Cars at the Beach

Steam Cars of the late 1960s and early 1970s

A good bit of this material is taken from American Heritage Invention and Technology article from 1998. Other information  taken from my notes.

In 1968, a renaissance in steam-car technology suddenly began, amid new found concern about the pollution caused by internal-combustion engines.

The U.S. government had recently imposed strict emissions limits on automobiles, and in May 1968 several federal agencies held hearings on alternative power plants. Among the first to speak out in favor of steam were Calvin E. and Charles J. Williams, twins from Ambler, Pennsylvania, who for years had been using profits from their family’s construction business to experiment with steam. They drove their steam-powered convertible, on which they dubiously claimed to have spent $2 million, to Washington and invited Sen. Edwin Muskie, Sen. Warren Magnuson, and others to go for spins. Bureaucrats were impressed by the vehicle’s silence, acceleration, and supposed 30-mpg fuel efficiency (on kerosene). The Williams brothers maintained in committee hearings that steamers burn fuel more slowly and steadily, and thus more completely, than internal combustion engines. Steam power, they said, is also more mechanically efficient.

That same year, Don E. Johnson, the 36-year-old president of Steam Dynamics, in Mesa, Arizona, argued that his 150-pound, 150-horsepower steam engine was much lighter than an equally powerful conventional one. He could make this assertion by ignoring all the ancillary parts of the engine, such as the boiler, burner, and tanks. Johnson had originally developed his engine for helicopters but believed it would work just as well in automobiles.

Ford and General Motors had already gotten into the act, albeit in lukewarm fashion. In March 1968 Ford had announced a joint steam development program with the Thermo Electron Corporation, of Waltham, Massachusetts. GM, meanwhile, worked with another start-up steam company, Energy Systems, Inc., and offered to supply several steam-powered sedans to the California Highway Patrol for in-service testing.

Thermo Electron Corp of Waltham, Mass. designed an engine that would use instead of water a non-aqueous organic fluid to drive it. The fluid did not corrode the metal, worked at much lower temperatures and pressures, and therefore should have cut cost of the engine considerably.

In addition to Ford's $4 million, Thermo-Electron put as much as $2 million in the project, and kept the rights to any technology developed. Ford would have to pay royalties to sue the engine, but in 1970 held 10,000 shares of Thermo Electron, and thus had options on stock that eventually could give it at least a 25% holding.

The organic vapor in Thermo Electron's design drove a piston engine. It is condensed and returned to the boiler in a hermetically sealed closed cycle. As in other steam engines, the fuel heating the boiler is burned continuously with lots of air. This virtually eliminated pollution by unburned hydrocarbons. The low burning temperature also cut down on nitrogen oxides.

Cost, weight, size and slow startup proved problematic problems. The organic vapor posed problems. Thermo Electron used thiophene. William Moore, director of industrial design for Lear Motor Corp., which has put its own steam car on a back burner, said Lear rejected thiophene because of its high volatility and toxicity.

The man who made the most noise about steam, though, was the brash and overconfident William P. Lear of Learjet fame. At a decommissioned military base outside Reno, Nevada, Lear developed several types of steam and steamlike engines. One was what he called an “involute expander,” which used intermeshing helical screws. Another was a 12 cylinder opposed-piston engine based on the British Napier Deltic diesel; the cylinders formed side-by-side triangles. A third was the Lear Vapor Turbine System, which involved a sealed turbine that used not steam but a revolutionary new fluid called Learium. Unfortunately, Learium was never developed.

In the end Lear did build a steam-powered Chevrolet Monte Carlo and a steam-turbine bus. With his usual hyperbole, he announced plans for a steam-powered Indianapolis race car, and he even scraped out an oval track behind his warehouse, supposedly to test it. But because he had so many different projects going—plus horrific problems with his engineering staff—nothing ever came of any of his steam-powered visions.

In October 1973 the Arab oil embargo hit, forcing automakers to turn their attention away from steam to the more immediate challenges of downsizing and making the internal-combustion engine cleaner and more fuel-efficient. They succeeded well enough to put steam out of contention. Despite the progress some engineers believed they were making between 1968 and 1973, steam cars continue to pose seemingly insuperable challenges, principal among them being fuel economy. There’s no promise of future improvement, as there is with electric cars, in which batteries are being made smaller and smaller.

The American Automobile at the beginning of the 1970s I : Ford

Hi folks -- I am starting a new study on the late 1960s and early 1970s. This period was pivotal to the future of the American automobile industry.  That year I graduated from Davidson College, largely in a mental fog concerning the world around me, obsessed with fears of the draft and oblivious to much of what was really important. Just as 1970 would prove decisive to the future of America, it was also decisive in a negative way in terms of my own life. I have spent much energy since then in dealing with the ramifications of the decisions I made back then, just as the American automobile industry continues to do.  Here is how Forbes began 1970 with its analysis of the auto industry:

"Automotive Products," Forbes,  January 1, 1970, p.191.

It was supposed to be the year of the intermediates -- the slightly smaller than standard sized Chevrolet Chevelle, Dodge Coronet, and Ford Fairlane, for example.

These models had been selling well for a couple of years, and the marketing experts decided that it was where they should put their styling emphasis and peppiest promotion. The production men geared up for a heavy output of the intermediate models.

So what happened? The public suddenly lost enthusiasm for intermediates and began buying more high-priced and low priced models. As a result the auto companies spent 1969 scrambling to change over production lines to meet demand.

In sales terms, 1969 was a year of sideways motion until the third quarter, when Chrysler sales edged off. That, combined with heavy retooling costs, caused a 48% earnings decline at Chrysler for the first nine months. By the 4th quarter, the entire industry's sales were running about7% below 1968's 8.8 million car volume, year to year. Although market shares held fairly steady for all but American Motors (victim of a five-week strike), profit margins narrowed considerably. By contrast foreign car importers had sales running about 10% ahead of 1968 toward year end.

The problem, of course is that the auto companies deal with a fickle auto-buying public whose frequent shifts in taste are encouraged by annual model changes and ever-widening product lines.  Back in the days when fewer models were offered in fewer price ranges, the auto companies had better control of their markets, and forecasting was much easier.  But now they are engaged in a billion-dollar game of trying to outguess the public.


The Ford product line reflected the dilemma of markets and complex consumer preferences. The LTD was placed at the top of the Ford line, a long wheelbase (121 inches) vehicle with hidden headlamps and five possible engines, ranging from a 302 cubic inch V-8 to a 460 big block. With hard top sedan, coupe, convertible and station wagon variants, the LTD was just one example of the fruits of flexible mass production, if one sees these large number of consumer choices a direct benefit to the firm. Immediately below the LTD was the Galaxie, also a 121 inch wheelbase car, and also available with numerous options, including a 6 cylinder 240 cubic inch engine. The intermediate model in the Ford line was the Torino, the Motor Trend car of the year for 1970. Influenced by designer Bill Shenk, the Torino had a "Coke bottle" shape with a narrow waist and bulging front and rear fuselages, mimicking a supersonic aircraft of the day. The Torino consisted of 13 models on a 114 inch wheelbase, and engines ranging from a 250 cubic inch 6 to a 429 that was featured in the Cobra Jet model. As Motor Trend commented, the Tornio was "Not really a car line in the old sense, but a system of specialty cars, each for different use…from luxury to performance."

The Ford Falcon, one of the original import fighters of 1960, only lasted though mid-year before it was discontinued.

A Galaxie 500 in stripped down trim.

 The LTD, this one obviously marketed to African-Americans.

 The Muscle Car -- a Torino intermediate -- not dead yet.

A base Mustang

The Maverick comes on board by the end of the year. See my The Automobile and American Life on the Maverick as depicted in Harry Crews' Car.

I

Tesla not welcome in North Carolina?

Hi folks -- thanks to former student Jesse Grewal for calling this article to my attention.


From the state that brought you the nation’s first ban on climate science comes another legislative gem: a bill that would prohibit automakers from selling their cars in the state.

The proposal, which the Raleigh News & Observer reports was unanimously approved by the state’s Senate Commerce Committee on Thursday, would apply to all car manufacturers, but the intended target is clear. It’s aimed at Tesla, the only U.S. automaker whose business model relies on selling cars directly to consumers, rather than through a network of third-party dealerships.

The bill is being pushed by the North Carolina Automobile Dealers Association, a trade group representing the state’s franchised dealerships. Its sponsor is state Sen. Tom Apodaca, a Republican from Henderson, who has said the goal is to prevent unfair competition between manufacturers and dealers. What makes it “unfair competition” as opposed to plain-old “competition”—something Republicans are typically inclined to favor—is not entirely clear. After all, North Carolina doesn’t seem to have a problem with Apple selling its computers online or via its own Apple Stores.

Still, it’s easy to understand why some car dealers might feel a little threatened: Tesla’s Model S outsold the Mercedes S-Class, BMW 7 Series, and Audi A8 last quarter without any help from them. If its business model were to catch on, consumers might find that they don’t need the middle-men as much as they thought.

Incidentally—not that he would be in any way swayed by this—I couldn’t help but notice that Apodaca received $8,000 in campaign contributions from the North Carolina Automobile Dealers Association last year, the maximum amount allowed by state law. I’ve reached out to the senator for further comment and will update this post if he replies.

Tesla’s vice president of corporate and business development, Diarmuid O'Connell, told me he’s hopeful that the state legislature will amend the bill so that it doesn’t prohibit Tesla from doing business there. He said the company has already sold 80 cars in North Carolina, mostly through the Web, and has about 60 more orders in the works. It also has plans to build its first showroom in the state next year. The Raleigh-Durham Research Triangle in particular appears to be a hotbed of Tesla interest, O'Connell said, which makes sense given its similarities to Silicon Valley.

In its current form, North Carolina’s bill would be the harshest of a handful of anti-Tesla regulations around the country. In Texas, the company is fighting a law under which the employees of its “showroom” in Austin are not allowed to sell any vehicles, offer test drives, or even tell customers how much the car costs. But at least Texas still lets people buy the car online, which North Carolina’s law would prohibit.

Tesla’s O’Connell rejects the idea that laws prohibiting automakers from selling their cars are designed to protect consumers, as trade groups like the North Carolina dealers’ association claim. He says the franchise-dealer model might work fine for giant automakers, but not for a startup like Tesla—especially since Tesla’s products represent a challenge to the traditional auto industry on which dealerships rely. “How do you sell the future if your business depends on the present?” he asked.

Robert Glaser, president of the dealers association, told the News & Observer that the law prohibiting Tesla sales isn’t just about his industry’s self-interest. Pointing to the Tesla representatives at a recent hearing, he said, “You tell me they’re gonna support the little leagues and the YMCA?”

If that’s the real issue, then I may have some good news for all concerned: I asked O’Connell, and he assured me Tesla would be happy to support the little leagues and the YMCA if that’s what North Carolina requires in order to do business there. Problem solved! Right, Mr. Glaser?

H/T Techdirt.

Moms and Cars -- Happy Mother's Day!

Hi folks -- Above are a few images that reflect mothers and the auto today.  With all the technologies to assist in household work, what has really happened is now there is more work for mother. Yet, the car or minivan is the only lace in which she can be alone at times, a private space for quiet time after dropping off the kids at soccer or dance.

My mother never did drive a car.  She did try to learn to drive during the early 1950s, but gave up after failing a driver's test in which she wedged the car between a tree and fire hydrant (true story). With the exasperated examiner next to hear in the front seat, she ended up pulling the shift knob off the stalk and handed to the tester, saying "now here you drive!"

Cars and Golden Retrievers

OK, how could I do a blog post on cats and forget about my two favorite grand-dogs, Ralph and Ed. Especially Ralph, who is one of the only living things on the planet that loves me! He will sit in my lap, stay by the door of the bedroom when I sleep at Lisa's house in Escondido, CA, and follow me endlessly. He and Ed have such big hearts (as well as big bodies), and I do miss them.  So here, for Ralph and Ed, are a few golden retriever and car photos!