Auto invention FLOPS ?

[Guest Silverghost]

Just for fun I thought I would ask this Question ?

What were some of the most memorable auto inventions or innovations that eventually became unsuccessful Flops !

Great ideas that were way ahead of their time that just never caught-on with the public ?

And just outright dumb ideas !

1) I have to think of the Octoauto with eight wheels !

2) 45 RPM under-dash record players

Edited October 5, 2010 by Silverghost (see edit history)

[d2_willys]

Air suspension in 1958 GM models.

Flightpitch/triple turbine dynaflows, and Chevy Turboglide.

Corvairs!

vacuum wipers

Vega aluminum engine

AMC PACER

[Guest]

How about Chevrolet's Ed Cole spending in today's money of a little over a billion dollars to try to develope the Turbo-Glide automatic transmission.

Don

[pacerman]

Air suspension in 1958 GM models.

Flightpitch/triple turbine dynaflows, and Chevy Turboglide.

Corvairs!

vacuum wipers

Vega aluminum engine

AMC PACER

Gotta disagree with you on the Pacer. Obviously you have never driven one. Styling, I'll admit was a lttle ahead of it's time. The wagons looked better though. The ride is like a big car. They are roomy and had rack and pinion steering with most U.S. cars did not. The wheel wells are made for today's low profile tires and 16-in or better size wheels. Vacuum wipers had their place too. Infinitely adjustible in speed. And they work Ok with the wiper motor and the booster in the fuel pump are both healthy.

[5219]

Talking cars! Remember the generic female voice telling you your door was ajar or your fuel was low?

How fast did that come and go?

[Ivan Saxton]

Milton Reeves is the first name I thought of too. His four and three axle conversions of Stutz and Overland cars were circus parade stuff, as was the stuffed front end of a dead horse that some snake oil promoter persuaded Apperson or Haynes (?) to fasten to the front of one of the pioneer efforts.

Reeves is rather more admired fo his variable speed V-belt Reeves Drive, which was most useful for some machinery but not applicable to an auto.

Then there was the multi-passenger two-wheeler built by Wolsely, I think, for some inspired inventer. This had a big gyro flywheel to assist the vertical alignment. Maybe the man should have just built a motorbike.

[Guest]

Corvairs!

Nothing wrong with Corvair after Bunkie Knudsen had it fixed---Ah, another Pontiac guy to the rescue !!

Don

[mrspeedyt]

1974 seat-belt ignition interlock system

vinyl roofs (any)

pot metal switch handles and trim

plastic body parts (1970s)

early plastic interior trim and parts (1940s)

[Guest papaw]

How about the Tucker center headlight that steered with the car.

[Big Beat]

The Wanker... er... Wankel rotary engine. The number one automotive flop/lemon/dog on my list. Ask the man who owned one

[DAVE A]

As much as I hate to admit it, the "tin block" engine that was the basis of the post war Crosley vehicles was also one of the prime reasons for the downfall of the company. A tremendous concept, a lightweight energy efficient engine made of 126 leaves of steel brazed together to form the block. Unfortunately prone to corrosion and left with uncorrected problems throughout the company's biggest sales year!!! Corrected by the introduction of the cast iron block the following year, but alas, too late to save the reputation of the company.

[Dave Mellor NJ]

CCW lugs,lug bolts,commutator on the shaft end of starter,ballast resisters.All advanced engineering features and grief producers on Mopars. Also teletouch shifters on Edsels,liquimatic transmissions,4-6-8 engines on Fomoco.Copper cooled engines,engine removal to change spark plugs,EV-1,Fiero,four-rotor, Aztec, 4-6-8 engines on GM

[R W Burgess]

GM's first diesel car engines, real winners!

The Oliver Tractor Company did the same thing in the '50's, trying to convert a gas engine to run as a diesel, with the same results, broken cranks, poor performance.

Wayne

[OldsDoug]

E

D

S

E

L

[Guest brh]

Some really good ones here. I really liked drilling holes through the fender well of a Chevy Monza to change the spark plugs, that was a winner.

[supersix]

1974 seat-belt ignition interlock system

vinyl roofs (any)

pot metal switch handles and trim

plastic body parts (1970s)

early plastic interior trim and parts (1940s)

Have to disagree about vinyl roofs being a flop. They were a popular styling fad for twenty years.

[Guest De Soto Frank]

Copper-cooled Chevrolet four ( NOT one of Charlie Kettering's better ideas...)

In regards to the Edsel being a "flop", being a former Edsel owner, the biggest engineering flaw with the Edsel was the "Tele-touch" automatic transmission shifter in '58: it did have reliability issues at the time, but I believe dedicated Edsel enthusiasts have come-up with a solution to make it a reliable system.

The bigger issues with the Edsel were it's front-end styling, and it being priced for a market share that really didn't exist ( or was already covered by existing Ford - Mercury - Lincoln products.)

Aside from Tele-touch, Edsel shared the same engineering with it's Ford cousins and was every bit as good a car as other '58-'60 FoMoCo products...

[Guest Double M]

Have to disagree about vinyl roofs being a flop. They were a popular styling fad for twenty years.

They sure were better than the phony convertible tops they give us now instead. Yuck!

[joe_padavano]

I have to disagree with nearly every post here (yeah, big surprise... )

Edsel? That may have been a styling flop, but it wasn't an "invention".

Vega engine? The basic engine design was fine - Porsche and Mercedes both have used the same linerless aluminum cylinder design with silicon carbide. The flop with the Vega was the decision to use a die cast block (for cost savings) that had the cylinders completely unrestrained at the top. Once the head was torqued, the cylinders deflected, leading to the rapid wear. Even when liners were installed, they still wore out prematurely. The fix, as developed by Vega road racers, was to weld aluminum blocks between the tops of the cylinders and the deck surface, then remachine the deck. That stabilized the block and fixed the premature wear problem.

The 4-6-8 engine? The problem was lack of computer horsepower to run it. Many of today's cars have displacement on demand with no problems.

Oldsmobile diesel? The flaw was the lack of a water trap in the fuel filter, which led to subsequent problems when owners didn't follow maintenance schedules. Besides, the DX block makes a bulletproof gasoline engine.

Seat belt interlock? Well, blame Washington, not Detroit for that one!

Engine removal to change plugs? If you're referring to the V8 versions of the Chevy Monza, the "engine removal" was actually just the removal of one motor mount bolt and the jacking of the motor a few inches to get clearance. Admittedly not ideal, but nowhere near "removal". Ever tried changing plugs on a FWD car with a transverse V6?

Corvair? What was wrong with the Corvair?

Talking cars? OK, I'll give you that one!

[Friartuck]

Didn't Cadillac locate the battery in the trunk in either '49 or '50? The same year they introduced the electric trunk release.....When the battery went dead, your couldn't get access to the battery

[d2_willys]

Gotta disagree with you on the Pacer. Obviously you have never driven one. Styling, I'll admit was a lttle ahead of it's time. The wagons looked better though. The ride is like a big car. They are roomy and had rack and pinion steering with most U.S. cars did not. The wheel wells are made for today's low profile tires and 16-in or better size wheels. Vacuum wipers had their place too. Infinitely adjustible in speed. And they work Ok with the wiper motor and the booster in the fuel pump are both healthy.

I believe 75 was the first year of the Pacer. When I saw one in a dealer, the first question to the pinhead salesman was: Where the hell is the V-6 that AMC jeep owned the rights to? Instead the guy says that AMC was planning on using a rotary engine. When that fell through they went back to the their inline engine. This put 1/3 of the engine in the passenger compartment, with virtually no room to service the back of the engine.

Could of had a really decent car if they had put the old Jeep V6 in it. Instead they sold the tooling back to GM and GM went on to produce thousands of 3.8L V6's. And soon AMC was gone!

Vacuum wipers, did not know that, better off that way, thought they went out with the early Broncos.

[d2_willys]

I have to disagree with nearly every post here (yeah, big surprise... )

Edsel? That may have been a styling flop, but it wasn't an "invention".

Vega engine? The basic engine design was fine - Porsche and Mercedes both have used the same linerless aluminum cylinder design with silicon carbide. The flop with the Vega was the decision to use a die cast block (for cost savings) that had the cylinders completely unrestrained at the top. Once the head was torqued, the cylinders deflected, leading to the rapid wear. Even when liners were installed, they still wore out prematurely. The fix, as developed by Vega road racers, was to weld aluminum blocks between the tops of the cylinders and the deck surface, then remachine the deck. That stabilized the block and fixed the premature wear problem.

The 4-6-8 engine? The problem was lack of computer horsepower to run it. Many of today's cars have displacement on demand with no problems.

Oldsmobile diesel? The flaw was the lack of a water trap in the fuel filter, which led to subsequent problems when owners didn't follow maintenance schedules. Besides, the DX block makes a bulletproof gasoline engine.

Seat belt interlock? Well, blame Washington, not Detroit for that one!

Engine removal to change plugs? If you're referring to the V8 versions of the Chevy Monza, the "engine removal" was actually just the removal of one motor mount bolt and the jacking of the motor a few inches to get clearance. Admittedly not ideal, but nowhere near "removal". Ever tried changing plugs on a FWD car with a transverse V6?

Corvair? What was wrong with the Corvair?

Talking cars? OK, I'll give you that one!

Hmmm, it only took the Corvair boys 5 years to fix a questionable rear suspension. The front suspension was fine except for the understeer. The engine was a good idea, but that fan belt orientation and the constant oil leaks were troublesome.

The Vega engine was a design flaw and was never addressed. Instead the boys at Chevy ended up going to a cast iron engine in the last years of the Vega and Astre.

[pacerman]

I believe 75 was the first year of the Pacer. When I saw one in a dealer, the first question to the pinhead salesman was: Where the hell is the V-6 that AMC jeep owned the rights to? Instead the guy says that AMC was planning on using a rotary engine. When that fell through they went back to the their inline engine. This put 1/3 of the engine in the passenger compartment, with virtually no room to service the back of the engine.

Could of had a really decent car if they had put the old Jeep V6 in it. Instead they sold the tooling back to GM and GM went on to produce thousands of 3.8L V6's. And soon AMC was gone!

Vacuum wipers, did not know that, better off that way, thought they went out with the early Broncos.

I don't think that AMC owned the rights to the former Buick V6 in 1975. They would have gotten them with the Jeep purchase in what? 1972? and then they started putting their own sixes in Jeeps, so they didn't need the V6 and sold it. I thought they sold the rights and tooling to British Leyland. They were planning to use the rotary being developed by GM but GM couldn't solve the technical problems and gave up on it.

The I-6 in the Pacer is only a problem when you need to remove the rocker arm cover. You need to roll the engine to a certain point where the rocker arms don't interfere with the removal. Everything else is accessible. From inside the car you don't notice the engine set-back. The Pacer sold really well the first year. Then sales began to taper off.

[d2_willys]

I don't think that AMC owned the rights to the former Buick V6 in 1975. They would have gotten them with the Jeep purchase in what? 1972? and then they started putting their own sixes in Jeeps, so they didn't need the V6 and sold it. I thought they sold the rights and tooling to British Leyland. They were planning to use the rotary being developed by GM but GM couldn't solve the technical problems and gave up on it.

The I-6 in the Pacer is only a problem when you need to remove the rocker arm cover. You need to roll the engine to a certain point where the rocker arms don't interfere with the removal. Everything else is accessible. From inside the car you don't notice the engine set-back. The Pacer sold really well the first year. Then sales began to taper off.

Pacerman: I really don't know that exacts of the V-6 scenario, but AMC used alot of other companies components, (mopar solid state ignition, harrison radiator, autolite starter and alternator, even a British Laycock de Normanville overdrive unit) so why couldn't AMC have bought the Buick V-6 GM and used it in the Pacer? From what I remember, the inline was a lot of engine in the Pacer engine bay. The AMC inlines are bulletproof bottom ends, not so much for upper ends. You mention the valve cover removal, well I had to bend some of the cowling up to get my brother's valve cover off his 75 Gremlin.

[keiser31]

The invention of the "color coordinated" 1955-56 Dodge Le Femme model was sort of a loser of an idea because a woman thought she had to match the pink and white car. Hence that model car did not sell well. They did come with little matching rose printed rain hat/coat/umbrella and compacts (I believe), though.

[Guest De Soto Frank]

Here's another gizmo that wasn't such a great idea after all...

Freewheeling.

A big hit when introduced in 1931-32 American cars, when engaged, it allowed the vehicle to coast w/o resistance of engine compression ( due to an over-running clutch, similar to that used in a starter drive).

The advantage was supposed to be an increase in fuel economy / decrease in engine wear.

Unfortunately, braking technology wasn't up to the added task, and "Freewheeling" disappeared from American cars after the 1933 season, and many of the cars that featured it, had it disabled.

Another gadget that had a brief run was the Startix, made by Bendix.

The Startix was a device that involved a relay circuit that caused the starter to operate whenever the ignition switch was turned-on. When the engine started, field current from the generator caused the starter relay to open, and kept the starter from operating as long as the engine was running. If the engine stalled, the Startix would automatically engage the starter.

The relay box was located under the hood, and featured a back-up operating plunger in case the Startix' electrical wizardry went on holiday.

It was used by Auburn, Studebaker, and a few other makers in the early to mid-1930's, but seems to have disappeared after 1936 or so...

[joe_padavano]

I don't think that AMC owned the rights to the former Buick V6 in 1975. They would have gotten them with the Jeep purchase in what? 1972? and then they started putting their own sixes in Jeeps, so they didn't need the V6 and sold it. I thought they sold the rights and tooling to British Leyland.

You are thinking of the aluminum 215 cu in V8, which shared basic architecture with the V6. GM sold the 215 to British Leyland in 1967, and it stayed in production through 2006. BL never had the V6. AMC had the rights from 1968 through 1974, when GM bought it back in response to Oil Crisis #1.

[Guest billybird]

I can name one that is ongoing as I type this. Ford duallys without a reasonable way to check/add air to the inside rear tires. I have had Ford duallys since 1997 and have always had to "fight" to service the inside rear tires. I bought after market extensions-ones good, ones bad. My current dually has everything but a bathroom on it and they could'nt do better than this with the rear wheels?

[d2_willys]

You are thinking of the aluminum 215 cu in V8, which shared basic architecture with the V6. GM sold the 215 to British Leyland in 1967, and it stayed in production through 2006. BL never had the V6. AMC had the rights from 1968 through 1974, when GM bought it back in response to Oil Crisis #1.

Thanks Joe: I thought AMC owned the rights till GM bought it back.

Thought of another wonder blunder: GM WINDSHIELD ANTENNA

[Guest]

[quote=d2_willys;

Thought of another wonder blunder: GM WINDSHIELD ANTENNA

I have one of those windshield antennas in my 76 Olds, it works great! What is the beef??

Don

[Dave@Moon]

There are no lists of automotive mistakes that aren't topped by the squalor that resulted from the formation of British Leyland in 1969. You don't go from the world's #4 car company to not existing in 15 years without doing something wrong.

1.. Triumph Stag V8. marrying 2 1.8L 4's to make a 3.5L V8 when you already have arguably the best 3.5L V8 in the business in the Rover? Stupid. Slapping it together so quickly and in such an underdeveloped state than MOST were replaced under a 2 yr. warranty program? Amazing!

2, Triumph Stag roof. A roll cage in case convertibles are outlawed? Yeah, that'll work!

3. 1974 MG bumpers. What? The 1973 bumpers are 1.5" too low to meet 1974 standards? OK, we'll just jack the car up in the air. It's only a sports car, who cares about handling?

4. (Rover) Sterling wiring. It's 1986. We're beyond the age of color coded wiring. Make 'em all green!

5. Triumph TR7 styling. This one was more a timing mistake, however the (literally) sabotaged build quality would have killed the marque anyway. People mocked the TR7/TR* in it's day. 10 years later Subaru was making effectively the same car design and it was called "cutting edge styling".

6. Austin Alllegro/Austin America/Morris Marina/etc. build quality. You can't make cars when your work force is actively seeking the company's demise.

[Dave@Moon]

The biggest flop in history? Probably (ultimately) Hummer.

[john2dameron]

Have to agree with Willys on the Pacer. Who wants to drive a car that looks like a lop-sided egg? Might as well add the Gremlin here. All the Vegas regardless of what engine they used and the Chevette and its Pontiac clone. Those so-called carriage roofs on 4-door sedans are hideous. What was Cadillac and Mercury thinking? Pickup trucks made in the '70's that rusted out on the way home from the dealerships. So-called smart cars are overpriced ugliness. Anything sold by Chrysler Corp. in the late ''70's and early '80's but specifically Dodge Omnis and Plymouth Horizons. The repair bills alone made a '79 Dodge Omni the most expensive vehicle to operate I ever owned.

[mrspeedyt]

1. my wife had a pacer wagon and after bolting on a set of wide wheels and tires (with the stock wheel covers installed) it looked good! it drove fine too.

2. vinyl roofs are a rust problem waiting to be exposed.

[Big Beat]

Not necessarily a flop, as it was very popular in its day, but I never understood rumble seats. I cannot imagine climbing into that narrow padded hole in the trunk, without tripping over the tail light, slipping off the fender and falling off nose first into the pavement... Especially on enclosed cars, just seems like a dumb idea.

[carbking]

(1) Rotary throttle carburetors

(2) "Vapor" carburetors

(3) ETHANOL MIXED WITH GASOLINE!

Jon.

[R W Burgess]

Not necessarily a flop, as it was very popular in its day, but I never understood rumble seats. .

They were designed as an extra sometime-use seat, when you still wanted to own a sporty car. Somewhat like some pickups of today with their extra, not so comfortable, back seating area.

I cannot imagine climbing into that narrow padded hole in the trunk, without tripping over the tail light, slipping off the fender and falling off nose first into the pavement... Especially on enclosed cars, just seems like a dumb idea.

In the early days, there were not a lot of well-educated lawyers around to sue the devil out of you if you made something possibly unsafe for the unstable upright (how long had man been standing on two feet at this time?) man of the day.

Wayne

[joe_padavano]

The biggest flop in history? Probably (ultimately) Hummer.

So I guess in your mind "profit" = "flop"?

You can say what you want about the H2 and H3 ("Hey, let's put a box on a Suburban or Colorado frame and charge 50% more for it"), but they were definitely moneymakers for GM.

I still think it's hilarious that the only time a Hummer goes off-road is if the owner accidentally backs over the landscaping on the way out of the driveway.

[poci1957]

I guess this thread can only demonstrate:

a. a flop is in the eye of the beholder, especially in hindsight

b. one man's hindsight flop now may have been very popular in it's day, such as vinyl roofs, windshield antennas, and Hummers circa 2002.

c. after Dave trots out references to British Leyland conversation slows because no one can top them!

I am with Joe on the subject of Hummers. I will not argue for their practicality or efficiency, of course, but agree that from GMs perspective in the late 1990s the whole Hummer idea seemed pretty good. They were making trucks anyway, just rebody a pickup and charge extra and watch the profits roll in. The only people who really lost on Hummer IMO were the dealers who had to build fancy, expensive facilities to get the franchise and were left holding the bag after only a few years.

Good topic though, Todd

[keiser31]

Maybe not a "flop" invention, but really, really stupid in my opinion...a gas pedal that only communicates to the carb via an electronic chip.