In 1949, Ford introduced its first completely redesigned line of cars since the end of WWII, beating the other major automakers to the punch. The Custom nameplate sat at the top of the trim levels, and for 1950, the Standard trim would be renamed Deluxe, with Custom becoming the Custom Deluxe. Over $72 million were spent in the development of the new line of cars, which were an immediate hit, selling well over a million copies the first year. In the first three days alone after the newly design cars were introduced, over 28 million folks (hungry for new cars after the war) crowded into Ford dealers for a look-see. By the end of the first year, Ford had racked up a $177 million profit off of their investment.
Engine options were either the tried-and-true 95hp 226 cu. in. (3.7l) L-head six or the 100hp 239 cu. in. (3.9l) flathead V8. Given the dual Lake Pipes on this car, I’d say the flathead provides motivation. It’s interesting to note that the six actually had more torque than the eight, and would probably be the better engine choice. The transmission was a manual, with an overdrive as an option.
1950 would be the second and last year for the single bullet nose (which has been shaved from this car – to spite its face, perhaps?), and in fact, only very minor changes were made from the ’49 model. In researching the ’49-50 Custom, I learned that the design of the car was derived from concepts out of the offices of George Walker, an independent car stylist of the day. He had first shopped the design to George Mason at Nash-Kelvinator, where it was received with excitement, but due to a communications lapse, no deal was ever signed with Walker. After not hearing anything for some time, Walker took the design to Ford, where it was chosen over a competing design by in-house stylist Bob Gregorie. Mason was furious, and immediately established an in-house design department at Nash to prevent this happening again.
A new 1950 Custom Deluxe Tudor Sedan cost $1,511 (about $14,645 in 2013 dollars). While looking much trimmer on the outside, the interior was actually very roomy, in part because the engine position in the chassis was pushed a full 5″ forward from the previous pre-war designs. Despite having a lower roofline, a man could still safely wear his fedora inside.
The ’49s were not without teething troubles, including handling issues and a noisy ride. Ford advertising for the 1950 models touted “50 Ways New, 50 Ways Finer” in an effort to reassure folks that they had indeed corrected the problems. Sales still fell off quite a bit though, to the tune of around 100,000 fewer 1950 models moving out the dealer doors, 35,000 of those missing sales being Tudor Sedans.
Sock hops were still a few years away when this car rolled off the assembly lines, but I think it does capture the essence of early post-war America with its clean styling, minimal ornamentation and tentative optimism. Aviation and military influences are evident, and would become even more pronounced as the Fifties progressed, to the point of excess on top of exaggeration. If you wanted an honest, simple car from the 1950s, you’d be hard pressed to find a better one.
Nice car and rare to see a single spinner without it Not very many 2door versions here ours were all fordors, Styling emulates the MK1 Zephyr which was first I wonder, At least the British Ford unitary body didnt crack when subjected to severe service like these did not as strong as previous Fords from the US.
Love, love, love these. Would really like to drive one someday, just to experience it.
Call me, I’ll give you a ride!!
Not to be a dick, which I am, the correct term is “lakes pipes”, derived from cars that raced at the El Mirage dry lakes beds, now Edwards Air Force Base, in California. The Southern California Timing Association (SCTA, which also sanctions Bonneville) began sanctioning timed events at El Mirage in the mid-’30s. Then, and later, cars were driven to El Mirage and then raced. To facilitate conversion from street to race trim, the Southern California racers developed the “lakes pipes” which with the turn of a wrench, permitted open exhausts and less parasitic losses. Yeah, the Beach Boys say “hear the lake pipes roar” in Little Deuce Coup”, but they were musicians, not racers.
Thanks for the etymology lesson, Kevin. I had never made the connection before (always thought they were named after a person).
I failed to mention the other “lake”, which was Muroc. Muroc + El Mirage = lakes.
I guess Ford got hit by the surprising surge of the 2-door hardtop when Chevrolet introduced the BelAir and Pontiac the Catalina (Buick, Olds and Cadillac already got their hardtops a year before) and Chrysler gived also hardtops to Chrysler, Dodge and DeSoto for the 1950 model year (Plymouth had to wait until the 1951 model year).
However, Ford had introduced their 1949 models more early in 1948 gived them a more longer model year for the 1949 model year which could also be a factor for the declining 1950 sales.
I spotted this picture of a proposed design variation for the 1949 Lincoln http://www.flickr.com/photos/glenhsparky/8081600122/in/pool-22276389@N00/
And here a scan of an aborted fastback version of a 1949 Ford then I scanned from a old issue of Collectible Automobile. This idea didn’t go further then the prototype stage.
The provenance of the ’49 Ford design is a very complicated and still controversial issue. Suffice to say there was a lot of Studebaker in the final design, both because Studebaker people were involved in the work (on an unofficial basis, of course) and because the ’47 Studebaker was the target in terms of size and packaging.
Unfortunately, the ’49 ended up being a rush job, which was the main cause of the many well-documented issues it suffered. Ford was desperate — they were losing horrifying amounts of money and a fair number of people assumed Ford was dying — and they just couldn’t wait. That’s probably the main reason the ’49s all debuted so early: Lincoln and Mercury were out by May 1948, the Ford in June.
How were Studebaker people involved with the new Ford? That’s a story I hadn’t heard before.
The person who’s generally credited with doing the actual design that became the ’49 Ford was Richard Caleal, a former RLA/Studebaker employee who went to work for George Walker in ’46. The work was supposedly done in Caleal’s home with help from some of his friends from the Loewy Studebaker staff, including Bob Bourke; exactly how much each contributed comes down to whose account you find more credible.
Assuming that was indeed the case (George Walker later asserted that the design was really by Joe Oros and Elwood Engel, who were at least responsible for creating the full-size model from the original 1/4-th scale clay), the design had at least a lot of influence from current and former Studebaker designers and the ‘package’ dimensions were pretty close to the ’47 Studebaker’s. The writer Tim Howley says there are photos of a Studebaker design from the same period that look a lot like the ’49 Ford. I don’t know that the Ford was a rehash of that design, but if you have some common people applying similar themes to approximately the same dimensions, it’s not unlikely that you’ll end up with some things that look similar.
I also covered this here: https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/through-the-window-classic-1950-ford-tombstone-pass-patrol-car/
There was a very good article about this in an article in Hemmings Classic Car several years ago. I believe a clay made in Caleal’s home was shown in the writeup as well. Very interesting stuff.
I always found it interesting that Chrysler Corporation paid dearly for the seriously flawed 1957 models, but the problems with the 1949 Ford didn’t seem to affect the corporation’s sales.
An interesting observation. I would guess several factors: First, Ford owners had been used to some Ford peculiarities for years, including the built-in cooling issues of the V8. Chrysler buyers had been groomed for years to expect top quality cars that were, perhaps, a bit dull. So part of it was likely expectations. Second, 1950 was still a strong economy, so even though Ford had a bad year in 49, the economy was still good in 50 (yet the car still declined, no doubt partly in view of the 49’s reputation). Purely anecdotal, but my grandfather had run a 35 Ford V8 from new and all through the war. When he was ready for a new car in 1951, he skipped Ford because of his perception that they were not well built. As for Chrysler, 1958 was a horrible economy, and people were probably much less inclined to gamble on the risk of problems than in normal years. I am sure there are some other ideas out there, including that Ford still carried a lot of goodwill from many, many people who had spent years in Model Ts and Model As.
I’m sure that buyer expectations were part of it. Chrysler Corporation did have a reputation for top-notch quality in the early 1950s. A man who worked at Ford in the early 1950s told me that Chrysler Corporation cars had the best quality among American cars in the early 1950s, because, as he put it, “They didn’t change very much.”
I’ve read that Ford did work hard to improve the 1949 Ford for 1950, so perhaps there were fewer “horror stories” among buyers of the 1950 and 1951 Fords. Chrysler Corporation had serious management problems in the late 1950s that hampered its ability to execute improvements among its cars.
I think Chrysler was also hurt by the dramatic change among buyer desires in the late 1950s. Overnight, buyers rebelled against fins and very low cars. Chrysler had the misfortune of leading the way with these styling trends in 1957. It’s worth noting that GM’s radical new 1959 models met with a mixed buyer response, while the boxy 1959 Ford sold very well. The 1949 Ford, meanwhile, was widely admired for its styling, and that basic body style continued to be admired even during its final year of production.
I think I prefer the fastback version. The 3 box version strikes me as rather plain and heavy-looking. The tail of the fastback looks nicely sculpted by comparison.
These 1949 and 1950 Fords were all over the place when I was fooling around with cars. I even owned a 1950 Ford convertible for a while – as is typical for me, I bought and sold it well before it would attain its present status as a high-priced collector vehicle.
I love these as well but have never spent time around one.
For perspective, this car is on a 114 inch wb, same as a 1979-end Crown Victoria.
And also on the same wheelbase as the 1960-63 Mercury Comet who was a senior compact and the wheelbase is 1½ inch shorter then the 1962 mid-size/intermediate Fairlane.
Really! These seem so much more compact in comparison.
Well they are a foot shorter than the 1979 Crown Vic and 6″ narrower. Obviously a few inches taller. The height changes how big they look too, in pictures at least.
My great aunts shared one of these, and it spent most of its life in their Long Island garage. When my dad bought it as a second car in 1972, it had only accrued 22,000 miles.
Chevy introducing the Powerglide in 1950 could also have stolen some Ford sales that year.
Pretty much the cars that saved Ford! The ’49 gave the company something modern to sell, and the ’50 generally fixed the body engineering issues that resulted from the rush job that it was.
As I understand it the Mercury body was originally going to be the Ford, but was deemed to big and heavy, and the Lincoln was to be a Mercury, with a larger “real” Lincoln and Continental above it.
This lead to a rushed programme for a more compact and lighter Ford and the almost complete existing Fords and Mercurys were all bumped up a notch in the model hierarchy.
It says something about the skill and dedication of the engineering and design staff that such a crash programme turned out such an iconic series of cars, and didn’t kill Ford in the process!
Yeah, that’s about right. The decision to take Bob Gregorie’s existing ’49 design and make it a Mercury was Ernie Breech’s. Aside from thinking the car too big, I think he just didn’t care for it. (George Walker later claimed that Breech showed him the design and Walker convinced him it was no good.)
Part of the reason the original design was significantly larger was that Ford had planned to offer it in addition to the so-called Light Car. That was also axed and became the French Ford Vedette.
it could be interesting to wonder what if Walker and Ernie Breech had accepted Bob Gregorie’s designs? Ford could have, sort of, imitated Plymouth who offered its 1949 car line-up in 2 wheelbases. The Deluxe was on a 118″ wb while the Plymouth Suburban was on a shorter 111″ wb. Then we could wonder what if KT Keller was a bit more open-minded for design ideas like they had once for an aborted plans for a 1943 Plymouth? http://www.flickr.com/photos/glenhsparky/8046706990/in/photostream/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/glenhsparky/8038234086/in/photostream/
But that’ll be for another story. 😉
And Ford was lucky to not being hit with quality problem then the 1957 Chrysler got, just imagine what if it was the case?….
Never knew this was meant to be a Nash design, that’s amazing. Would this have been the ’49 Nash instead of the Airflyte???
It’s so good looking and just right that it’s iconic. I love the way they used it in Dark City.
Not that it makes much difference, but the one pictured is actually a 1950 because it does have push button door handles or it could be a 49 with 1950 doors I guess. The 49 door handles were the kind you pull out like a refrigerator door handle. The change in door handles was one of the few visible differences between the two years. I grew up with these cars and there were several of both years in my neighborhood. Not much related to cars got past me in those days.
You’re correct that the subject car is a 1950. Since these were basically a two-year design, I referred to the ’49 a lot – sorry if that was confusing.
The thing I always used to tell a 49 from a 50 (at least on custom model) was that on side trim, the Custom tag hung under the chrome strip on the 49 while the 50 moved the Custom tag above the strip.
The parking lights are another quick spotting feature.
’49 has them as the end of the central grill bar.
’50 has them between the grill bar and the bumper, and the grill bar wraps around to the side of the fender.
Also, on a non-customized car, the ’49 has FORD spelled out on the hood above the spinner, and the ’50 has the shieldlike emblem there.
Another spotting feature of ’49 vs. ’50 was the hood ornament, it sat more upright on the ’49, kind of like a rooster’s comb, and was more of a squattier quarter circle on the ’50, a portion of them was made of clear plastic. And the trunk opener/emblem assembly was different, too, a chunkier version on the ’49, one side of which was a movable latch, I believe, and a more contemporary looking, elongated u-shaped fixed version on the ’50.
My dad had a ’50 Custom Tudor, a light grey color, he regularly got company cars every two years in those days. Although just a small child, I still remember this car sitting in the driveway of our new little tract-built house in a west L.A. suburb, the quintessential post-war family scene. That dashboard detail brought back a fun memory, too, I was often plopped in between my dad and mom in the front seat, staring straight ahead at that center mounted clock. I can still see that in my mind’s eye.
’49 has an exposed gas filler neck and cap. ’50 has it behind a door.
Ed: I’m certain that the 51 also shared that design. In 52 it changed and that design also lasted 3 years with 52,53,and 54.
You are right about the six. One of my friends had a 50 (I think) with a six. He could show tail lights to the rest of us that drove flathead V8s. Henry didn’t like sixes we are told so guess what got the ink. The eights also had the biggest development of speed parts.
Curiously, this was my pick when asked what we had planned to have as a first car. I could never choose between the 1940 and 1949 ford coupes. Actually owned four 1953 flathead v8s. Three ford and one merc. The fords were pretty good but the merc was an overweight loser. Interesting story.
The ’51 uses the same shell, but with a different nose treatment. The ’52 was an all-new body.
Fords with a 6 were unheard of over here unless they came from the UK American Fords had a V8 motor only. Nobody would pay the premium asked for a US car with a V8 that could not out perform a 6 so these Fords never really made it here. The traffic patrol department bought Zephyrs they were quicker and more durable than Ford V8s
As my uncle put it you didnt chase offenders with a V8 you put on the light and siren and hoped they stopped.
I’ve always liked the simple lines on these cars, and would love to have one sometime. Sounds as though getting the ’50 rather than the ’49 might have advantages!
FWIW, I was curious about “sock hop” history, and pulled up the Newspaper Archive; it starts popping up in numerous states in the late wartime years (’43-44-45, sometimes as a “Victory Dance”), and then in the postwar 40s-50s with even greater frequency. I wouldn’t have guessed, ’cause it’s become to stereotype-associated with the rise of rock ‘n’ roll.
Keep reading. You’ll be surprised that a lot of what we now consider ’50’s rock and roll’ actually was going during the tail end of the big band era. And ‘teenagers’ didn’t suddenly spring up in 1955/56, either. They were starting to be around in the early 1950’s.
Those huge period icons, James Dean, “The Wild One” and “Rebel Without A Cause” were pre-rock and roll, as Dean was dead in ’55 and the movies were ’55 and ’54 respectively. For the historical nitpickers, even though Ike Turner wrote “Rocket 88” in 1950(?) and Bill Haley did “Rock Around the Clock” in 1954,1956 is usually considered when rock and roll as a music form took off.
I once read a record review in Life Magazine (or one like it) on Bill Haley’s Rock Around the Clock. The reviewer panned it as one of the worst jazz records he had ever heard.
1949-54 or so is a really interesting period, musically. So many things going on from traditional big bands, bebop groups and multiple other jazz permutations, rhythm & blues and country and what was bubbling up into rock & roll, plus the vocalists that sold all the records.
Although the popular narrative likes to build a gate between one musical generation and the next, it is never that clean. Spend some time with Louis Jordan and his Tympany Five from the late 40s, and you will hear a jazz group that displayed a lot of the features of early rock & roll.
It’s an odd feeling to go back and revisit these artifacts that come from the edge of my preschool memories. I have vague memories of these things rolling around when I was a little kid…they would have been 13 years old at the time; plenty old in the day. But, road-salt, or rather, heavy use of road salt, was a relatively new thing. Cars were starting to rust out; but the older ones weren’t so much worse than the newer, yet. It was a recent plague.
The owners tended to be shriveled old men with suspenders, wire-framed round spectacles, and ill-fitting dentures. BROKE old men, in other words. You’d see them at church; see them at the druggist’s, see them at the grocery store. Those cars, in a world of 1963 Impalas and 1964 Ford Galaxies, were dated anachronisms.
It was only later that I learned of what a key role that car had in saving Ford. And how relatively modern it really was, flathead V8 notwithstanding.
We must be the same age … and I remember thinking that my neighbors had stepped into the modern era when the traded their ’53 Chevy (old car) for a ’64 Impala (new sleek car). Of course the same year, my parents upgraded from a Volvo 544 (weird old-looking car) to a 122S (weird not-so-old-looking car). In general, the ’49 Mercury was cool, the ’49 Fords and Chevies were not, and the ’53’s were worse.
I thought the ’47 Studebaker was the first all-new postwar car.
From an existing U.S. manufacturer, yes, although I believe it debuted about the same time (June ’46) as the new Kaiser and Frazer. They were all about two years ahead of Ford.
Love to find an old road test detailing these and their contemporaries.
Very appealing car and so modern for it’s time.
I sure miss whitewalls, chrome bumpers, and vent windows.
The fender skirts work well on the Tudor.
I even like the large white and chrome steering wheel.
Is the front grille mostly blanked off for cold weather?
Or is the grey piece a permanent part of the customizing?
Back when our Millennium was new, and Ford was futzing around with a “re-imagined” Thunderbird, they also did a concept car called the Ford Forty-Nine, inspired by their legendary 1949-50s. I sat in one at LA Auto Show, and liked the interior. It’s occurred to me that Ford should have put the Forty-Nine into production and left the 11th Gen T-Bird at the concept stage. Whatever its shortcomings may have been, at least this thing had a back seat, so it really couldn’t have sold any worse than the 2002-05 T-Birds.
The aforementioned indoors of the Forty-Nine.
That was a cool concept. I remember seeing it at the 2001 Chicago Auto Show.
It could be interesting to compare the Forty-Nine with the Holden Efijy
http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z10279/Holden-Efijy-Concept.aspx
The more I look to it, the more I agree with you, the Forty-Nine might had worked better then the 11th gen T-bird.
Love me some shoebox Fords. Dad born in ’43 so these are my ’50s icons, more than tri-fives. They were cheap used fun if you were in high school in the late ’50s – his was a ’51 convertible with a ’50 tudor parts car – and they lend themselves to all sorts of good mods. Thanks for the find, Ed.