Has there ever been a decade that has seen as much social change as the sixties? Not during my lifetime! Naturally, on a site like this we’d be thinking of car design, but consider the changes in fashion, in community attitudes, and since we do this sort of thing on CC sometimes, in popular music. Down under in 1969, this was the song that seemed to get most of the airplay. Psychedelic rock at its best! (Caution – video clip contains footage of a nasty WW2 leader for the purposes of satire.)
Unthinkable ten years earlier.
And the cars from 1969 would have been unthinkable ten years earlier, also. Consider Chevy. In 1960, for a family car you basically had this (or a Corvair);
Kinda space agey-looking, with that goldfish-bowl windshield, thin pillars, jet plane ornament on the doors with chrome strips and contrast paint trailing from it. And fins – horizontal here. All these things were gone, some long-gone, by 1969. I don’t have a ’69 big Chevy for contrast, but here’s a Chevelle;
Much thicker C-pillars, vaguely hipped rear quarters, no fins, and plainer body contours. No funky extrusions going on, or oddly-applied chrome trim. Basically clean, rational design except for some strange detailing here and there, like that quarter-window shape. Distinctive.
The Nova was similarly clean, here in base-trim fleet-car white. Only the fake louvres under the badge look odd, but they were a one-year wonder.
This Camaro has the up-and-coming vinyl roof, and also bodyside stripes. And of course Hugger Orange paint. We have hood vents, seemingly a muscle-car must-have, but the Camaro also has a return to more complex bodyside creasing with the wheel-arch flares trailing onto the doors and rear quarters.
Then there’s the Corvair. A leftover from 1965, only the thin real pillars mark it as not a 1969 design. Simple. Beautiful.
Other GM cars were similarly clean. Here’s a Pontiac GTO. At the front we have a loop-bumper, body-coloured here, with a prominent central protrusion to carry on the split-grille theme. Once again, we have bodyside graphic elements, which are multicoloured on this Judge, very much in keeping with the psychedelic ‘theme’ of the time.
On the Firebird we see the usual Pontiac cue of a split grille, complicated here by the area around the headlights being separated from the grille and surrounded by body colour. I feel it made for an overly-busy look; I preferred the cleaner ’68, but this separation of lights and grille was to spread throughout the Pontiac lineup. There’s a sharpening-up of the bodyside contours, with simple wheel-arch flares replaced by eyebrows trailing down the bodysides. This would be the beginning of some weird contouring of body sides during the seventies. Some Very weird!
From Oldsmobile, I have this ’69 442. More of a fuselage look than most Mopars! Once again you have very clean bodyside contours (which would gain prominent hips for 1970), with the black interior which because almost de rigueur for sporty cars during this period. Even if it was impractical in hotter climates, because Fashion. Black racing stripes on an Olds – who would have thought it ten years earlier?
No intermediate Buick though. I’ll show a 1969 Riviera, though really, I don’t like what they did to it.
From a lovely car in 1966, it seemed to get progressively messed up, but it shows the trend toward increasing front-end design complexity, at the expense of aesthetics.
(No, I don’t have any Cadillacs)
Moving across to Ford, here’s a Galaxie.
I’ve chosen a rear view here to highlight the Ford’s most unusual feature, the ‘tunnelback’ rear window (pinched from GM’s ’67 intermediates)—the profile of a sporty fastback with the glass slope of a regular coupe. Later to appear on the Jaguar XJ-S.
Here’s a Torino. Full fastback, though a more normal (but not ‘formal’) hardtop was also available. Fancy, a choice of coupe offerings! Clean lines, almost to the point of being nondescript. Only the bodyline crease continuing up over the wheel arches rates a mention. No stripes on this Cobra, and only a subtle hood scoop.
The Mach 1 Mustang looks to have had all the eye-grabbing stuff other Fords missed out on. Hood scoop, side scoops, side stripes, black hood panel, spoilers, quad exhaust tips… Overkill? Maybe but it certainly appealed to the teenager in me. Take away all the Mach 1’s graphic add-ons, and basic shape is nicely proportioned but unexceptional.
Over at Mercury, there was the Cougar, here an Eliminator (or two). Only a coupe or convertible but pleasantly shaped, and the graphics are more restrained than the Mustang.
Okay Mopar fans, your turn!
No big fuselage cars (don’t think they were ever done in kit form), so no Imperials or Chryslers. That means we start with this.
My love for this Charger design has nothing to do with that TV show. The style always struck me as something special. There’s almost something of a tailored look about it, which I enhanced here on this stripe-delete R/T. You could argue the sharp-edged style had run its race by 1969, but somehow this shape avoided looking dated.
In contrast, the regular Dodge intermediates sort of had a foot in the past with their visually separate roof and body, but weren’t as angular as the Charger, with more of a softer look aided by the hipped rear quarters. That turned out to be the way design was heading.
The Plymouth’s rear quarters were simpler, and I think, better for it.
If the GTX or Super Bee were too large or expensive, Dodge had you covered with the Dart. This GTS had a 383; probably not in full Road Runner tune, but did it really need it? Maybe until the 340 came along.
But this one’s my favourite though. I’ve always loved the look of these Barracudas. So here’s another.
That’s it for this time. Not sure what we’ll look at next time. Another year? A specific make, maybe Edsel? A specific model, like maybe the Nissan Skyline? Vintage commercials? Pickups? I haven’t written it yet, so who knows?
An interesting analysis, made more so by using your models to illustrate. I definitely see the commonalities across manufacturers, but I think GM was really head and shoulders above the others. The best of the ‘68 A Bodies (Chevy and Olds, in my opinion) really seemed not just to move the needle, but to be in an entirely new place. As an 11 year old, they made me a domestic car fan again. I loved my Johan ‘68 4-4-2 kit!
As for the Corvair in the lead shot, I’m not usually a fan of that look. Maybe a +1 from 13” to 14” wheels, but not so big and definitely not polished. But it looks good here, and I do love that green. Nice.
Thanks dman. GM was defnitely leading at the time, Ford and Chrsyler were to follow,, but it took a while for that clean look of the intermediates to percolate through to the rest of the GM range. Maybe it was just as well I chose the Chevelle to illustrate the massive changes from 1960.
And the Corvair; that’s not usually how I build, but I had this spare kit and started experimenting out in my ‘paint shop’. Once I had this colour, the big wheeeled look just seemed to flow naturally.
Your models are stunning! Yes, the 60s involved big changes in so much of our lives, including the cars we drove. One important development was the establishment of federal safety standards in the US, which to a limited extent by 1969, influenced the look of cars.
The 60s remain my favorite decade overall for car styling, at least from US automakers.
Thanks! Yep, being at that age in the sixties I was unusually aware of the changes going on around me, and the way older folk were uneasy about the rate of change.
I think my favourite years design-wise would be 1949-73 or so, before all US cars had to have those big bouncy bumpers and ran rectangular headlights which often didn’t suit the design.
That gold Chevelle is a ’68 model, right!
Yes and no. AMT revised some of the body details (taillights, vent windows, grille), but left the lower bodyside chrome strips in place. There may be other things wrong that I’m not aware of. The company was in someting of a crisis at the time, and did a few odd things with their models.
So many pretty cars .
I had a fleet model (ex SPD Metro) Malibu four door sedan, I thought it looked great with not too much chrome trim .
-Nate
Thanks Nate. Yes, it often seemed to us (Australia, Europe too) that American cars really had an excess of chrome, probably dating back to the early postwar years. The 1946-8 Mercury is one that sticks in my mind, or the pre-Stepdown Hudsons with those extra chrome strips on the doors at knee height. Then everything seemed to go mad in the fifties. Fortunately taste returned in the sixties, only to go AWOL again in the Brougham age. That’s why sometimes I’ll deliberately omit some chrome, and why I made that Nova a base model. (I deliberately didn’t show the 427 under the hood)
Chrome is good as an accent, but too much of it is like, I dunno, too much sauce in a burger? It takes away from your enjoyment of the underlying meat of the design. Does that make sense? 🙂
As always Peter, those are some outstanding models. I particularly like the lede Corvair and the yellow Super Bee Charger.
One of my overall takeaways about the design changes you discuss that occurred over the course of the 1960s is that the decade started out with conceptualizations of modernity and space-age sentiments; but by the time we finished the decade, we knew what actual space-age engineering design was and that implied a much more pared down and less ornamental nod to what simply “looked” space-age. In other words, we had a real space-age by 1970, and it turned out to be less fantastic (design-wise) and more practical. And most important, it worked.
Interesting stuff to think about for sure.
Thaks Jeff. That’s a great explanation for what was going on in design. I’d never stopped to analyze the influences behind it. Makes sense.
I agree with the influences of the Sputnik era up to about 1960 or so, but not so much on the influence of actual space craft in the mid-60s and on. What I see happening is “Italianization”, the huge influence of Pininfarina and other Italian carrozzeria on American design after they realized that their home-grown extravagant fins and chrome and such were a dead end.
I called Pininfarina’s 1955 Florida “The Most Influential Automotive design Since 1955” https://www.curbsideclassic.com/automotive-histories/pininfarinas-revolutionary-florida-the-most-influential-design-since-1955/
Its influence was absolutely massive; one can see the slab sides of the 1961 Continental and even more so in the 1963 Grand Prix and the GM A bodies. And so many others.
It marked a return to more formal and clean lines, with the emphasis on the whole body as a unified piece of sculpture instead of a conglomeration of affectations.
‘…conglomeration of affectations’ – I like that, Paul.
Perhaps America’s next point of departure, aftter tailfins and all that applied gorp, was the hipped rear fender? Followed by the formal roof? American designers always seem to have strived for the Next Big Thing, then returned toward a brief period of relative Euro-cleanness. I guess that’s the influence of the annual model change; like a whip being cracked over the designers’ shoulder, they always had to come up with something different, whether it represented an actual step forward or not.
“Spiffy, lil red, Corvair” for me!! Like that “unadorned, Baracuda”too!
Thanks JT!
As always, love this series!
Agree that GM was really setting the pace in the late Sixties, and the 1968 Cutlass is a prime example of the right design in the right size for the times. The contrast with the angular Dart hardtop could not be more dramatic, though I find both cars to be handsome vehicles. Oddly enough, I think 1968 is about when most full-size cars jumped the shark design-wise, becoming bloated and doughy-looking after several years of relative conservatism following the tortured excesses of the late Fifties.
Did you build both of the Cougar kits simultaneously to experiment with color, or were they built several years apart?
Thanks William. Yes, the juxtaposition of the Dart (a nice piece of design) alongside the Cutlass really highlights two different approaches to design back then. Arguably the Dart would be more practical, especially for rearward visibility, but the Cutlass design seems quite futuristic, as though GM skipped a generation of design from 1967 to ’68. The change is just so dramatic.
Totally agree with you about ’68. We didn’t get the American GM cars here after ’68, but I didn’t like what I saw in photos. Fords were still reasonably taut, but the fuselage Mopars just seemed overwrought; too much body height, not enough roof. And by then intermediates were so big I wondered what exactly was the point in making cars bigger still.
Yes I did build the Cougars simultaneously. A friend had messed up the paint on his Cougar and gave me the model. I stripped off his blue paint and used Competition Green; call it a late production ’69 car in a ’70 colour….
Just my opinion, but the 2 most beautiful cars to come out of Detroit in the postwar era are the 2nd generation Corvair and the 1967 Eldorado.
I can’t do you a 1967 Eldorado, Evan, but here’s a ’70. A very pretty shape.
Wonderful analyses and beautiful models. I hadn’t given that much thought to thicker C-pillars being a hallmark of late-’60s design, but yes! I will always love the second-generation Corvair and 2nd-gen Barracuda fastback from an aesthetic perspective.
Thanks Joseph. I was in holiday mode when I wrote this. I was having second thoughts after I’d sent it in, but Rich’s only quibbles were of a photographic nature.
I remember the C-pillars being a factor because Dad complained about them on his ’67 Falcon (compared to the ’62), and gave me some (underage) seat time so I could see what he meant. Then the next year’s Holden came out with even thicker pillars, and the next Falcon got thicker again (Australia only).
From a stylistic point of view I can see why they did it. If you’re not going to have the glass wrap around (‘old-fashioned’) then either the rear glass has to get closer to the passegers’ heads, or the pillar has to get thicker. Do both and you’re well on your way to a formal roof…
Lovely stuff. The 2nd gen Corvair will always remain in my 60s top ten. And it’s a very tough decade to pick from – definitely the most inventive of the second half of the 20th Century.
Oh and I vote Skyline for the next post!
So sorry, I wrote the next one yesterday. But I’ll move Skyline up the queue.
Strange how I’ve never owned a Skyline, wasn’t impressed by the ones I’ve ridden in (C210, R31) – but I’ve built so many of them.
Here’s a ’69 for you (I think the grille’s a ’69).
Part one of my Skyline story is now finished! 🙂
2nd Gen Corvair – a real one!
An American design that doesn’t have to make any apologies to the world, and doesn;t need any allowances made. The size, the shape, just right.
The 69 Dart GTS had the 10:1 compression 4bbl 383 that was optional in B and C bodies, but not the camshaft from the Super Bee and Road Runner 383.
Thanks Scampman. I knew somebody would know. It sort of stands to reason the Super Bee and Road Runner would have a hotter mill – it wouldn’t do having the smaller Dart being faster than the hyped performance models – but as we know Mopar didn’t always do what you might expect.
Thanks Peter. I enjoy seeing your work. On the Cadillac front, there’s the old JoHan kits on Ebay- I’ve built and restored quite a few.
Thanks Chris. I’m glad to have the opportunity to show them.
I deliberately keep off Ebay. Been there, done that. Too much temptation. I’ve never found the big Cadillacs particularly appealing, though I once built a ’68 Coupe De Ville for a friend. I did a ’64 decades ago, but traded it without taking any photos. Still not a ’69 though. Never mind. I have enough to build. 🙂