Top General Motors’ designers William Mitchell and Chuck Jordan showed glimmers of adaptiveness in an interview with Motor Trend (1971) magazine. However, the luxury of hindsight allows us to see some of the blinders that kept them from fully grasping the enormous changes that would engulf the U.S. automobile industry during the 1970s.
For example, Mitchell hedged his bets when answering the question of whether the future cars of the 1970s would be smaller.
“Well, let’s say they’re not going to be any bigger,” he responded to a Motor Trend query, noting that the added cost of beefed up bumpers and vehicle crushability could result in the need for cost — and thus weight — reductions. And that could mean trimming a car’s size. However, Mitchell also noted that GM’s big cars were so popular that “we just can’t make enough of them” (pp. 88, 90).
Mitchell was antsy about cars getting smaller
Jordan, who had recently returned to the U.S. from a stint at GM’s German Opel unit, noted that in Europe there was a “concern for getting as much interior space in the car for minimum bulk exterior-wise. . . . And I think that influence is being felt over here as we’ve got to keep the room inside the car, but we tend to lean to the bulk of the car” (p. 90).
Here is where Mitchell chimed in with his famous line about it “being easier to do a good looking big car than it is a little car. I say it’s like tailoring a dwarf” (p. 90).
Also see ‘Was GM’s approach to 1970s car design superior to Mercedes-Benz’s?’
Mitchell did acknowledge that engines “have got to get smaller” — and “cars have be lighter.” But in doing so U.S. automakers have “got to [be] very careful. If we went overnight from a Chevrolet the size it is to the way it was seven eight years ago, you’d have a helluva time getting a fellow to trade in his car for that” (p. 90).
Mitchell was presumably referring to the big 1961 Chevrolet, which was trimmed a decidedly modest 1.5 inches in length, 2.4 inches in width and 45 pounds in shipping weight. While it’s true that sales went down almost 13 percent from the previous year, one could argue that the problem wasn’t the smaller size but a recession that resulted in total domestic output to decline by almost 14 percent.
See, we can prove that smaller doesn’t sell!
Jordan, the ever-dutiful wingman, pointed out that when Cadillac offered a shorter model from 1961-63 that “you couldn’t give those things away.” He said that the division came out with a smaller car in response to surveys and letters complaining that Cadillacs were so big that you “couldn’t close the garage door” (p. 90).
The “compact” Cadillac did sell in very small numbers. However, as we discuss here, that model had the distinct whiff of what in time would be called a “compliance car” — it did not appear to be given much prominence. It’s almost as if GM wanted to prove that small didn’t sell.
Even more incredibly, Jordan didn’t seem to think it was a problem that luxury car owners couldn’t fit their cars in their garage. To me that sums up the arrogance of U.S. automakers during the postwar era.
The irony of these comments is that the next-generation big GM cars would be given a substantial enough downsizing in 1977 that they were within the same ballpark as the dreaded 1961 models — yet they sold fine.
NOTES:
Production figures and product specifications are from the auto editors of Consumer Guide (2006), Flory (2004, 2009, 2013) and Gunnell (2002).
Share your reactions to this post with a comment below or a note to the editor.
RE:SOURCES
- Auto editors of Consumer Guide; 2006. Encyclopedia of American Cars. Publications International; Lincolnwood, Ill.
- Flory, J. “Kelly” Jr.; 2004. American Cars, 1960-1972. McFarland & Co., Inc.
- ——; 2009. American Cars, 1946-1959: Every Model, Year by Year. McFarland & Co.
- ——; 2013. American Cars, 1973-1980. McFarland & Co., Inc.
- Gunnell, John; 2002. Standard Catalog of American Cars, 1946-1975. Revised 4th Ed. Krause Publications, Iola, WI.
- Motor Trend; 1971. “Motor Trend Interview: Bill Mitchell and Chuck Jordan.” July issue: pp. 88, 90, 92.
ADVERTISING & BROCHURES:
- oldcaradvertising.com: Chevrolet (1961, 1971)
- oldcarbrochures.org: Cadillac (1954)
Maybe Mitchell just didn’t know how to design a small car. Which would be ironic given that the 2nd generation Corvair was, IMO, a brilliantly styled car.
The pre-5 mph bumper Vega was a pretty stylish GM small car, too.