59 Raymond Loewy Cadillac Coupe Custom Concept Car FOR SALE...Check this out!

What an ugly POS !
I say "crush it", dont let future generations see this turd

 

Can anyone post something that Loewy designed that actually looks good?
And don't bother posting any Studebakers, because his funky ass designs only helped that company go down the shitter.
To me, his stuff always looked like a lot of "neato" ideas that don't belong together.

That said...I still think this car should be restored back to original and put in a museum with a life-size cutout of Loewy in his pinstripe blazer with plaid slacks (but that price is crazzyier than Loewy's designs).

 

This really hurts my feelings...

~Jason

 

Oh, nothing good really, just as mentioned previously, all kinds of very notable US company logos like the Lucky Strike logo, Greyhound bus logo, BP, Shell, Exxon, Nabissco, etc., etc., etc.; also trains, ships, buildings, Coke bottle, nothing too important really besides Studebakers:

http://www.raymondloewy.com/

http://www.raymondloewy.com/about/design.html

http://www.raymondloewy.com/exhibit/pdf/planestrains.pdf?id=3509

Yeah, he was pretty much a hack I'd say.

But also, you can dismiss the crazy Studebakers if you want, but the '53 coupes were some of the nicest looking cars ever, period.

http://www.rodandcustommagazine.com/featuredvehicles/1953_studebaker_coupe/index.html



But, with all the extraordinary he did actually accomplish, I still agree that this Cadillac was a dog that never should have seen the light of day.

education and knowledge can sometimes be a good thing

 

Ha, ha, I knew someone would get twisted over that comment - and for sure someone with a Stude.
Seriously, I'm not talking about logos and product packaging - that's a whole other focus (in which I'll admit he was succesful at), I'm talking about car design.
And the Stude coupe being THE Best Ever? That's subjective at best. It has some neato ideas, but as a whole it's a bit awkward looking and was hardly a very succesful design in it's day, as it was just a short time later that Studebaker was gone from the scene. No doubt due to people prefering to buy/drive something that their neighbors would not point at & laugh.

This is not a slam at all the current Stude owners out there - I think that now, given the passing of time, they are much more appealing, but part of that appeal is their oddity of styling. But that oddity is part of what originally caused the company's demise and I don't think you could really call that sucessful design.

 

You're a hard man to please. I understand your point and that is fine, but man if you think the above coupe leaves a little to be desired, not sure how to address that. There is not much wrong with that car and it would be pretty hard to actually improve it much. Compare that to any other US production car of the period and let me know what you think was even close to being a better design, from a perspective of then or now. Now it is hard to argue about aesthetics out of the period because there are just has too many variables, so no need to get into that.

Studebaker definitely made some mistakes, mostly financial. But yes, a part of it was they always tried to be a little more progressive in their designs and product than the others and that likely did reduce sales because they were leaders in design instead of followers of trends. The big 3 perfected following old trends instead of looking to the future, as they still do today, which I predict will be their ultimate demise. Let's see if either GM, Ford or Chrysler can make it to be a 114 year old company like Studebaker was before they finally folded. Chrysler should have already been gone by now if it hadn't been for the massive gov. welfare they got back in the 80's and Ford is now headed in that direction real fast now I would say. At this point, with the denial and off the mark crap they keep designing and the current world situation they need to figure out how to survive in, I would guess they have not the best odds of getting to 114. Ford has another 9 years to go and a lot can happen in 9 years. Gm has 14 more and Chrysler 20 if you consider Dodge started in 1914.

 

some neat detail touches on it.

 

perfect car for the donk crowd...

 

Both your replies are well thought and I really didn't intend to be a Stude basher. Loewy has just always struck me as one of those uppity designers who just did what "he wanted" and if others did not "get it" then it was because they were uncouth. Maybe he was not really that way, but the things I have read of him give that impression and that taints my view of him.

I think a good design appeals to pretty much all who view it and by Studebaker trying to pave a way for their future by allowing a nut like Loewy to come up with wild designs that ended up appealing to only a few, was obviously a poor choice.

But...having been a graphic designer for nearly 30 years now, if I look at the list of his achievements compared to mine - if I'd done only a fraction of the things that he did, then I would have considered myself to be a succesful designer, so who am I to judge?

 

Raymond Lowey should be rememberd for the '53 Stude, his finest hour. I think his clutch was slipping when he drew this abortion.

 

Think about this one.
GG1
Starlight stude
This POS

all basically look the same coming or going. Obviously, this guy didnt know which way was up.

 

No harm cleatus and honest opinions as always welcome in my book. I never knew Loewy personally, not even close. He very easily and likely was an egotistical ass. You almost kind of have to be to be successful at his level and his profession. Maybe he was, maybe he wasn't, I don't know actually. But I am an architect and I completely understand the uppity stuff and definitely make extra effort myself to avoid that - I hate that stuff too.

His accomplishments, for the large part speak for themselves though. I appreciate good design and especially design that is both good and pushing new thoughts. But, I also have a strong appreciation for old stuff that was good design as well. What I don't like is new stuff that is at best a bad imitation of old stuff because the designers can't come up with something good on its own merit. Think all the new retro garbage they are making now, not to even mention the "new" rehashed Camaros that are coming up in a year or 2 that aren't even out yet (my god, will GM ever get a clue before it is too late?). Studebaker at least took some chances and I give them a lot of credit for that. America needs people that are willing to take chances now more than ever. This country was built on inventors and risk takers, not followers. If any of the big 3 now had half the balls that Studebaker did, they might have a fighting chance at the future. But, if they want to keep building for the past, they are going to find themselves in it along with Studebaker.

When you take risks, sometimes they don't work out and the best people learn from their mistakes. This Cadillac may have even been viewed as a mistake and a pile of crap by Loewy himself. Sometimes what is produced isn't 100% your fault because others had more influence. Working on a project just like that right now. The client doesn't want to take my advice and thinks they know better, but I know for sure they don't. But, whatever. If they want to fuck up their project, it's theirs to fuck up I guess. Sadly, now my name is attached to it. I could throw a fit and maybe get out of it somehow, but that won't be a good solution either and hopefully there is still some way to save it. Maybe Loewy took some of those lessons for this "mistake" and applied them to another love it or hate it car, the Avanti. I personally am not too big on the Avanits. But, they definitely had influence and are very notable cars for better or worse, love it or hate it. Interestingly, the Avantis survived past Studebaker itself and were still being made up until a couple of years ago and surprisingly still looked pretty good and modern with just normal and pretty minimal updating of the basic design.

 

Interesting take, but in some ways, I can't blame the Big 3 for their conservatism. Anytime they try something wild - think Chevy SSR pickup - they get their sack handed back to them.

I'm sure their designers and perhaps even management would love to think more outside the box (and probably have penned some cool ideas), but the general public is all about conformity whether they think they are conformist or not. Few want to stand out. Wether it be cars, fashion, music or whatever...everyone seems to want to do, say and act like exactly what they view on TV and the masses become more homologated as time goes on. Better to have a nice plain sedan (and they all pretty much look alike) and play it safe. Sure, put a wing and some dubs on it - then pretend you are a standout.

An example would be the old Speedvision where we were treated to all kinds of racing of every type imaginable, all around the world. Now we have SpeedTV and we get a choice of NASCAR or NASCAR so that the masses can all talk about the same thing.

But I digress.

I guess it is a fine line to walk if you are a designer. Like you say, you need to succumb to those that write the checks. Or you can be a wildman like Loewy and throw caution to the wind. I'll give him credit for that at least.

 

This is a good conversation and some good point both sides. But, about the Chevy SSR, that is a prime example of just how badly Chevy doesn't even know how to design anything good. Agreed, they tried to produce something a little creative, but they just dug into their bag a previous successes (from 50 years ago ) and designed a new "hot rod" pickup using old design cues and ripping off real hot rods in the process. They don't even understand the real charm of the old trucks and the personal hot rods that people have made them into. To try to make a factory retro version of a hot rod is just plain asking to kicked in the balls. And to top it off, it didn't even really have good performance either. that thing is half baked all around. If they had just came up with a cool modern design that wasn't trying so hard to be retro, they might have had a fighting chance and something to work with and build on. But, to your point, yes it has been proven the big 3 are bad at thinking outside the box. But when your back is to the wall, you don't have much choice. They had better get better at it real fast or other companies that can will push them aside. That is just basic capitalism and free world market reality - the game they promote, but ironically aren't very good at.

I think the real future for US auto makers is likely smaller scale, smaller market cars, high end or "American" design unique niche cars and trucks. They will need to be more like Porsche, Ferrari, Aston Martin, Land Rover, Jaguar, etc. Sell a unique brand product with much lower volume but higher profit margin. Since they seem to want to fight and deny global demands and energy, labor and environmental realities, then that is all that they can really hope for. Maybe they should actually just produce a bunch of "back-when-America-was-good" style retro machines and hope there is enough people in the world in the future willing to pay enough for them to keep them in business.

Now, don't get me started on all the lame Hollywood remake movies. Hollywood can't even come up with new ideas.

 

+1 It is amazing what information can be found on the HAMB. That is an ugly beast, I'd have to agree - but, Loewy was a genious and this just has to be chalked up as a less inspired moment. The 59 Cadillac was so over the top that it's a pretty big challenge to "undo" the factory styling.

 

Interesting that you view the SSR as a retro-attempt. I never saw retro in it.
I think we can all agree it is fugly tho'
Probably looked good on paper, but it seems they could have seen the fugly during the mock-up stage?

 

I guess that is one of the things that always struck me about Loewy's Cadillac re-style. I seem to remember him being quoted as saying that he hated the 59 Caddy because it was a blatant example of American excess and therefore he was going to take it upon himself to make it "right" - well - as we all know the 59 Cad went on to be an icon and his re-style gets a big thumbs down. So I really do think that in terms of auto styling at least, he really did not have a feel for what looked good so much as he had the egocentric designer's "only I know what is best" mentality.

 

Just to add to the conversation... I give you the man and his machine.

 

that's nads,,,isnt it?

 

Ooh, he seemed to be having a low point in personal fashion at that time as well. But, actually the car photographs better there and that angle and the chrome bumpers instead of black along with fresh paint obviously help. Still seriously ugly front end though.

And yeah, I bet he probably was a bit pompous, especially if you had just whipped his ass in a round of golf and told him what a piece of crap that car was.

 

Lowey was a great front man and was GREAT at designing logos and other "pure," simple exercises, but a great AUTOMOBILE designer he was NOT. The truly GREAT designs that came out of Lowey Studios for Studebaker, the '49 pickup and the '53 coupes were BOTH designed ONE HUNDRED PERCENT by Bob Bourke, a Lowey employee. We call them "Loewy Coupes," but they really SHOULD be known as "Bourke Coupes."

That Caddy is so fucking ugly it makes my eyeballs hurt.

 

Listen to the man, he knows what he's talking about......... Bob Bourke helped design the '49 Ford as well.

 

Bob Bourke actually designed the 53 Studebaker? Well, I didn't know that. I guess you can learn stuff here. No matter who did the design, I still love them, even though 48 years ago this month one of 'em damn near killed me at El Mirage.

Like they say , "live and learn-die and foget it all"!!

 

I was going to add what Songer posted: an awful lot of stuff gets attributed to Loewy the Man, when it rightly should be attributed to Loewy the Company/staff. I for one have no clear idea exactly what the man vs. the Co designed, beyond the well-known examples of the '53 coupe & the Avanti. As a whole, there's an excellent body of work in general tied to the name, but I agree with the dissenters here: this is fairly awful work.

I have a few truncated photocopies of this car in my files, and in Loewy's own words RE this car: "...we wanted a large, air-conditioned, chauffer-driven car. I bought a Cadillac and shipped it to France. {{it was a Series 62 coupe, not an Eldorado, BTW}} Its general appearance was acceptable, but for the front end and the extravagant rear fins. I (something) the car and removed all the bulky chrome-plated extras, about a hundred and (something) pounds of junk. ...We lined a huge empty space in the front fenders ahead of the wheels {{here he ELONGATED the stock '59}} with felt and so created 2 extra luggage compartments. The showy wheels were simplified with Avanti hub caps. In the cowl, immediately ahead of the windshield, we provided large circular openings for better ventilation. The color, like most of my cars, was a light metallic beige. For those who did not mind driving a chrome-plated barge in traffic, the standard Cadillac of the period was a comfortable, excellent machine."

 

Mebbe Raymond came into work after a hard nights drinking and tried real hard to be creative?
Hey,we can't always hit the mark?

 

I recall reading that interview also. Apparently the guy that did the body mods took the front clip and fins in trade for his work. Loewy toured Europe in this car and didn't want to be seen in the car as it was originally. He himself was French and was influenced by European designs no doubt. The blade type bumpers certainly attest to that and show up on the Avanti and influenced many 60's cars. I agree the car is not a aesthetic triumph but is an important car regardless. I'm glad it was posted as I wondered what happened to this car. I saw it many years ago in a dream car book in the library.

BTW Loewy designed the paint scheme on Air Force One also.

 

Good point. I knew that about the trucks as that is what I am into, but wasn't sure how much hand he had in the coupes as well. I had assumed he was more involved but maybe not. I know Loewy specifically didn't want to be involved much or credited with the truck designs as he didn't consider them worthy enough of a product. But it is logical Bourke also pretty much designed the coupes himself as well, but with Loewy actually taking more credit for them than perhaps is accurate or fair. I know I like the 2R series trucks and they were very advanced for their time as well and actually very nice complete all new for the time designs. Obviously, Bourke did work and answer to Lowey, so some credit is still due to Loewy for the coupes regardless. I think Bourke does deserve a lot more credit that he got.

 

Whoa, WQ59B, wow, that quote makes him sound a lot more like a customizer, not a car designer. It is amazing the level of information about even the most obscure cars people come up with and the speed of it too on the hamb. I like these kind of research and discussion threads. Always good to learn something new and see a different perspective.

He referenced the hub caps as Avanti's. That means the Avantis must have already been done and maybe even out when this car was done. What year was this car put together? Well, so much for applying the lessons on the Cadillac to the Avanti. Maybe he got a little cocky with the Avantis and didn't know when/how to stop on this one. Or maybe someone else also had more of a hand on the Avanti and the Cadillac was more of his and less of a success?

 

See- there's inaccuracies from Loewy himself. First (by omission) implying there was so much room in the front end there was room for luggae compartments when he stretched the front.... and the hubcap reference. They are NOT Avanti caps; those have 5 'spokes'- these are the plain '53 'caps- similar idea, obviously different cap.

studetrucks- sure seems the car was done in '59/60- from what I've read & recall; he bought the car new and tore into it pronto. The hubcap issue supports this.

The rear of the '59 reminds me of the Avanti a bunch- the 'tumblehome' of the rear fascia, the blade bumper, the blunted curves, the slapped-on squared lights... IIRC, didn't Tom Kellogg do the bulk of the Avanti?

 

that front end reminds me of bender the werecar



and the effor mentioned tubby corvair ness