In reality, the unibody was probably more safe than the traditional designs of the 1930's. There was also a perception that the unibody design was unsafe. "This was another situation where a car design was ahead of its time and never really caught on. These cars also had unibody construction rather than body on frame, which was common at that time. These cars had aerodynamic styling, which was really innovative for that era. This was a smaller version of the Chrysler Airflow, also introduced in 1934. Larry Heath wrote: "The 1934 DeSoto Airflow. Jerry Paul wrote: "This week my guess is a 1934 DeSoto Airflow." It didn't help that a few early Airflows had major, engine-falling-out-type problems that stemmed from the radical construction techniques required." "As it was, in 1934, the car's dramatic streamliner styling antagonized Americans on some deep level, almost as if it were designed by Bolsheviks. Twenty years later, the car's many design and engineering innovations - the aerodynamic singlet-style fuselage, steel-space frame construction, near 50-50 front-rear weight distribution and light weight - would have been celebrated.
The Airflow's 'worst'-ness derives from its spectacularly bad timing. It is on Time magazine list of the 50 worst cars of all time. Paul Perdue wrote: "This week's vehicle is a 1934 Desoto Airflow. With some factions giving partial credit to the Airflow influencing the initial design of the VW Beetle, it was definitely the bug."ĮVANS: PJ Rodgers said: "It's a 1934 Desoto AirFlow." "For the manufacturers, it's a "sometimes-you're-the-bug-sometimes-you're-the-windshield" existence. Such is the fickleness of the public's acceptance. Eventually all manufacturers adopted some of the Airflow's engineering feats, such as pushing the wheels out further to the four corners, placing the engine directly over the front axle and of course the unibody construction. 1936 was the last year for the DeSoto Airflow and the Chrysler version only lasted one more year after that. "Chrysler was quick to correct the front-end styling for the 1935 model year but it just was not enough. The DeSoto version was also seen as stubby and awkward since it was on a shorter wheelbase than the Chrysler version and with this being its only offering, DeSoto sales suffered drastically. "Aside from that, the front-end styling was shunned by the public because it was just too different from everything else.
#1934 chrysler airflow driver
By the way, I do not think the driver went over the cliff with the car! GM and its dealers were quick to deem the car unsafe, saying, 'That car doesn't even have a chassis! That body can't protect you the way a solid steel chassis can!' Despite a much-publicized stunt where an Airflow was driven off a 100-plus-foot cliff and then driven away under its own power, the seeds of doubt were planted. "The Airflow was the first all-steel, unibody car at a time when nearly all other manufacturers were using steel panels over wood-frame bodies. "Entire books have been written on the whys and how-comes, but basically it was just a little too forward-thinking for the time, and Chrysler simply underestimated the public's resistance to such radical change. Introduced in 1934 as the only DeSoto offering and as an addition to the 1933 Chrysler carryover lineup, the Airflow was a failure from the start. I noticed the fins open on the hood area, so that tells me they needed extra cooling, but I don't see the windshield looks like it pushes out, and the '35 did."ĬANTON, GA.: David Anderson wrote: "Way before Ford stepped all over itself with the ill-fated introduction of the Edsel, Chrysler did it way better (worse?) with the Airflow.
#1934 chrysler airflow cracked
Sam Roney said it was the 1935 DeSoto Airflow: The aluminum block engine caused a lot trouble with cracked heads on them. (Too much time has passed to remember how it was on the street.) Keep these coming!"
"A friend of mine had one in the 1960s, and we thought it was the most unusual thing we had ever seen. This was probably the most streamlined auto on the American market at that time. This appears to be an early attempt at a unibody design in that this car had a 'cage-type' frame around the passenger, trunk and hood areas. The rear-seat passengers were moved forward so that both front and rear passengers were riding 'between the wheels,' according to the sales brochures. wrote: "The photo is of a 1934 DeSoto Airflow or 'Floating Ride' concept by Chrysler.
0 kommentar(er)
