Nash image by oldparkedcars.com
(first posted 5/26/2012) Bill Stout’s rear-engined aerodynamic Scarab “mini-vans” were brilliant, and way ahead of the times(and too expensive) for the mid-thirties. But Nash decided all the Scarab really needed was a long hood and conventional front engine to be good enough for 1949. Not so, as it turned out.
Related:
CC 1950 Nash Airflyte: Did Somebody Say Bathtub? Tom Klockau
Getting Passed On The Right By A Speeding Bathtub Nash
Love the way you lay out genealogy that others don’t see. Suppose that successful designs were just a likely to be stolen in our car market as the post WW2 japanese bike market. Just doesn’t seem to be so till someone looks hard.
God Damn It! You took the words right out of my bloody comment on the Airflyte article! I was looking up Wikipedia for some pictures of the Scarab, when I refresh and see this!
Having never seen a Scarab in the metal, just how big was a Nash Airflyte compared to the Scarab? The pictures make them look about the same size, but that could be done thru enlarging.
I don’t have time to google that right now, but I’m going to guess that the overall length was roughly similar, with the Scarab possibly being shorter, because of the lack of a hood. The Scarab was probably a bit taller. The wheels were probably similar sized, and they look roughly similar here.
Iirc the Scarab used 16-inch Ford wire wheels.
I don’t want to get those designers that may be lurking on the page to get their panties in a wad, but that Scarab is the bloody personification of Art Deco!
1935 Stout Scarab: 135″ wheelbase, length approx. 192″
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/1936-stout-scarab.htm
1950 Nash Ambassador: 121″ wheelbase, 210″ length.
http://www.carfolio.com/specifications/models/car/?car=195327
Those two views are uncannily similar, nicely done. Side views are quite a bit different, not just due to the Nash’s hood.
That Scarab must have made a big impression on how much space a car can have. In that sense it blazed a trail for the Airflyte and other big streamliners.
The smaller Nash 600 was on a 112 inch wb with a 201 inch overall length, so even the shorty Nash was longer than the Scarab. But then my great big 94 Ford Club Wagon (138 inch wb) was shorter in length than my 93 Crown Victoria (114 inch wb), which I learned when I used to park them side by side in the same garage.
Nash Ambassador for comparison.
That Nash’s rear end picture reminds me a lot of the Soviet’s GAZ Pobeda. It has very similar rear styling.
http://files.turbosquid.com/Preview/2011/09/11__09_37_48/134%20gaz-m20%20pobeda%20studio%200002.jpg6a2f2f9e-1aa8-496a-ad8f-71a996cd6126Large.jpg
For some reason, the link you provided doesn’t seem to be working. I clicked on it, and it came up “Error”.
I suppose it was this photo.
Rear window and rain gutters look superficially similar, but overall the Nash’s tail is much more egg-shaped, rather than just sloping. Can’t say they are extremely similar.
I saw a Scarab at Hershey’s Fall Annual Meet. Must have been the early 1990’s. Most memorable car ever. A crowd was around it the entire time. Simply stunning. That being read, I’ve always wanted a collectible car and I think the Nash is it. If you ever watch old Looney Tunes, you will note that the cars seem to be a look a lot like a Nash, with a Kaiser thrown in for good measure.
howstuffworks.com has some good interior photos of this car which features modular seating , folding table, and wooden interior paneling . Only thing I see lacking, is a trunk of some kind. I wonder if there was trunk in front of the driver, like a VW bug.
Sweet looking car, the Stout Scarab. It’s a shame that it was too expensive for mass production. One good thing about it is that it influenced other car makers, such as Nash, to style their cars.
I was lucky enough to see a Scarab–possibly this same one, as it was silver–in person at a show back in 2007. Unbelievably striking. And larger than you might expect!
Very interesting comparison. I can hardly imagine two cars with more divergent driving dynamics. Those Nashes were supposedly understeer on steroids while the Scarab reportedly had enough weight in the back to make a VW or Corvair feel like it had the stability of a Miata by comparison.
The Owls Head Transportation Museum in Owls Head, Maine has a Stout Scarab on display. It’s worth a look if you’re in the area.
Very interesting , the follow up comments too .
.
I’d love to get a drive/ride in a Scarab .
.
-Nate
I too have seen a Scarab in person, it was on the Hemmings Great Race years ago at the stop in Fallbrook, Ca. Neat car, but I am not a fan of the Ford flatty powerplant. Those cockroach Nashes really speak to me. Someday…..
Ive never seen a Scarab and bathtub Nashes arent exactly thick on the ground over here either, the both appear to be channeling a Tatra especially the Scarab with its rear engine setup.
In fact, the Stout predates Tatra T77 by 2 years (1932 vs. 1934). It was designed roughly simultaneously with the first rear-engined Tatra, the V570, so it is quite difficult to tell who was first to come up with the idea, Ledwinka or Stout.
Well, it’s kind of hard to say who started down that road first. Tatra and Stout, sure, but ever heard of the Burney Streamline? British-built, handful made, streamlined limousine, big straight-eight (!) in the tail…. 1929-ish. Unlike Stout, the Burney design was bought by Crossley, who made another handful of these in 1934-35.
Rumpler was the true aerodynamic pioneer. There were previous attempts to streamline cars, but not very serious/functional. The 1921 Rumpler Tropfenwagen was revolutionary in every way: rear engine, the very first rear swing axles, and a CD of 0.28!
It really got the whole ball rolling, and inspired Ledwinka and all the others (including the Burney). Rumplers were actually built and used as taxi cabs in Berlin because of their roomy mini-van like cabin, although its aerodynamics were rather wasted in that role.