 2007 Highlander! And, prices have risen accordingly. (One feature noticeably lacking from all 2018 contenders, however: a cassette tape player in the audio system. I don’t even think they have CD players, anymore. My ’07 Highlander’s JBL has both).

I read and summarized reviews of various models for my spreadsheet, and collected data on cargo volume, curb weight, fuel economy, horsepower/torque ratings of engines, 0-60 mph acceleration times, and price ranges based on each make’s “Build and Price” web page. My wife dutifully went over all the data in my spreadsheet. Her job was to pass judgement based on the numbers: “That costs too much! That’s horrible gas mileage! Why do we need a V6? I don’t want to drive anything that big – forget the three-row seating vehicles!” She knew her role well.

The dynamics became clear. When we started seeing and sitting in the various contenders at the Show, we both knew we would leave with a much smaller list -- if we wait until next year, there will be more choices.

The midsize crossover segment of the market is very large these days – and very hot in sales. My spreadsheet, in its final form before the show, contained 22 different vehicles. But, after spending more than four hours at the show, and discussing what we learned, our list now contains eight vehicles – all with only two rows of seating. No hybrids on it, yet fuel economy will be the same or better than our 2007 Hybrid Highlander – efficiency of all engines has increased that much in the last eleven years (mostly because of advanced turbocharged fours). Cargo volume may be slightly less than our Highlander’s, especially in the five “compact” crossovers on our revised list, but all have roomy and comfortable passenger cabins.

The Finalists and the Market

Here are the eight finalists: five smaller – Chevy Equinox, Ford Escape, Honda CR-V, Subaru Forester, and VW Golf AllTrack. And, three bigger – Ford Edge, Nissan Murano, and Subaru Outback. Near-luxury two-row contenders from Acura and Volvo were eliminated due to “costs too much” criteria, and all three-row crossovers from my original list were eliminated due to some combination of size, price, and fuel economy factors. The GMC Terrain was eliminated because of the brand’s marketing image – it’s a TRUCK brand!

Three different engine configurations exist among the eight finalists: five of them have those little turbo 4s, the two Subarus have their characteristic “boxer” (horizontally opposed) engines, and the Nissan Murano still uses a V6 (it is the most economical of all V6s – EPA rates it at 21/28 mpg).

All contenders have many “active safety” features (using external sensors and actions), like collision avoidance, lane change warning, backup cameras -- unknown eleven years ago except in the most expensive luxury models. And, all eight finalists feature higher quality interior design than our Highlander – mostly leather, heated seats, center-mounted touchscreen for infotainment and climate control. All except Forester offer Apple CarPlay, enabling access to all the apps on our paired iPhones via the infotainment system.

I never assume that the car-buying consumer always makes the right decisions, and my wife is not even aware of market share for the 22 vehicles on my original list. Yet, we seem to have come down to primarily the dominant players in the market. Two exceptions are that at least one of us (me) was really impressed by the Golf AllTrack wagon, despite its relatively modest profile in the U.S. market. And, the Toyota line for 2018 – both Highlander and RAV4 – were nixed by one or both of us, the former due to size (much bigger than our 2007), the latter because of inferior “fit and finish” compared with its main competitors (looks cheaper, less classy). Toyota may well remedy the RAV4 problem next year with a new generation due in 2019. But all our finalists, except that VW, are strong contenders in the most competitive market segment existing today. Could it be consumers really are intelligent beings? Or, is it that we have now sunk to the level of average auto-buying consumer?

Our next step will probably be arranging test drives at dealers. But, there is no current schedule allocating time for that adventure. We may delay until the 2019 model year, with its new choices, before taking such action. But, the Auto Show was fun – first time we’ve indulged the annual extravaganza since 2011. We practically closed the place down shortly before 10:00 on a Friday night!

Appendix

Crossover Shopping, 2018 – The Eight Finalists (Alphabetically), photo of spreadsheet



















Sunday, August 27, 2017

Exploring the Sundwick Automotive Photo Library: Part III – Imports in the Heart of the Auto Industry, Detroit-Flint, 1953-63

William Sundwick

Beginning in the 1950s, before Detroit discovered “compacts,” there were dealer franchises in the heart of the auto industry, from Detroit to Flint, that sought to fill a growing demand for small, economical cars. They sold various low-priced models from Great Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Sweden, and even Czechoslovakia. In the 1940s there had been attempts by U.S. automakers to market smaller cars, but the only successful model was the Rambler from American Motors, first introduced in 1950 (still Nash at that time).

There, in the “belly of the beast,” a rebellious sense captured some local consumers who were skeptical of the long-term viability of their communities’ dependence on the dominant American auto manufacturers. In Flint, it was GM. These consumers were non-conformists. Yes, they wanted sensible, economical transportation, but they also just wanted to be different from their neighbors!

In my family, the first to express his non-conformity this way was my Uncle Carl. He taught music in the Detroit public schools, and was the conductor of a large high school orchestra. One of my earliest “car memories” was of his peculiar little Renault 4 CV, which he owned about the time we moved north from Dearborn to Flint. The 4 CV was well-known in France at the time, but I certainly had never seen one here, in eastern Michigan.

Its engineering was based on the rear-engine platform which was becoming popular in Europe for many small cars. But, unlike the VW beetle, it used a tiny (550 cc, or “4 CheVaux” by French measures) cast iron in-line four – not the horizontally opposed aluminum engine used in VWs and Porsches. And, also unlike VW, it had four doors! My uncle’s 4 CV was black, but when I studied in France during my junior year abroad in 1967-68, I discovered they were made in other colors, too. 



After moving to Flint, I discovered that, even in that smaller city –in effect, a General Motors “company town” – there were a few people that owned low-priced imported cars. I saw Austins and Morrises,  and those popular-priced sports cars: MG and Triumph. Austin-Healeys had a bit more muscle, didn’t see too many in Flint. Nobody would spend the money for a Jaguar XK-120.  
Imported did seem to mean English in those days – perhaps due to the regional influence of the Detroit BMC (British Motor Corporation) franchise, Falvey Motors.

When the Renault Dauphine replaced the 4 CV in the late ‘50s, they became popular as well (there was even a Renault dealer on the outskirts of Flint).

Volkswagen was in the mix, but hardly dominant among the various European choices.


In my Flint neighborhood, soon after moving there, I discovered an insurance salesman on the next street who drove a beautiful Jaguar Mk. VII sedan (selling for $5-6K, even in the fifties), and a strange family of central European origin who bought a Czech Skoda! (Where? I don’t know … were they Communists? Don’t know that, either).

Then, another uncle in Detroit (Uncle Bob) was bitten by the import fever. He was an independent CPA, apparently feeling no allegiance in his vehicle choice to Detroit automakers (well, he did have a second car, a Ford Country Squire, as I remember) … first he 
bought a spiffy Triumph TR-3 roadster, then a tiny Fiat 600, later a
 
slightly larger Fiat 1100 wagon. He also passed along the old issues of his Road & Track subscription to me, after he finished them.

One thing that sets these 1950s imports apart from the Japanese invasion of later decades is that they were not demonstrably higher quality than contemporary American cars. In fact, buyers were generally willing to settle for lower quality as a fair trade-off for their considerably lower retail price. Most were notoriously unreliable – and, parts may have been costlier than those from domestic manufacturers. 

Here is where Rambler excelled, after establishing itself nationwide in the mid-fifties. It had comparable reliability to other American makes, yet still offered that appealing smaller size and greater fuel economy, for a price slightly lower than market leading Chevrolets, Fords, and Plymouths. In the aggregate, Rambler and these imports motivated new “compact” designs from Detroit’s Big Three by 1960 (Chevrolet Corvair, Ford Falcon, and Plymouth Valiant).

General Motors, prior to the introduction of the Corvair, had tested the waters domestically by selling German Opels through Buick dealers across the U.S. Ford had been trying to do this with English Fords, selectively in certain markets (including Detroit) throughout the fifties. 
Chrysler briefly partnered with Rootes Group in Britain (Hillman, Sunbeam) and Simca in France, but somewhat later, and with little impact where I lived.

By the early sixties, the British imports (except for those great popular sports cars) and smaller Germans (save VW) were fading

from the scene, until something revolutionary entered the American market in the early sixties, again putting Britain briefly in the center of attention. This was the original BMC Mini, designed by Alec Issigonis, and first reaching our shores in 1962.

Renault and Fiat kept a following through the sixties, but Borgward, Goliath, DKW, and that weird Czech import, Skoda, all disappeared. Swedish Saabs and Volvos made their first big U.S. push in the late ‘50s, too. And, Alfa Romeo competed directly with the Brits -- giving their signature low-priced sports car platform an Italian accent (low-priced compared to Jags, Porsches, or Mercedes SLs, at least).


As the sixties wore on, interest in most of the European brands continued to decline, with Volkswagen and sports cars the exceptions. The Japanese, first arriving on the West Coast only in the late ’50s (Datsun and Toyota), and East Coast in the mid-60s, would remake the landscape for the domestic auto industry in the following decades. Detroit ultimately would become a shadow of its former self. 


Friday, June 9, 2017




Exploring the Sundwick Automotive Photo Library: Part II -- Customs

William Sundwick

What is a “custom car?”  This library will use the following definition:

Custom: any car or light truck that has been altered in appearance significantly from a model available in the manufacturer’s original catalog for that model year. The alterations may be done professionally, or by the amateur vehicle owner. They can include custom paint jobs, sheet metal work, replacement of exterior visual components by non-standard components, or any combination of these things. Custom wheels are not enough, by themselves, to constitute a “custom car.”

Note: this definition is limited to physical appearance of the vehicle. It must be noticeable from the photo.

The obvious question that arises about custom cars is one that still mystifies me – why? Why would anybody want to spend their time, and often a great deal of money, to create a vehicle which most likely will fetch less in resale than a similar vehicle that was restored to “mint” historic condition?

It is not financial reward that motivates the custom designer, although there certainly are custom car shows that the vehicle could enter, with prize money of sorts; but, it will never match what the amateur owner would have spent producing his work of art. On the other hand, buying a custom that somebody else has created, can be much easier than buying a restored “classic.”

Is it the desire to create something? A true artist’s craving? I maintain this comes closest to describing the motivation of custom car builders. And, what’s more, the people who may be bitten by this craving are a very select group – probably rural, non-college educated, with few other opportunities for individual creativity (presumably with some body shop, and sheet metal, skills).

This peculiar (one might even call it “deviant”) fetish about cars has been impressively captured, in the American mid-west and southwest, by the CarNut.com web site. Most of the entries for custom cars in the Sundwick Library come from that site -- specifically: carpicsindex.com.


Let’s look at some representative examples, with commentary on each.

Early Rods – the “Classic” era of the ‘20s and ‘30s 

Chevy, Ford, Plymouth --   many professional custom car builders, like RODriguez, below (photo credit: Frank Filipponio), have used platforms from early Fords for their creations. Likewise, there are fiberglass or aluminum replica customs from several shops based on early Fords from the thirties, like this ’37 “convertible hardtop” … 

 

 “Hi-boys” and “Lo-boys” refer to fenderless hot rods from the era, which may be chopped (lowered roof) or channeled (lowered body on frame), or both – these two early Fords are good examples, one for show, one possibly a competition dragster.   


Although never as popular with the hot rod and custom demographic as early Fords, the other sales leaders of the thirties, Chevrolet and Plymouth, also have received some attention over the years. Here’s a great example of a “chopped” custom sedan, a ’34 Plymouth, and a Chevrolet sedan delivery from 1935.

Sedan deliveries became popular models for California customizers in the forties and fifties, as “surf wagons.” 
 


Finally, the category of “street rod” has been popular for conveying the sense of a car which can be driven on the street, attracting much attention, especially with suitably tuned exhaust note, but the best examples, like the ’39 Plymouth here, are strictly for shows.

Other makes -- The basic styles of customs and hot rods were also applied to other makes besides the three main market leaders of the thirties. This excellent channeled ’31 Essex sedan is an example (Essex was a popular-priced brand of Hudson).


Or, these two radical customs – an airflow Desoto and a wild chopped Hudson: 






Often, the special characteristics of a certain model might be just what the custom builder is seeking – e.g., the unique radiator/grille shapes on a ’34 Olds, or ’37 Chrysler (below) …






The replica business has not totally ignored other makes, either. The same fiberglass custom replica bodies made for Fords can sometimes be found on other cars, like this Lincoln Zephyr coupe by DeConides:
One final category in this period which bears inclusion in my definition of “custom.” These are the customs built for wealthy customers who could specify a bespoke body designed just for them, and placed on whatever Packard, Cadillac, Rolls Royce, or other expensive chassis, they select. Here is one of these, a very exotic French Delage town car (body by Fernandez, not well known in U.S.):



 “Lead Sleds” and “California Customs” – the ‘40s and ‘50s

Perhaps it was the “New Look” that postwar cars began to take in the forties -- elimination of running boards and pontoon fenders, body entirely enclosing wheel wells, more streamlined models – but, for whatever reason, the new look in customs reflected those changes. The primary objective was to make the car as low to the ground as possible, often weighing down the body with lead (hence the slang term “lead sled”). Then, typically, heavy chrome was added, especially from other contemporary makes.
The wilder variations became known as “California” customs, since the Golden State seemed to foster the most creativity in this area. As with many things that originate in California, it soon spread across the country.

Predominant in the period were the “shoebox” Fords and Mercurys (1949-51), but the Chrysler “Forward Look” (1955-59) featuring monstrous tail fins captured some imaginations, as did the similarly befinned ’59 GM bodies. The more discerning types liked the elegant, yet sporty, Raymond Loewy Studebakers of 1953-55. “Step Down” Hudsons (1948-54) and Nash models (1949-54) were, likewise, worthy of note to some customizers.

Here, then, are some examples from this wild and crazy post-war period in car design …

Shoebox Fords (including Mercurys and Lincolns) –  Somehow, the early focal points of custom projects were the “shoebox” generation of Fords and Mercurys (sorry, no explanation found for where the nickname originated). These were not necessarily more streamlined than the competing designs from GM, Hudson, Nash, or Studebaker (they were sleeker than Chrysler products in those years, however). Possibly because of the hot rod legacy of the Ford flathead V-8, they came to dominate the custom field. While the Ford body designs evolved in the fifties (and the flathead engines were consigned to history), the custom builders’ loyalties to Ford remained.

Typical “Merc” customs, the most popular by far, were chopped, and had a grille from some different car of the fifties (DeSoto was common), or something with heavy chrome teeth made by a custom shop, often chrome trim from a different car (Pontiac in one example here) was added … and, of course, the mandatory custom paint job. Note the “canted” quad headlights on the ‘50 Ford shown above, maybe from ‘58-’59 Lincoln?



 GM, and Harley Earl – The forties belonged to General Motors. It’s chief designer, Harley Earl, created a classic look eventually shared by all GM bodies – pontoon fenders which, after ’41, included part of the front door (on ’42-’48 Buicks, front fenders presented a continuous ridge all the way to the rear skirted pontoons). The fastback, or “torpedo,” body style in either 2-door or 4-door versions was all the rage. Their elegant lines have been a favorite among classic collectors, as well as customizers – as seen in these examples.


  The Loewy Studebakers, Step Down Hudsons, and Nash– Raymond Loewy was the designer responsible for the very first “new look” postwar car: the 1947 Studebaker. No front fenders were visible on lower body, which entirely enclosed frontal area – and, only vestigial traces of a rear fender line (see the 1950 Stude pictured here).

Hudson introduced its similar “step down” body in 1948, and Nash in 1949. By this time, the fully enclosed lower body was universal in Detroit.

Loewy, however, despite dire financial straits at Studebaker, continued with a truly exotic new design for 1953. It was inspired by Italian body styles on expensive sports cars, both elegant and sporty. Yet, it was made for a popular-priced car in the U.S. Studebakers were intended to be competitive with Chevy, Ford, and Plymouth! The ’53-’55 Loewy designs have long been prized both by collectors and customizers. 

Forward Look Chrysler Corporation –  Suffering from loss of market share in late forties and early fifties, Chrysler Corporation embarked on a rebranding project for its 1955 line – it was called “Forward Look,” new bodies throughout the line, inventing the fashionable “tail fins” in 1956, and carrying it to extremes with a second new body shell introduced for 1957 models. Perhaps the finest example of the Chrysler tail fin is seen on the 1959 Plymouth shown below. DeSotos, Chryslers, and Imperials were nearly as magnificent, though.


An interesting side note: the 1956 Plymouth wagon on the left is an example of a small sub-genre of custom – the passenger car body placed on a 4x4 truck (or Jeep) chassis. Strange, but true, for a few imaginative custom car builders!




General Motors, 1959 – Tail fins, unashamed! Buicks, Cadillacs, and gullwing Chevys – all with soaring fins. 

This Buick convertible also shows another fashion statement of the era: a “continental” spare kit (named after the iconic original Lincoln Continental of the forties).

Many consider the ’59 Cadillac as the most outrageous statement of the age of chrome and tail fins ever dreamed up. That makes them a good source for customs – since little needs to be done to alter the original, save a special paint job, wheels, maybe some de-chroming.
Low-end Chevy models (like this Biscayne) were faves among the street rod set, going back to the classic ’55 –’57 model years. This ’59 maintains a simple minimalist approach to customization, despite the natural gullwing fins.


For the strip –  organized drag racing, under the auspices of the National Hot Rod Association (NHRA) began during this period. Originally, as the name of the governing body implies, the sport consisted mostly of modified (“built”) early Fords, what we usually call “hot rods.” But, soon there was a proliferation of cars running the quarter mile in various classes, with certain models from the forties becoming early favorites in the free-for-all “gas” classes (only restriction: they run on regular pump gasoline, with normal octane ratings, as opposed to nitrous oxide, or some exotic blended fuel). Among the early favorites on the strip were English Ford Anglias from the late forties, and Willys Americar models from the thirties and early forties (Willys abandoned passenger cars for the Jeep during World War II). 

Later, the popularity of a variety of custom “street rods” forced the NHRA to add other classes to accommodate these customs – they were known as pro-street, pro-comp, or pro-mod. As with the earlier “gassers,” there were no restrictions on engine or drive train modifications. Pro-street machines were allegedly “street-legal,” but, otherwise, anything was allowed.




The early fifties produced further classic dragstrip contenders, like the Henry J (a small car added to the Kaiser line, for a production run of three years, 1951-53), the iconic ’55-’57 Chevrolets (everybody’s favorite street machine), and all the popular makes, given appropriate modifications to stock engines. But, there were limits to body modifications depending on where you intended to compete – pro-mod allowed fiberglass or aluminum body parts as replacement for stock steel. Early gassers did not allow substitute body parts, only removal of bumpers and chrome, cut out wheel wells, and the like. 
 










Muscle cars and “tuners” – the ‘60s and beyond

Custom cars continued to be built, both by amateurs and professionals, through the sixties, seventies, eighties, nineties, and aughts. Only recently have manufacturers begun to compete directly with the performance “tuners” who had been building limited run high-performance versions of popular (or exotic) cars.

Perhaps the amateur customization market has faded out due to costs, but also fewer old car platforms survive – people keep their cars and trucks much longer now than previously, replacing them simply costs too much. In case you haven’t noticed, the demographic most active in the custom car market is not getting richer!

Detroit iron –  while the amateur customizing styles started in the fifties continued through the end of the century, the popularity of trucks and SUVs started a new style of tough-looking off-road vehicles, including “monster trucks” in the eighties. And, “muscle cars,” light-weight mid-sized sedans with large displacement V-8s, then the “pony cars” (Mustang, Camaro, Firebird, Barracuda and Challenger … and AMC Javelin) also contributed their bodies to customization.

Here are some examples:

This Corvette follows the show/strip custom style started in the fifties …

But, the advent of the big-block V-8 muscle cars in the sixties supplied a wide range of cars for customization not seen in the previous decade. 



And, some purely artistic renderings continued to be built, like the ’70 Camaro below. 
On the professional side of the customization world, there were entrepreneurs who specialized in conversion of coupes into convertibles, since Detroit decided to stop building most convertibles as production body styles, in the early seventies. The ’86 Capri drop-top here is an example of this.

First, pickup trucks, then SUVs became very popular in the period. Custom builders wasted no time finding ways to modify the stock appearance of these popular vehicles. Often, the look desired was a tough, off-road appearance, like this early Jeep Wagoneer, but the more familiar custom sheet metal and outrageous paint jobs also continued to draw some practitioners …


The “roadster pickup,” like this GMC, is a throwback to Model T and Model A Fords. It is something which is perpetuated by the Jeep Wrangler in production, but hasn’t been offered by too many Detroit truck makers.

Another institution that made its appearance in the sixties was the “stretch limousine.” These were always custom bodies, often produced in limited numbers by “coachbuilders” … much like those of the ‘20s and ‘30s. Some are really bespoke, others are from catalogs.    
      


This Stutz is a truly bespoke vehicle built for the President of Gabon, in Central Africa. 

Finally, there appeared in this period some elegantly designed luxury coupes … Thunderbird led the way, followed by the Buick Riviera, Olds Toronado, and Lincoln or Cadillac versions of same. Buick and Olds versions, especially, have lent themselves to some visually appealing reworks:






This T-bird was cleverly designed to look like a “shoebox” Ford of about 1950! Apparently, built by a real retro fan.

Japanese “rice burners” – Not yet apparent in the sixties (or even seventies), but by the early eighties, we had an entirely new source for custom cars – Japan.

Because many models were popularly priced, affordable by the many, builders soon popped up specializing in these “rice burners,” to use their early colloquial nickname. Parts, both for alteration of physical appearance and getting increased performance from the little 4-cylinder engines, became available from domestic specialty shops. Customizing of the imports followed the same pattern as they had in the previous generation for Detroit iron. 


As the East Asian imports became popular, the globalized U.S. automakers acquired some of the Japanese manufacturers, or at least had cooperative marketing agreements with them, so they could sell the Japanese cars here, branded as Chevrolets or Dodges … and, of course, custom builders would get hold of them, and modify them. Look at the Chevy Aveo (Korean Daewoo) and Dodge Colt here (Chrysler had controlling interest in Mitsubishi for a time, later sold it). 


Mitsubishi found that some of its models, in the nineties, were popular in the U.S. market under their own moniker … like the Eclipse sports coupes and cabrios. 


But, the Japanese market leaders were also the leaders in amateur and “tuner” modifications. Honda and Toyota dominated, with Nissan (formerly marketing its products under the “Datsun” brand) not far behind. Then came Mazda (Hyundai, too, after it entered U.S. market in the nineties).






           
                     



The design study of a Datsun “Z-car”(above) is what an earlier generation would call a “radical” custom. And, the popularity of small trucks from Japan beckoned the custom builders just as did their bigger Detroit cousins.

Other imports – of course, European imports continued to be popular after the arrival of the Japanese on our shores. Volkswagen had a long history of customization, going back to early days of the “beetle” in the fifties. Dune buggies were especially popular in the sixties and seventies, based on beetle chassis, but other creations could be found as well – like this “hi-boy” sedan from 1969.


In the sixties, there were also British sports cars, in the eighties and nineties, Volvos and BMWs … all had their adherents among the custom builders. If a car was popular, somebody would build a 
custom from it.





The bespoke world for the ultra-wealthy did not ignore German or Italian exotics, either. This Ferrari 456 “shooting brake” for the Sultan of Brunei is a good example … 

Or, the odd case of a car with a clearly foreign provenance, but an American branding as a custom, like this Pontiac “sport truck” (really an Australian Holden, like the Pontiac G8, itself) …



Then, there is the case of the popular-priced American car (Pontiac Fiero) styled to look like exotic Italians (Lamborghini/Pantera mix) …


All these cars were crafted by enthusiastic and skilled hands, all involved considerable expenditure of resources … both temporal and financial.

One might ask: to what end? The only thing they all have in common, over multiple generations now, is that their owners considered them to be works of art.

Tastes may differ, but to the artist, the only tastes that matter are his own!