The 1936 Arrowhead Teardrop Car

[George Smolinski]

From Southern California in 1936 came the Arrowhead Teardrop Car, which its creators claimed was “America’s first truly streamlined automobile.” 

 

It’s often said that the perfect aerodynamic shape in nature is a drop of water falling through the air—a teardrop, in the vernacular. That is not to say, however, that the teardrop is the ideal aerodynamic shape for an automobile. That’s another proposition altogether. But then, aerodynamic perfection was not the goal of the Arrowhead Spring Water Company of San Bernardino, California in 1936. The bottler was simply looking for a memorable marketing gimmick.

 

The design of the Arrowhead Teardrop is credited to W. Everett Miller, a prolific West coast car designer who worked with the coachbuilding firm of Walter M. Murphy, among others. On this project he was partnered with Medardo Morgagno’s Advance Auto Body Works of Los Angeles, where they often collaborated on promotional vehicles for Gilmore Oil and other clients. The body, very nearly a true teardrop, was constructed from sheet aluminum formed over an elaborate wooden buck, with a pair of front-opening doors and a large clamshell engine cover in the rear. The headlamps were Woodlites, as used by Cord and others, but tucked inside the body. Exactly 17 feet long, the Teardrop was painted in “Aquamarine Blue with chromium finish,” according to the company.

 

The Teardrop’s chassis was, if anything, even more unusual than the bodywork. It was a three-wheeler in the same general configuration as Buckminster Fuller’s Dymaxion car, though significantly different in detail. A Ford V8 engine, torque tube and drivetrain unit was turned around so that the former rear axle now drove the front wheels, while the single rear wheel performed the steering duties. The brakes were Lockheed hydraulics on all three corners, while the rest of the running gear appears to be early-to-mid ’30s Ford. The cost of construction was reportedly $8,000, a hefty investment in the middle of the Great Depression.

How the Teardrop handled on the road was never reported, but if it was anything like the Dymaxion, we’re guessing not very good. Rear-wheel steering is fine for tool carts and fork lifts, but at any greater speed things tend to go wrong in a hurry. In June 1937, the Automobile Trade Journal reported that the car was severely damaged in a crash, and it was presumed scrapped.

However, in July of 2020, Geoff Hacker and Bob Cunningham, reporting from Geoff’s website Undiscovered Classics (great site, check it out) unearthed a photo of the Teardrop in the late 1940s, now repaired and carrying signage from the Craig Oil Company of Los Angeles, which then advertised its Wilshire Boulevard service station as the largest in the world. What happened to the Teardrop after that, we don’t know.

[Billy Kingsley]

That is so cool. Love the oddball stuff like this. 

[Walt G]

I had a good amount of conversations with Everett Miller some decades ago and he sent to me a brochure that he created about the cars. Perhaps his collection / automotive library is now part of the Nethercutt Collection ? Here is an image from the brochure he sent to me.

[John_S_in_Penna]

11 hours ago, George Smolinski said:

It’s often said that the perfect aerodynamic shape in nature is a drop of water falling through the air—a teardrop, in the vernacular....

 

George, where did the text come from?

From a book;  or if a website, can you provide a link?

 

It's always right to credit the author, and we might

like to look further into this interesting subject.

Thanks for sharing it.

[TAKerry]

A guy passed us on the road yesterday in one of those modern raptor type 3 wheel vehicles. That would make a great platform to put a reproduction body of this on!!

[Guest]

It is incredible to think that a vehicle this unique has simply been lost to the sands of time.

The idea of rear steering is less than comforting.

[Rusty_OToole]

I don't know, boats and airplanes do all right with rear steering. The only reason cars steer by the front wheels is so the horse can pull it easier.

[wayne sheldon]

I suspect that rear wheel steering would be difficult at higher speeds. But I would like to try it. I am in an unusual position there. When I was very young, my grandparents were still growing peaches outside Modesto California. I was steering the Ford 9N tractors while sitting in my dad's or grandfather's lap by the time I was three, and shifting the gears (they pushed in the clutch) soon after. When I was six, I showed them that I could safely press the clutch pedal myself, and was driving the tractors solo. I often brought the last trailer of the day in from the orchards during the peach harvest. Beyond the tractors, I was also driving the fork lift and working the hydraulics (under supervision) during those years. My grandfather retired and my farming adventures ended by the time I was twelve. However, I had a good number of miles driving that rear wheel steer fork lift by then. 

I haven't had many opportunities to drive a rear wheel steer vehicle since then, but the few times I did, it just felt natural to me.

[Guest]

Hmmmm?

I think it's fair to say that boats and airplanes both work and steer on a much different principle than cars.

One only has to drive a forklift a very short distance to understand how quickly the formula changes for a terra-bound vehicle when comparing front to rear steering.

The true reason cars "steer by the front wheels" is completely a matter of control. 

I don't understand the reference to steering and a horse pulling a car? Unless this is being confused with the old argument of front wheel drive vs. rear wheel drive and the image of a horse pushing a cart as opposed to pulling the cart.  

[TAKerry]

Another that feels strange at first is an articulating loader. Takes a bit to get used to.

[George Smolinski]

10 hours ago, John_S_in_Penna said:

 

George, where did the text come from?

From a book;  or if a website, can you provide a link?

 

It's always right to credit the author, and we might

like to look further into this interesting subject.

Thanks for sharing it.

I saw it on FB. https://www.macsmotorcitygarage.com/the-1936-arrowhead-teardrop-car/

I follow the above link on FB. If you Google 1936 Arrowhead Teardrop Car, you'll get more info also. Hope this helps.

How'd you like to pull into a show with one of these? Think you'd draw any attention?

[Rusty_OToole]

4 hours ago, GregLaR said:

Hmmmm?

I think it's fair to say that boats and airplanes both work and steer on a much different principle than cars.

One only has to drive a forklift a very short distance to understand how quickly the formula changes for a terra-bound vehicle when comparing front to rear steering.

The true reason cars "steer by the front wheels" is completely a matter of control. 

I don't understand the reference to steering and a horse pulling a car? Unless this is being confused with the old argument of front wheel drive vs. rear wheel drive and the image of a horse pushing a cart as opposed to pulling the cart.  

Horse drawn wagons and carriages had front wheels that steered so the horse could pull them around corners. The first autos were "horseless carriages" that kept the same layout. It was not adopted because they tried everything else but because they didn't try anything else. Buckminster Fuller drove his Dymaxion cars many thousands of miles. I have not driven one but like to think it would work ok once you got used to it. A short wheelbase fork lift with high center of gravity small wheels and quick steering is something else.

[Guest]

I imagine it would be terrifying with a longer wheel base at highway speeds.

Have you ever tried driving your car in reverse at higher speed, say even 30-35 mph?  Control is pretty quickly lost.

I'm no engineer but I believe if it was feasible for anything more than a novelty/specialty vehicle,  someone would have produced it by now.

 

 

[Rusty_OToole]

Car steering is set up to be stable going forward which makes it unstable going backward. It would be interesting to build a 3 wheel car steering by the back wheels, aligned properly and see how it works. Can you imagine an airplane with the control surfaces up front and how unstable it would be?

[JFranklin]

Although the text refers to rear wheel steering, the chassis photo isn't very convincing of that. But what do I know. I have seen a Dymaxion at a museum and it was quite interesting. I always liked Mr. Fuller's domes.

Edited August 5, 2021 by JFranklin (see edit history)

[Guest]

56 minutes ago, Rusty_OToole said:

Can you imagine an airplane with the control surfaces up front and how unstable it would be?

Good grief.

Again, I don't think anyone would make a correlation between the steering capabilities of an airplane and those of a car.   There have been many production 3 wheeled cars built, Morgan, Renault, Messerschmitt, the newer Polaris, etc. and they've all opted for front steering.   

Here is a good video showing what an abysmal failure the Dymaxion, was with it's rear steering.

Interestingly, the driver does mention that it compares with the sluggishness of both a rear tiller boat and a tail dragger of an airplane.  

 

 

 

[Paul Dobbin]

Didn't Hemming's Motor News have one of those at their gas station some years ago?

[wayne sheldon]

The very short wheelbase of a forklift simplifies steering, handling, and precision in short distances. The REASON for rear steering on a forklift is in fact precision. Once one gets the feel for it, a well loaded pallet can be targeted (forklifts with side to side slide help those that don't get really good at this!), and with the fixed front wheels having their peculiar geometry, steered straight forward sliding a well squared pallet in between another one or two with only a fraction of an inch to spare. I was doing that when I was eight, and doing it quite well!

Longer wheelbases work very differently. Front wheel steered cars, the car follows the steered wheels. One can or really NEEDS to visualize only a short distance ahead, and the rest of the car follows the front end. Long wheelbase rear wheel steered the rear end guides the front end and the driver MUST visualize with great accuracy at least two to three times the wheelbase ahead. With front wheel steering, a one foot error in visualization can be corrected in about one foot. With rear wheel steering on a long wheelbase vehicle, a one foot error in visualization would take about six to ten feet to correct! A forklift, with its short wheel base might be able to correct a one foot error in about two feet. The relationship between wheelbase and distance to correct an error is a geometric progression. Each additional foot of added wheelbase adds considerably more distance than the previous foot added. Got that? Given that, one can quickly see that rear wheel steering gets into trouble really quickly. The worst part isn't even 'normal' driving. It would be emergency maneuvers. A sudden need to pull hard 'left' may not be able to be planned for twenty feet ahead! Even relatively minor potholes or objects that suddenly need to be avoided could become a disaster!