Who did Chrysler's styling 1939-49?

[Rusty_OToole]

I have been trying to find out who was in charge of styling at Chrysler Corporation. It was Ray Deitrich from 1934 to 1938. Walter Chrysler thought a lot of him but the other top brass there hated his guts, and when Walter Chrysler died they fired him at once.

Then in 1949 K T Keller hired Virgil Exner who was responsible for the new direction Chrysler took in the fifties.

But who did the work from 1938 to 1949? It is an odd period in Chrysler styling, basically they used the same 1938 body, suitably restyled, during this whole period, actually 1938 models to the early 1949s. The "new" 1949 models look like they were designed for no reason at all, according to one critic.

Is it possible that no one was in charge? This does not seem possible. Maybe Briggs employees took up the slack. Briggs made Chrysler's bodies during this period after all.

Can anyone clear this up?

[Guest De Soto Frank]

For some reason the name Oliver Clark comes to mind... not sure if he was responsible for the era in question, though...

While the '41- early '49 MoPars are essentially the same car facelifted from year to year, they share almost nothing with their '38-'40 predecessors...

Not sure how much "sharing" there is between the '38-'40 cars either...

While they were not a radical "clean-sheet" design, the '41 MoPars ( at least Dodge, De Soto and Chrysler) were indeed "all-new" cars, in terms body shell, frame, brakes, suspension components - at least in that none of these components swapped with their earlier badge-mates.

As an interesting( ?) aside, a friend has a very nice all original 1941 Chevrolet, and over his two-year's ownership has discovered that the 1940 model Chevy is a stand-alone car, sharing almost nothing with it's 1939 and 41 badge-mates. Not sure if any of the MoPars were similar oddities bewteen '38-'40.

[Rusty_OToole]

Deitrich was proud of the job he did face lifting the 38 body for 39 including a V shaped windshield and new roof. This surprised me as I always thought they were 2 different cars. But no, the 39 was a revamped 38.

If you compare the 39 and 40 you will see they were very similar. Either the 40 was a heavily revamped 39 or the 40 design followed the 39 quite closely.

From 40 on you can see the resemblance year to year. If you are in doubt look at the back of the 4 door sedan body. The trunk lid and rear quarters hardly change at all from 40 to 48 while the body remains more or less the same, with different fenders and door contours and larger windows. You need to compare one year with the next to see how clever they were in getting a new look without ever scrapping the old car body completely.

The only point I am in doubt about is the 39-40. Were these 2 different cars or one car heavily revamped? Given the corporate attitude toward styling, I find it easy to believe they did not spend the money on a new body unless they had to and that did not occur until 49. But could be convinced if I see evidence to the contrary.

So, it seems the Chrysler reputation for putting engineering ahead of style was true. Engineering had the upper hand until the mid fifties and even after that, styling did not have the freedom and control they did at GM.

What I can't seem to pin down is who did the styling in those years? Was there anyone at Chrysler with the title Head of Styling or Vice President In Charge Of Looking Halfway Decent?

[Guest De Soto Frank]

No doubt that after Walter P.'s passing, the emphasis was on engineering, and Kaufman Thuma Keller's insistence on being able to wear his hat while seated inisde the car... and styling took a back seat as it were.

Plymouth may have been an exception in carrying-over the 1940 body to '41, but the Dodge-DeSoto-Chrysler bodies were indeed all-new for '41... they may not have looked like it at a glance, but they are distinctly different from the 1940 models.

I need to go back and study some pics, but I would assume that the '37-'38 used the same body shell, and would expect that '39 and '40 might have been the same shell too, especially if they were doing an all-new, if conventional, chassis and body for '41...

The idea of a complete re-body for one year only, does not sound like something Chrysler would do...

[TG57Roadmaster]

You'll find Dietrich ultimately responsible for all Dodge-DeSoto-Chrysler designs up to WWII, with '39 a complete redesign from '37-'38. The all new 1940 models are virtually the same as '41, with the exception of trim, and '42 is an update of the '41 bodies that carried over with few changes until the Second-Series '49's debuted in March-April that year. The '40's rode on new longer wheelbases than before, shortened by an inch on most models for '41, which carried through till '49.

Some sources say Dietrich left after WPC's stroke in '38, others say he didn't leave until WPC's death in '40. Either way, his influence carried over, with help from others, till the high-hat '49's appeared. Dammann's 70 Years of Chrysler credits Chrysler stylist Dean Clark with the unique Hayes-bodied coupes, 1,000 of which were spread across the three upper divisions.

TG

[Guest De Soto Frank]

I just spent some time with "Standard Catalog of Chrysler: 1914-2000", and went through every chapter from Chrysler down to Plymouth. Didn't find much info.

Oliver Clark was apparently head of styling from 1924 until he moved-up the coporate ladder and was replaced by Dietrich in the mid '30s...

( I wonder if Dean Clark is any relation to Oliver ? )

The only name I could find connected with Chrysler styling after Ray Dietrich was Chrysler division president David Wallace, who was credited with the design of the 1941 "barrel-back" Town & Country wagon, and perhaps that was his only creation.

I still maintain that while the '40 & '41-'48 senior MoPars look similar, if you park a 1940 and a 1941 model next to each other, you will begin to see many differences - the '41 is longer, lower and wider, the windshield has a greater rake and the body bulges-out more at the B-pillar. The '41-'48 models ( with the exception of Plymouth) use the same body shell.

Perhaps it was simply the "anonymous" in-house design team that simply kept refining Dietrich's 1939 facelift through the 1940's ?

And I probably shouldn't mention this, but I'm pretty certain my '41 De Soto has a Budd body... there is an embossed tag spotted to the inner door frame on the RF door... I would have to remove the trim panel to view it though...

I don't recall Carl Breer talking about styling in his memoir, but I will dig that book and have a look...

Edited November 12, 2011 by De Soto Frank (see edit history)

[Rusty_OToole]

I thought Briggs made all Chrysler bodies until Chrysler bought out Briggs in 1954? With the exception of certain special models like the 39 Hayes coupes, the Imperial limousines bodied by Derham, and woodie station wagons and T&C bodies?

I have seen Budd labels in early thirties Chryslers but thought the Budd connection ended with the Airflow.

[Rusty_OToole]

What I am interested in specifically is who styled the 49s? Or were they designed by the engineering department with no styling input at all?

Chrysler styling is a funny business. I have seen pictures of clay models made by Deitrich in the late 30s. They were much better looking than the cars they produced yet looked practically identical. Apparently when styling came up with a design, they handed it over to engineering and after that had no further input. Engineering did as they pleased with it. They changed the lines slightly for reasons of their own and the result was much less pleasing than the original, although you can't put your finger on a single obvious difference.

In spite of this they made some good looking cars in the thirties and forties. I would not put them in the same class as the 41-47 Packard or the better GM styles but they weren't bad.

It's the 49s that bother me. Has anyone else noticed that you could line up a 49 Plymouth, Dodge, DeSoto and Chrysler and other than the grille they look identical?

[Guest De Soto Frank]

Well, if you blurred-out the grille, I'd suggest that the '42-'48 are equally indistinguishable...

In spite their boxiness, I think the '49-'50 MoPars are fairly decent looking in their own right... not sleek like GM, or imposing like Packard... but not ugly.

The Plymouth and Dodge look a little stubby, especially the short wheelbase models, but they're not hideous.

The '50 New Yorker Town & Country Newport HT is one fine looking automobile... perhaps its 131" wheelbase makes it look less boxy...

But... compared to the sexy "L-29 Cord" styled '31-'33 Chryslers, anything afterwards up to the "Forward Look" was kind of hidebound.

I too would be curious to know who did the '49 re-style... which, true to MoPar's engineering-first heritage was facelifted through the 1954 season...

[skyler]

i owned a 1950 dodge for my first car in 1966.very roomy car inside, you could get in wearing your hat, a very dependable but slow with fluid drive, but not a very stylish car compared to the oldsmobile or mercury, or others of that era. the dash was rather nice even though it was fake woodgrain. square guages with a green tint and a fair amount of real chrome. you rarely see any of these at shows. mine had the famous $19.95 earl schieb paint job. if i ran across a decent driver i would buy it as these are easy cars to work on and easy to keep running. skyler

[TG57Roadmaster]

There are a couple of mentions in Richard M. Langworth's Collectible Automobile piece, June, 1998, worth noting. Henry King was chief body designer for the '49 Chrysler, and Exner came in sometime in late-1950. In CA, December, 1998, Buzz Grisinger notes that Oliver Clark was chief body engineer during much of the era we're talking about. The design staff under King reported to (and were under) engineering; frankly, it's all pretty confusing.

Grisinger further stated that most of the '35 to '41 designs were styled by himself, Herb Weissinger and Rhys Miller, under Dietrich till 1940. As y'all have said, K.T. Keller had much to say about design during his time, too. It's well known that engineering ruled the roost, and that design took a back seat to that department.

Though the '49's have a certain stodginess, you may agree that one area where the '49 Chrysler and DeSoto can't be faulted is in their asymmtrecial dashboard designs. (Mercury, Lincoln and the one-year-only senior Buick dashes that year all showed a driver-oriented design, too). The rich Desoto dash always stops me in my tracks when I see one...

Off-topic, but the '49 Buick dash is a stunner, too, and for '50 they reverted to a '48-like style that lasted till '54...

Larger, I wish I had a better pic of the '49 DeSoto dash for comparison.

As for body design, MoPaR's '49-and-on offerings do have some (above-mentioned) winners, IMHO;

the coupes, T&C's, convertibles and Imperials come to mind, but they are boxy. Kind of a love-it or

leave-it affair for me, and I wouldn't mind having a nice example some day. Maybe a Wayfarer,

a Traveller, a Sportsman, even a Carry-All would fill the ticket...

I mean, hey, a guy can dream (outside the box), right?

TG

[Rusty_OToole]

I didn't say they were ugly. They look pleasant enough in their practical way. Like Aunt Mildred in her Sunday hat. Nice enough if rather boring. While a 49 Buick, Studebaker or Mercury seems to have more style to it.

Virgil Exner started at Chrysler in 1949, too late to do anything about the 49s or 50s. But the 51 and 52 models show more style in their face lifts, the 53 and 54 are what the 49 should have looked like, and in 55 and later he really gets to show his stuff.

This was a radical change for Chrysler Corporation and I am curious how it came about.

[Guest prs519]

Cars and Parts magazine used to have great biographies which often included the stylists who were responsible. I think there is a fairly big name associated with the years you seek information, but I can't think of who the post war main styling guy was. Sorry! I would like to add though, that I believe what you say about the year 1940 having excess uniqueness, and that it certainly extends to the 1940 Ford products. The 1940 Ford products seem to always have had more appeal, especially to collectors, than several years on either side of that year. Maybe the big three are themselves part of a big one, whose corporate name is kept secret? HO!

Perry

Perry

[J3Studio]

Interesting discussion - thanks!