One of the most enigmatic cars of all time is Chrysler’s Airflow. It is listed number seven on Time Magazine’s list of all time worst cars. At the same time Chrysler Airflow is also listed number two in Time’s list of most important car of all time. To put the Airflow into some perspective Time also rates the Car of the Century, Ford’s Model T as the second worst car of all time and gives it a billing of the most important car of all time.
The logic in Time Magazine’s assessment is that even though the Airflow was a sales flop and rated about 2 out of 10 in the beauty stakes, the Airflow put automobile aerodynamics on the radar. And the Model T simply won because it proved Henry Ford’s theory of mass production with the result that mass production actually drove Model T prices down during the course of the vehicle’s long lifespan making it accessible to all and sundry. This is the template that has been used ever since in automobile manufacture.
The big difference between these two American icons is that the Model T became a sales bonanza over its two decades of production, yet the poor old Chrysler Airflow was a sales flop. We found this magnificent 1936 Chrysler Airflow C11 Imperial Limousine at the 2011 RACV Motorclassica in Melbourne. It is one of only 17 of this variant produced and the only one known to be still going. Remarkably, it is in basically unrestored condition apart from mechanical repairs using original Chrysler parts.
What makes the Chrysler experiment with the Airflow significant is that it was the first time a US maker examined in detail how to streamline a full-size production car. Elsewhere in mister-cars.com under Bugatti in the classic cars section we have a story on one of the first cars to be streamlined, the Bugatti Type 32 built and raced in 1923. Naturally, cars meant for speed and racing pioneered streamlining and what develops on the race track quite often ends up in commercial passenger vehicles.
At the core of the Chrysler Airflow was the desire to understand the relationship between a given form - the car - and how that form was affected when moving through the atmosphere.
Chrysler engineering’s Carl Breer was intrigued by what made aircraft able to fly. What shapes allow this to happen? Chrysler built a wind tunnel to pursue a better design for cars - designs that would see vehicles slip through the air rather than push against with upright radiators, large flat headlamps and windscreens.
To ensure they understood what they were seeing Chrysler engineers enlisted the help of aviation pioneer, Orville Wright, one half of the Wright Brothers. The goal was to find the ideal car shape that would use the forces of nature, not fight against them. To test their ideas Chrysler shaped 50 models for testing. At the same time they also tested their conventional models and found they were more aerodynamic when the rear end was pointed into the wind tunnel, than the front end! Looking at car design in the early 1930s it is easy to see why with cars tapering away in the rear end, but presenting a bold, aggressive and upright front end.
The engineers also embraced the monocoque construction method to reduce weight by doing away with a conventional box chassis and improved streamlining. And, the story does not end there. By the mid 1930 cars had become far more reliable, but more complex issues such as weight distribution had not been thoroughly researched. Most cars of this era had a higher percentage of weight over the rear wheels - leading to heavier spring rates in the rear - and resulting in a harsh ride for passengers. Chrysler engineers moved everything forward to give a more even distribution of weight with passengers aboard, allowing for lighter springs in the rear and a better quality of ride. The Airflow was not pretty, but there was a lot more to the vehicle than its skin. These changes in design also resulted in a car than handled pretty well.
Despite all the work that went into the Airflow all the American public saw was a car that was pretty much pig ugly. Even with all the technology and design who wants to been seen in a car that is the quasimodo of the automobile world? The 1934 Airflow also suffered from manufacturing problems due to the design and those early models driven up to around 130 km/h sometimes suffered from the straight-eight engine breaking loose from its mounts.
The eight cylinder Airflows came in four different wheelbase options (3140mm/3300mm/3490mm and 3720mm) in the CU Airflow Eight, CV Airflow Imperial Eight, CX Airflow Custom Imperial and the CW Airflow Custom Imperial with body by LeBaron. Less than 11,000 Airflows sold in 1934, well under sales of Chrysler’s conventional line up. DeSoto - a division of Chrysler - had a line up consisting exclusively of the Airflow design in short wheelbase format and suffered badly from having all its eggs in one basket - or should that be one basket case.
Changes were made to the 1935 model Airflow softening the waterfall grille in particular, but the smooth rear end remained. Chrysler also released a new model - named the Airstream - which also carried the DeSoto name and this smooth vehicle went on to outsell the Airflow by more than 3 to 1.
The 1936 Airflow also underwent changes to the grille, but what really took the cake was an added boot that gave the rear end of the car a hump on the previously smooth back end - quasimodo-ish if you like. Despite the changes, the inherent technology, the aerodynamics, the Airflow, due to its appearance failed to catch the imagination of the buying public. The change was simply too radical, too futuristic and too butt ugly. By 1937 sales had slumped to just 4600 and the Airflow project was scrapped.
As plain as our featured 1936 Chrysler Airflow C11 Imperial Limousine is, the car remains a remarkable achievement by Chrysler in terms of engineering and design. Our featured car in particular is a magnificent example of a magnificent flop despite its being one of the more influential US cars ever made. The car is owned by Dr Khoi M Bui of Melbourne and came from San Francisco where it won many awards at concours events.
|
Print Article
Submit Feedback
Email This Article
