Dean’s Garage has a great discussion about William Mitchell’s swan song, the 1977 Pontiac Phantom (Smith, 2020). I must admit feeling rather ambivalent about this concept car. Although it strikes me as one of the best-executed examples of the neoclassical look, it also raises an impertinent question: Did Mitchell overstay his welcome as head of design for General Motors?
I’m hesitant to ask that question because Mitchell is so highly regarded by many people who worked with him. In addition, who am I to weigh in when my car design experience reached no further than filling sketchbooks when I was in high school? As such, my musings may be best viewed through the lens of corporate strategy rather than design (although I will talk about the latter, with the understanding that styling is inevitably subjective . . . and everyone thinks they are an expert).
Phantom is an exemplar of the neoclassical look
I find myself feeling nostalgic when looking at the Phantom because it reminds me of some of the sketches I made during that time period. I really liked curvaceous interpretations of the neoclassical look. My designs tended to include a highly tapered front and rear end, and a V-shaped hood line that arched from the base of the greenhouse. Then, as now, my favorite part of the Phantom is the front end, which offers an exceptionally clean interpretation of the streamlined designs of the late-1930s. (Out of respect for copyright, you will need to go here to see slides of the Phantom.)
My least-favorite part of the Phantom is its fastback shape. It strikes me as needing either a bit more inward tapering in the tail or a gentle S-curve. I am also not a big fan of the exaggerated wheel cutouts, which have a contrived quality.
Also see ‘Retired designers ponder a once and future Pontiac GTO’
Those nitpicks aside, Mitchell deserves credit for championing such an understated and rounded design during a period when the neoclassical look tended to be overwrought and boxy. If I had ended up going into car design as a career, I would have felt like I was in hog heaven if I could have magically landed on this project’s design team.
Phantom also showcased an obsolete design approach
All that said, the Phantom also displayed how Mitchell was a product of a bygone era. His design sensibility was out of step with the need for smaller cars that were both more efficient and practical.
Even if one views the Phantom as purely a styling exercise divorced from reality, I still think it would have looked better if it had been downsized. GM’s F-body, which was used for its pony cars, could have offered better proportions than the mid-sized B-body used by the Phantom.
By the same token, the Phantom could have been more visually interesting as a 2+2 rather than a two seater. That might have also given the concept enough plausibility to be considered for production — with, of course, all of the design compromises that would have entailed.
Also see ‘Insider’s look at car design steers clear of Detroit’s fall’
For example, one version of the Phantom had ribbed bumpers. This suggests that 5-mph bumpers might have looked less massive with dual chrome strips over otherwise body-colored bumpers.
So did William Mitchell stay at GM too long?
This topic is worth a longer post, but my short answer would be yes. Mitchell was arguably at the peak of his design powers in the mid-60s, but by the early-70s he was losing his touch.
As a case in point, the 1971-73 Buick Riviera was an outright flop and the second-generation Cadillac Eldorado was outsold by a Lincoln. The problems with these bloated halo cars could be partly blamed on GM management. However, they also showed how Mitchell’s design taste was growing out of sync with a changing market.
According to John Z. DeLorean, Mitchell opposed his proposal to downsize GM’s mid-sized cars because it would take “the corporation into a more utilitarian design and away from the longer, lower and sleeker look” (Wright, 1979; p. 182).
While DeLorean may not be the most trustworthy source, his story aligns with Mitchell’s lament that “(d)esigning a small car is like tailoring a suit for a dwarf” (Lamm and Holls, 1996, pp. 184-185).
The Phantom epitomized Mitchell’s penchant for big, bold rolling sculpture. Instead of trying to adapt to the times, he blissfully ignored them. Personality politics aside, is it any wonder why GM management ignored the Phantom? For all of its good qualities, it was a stylistic dead end.
Share your reactions to this post with a comment below or a note to the editor.
RE:SOURCES
- Lamm, Michael and Dave Holls; 1996. A Century of Automotive Style: 100 Years of American Car Design. Lamm-Morada Publishing Co.
- Smith, Karl; 2020. “Mitchell’s 1977 Pontiac Phantom.” Dean’s Garage. Posted October 29; accessed December 16.
- Wright, J. Patrick; 1979. On A Clear Day You Can See General Motors. Wright Enterprises, Grosse Pointe, MI.
ADVERTISING & BROCHURES:
- wildaboutcarsonline.com (Automotive History Preservation Society): Pontiac Firebird (1977)
In the Motor Trend article, it stated that this car was designed by Mitchell as a going away gift to GM. This is 1976-77. So many of the design cues reference production models of the early 70’s, the ’71 Buick Riviera, and the rear end and front prow of the ’73 Pontiac Le Mans, Even the Phantom Corsair. The usual process is for concept cars to preview future design, not reflect past design. It makes me wonder if the car had actually been designed earlier. The sheer look of the mid to late ’70s was better demonstrated by the ’75 Seville,’77 Deville, and other downsized full size cars. The F cars still had a similar curvaceous shape but they were from the late 1960s. The Phantom, if produced, would have looked totally out of step with the times.
I agree. And, as I talked about in the story, at that point in time I was still quite taken by organic shapes that evoked the classics. Car design in the late-70s and early-1980s was terribly boring to me because it seemed like everybody threw away their french curves.
One irony is that eventually the auto industry did come back to these kind of shapes. The Chrysler Atlantic concept car is a particularly interesting example. A totally impractical design, but it had some really interesting lines.
I wonder if Bill Mitchell would have been inspired by Virgil Exner’s Stutz revival car to create the Phantom?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stutz_Blackhawk
And speaking of Stutz, I saw this old drawing from 2004 showing a more modern Stutz drawing from Virgil Exnerr Jr nad we could wonder if it might have been a little bit inspired from the Pontiac Phantom as well. https://www.madle.org/exjstutz2004.htm
The Phantom had no intentions of any form of production. It was to be Bill Mitchell’s personal car in retirement. It only needed to satisfy a single person.
It was not made into a functional car because Howard Kerl killed the project in an FU to someone he had butted heads with for years. A spiteful act against someone that had delivered spectacular results for GM for decades.