(first posted 3/18/2017) Welcome to the third and final installment of the ‘60s British Deadly Sins. The term “globalization” may be a more recent coinage, but half a century ago, luxury cars were already there. After the refined Alvis and the blue-blooded Lagonda, let’s have a look at something more sybaritic and eminently ‘60s, the fiberglass-bodied, Italian-styled, American-powered Gordon-Keeble coupé.
The Peerless GT, so named because it was built where American Peerless trucks were assembled during WW1.
Back in the ‘50s, the rise of glass-reinforced plastic (GRP, as the Brits usually called fiberglass) led to a bewildering array of low-production cars in both Europe and the US. Fiberglass seemed like a God-send: cheap to make, light and rust-proof, it could be shaped in any way designers wished. One such low-production car, the Peerless GT, is where the Gordon-Keeble story starts. John Gordon, who spent his weekdays selling second-hand Bentleys in Slough and his week-ends racing hillclimbs, became involved with the folks behind Peerless, making astute recommendations as to the car’s layout and chassis. The Peerless GT had a tubular spaceframe, GRP panels, a Triumph 2-litre engine and a de Dion rear axle. Gordon joined the Peerless board in 1957 and soon encountered Jim Keeble, an engineer who sold some of the cars at his dealership. Keeble had an American client who wanted to replace the Triumph plant with a 4.6 litre Corvette V8 – an enticing proposition.
Things quickly soured at Peerless; despite the car’s success, Gordon left the company in 1959. He was convinced that an Anglo-American bitza would be a terrific seller, provided it was styled with more panache and built with more care than Peerless were managing. (Peerless came to the same conclusion, launching the Warwick, a mildly restyled Peerless with a Buick V8, a couple of years later.) With Keeble’s help, Gordon developed a new spaceframe around a Corvette engine and went to Italy, the masters of automotive beauty, to make his prototype as easy on the eyes as possible. A young Giugiaro, then at Bertone, was tasked with designing the Gordon GT, as it became known, in late 1959. Bertone built the body (in aluminum) in a few weeks.
The car was shown on Bertone’s stand at the March 1960 Geneva Motor Show, where it was noticed for its interesting characteristics, but Gordon now needed to find backers and facilities to turn his vision into reality. This proved time-consuming and difficult, but things started coming together by 1963. After all, the stylish V8-powered coupé was becoming the in thing by then: AC, Bristol, Iso and a few others were following in Facel-Vega’s footsteps, using Detroit-made engines to provide an ample cavalry and reassuring reliability to an exclusive but expanding clientele. (Of course, the Brits had already done that back in the ‘30s with the likes of Jensen, Railton or Brough, and more recently with Allard.)
John Gordon and Jim Keeble were busy getting their operation online in 1963, contracting Williams & Pritchard to build the bodies and setting up a small production line in Eastleigh, near Southampton, to manufacture the chassis. GM were content with supplying the small-time British firm with as many small-block V8s and transmissions as they wished: the Gordon-Keeble was not a threat to the Corvette: being only produced in LHD, it was ill-suited to the British market in any case. One issue with the GK1, as the coupé became known, was a lack of a distinctive logo or badge. One day, as a pre-production car was out to be photographed, a tortoise crept into shot. Someone grabbed it and put it on the front of the car, where it proceeded to relieve itself, to the amusement of all present. With characteristic British irony, the slow-moving reptile standing in a puddle of urine became the fast and refined Gordon-Keeble’s logo.
The Gordon-Keeble GK1 was presented again – on its own stand this time – at the Geneva Motor Show in early 1964. The motoring press were enthusiastic: 300 bhp with massive torque (360 lb./ft @ 3200 rpm), 145 mph top speed, 0-60 in about 6 seconds, fade-free Girling discs all around (with twin servos), a rigid structure with a well-engineered de Dion rear axle, an all-synchromesh Warner 4-speed… The interior was luxurious enough, though more Italian in feel than British, save for the Wilton carpets.
On the minus side, the Marles-Adwest variomatic steering was criticized for its feel, fuel consumption was rather high for European standards and the floor gearshift was tilted the wrong way (being made for LHD vehicles).
Though five years old by then, the styling was still fresh, though the vertical taillights would have looked passé on a Continental car. When seeing the car in profile, it seems the proportions are a bit off. A slightly longer wheelbase and a shorter front overhang would have probably looked better. Still, the car had charisma and it was breathtakingly fast. Jim Keeble made sure of this himself: he would take every car out on a stretch of Roman road near the factory, pushing the speedometer needle to 140.
Eager to start selling as many cars as possible, Gordon-Keeble were obviously aware of the other animal in the room: the E-type. The tortoise feared the big cat’s incredible speed, styling and low price – under £2000. John Gordon determined that the GK1 should be kept at as low a price as possible to give it a fighting chance. The car’s £2798 launch price was very competitive, but also meant that the company’s profit margins were pretty thin.
The British sports / GT market was pretty crowded in the mid-‘60s. Other firms besides Gordon-Keeble were resorting to American power and fiberglass bodies allowed for big automakers to enter that market with relative ease. In the larger 6- and 8-cyl. class, the wealthy Brit was spoilt for choice: whether one wanted a “drop-head” or “fixed-head” coupé to experience fast motoring, be it “sporting” or “touring” in essence.
The breadth of the market was pretty incredible. Of course, the Bentley Continental buyer would probably not have cross-shopped a Sunbeam Tiger, but both cars were rare and exclusive in their own way – and completely out of reach for the overwhelming majority of British motorists, who would gingerly commit a year’s salary on a shiny new Morris Minor or a Vauxhall Viva.
Alas, the Gordon-Keeble’s low, low price (all things being relative) did not guarantee the car’s success. The company’s low cash-flow meant that it would have needed to expand sales to other markets to ensure its future, but this did not happen. After all, it was early days still, and UK exports were subject to tariffs on the Continent. John Gordon preferred to focus on the home market first and develop the marque’s reputation there. But in the winter of 1964-65, the whole strategy came undone.
One of the Gordon-Keeble’s least-liked features, its steering, became a stumbling block as a lengthy strike paralysed its manufacturer for months. In turn, this led to halting GK1 production and put the struggling firm in the red. By the spring of 1965, Gordon Automobiles Ltd. went into liquidation and John Gordon had to leave the company, which had produced and sold 80 cars in about 12 months.
But the car had its fans, and Jim Keeble soon managed to find new backers to restart production by late 1965. The model was soon re-christened “Gordon-Keeble I.T.” (International Touring) and the GK1’s cheap imitation leather was replaced by genuine hide, but otherwise, the coupé stayed the same. The price, however, did not. Keenly aware that the previous company’s financial health was always its Achille’s heel, Keeble Cars Ltd marketed its product near the £4000 mark, above Jensen and quite near Aston Martin’s territory.
A new steering box (made by the same manufacturer) was also installed. It was the same as the Rover 2000 unit, but critics were not impressed by the result. Upping the price by over £1200, the cost of a decent car in itself, did not win over the clientele.
Jim Keeble left the company in early 1966, as sales remained below expectations and cash-flow problems resurfaced. By the end of the year, only 18 cars had been sold and Gordon-Keeble stopped production yet again, though one final car was put together from spare parts in 1970.
Source: Wikipedia
Amazingly, the car was not dead yet. John de Bruyne, a businessman from Newmarket, bought Gordon-Keeble’s tooling, remaining engines and even its logo, and devised a facelifted version of the car, now called the “de Bruyne Grand Touring.” The front end’s slanted quad headlamps were straightened and the dated rear lights were replaced by horizontal units, this redesign being the work of de Bruyne’s brother-in-law, Peter Fluck. The one and only prototype, which was allegedly made from an early-model GK1, was presented at the 1968 New York Motor Show, as de Bruyne felt that the car’s only hope was to be sold in America.
Another model, also featuring a 327 Chevy engine but mounted just ahead of the rear wheels, was presented alongside the Keeble. The Grand Touring and its mid-engined cousin came to naught though. The price for the GT was set at £4250, which would have still been pretty low. In any case, after the New York Motor Show, de Bruyne realized there was no way to make the plan work and threw in the towel.
All told, if we count the Bertone-bodied 1960 prototype and the one made in 1970 from spares, 100 cars were assembled. It was perhaps naïve of John Gordon and Jim Keeble to pursue their GT dream. If production had gone ahead circa 1960, certainly the car would have stood a better chance, as the Anglo-American hybrids were not yet on the scene. Being beholden to the whims of parts suppliers was a foreseeable risk, too. The Deadly Sin element lay in the Gordon-Keeble’s pricing, which was far too low for the company’s good.
As a testament to the car’s appeal and fundamentally sound concept, about 80 of the 100 Gordon-Keebles made 50 years ago are still in running order and enjoyed by their owners. A very active owners’ club was founded back in 1970. The club invited John Gordon and Jim Keeble, who kept working together in non-automotive ventures, at one of their annual meetings, where the above photo was taken in 1989. It’s heartwarming to see that the two men behind one of the coolest British coupés ever made lived to see that their work was still cherished decades after production stopped.
That’s it for this edition of the British Deadly Sins. A third one is not unlikely, though before I get to that, another country should get its turn on the hot seat. Perhaps it’s time for me to brush up on my (very limited) German…
Bis später!
While Alvis and Lagonda were names I was familiar with (while knowing nothing about the cars themselves), this one is completely new to me. This one should have had success written all over it, particularly as an export to the US.
But then again, we already had the Avanti II which never sold in significant numbers. Still, I think there were many Yanks who could have been swayed by the lure of a British sports/tourer but with a common American powertrain. The Sunbeam Tiger did relatively well here, though as you note, at a significantly lower price.
The Avanti II had steadily increasing sales for nearly 20 years. It had no second act, but it certainly sold as well as anyone could hope.
As a practical matter, no limited production European car could hope to match the Corvette on price, performance, and image in the Sixties. The actual market for a “European Corvette” priced 25 or 50 percent more than an actual Corvette would be a tiny percentage of the Corvette’s own market. A European competitor would have to be a different kind of car, like a Porsche or a Jag.
0n the cars home turf ,the UK , the XKE was king . GK placed them selfs in the market above and still didnt make money. £200 more brought the established
Alvis with a steal body.
It has been said that Armstrong-Siddeley were set to make the Gordon GT prior to the parent company ceasing car production.
Also during development of the Reliant Scimitar GT, an alternative proposal put to the Reliant board was to buy the Gordon GT in order to save money and time on development costs.
Reliant looked at the Gordon GT and figured that while a lot of money could be saved with a GRP version of the Giugiaro styled body, other aspects such as the chassis and the labor intensive complexity of the design would have meant Reliant would still be selling the car at a higher price then was desirable. Reliant ultimately rejected the Gordon GT proposal because they were not yet ready to overtly produce a direct rival to Aston Martin.
Is it known which other companies and facilities John Gordon went to during that time before the Gordon-Keeble GK1 entering production?
Like the looks of the later de Bruyne GT, wonder though whether it was possible to lengthen the Gordon-Keeble to create a 4-door variant?
Thanks for the story of the logo, one amusing piece of G-K I didn’t have. As always, deftly brushed.
If you’d asked me why the badge had a yellow background, I would have assumed that a graphic designer thought it looked good that way. I’d never have guessed the real story!
Over the years I’ve read several magazine stories about the GK but never heard the mascot story! Looking at the complexity of the frame/chassis it’s easy to see that a lot of time and expense went onto the construction of this car. No wonder that it was costly, cutting the profit margin out was a desperate move. Unfortunately it didn’t work. I think the car is beautiful and cleanly styled, especially the greenhouse. The photo of the red car is fanaststic. The horizontal tail light update didn’t do anything except detract from the design. The canted headlamps look okay to me on this particular car. The car should have been realistically priced the same as the Aston Martin but since the GK lacked a pedigree, I know which one I would have bought! Thanks for the story.
Great writeup, I knew of the Gordon Keeble but had always thought that it had a direct lineage from the Peerless. But it is quite indirect.
Never seen a GK although I did see a Peerless once at Mosport in 2004
Yeh, actually, that was my car, I lived in Blackstock from 1998 to 2005 and brought this car from the uk with me. took is to Mosport a few times, even got to round the track with it. I worked for a while a t British Classics in Markham for a while, , then Ken Mason in Orangeville, then LNER in Newmarket, (john Watts) and Tony Tracy (paul tracy’s dad) fixing old cars, Got friendly with Norm Mort, the journo , he never got the facts right, but I used to go to work in Markham in this, was in the shop for a while sorting the overdrive., took it to Kingston vintage auto show, and as many auto shows as we could get to. there was one west of T.O. went to a few times, name escapes me . but it was the only one on the road in On.., there apparentlt were 2 others existing , good times.. still have the car today, still use it. Now in Wales. UK. Paul Milsom
yeh… Bronte Creek is where we go to as well.. don’t know if
they’ll let me do this, but you can get in touch on peerlessgt (at) toucansurf.com regards paul m
yeh… Bronte Creek is where we go to as well.. don’t know if
they’ll let me do this, but you can get in touch on peerlessgt (at) toucansurf.com regards talking of Keebles. my friend Ken had 2 peerlesses, couple scimitars and a keeble. Had a few rides in the Keeble…. brutal. absolutely brutal 300 hp in a light car. terrifying stuff. met Ernie knott, also spent a few hours with John Gordon. at a TR International weekend , he was the guest of the Peerless andWarwick group. got some pics. theres one of him on here somewhere at a GK… paul m
I wouldn’t call this a deadly sin, but a great success! It’s only a deadly sin if ones expectations are set on the likes of Aston Martin. But these were two guys with no previous experience in having their own car making company, making a bitsa special to the highest standard they could possibly achieve within the means they had. That they were able of making a hundred cars is no mean feat in itself.
I’d say the venture borders on professional car making, but they were also on the top end of making specials. They were enthusiasts more than entreprenuers, and it’s astonishing they went as far as they did. As I understand it, the company lived in a perpetual cash/flow problem, where they could only finish cars at the rate payments arrived. So, they more or less could only build the next one with the proceedings of the last.
I would also call it a great success in the sense the owner seems to have appreciated their cars like nothing else. Cars stay long with their owners, and it’s very seldom a cars changes hands. I’d say they must’ve had the highest rate of surviving cars to cars produced than any car maker ever. If 80 cars survive after fifty years of a hundred cars produced, that tells much of how much the owners appreciate what they have.
In a way, you’re right, it was a small miracle that the car did as well as it did.
On the other hand, the same car caused the death of three companies that tried to make it. Pretty deadly, no?
Well, when you put it that way? 🙂 But yeah, I have a thing for glorious failures, and this project was really doomed from the start. They would’ve needed a lot more cash to make it a viable business. On the other hand, I’m glad they went away and did it anyway, because the world would’ve been poorer without it.
I really like the first G.K.1 ad (photo 6). It is both informative and factual; it doesn’t talk over my head or talk down to me (perhaps a narrow target) and there are no tuxedo’d men and be-gowned elegant ladies to try to make me think the car would make me live like them.
… or a movie star falling backwards into a swimming pool – I have no idea where that recent ad was going, but I digress.
And then this: ” … the dated rear lights were replaced by horizontal units”. It may just be me and Jose Delgadillo (above), but those “dated” vertical rear lights seem very elegant indeed; the horizontals not nearly so much.
Love the 1989 photo of John Gordon and Jim Keeble going over old times.
Great write up; thank you.
Completely agree on the tail lights — the de Bruyne version is not an improvement. However, from a 1968 point-of-view, vertical lights were the most outdated part of the car and relatively easy/cheap to change.
‘Modernizing’ a Giugiaro design is akin to touching up the Mona Lisa with a sharpie.
My favourite car ever. I was smitten with this in the sixties. There was a British movie made, probably in the late sixties,( I saw it by accident years later) in which the male lead drove a GK, but sadly I can’t remember what it was called.
I grew up close to Williams And Pritchard but never realised they built GRP bodies as well as aluminium.
A classic Giugiaro design with a superb space-frame and Corvette drive train. What’s not to love? And I did, as a kid already, finding it a very compelling package.
One thing you didn’t touch upon was that the virtual twin of the GK was being built in Italy, the Iso IR 300. Design by Giugiaro, drive train by Corvette, deDion rear suspension, and four wheel disc brakes (from Jaguar).
Needless to say, it looks rather similar, but unlike the GK, the Iso was relatively successful, and stayed in production for some ten years, and was the whole basis for the other Iso cars to come.
I rather think that given the choice, a lot of buyers might have preferred the genuine Italian experience (and interior) to the British version. And of course Iso was much better capitalized.
The IR 300 went into production in 1962, and quickly established a niche for itself. I should go and see what their relative prices were at the time.
Wow, that’s like a proto BMW E9(obviously playing off the established Bertone influence). That’s another beautiful car I never heard of!
Front end dare I say also bears a striking resemblance to the 61 Rambler American
Ive never seen a GK though there is meant to be two in this country so theres still a chance I will, a great idea ruined by circumstances beyond the designers control.
“Perhaps it’s time for me to brush up on my (very limited) German…”
Yes, we want to hear about NSUs, Borgwards or some unknown german manufacturers!
Do not forget Glas as well along with DKW, Neckar, Messerschmitt, Horch, Trabant, Wartburg, Gutbrod, etc.
excellent series, wonderfully written!
The diamond-tufting on the interior door trim looks like something in a modern Bentley…or Hyundai Sonata whatever that’s worth.
The Avanti/Avanti II story would be an intriguing read…although in that case pics of some of the tacky 70s-era color combinations and interior upholstery could make you want to gouge out your own eyes.
Front view, seems to me Peugeots 504, in US guise (two round lights), and their straneous folds in the hoods
An excellent write up of this amazing cars short history.For my sins I have owned two & I still cannot believe this myself! Chassis no.`s 11 & 97 but I now have just the one – chassis no.11 which is definitely going to be a keeper. I love the dashboard & instrument panel along with that great badge. Always wanted (and still do) an Iso Grifo but now have a car as stylish without all the rust!
Hey, sorry I’m only discovering this now. Wow, you have personal experiences that few mortals have had! Owning 3% of an automaker’s production, for starters.
Glad you thought the post was ok. Any chance you could post a few pictures of your GKs?
A fascinating article on a car I would not have otherwise heard about; thank you!
It’s really an interesting car. I first heard about it from an older brother who was a car mechanic for many years when he showed me, in the late 70s, an article about it in “Thoroughbred and Classic Cars.”
The article here is also interesting to me for reasons other than the car, because the guy leaning on the passenger side of the red car with the “6075 PP” plate shown in the article looks quite similar to my dad, who’s paternal grandfather was born in Stutton, England in 1858 and ended up in the northeast US (where I am now) by 1877.
Yes, my name really is Gordon Keeble.