Toggle

Toggle (pronounced tog-uhl)

(1) A pin, bolt or rod placed transversely through a chain, an eye or loop in a rope etc, as to bind it temporarily to another chain or rope similarly treated.

(2) In various types of machinery, a toggle joint, or a device having one.

(3) An ornamental, rod-shaped button for inserting into a large buttonhole, loop or frog, used especially on sports clothes.

(4) In theatre, a wooden batten across the width of a flat, for strengthening the frame (Also called the toggle rail).

(5) In engineering and construction, a metal device for fastening a toggle rail to a frame (also called a toggle iron); a horizontal piece of wood that is placed on a door, flat, or other wooden structure, but is not on one of the edges of the structure; an appliance for transmitting force at right angles to its direction.

(6) To furnish with a toggle or to bind or fasten with a toggle.

(7) In informal use, to turn, twist, or manipulate a toggle switch; dial or turn the switch of a device (often in the form “to toggle between” alternate states).

(8) A type of switch widely used in motor vehicles until outlawed by safety legislation in the 1960s.

(9) In admiralty jargon, a wooden or metal pin, short rod, crosspiece or similar, fixed transversely in the eye of a rope or chain to be secured to any other loop, ring, or bight.

In computer operating systems and applications, an expression indicating a switch of view, contest, feed, option etc.

(11) In sky-diving, a loop of webbing or a dowel affixed to the end of the steering & brake lines of a parachute providing a means of control.

(12) In whaling, as toggling harpoon, a pre-modern (believed to date from circa 5300 BC) harvesting tool used to impale a whale when thrown.

1769: The origin of toggle is murky and the best guess of most etymologists is it was in some way linked with "tug".  In the sense of a "pin passed through the eye of a rope, strap, or bolt to hold it in place" the origin is believed to be nautical (though not necessarily from the Royal Navy) thus the speculation that it’s a frequentative form of “tug” or “to tug” (in the sense of “to pull”), the evolution influenced by regional (or class-defined) pronunciations similar to tog.  The wall fastener was first sold in 1934 although the toggle bolt had been in use since 1994.  The term “toggle switch” was first used in 1938 although such devices had long been in use in the electrical industry and they were widely used in motor vehicles until outlawed by safety legislation in the 1960s.  In computing, toggle was first documented in 1979 when it referred to a keyboard combination which alternates the function between on & off (in the sense of switching between functions or states as opposed to on & off in the conventional sense).  The verb toggle dated from 1836 in the sense of “make secure with a toggle” and was a direct development from the noun.  In computing, the toggle function (“to toggle back and forth between different actions") was first described in 1982 when documenting the embryonic implementations of multi-tasking (then TSRs (terminate & stay resident programs).  Use of the mysterious togglability (the quality of being togglable) seems to be restricted to computer OSs (operating systems) to distinguish between that which can be switched between and that which is a stand-alone function which must separately be loaded & terminated.

The noun toggery (clothing; a clothing shop) is unrelated and was from tog.  It described (in slang), capes, cloaks & coats and (in New Zealand & Australia), swimwear (as a clipping of "swimming togs").  The origin of tog as various garments was as a shortened form of the earlier togemans & togeman (cloak, loose coat), from the Middle English tog, toge & togue, from the Old French togue, from the Latin toga (cloak, mantle).  Togeman(s) was criminal class cant for "cloak or coat" and in the shortened form "tog" it had spread to general use, by the early eighteenth century meaning "coat" and that also underwent mission keep, coming to be used generally of "clothing".  As a verb tog (as both "tog" & "tog up") emerged very quickly.  The special use of tog in fluid dynamics was as a unit of thermal resistance, being ten times the temperature difference (in °C) between the two surfaces of a material when the flow of heat is equal to one watt per m2.  The discipline in the 1940s appropriated the word from its commercial use as a material used in the thermal insulation of clothing.  Tog was also (as a clipping), slang for "a photographer".  Toggle is a noun & verb, toggled & toggling are verbs, toggler, toggery & togglability are nouns and togglable is an adjective; the noun plural is toggles.

The Jaguar E-Type (XKE) and the toggle switch

1964 Jaguar E-Type S1 OTS (Open Two Seater, as the factory at the time described the roadster body-style.

Jaguar’s E-Type (sometimes in North America (NA) informally called XK-E or XKE) deputed in 1961 at the now defunct Geneva Motor Show and it created quite a stir, at once recognized as one of the more seductive shapes ever rendered in metal, a view with which many today agree still.  The impact it made is undisputed but in industry folklore what is contested is whether Enzo Ferrari (1898-1988), attending the show, called it “the most beautiful car in the world”.  The origin of the tale is a recollection by Norman Dewis (1920–2019) who between 1952-1985 was a Jaguar test driver, the website Hemmings reporting him saying of that moment in Geneva: “I always remember Enzo Ferrari coming up to me.  He walked around the car. He said, ‘Norman, it’s the most beautiful car I’ve ever seen.  But there is one mistake on the car.  It hasn’t got a Ferrari badge.’’

1966 Jaguar E-Type OTS.  The cockpit of the "toggle switch E-Types" was one of the classic looks of the analogue era,  Unlike the Jaguar saloons in production at the time, from the start, the E-Type's dashboard had a padded top-rail.    

Il Commendatore seems never to have confirmed or denied expressing the sentiment and there’s no mention of it in Le mie gioie terribili (published in English as “My terrible joys: the Enzo Ferrari memoirs” (“My Terrible Joys” must be one of the finest titles for a memoir)).  So, in the absence of a denial the story stands and the E-Type clearly made an impression because after concluding the sleek shape was likely to confer great aerodynamic advantage, signor Ferrari returned to Modena and ordered the development of the 250 GTO, the three dozen-odd built now among the highest-priced collectables.  It’s not unknown for a statement of perhaps dubious provenance to gain an aura of authenticity if the subject decides it reflects well on them.  In the 1961 Australian general election, as the counting concluded, the government and opposition had won equal numbers with a single seat still to be called; on that one seat rested the fate of the election.  That one seat was held by the conservative Jim Killen (1925–2007) and ultimately he prevailed, ironically because of the “leakage” of a handful of preferences from the Communist Party candidate.  Elated, Killen told the press he’d received a congratulatory phone call from Robert Menzies (1894–1978; prime-minister of Australia 1939-1941 & 1949-1966) who’d said “Killen, you’re magnificent”.  The quip had come from Killen’s imagination and later, ruefully, he would reveal that at the first post-election meeting of Liberal Party members, Menzies “didn’t even offer me a drink.”  Still, Menzies never disowned the comment and one of his press secretaries confirmed he’d been happy for it circulate.

1961 Jaguar E-Type S1 roadster with toggle switches and aluminum trim panels.

Ergonomically, while an aesthetic delight, the layout was not wholly successful though toggle switches are thought more sexy than the later rockers (although, sardonically, in the E-Type community they are sometimes described a "suicide switches") which were adopted to comply with US safety regulations.  There are two different stamping patterns for the aluminum trim pieces and the one used on the very early cars is much prized; it has never been available as a re-production.  In 1963, as a running change (the factory bulletin indicating it was done to reduce glare), the panel's covering was changed to black vinyl.  The use of aluminum facia plates in a Jaguar was untypical and the designers later recalled it was done just to provide that "race car look" rather as some of today's manufacturers and tuning houses will use carbon fibre (real and fake).  The factory certainly was aware of the significance of the ambiance in cockpit design.  The earlier XK120 (1948-1954) had been available as a FCH (fixed head coupé), DHC (drop head coupé (ie a cabriolet)) and OTS but while the first two received the traditional burl walnut veneer, the "sportier" OTS's facia was covered in leather & leathercloth.  The latter was thought a more modern look which increasingly was used on the successor XK140 (1954-1957) & XK150 (1957-1961) with only the saloons using timber exclusively (which remained an option for the XK150).

Custom timber veneer fittings by Madera Concepts for Jaguar E-type in burl walnut (left) and Carpathian elm (right). 

Unlike the XK150, the timber fittings were never a factory option but some owners found the look irresistible and commissioned specialists to create the pieces.  Although the total area is not large, some disassembly and reassembly is required and with a few curves around which the veneer must be made to curl, it's a job which demands expertise.  The fine craftsmen at Madera Concepts in California report having done sets in both burled walnut and Carpathian elm, the results looking exactly as one imagines the factory might have produced had there ever been a Daimler version of the E-Type.  Of course, however much those commissioning the work might be delighted, the originality police are unlikely much to be impressed.  Views change and by 1985 timber had re-appeared in the cockpit of the E-Type’s nominal replacement (the XJ-S (1975-1996 and in 1991 named XJS during Jaguar's time as subsidiary of Ford) so walnut in the one-off “notchback” Daimler XJ-S prototype was not a novelty.

Erected soft-top on 1969 E-Type S2.

Jaguar devoted time and resources to testing the E-Type but one thing which slipped through the pre-production process (as well what must have been indifference to the glare from the dashboard) was a buffeting the OTS's fabric soft-top suffered at certain speeds.  It seems an obvious thing not to notice but, like the HST's (Hubble Space Telescope) mis-shaped mirror, it was just one of those things.  With the E-Type's release date locked-in, it was too late to redesign the components and it was a hint at the machine's intrinsic unsuitability for mass-production.  The factory had not expected demand to exist in anything close to what instantly emerged (they'd expected to sell at most a few thousand but not some 72,000 over 14 years; the world was however seduced and to this day the E-Type remains the definitive Jaguar).  The consensus among the cognoscenti seems to be if Jaguar had anticipated what a huge seller the E-Type would become they might have (1) devoted a few more months to the development and (2) on the production line spent maybe another £40 per car, meaning many of the E-Type's inherent problems might have been solved and adding £40 to the price would likely not much have affected demand.    

The fix.

Jaguar's Q&D (quick and dirty) solution for the buffeting was to weigh-down the affected area with a chain of lead-shot, sewed into the fabric in effectively the same way weighted hems are used in fashion.  Just over a half inch (14 mm) in diameter, the lead-shot bag was wrapped in a sisal cord with two 12 inch (300 mm) draw-cords to permit it easily to be pulled through the pocket in the top.  It was such a rush-job Jaguar never allocated a part-number and it’s only ever been part of hood cloth assembly (#BD20582 for the Series 1; 159.854 for the Series 2).  Both the S1 (1961-1968) and S2 (1968-1971) E-Types had the lead-shot bag, even though the soft-top’s frame was re-designed for the later cars (the S1 with three bows, the S2 two and the clamps securing the mechanism to the windscreen header rail were strengthened) and for the S2, the size of the shot-bag was reduced slightly to accommodate a change in placement, now beneath the centre strap between the bows.  Interestingly, despite presumably having at least slightly different aerodynamic properties, there seems to have been no difference in the buffeting suffered by the early cars with mohair fabric and the later which used Everflex (a tough, high quality synthetic used by Rolls-Royce during it's unfortunate "vinyl roof phase" in the 1970s (Rolls-Royce never used the word "vinyl", always insisting it was "an Evereflex covering").  For the S3 E-Type (1971-1974), the soft-top was again re-designed, this time in a way which rendered the lead-shot chains unnecessary.  

 

On the E-Type, the toggle switches were fitted only to the S1 & S1.25 cars built between 1961-1967 and they're admired both for the "vintage" appearance and their delightful tactility, the centrally-located array controlling functions such as lighting and the windscreen wipers.  Even by the slight standards of 1960s ergonomics the arrangement wasn’t ideal but, sitting beneath the gauges, it was an elegant and impressive layout the factory would retain for more than a decade, the E-type using the arrangement until production ended in 1974 and it endured on the low-volume Daimler DS420 limousine until 1992.  However, while the layout for a while survived, the toggle switches did not, the hard-edged protuberances deemed dangerous by the US NHSB (National Highway Safety Bureau (which in 1970 became the NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) under the newly created DOT (Department of Transportation), established by an act of Congress on 15 October, 1966 and beginning operation on 1 April, 1967) which, since the publication of Ralph Nader’s (b 1934) book Unsafe at any Speed (1965) had begun to write legislation which stipulated standards for automobile safety, this in parallel with the growing body of law designed to reduce toxic exhaust emissions.  The world into which the E-Type had been born was in its twilight.

1973 Jaguar E-Type S3 roadster with rocker switches.

On the later roadsters, the far-right rocker switch was un-labeled because it was functional only on the coupés, activating the rear-window demister; on the XJ sedans (which used the same switch apparatus), it swapped the flow between the dual gas (petrol) tanks.  When the S2 XJ was released in 1973, the whole dashboard was revised, greatly improving the ergonomics but lacking the visual appeal of a look dating from 1959 when the Mark II saloon (1959-1969) was released although the most extravagant implemental was on the Mark X (1961-1966) which used a full width assembly in timber veneer.  While impressive, airbags were decades away from mass use and seatbelts were uncommon so when the model was revised and released as the 420G (1966-1970), the top rail received a padded vinyl covering (with a central clock).  It didn't look as good but may have reduced the severity of a few head injuries.

In 1968, the new wave of legislation came mostly from the DOT so applied almost exclusively to vehicles sold in the US but such was the importance of that market it made little sense for Jaguar to continue to produce a separate line with toggle switches for sale in the rest of the word (RoW) so the decision was taken to standardize on the flatter rocker switches with their safer, rounded edges.  At much the same time, other changes were made to ensure the E-Type on sale in 1968 would conform also to other new rules, the most obvious being the replacement of the lovely covered headlights, replaced by units in a scalloped housing, mounted slightly higher (there was also a minimum headlight-height stipulation).  Given the extent of change, it was decided to designate the updated cars as the S2 (Series 2).  Despite the perceptions of some (fuelled by internet posts and re-posts), by 1967, Jaguar, while not a mass-production operation along the lines of a computerized Detroit assembly line, had long since ceased to be a cottage industry and as a change was made in a model’s specification, except for specified batches, it was applied to all production after a certain date.  Although the factory’s records document this, urban myths continue to circulate, stimulated by so-called “unicorns” such as the handful of 3.8 litre Mark 2 saloons built after 1967 when the line was rationalized (as the 240 & 340) and restricted to the 2.4 & 3.4 litre XK-Six; those 3.8s were official “special orders” and not ad-hoc aberrations.  However, nothing in the era has resulted in as much misinformation as the specification of what came (unofficially) to be called the S1.25 & S1.5 E-Types, the most common myth being that before S2 production began, some cars left the factory with a sometimes unpredictable mix of S1 & S2 parts, this haphazardness accounted for by the expedient of “using up stock”.  In the industry, (even in computerized Detroit) the practice was not unknown but there’s no evidence of the practice among 1967 E-Types.  What seems especially to attract speculation is the phenomenon of “overlap”, a word describing a Jaguar found to include some “later” or “earlier” features than the build date and VIN (vehicle identification number) suggest should be fitted.  It's part of the charm of the breed and was usually the result of the recorded “build date” reflecting when a car passed the final quality control checks; apparent discrepancies did happen if a car with an earlier chassis number had been returned for rectification of some fault, thus picking up what appears to be an “out-of-sequence” date.

1967 Jaguar E-Type S1 OTS (left) and 1976 Jensen Interceptor III (J Series) Convertible (right).

With the end of E-Type production, no Jaguar subsequently used the classic dashboard layout although it did endure on the Daimler DS40 limousine, built on the platform of the old Mark X.  Although over 4,000 DS420s (including two built by Vanden Plas as landaulets) were built (plus an additional 900-odd supplied as “commercial chassis” to coachbuilders who would fabricate custom aft-sections, configured mostly as hearses), the model was never sold in the US, the costs of the engineering required to make it compliant with the NHTSA’s ever-evolving rules to high to make the low-volume model viable.  Jensen however adopted the layout for the Interceptor (1966-1976) when in 1969 the Mark II was released although it too was compelled to replace the toggle switches with rockers and they went above and beyond the regulator’s dictates, installing them in a recessed, padded housing.  Even on the Interceptor Mark III (1971-1976), although there were a number of detail changes to the dashboard over the life of the model (there were “G”, “H” & ”J” series, “I” skipped to avoid confusion with the numeric “1” (one), a convention followed by many including bra manufacturers and Boeing when updating the B-52H Stratofortress), the Jaguaresque layout (an array of gauges in the centre with a line of toggles below) remained to the end.  Again, the ergonomics were not state of the art but, like the Jaguars, the Interceptor had other charms.

2006 Spyker C8 Laviolette Widebody: Dashboard layout with four-spoke “propeller” steering wheel (left) and toggle switches with nerf-bars (right).

Pleasingly, although thought extinct on the road, the toggle switches did make a comeback with several small-scale manufacturers unable to resist the look.  The way that look was kept while remaining compliant with the rules was to add rounded nerf-bars on each side of the switch, a trick borrowed from racing cars where the fittings were used to ensure a driver didn’t inadvertently “flick to wrong one”, always a risk because of the thick gloves usually worn in competition.  Spyker, a boutique operation from the Netherlands, began operation in 1999, the name coming from a Dutch coach-builder that between 1880-1926 would branch out from horse-drawn carriages to automobiles and even aircraft.  Since 2000, between various local difficulties (including bouts of bankruptcy), Spyker has produced a number of high-performance models and while the mechanical specification has always been impressive, what has also drawn attention are the exquisitely finished interiors, the intricacies (typified by the nerf-bars around the toggle switches) a delight for those who fetishize such things.  Unfortunately the four-spoke “propeller” steering wheel (a style last seen in volume on the Jaguar XK150 (1957-1961) was eventually judged just too potentially lethal to be granted an exemption from compliance and was replaced with something more accommodating from the Lamborghini parts-bin.

Engineering as art: Gear-shift mechanism, 2006 Spyker C8 Laviolette Widebody (left) and 2007 Spyker C8 Laviolette Targa with, softer, gentler steering wheel (right).

What did however survive was the wonderfully crafted shift mechanism for the rear-mounted ZF transaxle and although the exposed shafts of stainless steel might seem an affectation, it's pure functionalism; being a direct mechanical linkage, they provide precise gear-shifting, always a challenge with such a layout (the Porsche 914 (1969-1976) community coined “broomstick in a jar of mayonnaise” to describe the experience of the earlier "tail-shift" models, the post 1972 "side-shift" build a great improvement from "bad" the "satisfactory").  The shape of the shifter’s knob reflects the modern practice, dating from analysed data derived in the late 1960s from the Swedish government's mandatory post mortems (autopsies) of road-accident fatalities (under Swedish law, such corpses were for 48 hours the property of the state).  What the pathologists' findings revealed was lives could be saved if engineers could devise as a shift lever handle too large to penetrate the eye socket.  One of the first knobs to reflect this design imperative appeared in 1971 on the Mercedes-Benz 350 SL (R107, 1971-1989) although, there being an element of the macabre in the research, the origin of the shape wasn't something the factory choose widely to publicize.  The small innovation was a classic example of what's called “passive safety”.  Spyker’s engineering is thorough and although pure-steel from transaxle to knob, heat-soak along the shaft is said to be minor so there was no need to resort to a timber knob as Porsche did in the late 1960s on some of its race cars; to this day the urban myth persists that Porsche used balsawood to reduce weight by a few grams.  

The pure lines of the S1 E-Type (top) were diluted, front and rear, by the need to comply with US safety legislation, the later S2's head & taillights more clunky.  The collector market slang for the later headlight treatment is "sugar scoop".

The process by which S1 evolved into S2 was in a sense transitional which is why the designations S1.25 & S1.5 became accepted in the jargon.  Not used by the factory, the terms are said to have been “invented” by JCNA (Jaguar Clubs of North America), the S1.25 run beginning on 11 January 1967 after production resumed following the Christmas holiday while the first 1.5s were built mid-year.  Although within the collector community much is made of the defining differences between the “pure” S1 and the “transitional” S1.25 & S1.5, that “purity” is nuanced because like many others, the E-Type was subject to constant product development with changes appearing from time to time and "S1" is a concept rather than a static specification.  Early in the model run, there were some obvious changes such as (1) the modification to the “flat floors” to provide more leg-room, (2) the integration of the hood (bonnet) louvers into the pressing, (3) the external hood (really a “clamshell”) release (there were two types) being replaced by an internal mechanism, (4) internal trim changes including the dashboard materials, console and seats, (5) the replacement of the Moss gearbox with an all-synchromesh unit and (6) the 4.2 litre engine replacing the original 3.8.  Beyond those well-known landmarks, between 1965 and early 1967 there was also a wealth of barely detectable (except to experts of which there are quite a few) cosmetic changes and mechanical updates including: (1) the glass windshield washer bottle being replaced by a plastic container (March 1965), (2) the addition of an alternator shield (October 1965), (3) an enclosed brake and clutch pedal box (October 1965), (4) a hazard warning (4-way) flasher included for US market cars (November 1965), (5) sun-visors added to the OTS (February 1966), (6) instrument lighting changed from blue to green (March 1966), (7) the rubber boot at the base of the gear lever being replaced by a black Ambla gaiter (October 1966), (8) detail changes to the gearbox cover and prop shift tunnel finisher (October 1966), (9) the material used for the under-dash panels switched from Rexine-skinned aluminum to fiberboard (October 1966) and (10) a Girling clutch master cylinder replaced the Dunlop unit (December 1966).  One quirky part of the evolution was that although, from their introduction in 1966, the 2+2 cars included a door for the glove-box, one wasn't fitted to the OTS & FHC until  the S1.5 run.

Jaguar E-Type: S1 with covered headlight (left), S1.25 with early "sugar scoop" (centre) and S2 with later "sugar scoop" (right). 

After the lovely headlight covers were legislated to extinction by the DOT bureaucrats, the replacement (uncovered) apparatus came to be called the “sugar scoop”, a term earlier used for the Volkswagens & Porsches sold in the NA market which had to be fitted with sealed-beam headlights because of protectionist rules designed for the benefit of US manufacturers.  The use of “sugar scoop” for the E-Type was appropriate because the visual link with the utensil was much more obvious than on the Volkswagens & Porsches.  There were three different designs of sugar scoops, one for the 1.25 & 1.5, one for the S2 and one for the S3.

Straight six by Emily Abay (b 1986).

UUA 368 is an Australian-registered 1968 (S2) Jaguar E-Type available for hire at a daily rate of Aus$990.00 (including 200 km (124 miles)); the hire company dubbed her (the car) "Penelope" (unfortunately, the company does not expand on how the names were chosen).  Not all jurisdictions allow the registration plate to be painted on the hood, a practice made famous in 1961 by photographs of 9600 HP, a pre-production E-Type used as one of the factory’s original press-cars.  It was 9600 HP which The Autocar magazine took to Belgium, successfully verifying the then astonishing claim of a top speed of 150 mph (241 km/h) although, years later, it was revealed there had been a few subtle tweaks and an E-Type off the showroom floor wouldn’t quite have hit the magic number, no matter how long and straight the road.  Painting the registration on the hood avoided disfiguring the lovely lines with a plate (no flat surfaces on the front of an E-Type) and many followed the lead, some places allowing it, some not.  A S2 E-Type, UUA 368 has the one of the more elevated of the sugar scoops but, being delivered in Australia, it retains the triple SU carburettors by then denied to customers in NA so response will be lively, especially above 100 mph (160 km/h).

A US market 1977 Porsche 911 (1964-1989), fitted with the front bumper assembly of a later 911 (964 (1989-1994)):  The original “sugar scoops” are seen on the left and the replacement Hella H4 lights are to the right (in RoW cars both H2 & H4 units were fitted).  The (non-figurative) sugar scoop (centre) is Japanese, circa 1970s.  Sugar scoops are used to scoop sugar from a “sugar scuttle” whereas if one’s sugar is in a “sugar bowl”, a “sugar spoon” is used.  The difference between a “sugar spoon” and a “tea spoon” is the former has a deeper and usually more rounded bowl and most are supplied as part of a “tea set” or “tea service”, often with the same decorative elements.

1966 Jaguar E-Type FHC: undeniably, the headlight covers were a sexy shape.

Despite that myriad of modifications, all E-Types prior to the S2 are S1s but the running changes can be of significance to restorers if the object is exactly to emulate the state in which a vehicle rolled off the production line; in events such as a concours d'élegancé, judges can deduct points for even minor infractions.  Things became more distinct when on 11 January 1967 the first E-Type destined for the US market was built without the covered headlights and this marked the beginning of the run of what would come to be known as the 1.25 although it wouldn’t be until mid-year the open headlights became a universal fitting.  Unlike some cars where changes can be determined from the sequential VINs, the only way accurately to determine whether a 1967 E-Type built between January and July was fitted with covered or uncovered headlights work out the market for which it was built, those for NA using the uncovered fittings.  That's because an analysis of successive VINs will reveal on a given day there might have been a mix of cars going down the production line with different headlight assemblies.  Curiously, there were some 1968 E-Types built for Canada which included the triple SUs and while these included the interior changes mandated by US federal law, the door mirror on the driver’s side wasn't fitted and the tail and side lights were a different specification.  From 1969, Canada aligned its regulations with those of the US so from that point on, the NA specification was standardized but the history of S1 production does illustrate why things be so challenging for restorers wishing exactly to replicate what the factory did.

Between August-October 1967, the 1.5 run was built with twin Zenith-Stromberg carburetors (in a specification designed to reduce emissions) replacing the triple SUs (on NA cars), the substitution of ribbed camshaft covers, a higher mounting of the headlights (to meet minimum height requirements) and the adoption of rocker switches; at this point, the teardrop tail lights remained, the other most obvious external marker of the S2 being the chunky lights below the rear bumper bar.  In the usual manner, updates continued, such as twin cooling fans (a good idea) and 1000-odd run of the so-called "R2" cars, almost all of which were registered as 1971 models although many left the factory in 1970.  The R2 S2 E-Types gained a pair of "leaper" badges on the flanks, just behind the front wheel arches.  Unlike the steel leapers centrally mounted on the hoods of other models, the badges required two part numbers, one each for the left & right.  It seemed a pointless addition and just an addition of more clutter, as they were on the S1 (1968-1973) & S2 (1973-1979) XJs.

1971 S2 Jaguar E-Type (centre) from the "R2" run of 1000-odd with the leaper badges on the flanks.

So much did the clutter created by bigger bumpers, protuberant headlight assemblies, badges and side-marker lights detract from the lovely, sleek lines of the Series 1 cars, bolting a luggage rack to the trunk (boot) probably seemed no longer the disfigurement it would once have been.  The left-hand (left) and right-hand (right) badges, being directional, were different part numbers (BD35865 & BD35866 respectively) and those used on E-Types were silver on black.  There were also variants used on the XJs which were gold on black and some had the leaping feline at a slight slope, both matters of note for those wishing to restore to the exacting "factory original" standard.  

So, without a flow chart, it can be hard to follow and, because of some overlaps in the production process, the S1-to-S1.25-to-S1.5 transition wasn’t entirely lineal but none of this is mysterious because the JFSBs have documented and explained these “inconsistencies”.  Still, there are enough quirks to enrage some and delight others.  For example, there were a certain 32 specific NA market vehicles fitted with the headlight covers which were built with serial numbers later than the first of the open headlight cars.  Not all E-Types built for NA in 1967 thus had the open headlights and a not insignificant number of those 1.25 spec vehicles have been retro-fitted with the covers.  Such is the appeal of the covered headlights that although the E-Type market is monitored by the originality police (the “matching numbers” crowd with their extraordinary knowledge of things like “correct” hose clamps or screw heads), there is some untypical forgiveness for “back-dating” headlights to the sleeker look and they're not unknown even on the later, and much different, S3 cars.  Also, although US market S2 cars were from very early in the build fitted with the side-marker light assemblies, it wasn't until late in 1969 bulbs and wiring were fitted (the relevant law taking effect on 1 January 1970); prior to that they'd functioned merely as “side-reflectors”, meaning latter day purchasers need to inspect non-illuminating examples to work out if they're defective or just reflectors.  Opinion seems divided on the matter of fitting the triple SU carburetor assembly to cars delivered with the twin Zenith-Strombergs and many have been converted.  It's not difficult to make a 1.25 visually indistinguishable from a S1 and to do the same to a 1.5 is a matter just of more parts, time and money, the ethics of both ventures being transparency; once modifications are disclosed to a potential purchaser, it's up to them to decide if originality is critical.  Armed with lists of VINs, JFSBs and encyclopaedic knowledge, the JCNA's originality police will not be fooled. 

The lure of the headlight covers: 1973 E-Type S3 with headlight covers subsequently added (left) and with the standard "sugar scoops" (left).

These are US market cars with the additional "dagmars" appended to the bumperettes.  Even by 1973, thin whitewall tyres were still a popular option on US Jaguars and they remained available until the last were sold in 1975 but the wide whitewalls often supplied in the early 1960s had long fallen from favor.  Although the judges in the JCNA confederation are usually uncompromising, they make a rare exception in not deducting points from late-build E-Types (the so-called 1.25 & 1.5) which have been fitted with the headlight covers.  The covers never appeared on the S3 E-Types but their unexpected presence clearly doesn't dissuade buyers because the S3 pictured above (left) in February, 2021 sold at auction for US$230,000.  It was an exceptionally low-mileage example (8000-odd miles (13,000 km)) but even given that it represented an impressive premium for what was a "modified" vehicle.  The S3 cars also had a number of year-to-year variations but compared with the constantly evolving S1 the specification tended to the static.  One quirk was that as well as offering the new 5.3 litre (326 cubic inch) V12, it had been intended also to make available a version with the 4.2 litre XK-Six with brochures and promotional materials printed before the decision was taken only to fit the V12.  However, four six cylinder pre-production prototypes were built and one is known to survive; curiously, despite the rarity (indeed, it may genuinely be a unique, historic E-Type footnote), at auction it achieved a price little different from a 1971 V12 model in equivalent condition.

Jaguar E-Type production breakdown, 1961-1974.  

While the loss of the toggle switches, teardrop taillights and headlight covers caused many to lament that the world was shifting from elegance ungainliness, some other changes also induced pangs of regret.  The switch from triple to dual carburetors was necessitated by the emission control regulations; the claimed HP (horsepower) dropped from 265 to 246 and while not many took the original rating too seriously, there was a drop in performance, especially in the upper speed ranges.  One often less noticed change mandated by the DOT was the replacement of the “eared” knock-off hubs for the wire wheels (the E-Types only ever using a two-eared version although third-party items with three ears are available) with a more “pedestrian friendly” type which, bewilderingly, are now referred to as the “non-eared”, “curly”, “octagonal”, “smooth”, “federal” “safety” and “continental” knock offs.  Take your pick.  Buyers could also take their pick of whether their “improved” wire wheels (now incorporating a forged centre hub) were painted in matte silver or chromed although the JFSB did caution that because of the altered configuration of the spokes, the wheels were not interchangeable with the earlier type except as a complete set (ie five per car).  Available from 1 January, 1968 (the effective date for many of DOT’s new rules), this was Jaguar’s last update of the wire wheels which, in a variety of forms, the company had been using since being founded in 1922 as the Swallow Sidecar Company.  Never offered on the biggest and heaviest of the post-war cars (the Mark VII, VIII, IX and X/420G) or the new XJ range, they were last used on the “overlap” Daimler saloons (250 & Sovereign) in 1969 although they remained an option for the E-Type until the last was built in 1974.  

Wire wheels and associated components for the E-Type by Martin Robey; note the two designs of spinner saver (eared & non-eared).

Although a handful of small-scale producers (the last hold-outs from the days of cottage industries) continued to offer wire wheels, their final appearance on the option lists of the UK industry’s volume models came in 1980 when the last of MG's Midgets and MGBs were sold.  The term "knock-off" sometimes confuses because in slang it can mean a "fake or reproduction item" but in the context of wheels the original meaning described the centre-locking hubs (known also as "spinners") which were tightened or loosened by being "knocked" on the ears with the (often lead-faced) mallet (sometimes described as a hammer) included in the tool kit.  In racing, pit crews would strike the ears directly but tool-kits usually included a (typically timber) "spinner saver" to minimise damage to both hub and mallet; when non-eared hubs appeared, the shape of the spinner saver was also changed.  So the term can confuse: The famous Italian manufacturer Borrani produced many wheels with centre-lock hubs so the phrase "Borrani knock-offs" is standard industry jargon and by convention "knock off Borranis" is used of replica locking nuts (also called "spinners"), the presence of which can be a concern because they might be of lower quality, not manufactured to the safety and performance standards of the genuine product.  

Norway’s Motorhistorisk Klubb Drammen (Historic Car Club of Drammen) from Buskerud county reported on an exhibition hosted on 2 July, 2014 by the Norsk motorhistorisk museu (Norwegian Motor Historic Museum) in the village of Brund, the event honoring Lindsay Lohan’s (b 1986) 28^th birthday.  The red S2 Jaguar E-Type had received a recent restoration but a detailed examination would have to be undertaken to determine the degree to which it remains in its original specification.  Given the visible clues and its presence in Norway, this may have been a RoW (which the triple SU carburetors would suggest though they are a popular swap on twin-carb models) car but there’s a lively two-way trans-Atlantic trade in E-Types (many now expertly restored in Poland) so it may originally have been sold in the US or Canada.

The “Shaguar” used in the three Austin Powers movies (1997, 1999 & 2002).

The Shaguar was a 1967 S1.5 E-Type which featured the combination of teardrop taillights, twin carburetors, sugar scoop headlights, a glove-box door, rocker switches and, being right-hand drive (RHD), it wasn't built for NA.  When the auction house published the photographs, the vibrant on-line originality police did their analysis and concluded it was built in December 1967 as a 1968 model but was in far from original condition (beyond the obvious paint and Shaguar badge).  The dashboard included the earlier manual choke and the heater and vent controls appeared to be missing and while the side & turn lights were NA specification, the taillights were those used on RoW cars.  The tachometer was the one one fitted to S2 models and it was suspected this may have been swapped when the later, non-original engine with the twin Zenith-Stromberg carburetors was installed.  Over the decades, many E-Types have for one reason and another drifted far from their original build and usually this limits their appeal to collectors but at Mecum Auctions in January 2025, the Shaguar realized US$880,000 (including 10% buyers premium), several times the typical sale price of a non-original S1.5 RoW E-Type in the same condition, its history as a cinema prop clearly an attraction.

Heckflosse

Heckflosse (pronounced hek-flos or hek-floss-ah (German))

A nickname for the Mercedes-Benz W111 & W112 sedans produced between 1959-1968 (1961-1971 for the coupés and cabriolets with the pruned fins) and translated in English as fintail ("finnie" the affectionate diminutive).

1959: A compound word in modern German, Heck (rear; back) + Flosse (fin).  As a surname, Heck (most common in southern Germany and the Rhineland) came from the Middle High German hecke or hegge (hedge), the origin probably as a topographic name for someone who lived near a hedge.  The link with hedges as a means of dividing properties led in the Middle Low German to heck meaning “wooden fencing” under the influence of the Old Saxon hekki, from the Proto-West Germanic hakkju.  In nautical slang heck came to refer to the “back of a ship” because the position of the helmsman in the stern was enclosed by such a fence and from here it evolved in modern German generally to refer to "back or rear".  Flosse is obscure but was probably related to the Middle English and Old English finn, the Dutch vin, the Low German finne and the Swedish fena.  Because all German nouns are capitalized, Heckflosse is correct but in English, where it's treated as a nickname, heckflosse is common.  Heckflosse is a noun; the noun plural is Heckflossen (although it has in English texts appeared as Heckflosses). 

The (low) rise and (gradual) fall of the Mercedes-Benz tail-fin

Lindsay Lohan examining the damage to a 2009 (fifth generation) Maserati Quattroporte leased by her father, the impact suffered in a minor traffic accident while her assistant was at the wheel, Los Angeles, 2009.  More than many, Lindsay Lohan probably understands the value of Peilstege.

Chrysler in 1957 really did claim their tail-fins were not mere decorations but "stabilizers" designed to move the centre of pressure rearward.  Although designed during Detroit’s tail-fin craze during the mid-late 1950s, Mercedes-Benz always claimed the Heckflosse (tail-fins), introduced in 1959, weren’t mere stylistic flourishes but rather Peilstege (parking aids or sight-lines (literally "bearing bars")), the construct being peil-, from peilen (take a bearing; find the direction) + Steg (bar) which marked the extent of the bodywork, this to assist while reversing.  It's never been clear if this interpretation existed during the design process or was applied retrospectively in response to criticism after the debut but by 1960, even in the US where the things has assumed absurd proportions, the fin-fad was fast fading.  As a cultural artefact, the distinctiveness of the Heckflosse made them a staple for film-makers crafting the verisimilitude of the 1960s High Cold War, just as the big 600s (W100, 1963-1981) from the same era are used still when wealth or evil (not always synonymous) needs to be conveyed.

1963 Mercedes-Benz 300 SE Lang (Long) (W112).

Although on a longer wheelbase than the standard 300 SE, the model designation remained the same, the SEL nomenclature not appearing until the subsequent (W109) 300 SEL (1965).  The additional framing around the badge appeared only on some early-build models and was a unique embellishment although the 300 SE, by German standards "dripped with chrome".  The chrome trim attached to the tail-fins on the 300 SE and the most expensive of the W111 range (220 S & 220 SE) wasn't fitted to the 220 or the cheaper W110 models and in a quirk of production-line economics, it transpired it was more expensive (ie labor intensive) not to fit the trim because of the additional finishing required.  The alpha-numeric soup of model designations which proliferated from the late 1960s started as something almost logical (ie a 300 used a 3.0 litre engine, a 220 a 2.2 etc) but as new product lines emerged, anomalies increased until, in the early 1990s, it was re-organized although the new system would generate its own inconsistencies and eventually the number often had only a vague relationship with engine displacement.

Heckflosse assembly line, Stuttgart, Germany, 1962.

The Heckflosse was one of the first cars to include in its design the concept of the “safety cell”, a passenger compartment designed to protect the occupants in the case of impacts or roll-overs, the structures to the front and rear (ie the engine bay and luggage compartment) essentially “sacrificial”.  This idea was the ancestor of the modern “crumple zone” in which the front and rear compartments were designed to deform upon impact rather than retaining structural integrity, the object being to absorb and dissipate the energy generated in a crash, preventing it reaching the passengers.  The concept was not new, having for generations been a part of naval architecture, warships using what designers dubbed the “armored citadel”: a kind of “box” containing the vital machinery and magazine (ammunition), the structure created by the armoured deck, waterline belt, and the transverse bulkheads.  While this design didn’t make warships “unsinkable”, it did make them harder to sink and there have been ships which have had their whole bow & stern blown off yet have remained afloat, able to be towed back to port.

1961 GAZ-13 Chaika (Seagull) (1959-1981, from the Soviet Union, left), Sunbeam Alpine (1959-1968, from the United Kingdom, centre) and 1961 Chrysler Imperial Crown Windsor (from the US, right).  There's long been much comment about the Heckflosse's fins (only the factory called them Peilstege) being a unexpected concession to a styling fad but they do need to be compared with what was happening not only on both sides of the Atlantic but in Moscow too.

1957 Ford Thunderbird.  Fin-wise, the closest comparison to the Heckflosse was probably the 1957 Ford Thunderbird which, compared with what Chrysler and General Motors (GM) were doing at the time, was quite restrained.  Genuinely, the fins on the first generation Thunderbird (1955-1957) were functional as Peilstege.

On 1 October 1966, Heckflosses were part of the small motorcade in which, having served the twenty year sentences they were lucky to receive from the International Military Tribunal (IMT) at the first Nuremberg Trial (1945-1946), war criminals Albert Speer (1905–1981; Nazi court architect 1934-1942; Nazi minister of armaments and war production 1942-1945) and Baldur von Schirach (1907-1974; head of the Hitlerjugend (Hitler Youth) 1931-1940 & Gauleiter (district party leader) and Reichsstatthalter (Governor) of Vienna 1940-1945) were driven from Spandau prison in Berlin.  The next day he boarded a Pan-Am Boeing 727 for a flight to Hanover, his first time on a jet aircraft because in 1945 permission had been denied (ostensibly on security grounds) for him to go on a test flight in one of the two-seater Messerschmitt Me-262s built for training.  Like many aspects of his life after release, the THF-HAJ flight had been planned while in Spandau, Speer particularly taken with the 727 because he'd so often seen it during its final descent while tending the prison grounds which he'd transformed into a landscaped park.

1971 Mercedes-Benz 280 SE 3.5 Coupé (1969-1971).

On the sedans, the uncharacteristic exuberances were left undisturbed until production ended in 1968 although after 1965, the range was restricted to a line of lower cost, utilitarian models.  The coupé and cabriolet were introduced in 1961 and lasted a decade; truncating the Heckflosse, they achieved an elegance of line Mercedes-Benz has never since matched but then, few have.

1969 Mercedes-Benz 300 SEL 6.3 (W109, 1968-1972).

By 1965, on the W108 and W109 (1965-1972 and which replaced the more expensive W111 models & all the W112 sedans), the fins, though barely discernible, still existed, the factory noting the contribution to structural rigidity, adding strength without the increase in weight the use of other techniques would have imposed.

1978 Mercedes-Benz 450 SLC 5.0 (C107, 1977-1981).

Advances in metallurgy and engineering meant achieving the required strength became possible even without additional curvature in the metal and in 1971 the R107 (roadster 1971-1989) and C107 (coupé 1971-1981) debuted with the rear surface an uninterrupted flat plane.

1978 Mercedes-Benz 450 SEL 6.9 (V116, 1975-1980).

Despite that, a year later, the W116 sedans (1972-1980) were released with the most vestigial of fins.  The retention of styling elements between generations is not unusual, the second generation Range Rover reprising the earlier model’s distinctive hood creases, even though no longer a structural necessity.  Because there was uncertainty around whether US regulators would outlaw convertibles, no coupé or cabriolet version of the W116 was developed which is why a LWB (long wheelbase) coupé version of the R107 SL was released (as the C107 SLC) and the R107 lasted an impressive 18 years, not replaced until 1989.

1954 Chevrolet Corvette.

Almost apologetically, much has always been made of Mercedes-Benz in the late 1950s not being tempted to follow the lead of GM and Chrysler (Ford never really got involved) in making the W111's tailfins (whether they were really there to help when parking or were merely thought fashionable) truly macropterous but that doesn't mean Detroit may have influenced things because they also did some small "Heckflossesque" fins.  One intriguing element on the original Chevrolet Corvette was the use of protrusions to house the taillights.  When in 1953 the Corvette was released, the fins with which US cars of the era were to become so associated had been around for a few year but hadn’t yet grown (variously upwards & outwards) to the absurd proportions they would later assume and there was nothing unusual in taillights being housed in some construction integrated with the bodywork; once just “bolted-on” lens, taillights had become a design element.  What appeared on the early Corvettes are not really fins and are most analogous with the streamlined nacelles which appeared on contemporary aircraft as enclosures for jet engines; that aspect of aviation architecture would for years be a popular motif for the taillight stylists (by then a highly valued member of the team).  Despite that, the accepted term describing the sculptural extensions is “taillight pod”.  Interestingly, in some of the internal corporate memos the term “nacelle” was used but “pod” became the accepted standard.

1954 Corvette taillight (left) in pod with finlets.

The pair of small blades adorning the upper surface (although sometimes referred to as “finettes”) were in the documents of the GM Design Studio called “taillight bezels” or “ornamental finlets” and, modest as they were, the C1 Corvette probably was the first production car with “four fins”, those with them tending to fit them in pairs although, as a piece of biomimicry of aquatic species, some of the memorable inter-war and early post-war Tatras from Czechoslovakia had a single "central fin" running downwards from the rear of the roof.  The Tatra's fin (the concept familiar from LSR (Land Speed Record) machines) was there to enhance straight line stability and it was needed because of the car's configuration (advanced aerodynamics, a rear-mounted V8 engine and swing axles).  The fin did what it said on the tin but did little to alter the handling characteristics which, by virtue of the mechanical layout, could in unskilled hands be challenging.  The Corvette's behavior was more predictable but that didn't apply to the stylists (they weren't yet "designers") at GM and Chrysler who embarked on a process of “finflation” from which, mercifully, Chevrolet's sports car was spared.  Those on the early Corvettes were at least in a similar aspect ratio to those which appeared on actual jet engine nacelles where they were used to direct airflow in the desired direction and there would have been a slight aerodynamic effect (for better or worse) but the finlets were essentially decorative as GM’s memos indicated and similar additions even appeared on some dagmars (such as the 1954 Buicks).  The Corvette’s designers clearly though the moment had passed for when the restyled 1956 range was released, the pods had been banished, never to return.

1959 Pontiac Bonneville Convertible (left) and 1959 Pontiac Catalina Convertible (right).  Pontiac used the elongation of the elliptical taillights as a marker of a model's place in the division's hierarchy.

On the Corvette, the “taillight pod” and “ornamental finlets” combo didn’t make it into the 1956 range but the idea clearly became lodged somewhere in the GM collective memory because, on a grander scale, both were reprised on the 1959 Pontiacs; longer, higher and wider than the 1953 original, the look might have attracted more publicity had GM’s take on fins that year not been dominated by the Cadillac with the “twin bullet taillights” and the Chevrolet’s “bat wings”.  Compared with those extravagances, what Pontiac did was almost subtle and anyway overshadowed by two of the division’s more enduring debuts, the “split grill” and “year of the wide-track” campaign, the former coming and going, the latter lasting for more than a decade.  In a harbinger of what was to come (and ultimately doom Pontiac), all five GM divisions built their cars using the single platform of the GM B-Body and it was remarkable the stylists were able to achieve noticeably different appearances despite sharing the same structural core.  Whether the 1959 Pontiac's four finlets made them a more functional Peilstege than the two on the 1959 Heckflosse seems dubious although at 213.7 inches in length (5,428 mm) compared with the W111's 192 (4,875), drivers of Pontiacs would have needed them more.  Even a 1959 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud II was only 213 inches (5,410) long and its bustleback had no fins whatever but many were chauffeur-driven so presumably “the help” were anyway good at parking. 

The Heckflosse as rally and race car

Mercedes-Benz 220 SE, Monte Carlo Rally, 1960.

To those accustomed to how things are done in the modern WRC (World Rally Championship) or have memories of the marvellous Group B cars of the 1980s (a category which enthralled everybody except the clipboard crew at the FIA (Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile (the International Automobile Federation)) which, being international sport’s dopiest regulatory body, of course outlawed the things) it will seem improbable the Heckflosse would have been a successful rally car but the record was illustrious.  It’s best remembered for the 220 SE which won the 1960 Monte Carlo Rally but there were many other successes including the 1961 Algiers-Cape Town Central Africa Rally, an arduous event of some 13,500 kilometres (8400 miles) conducted over several weeks on a route from Cape Town to Algiers (a 190 D (a diesel-engined W121 “pontoon” rather than a Heckflosse) had won in 1959 which proved it was a rally which didn’t rely solely on speed).  First run in 1951 and based on an event staged in 1930, in 1956 a Fiat 1100 and a Ford Ranch Wagon V8 (two vehicles most unalike) had tied for first place, the latter driven by Elon Musk's (b 1971) maternal grandfather, chiropractor Joshua Norman Haldeman (1902–1974), who was an interesting character.

Mercedes-Benz factory rally team (part of the competition department, scaled down since the withdrawal from top-flight Formula One and sports car racing after 1999),  Acropolis Rally, 1963.

The most prestigious African rally was the East African Safari and a Heckflosse 220 SE won in 1961, following victories by 219s the previous two years. The 219 (W105, 1956-1959) was a curious anomaly among the post-war Mercedes-Benz saloons in terms of both nomenclature and engineering.  Using a “mix & match” approach which had been part of the transportation business even before things became motorized, the 219 used the 2.2 litre six-cylinder engine familiar in the various 220s (W128 & W180) but mounted it on the shorter “pontoon” platform used by the 4-cylinder 180 & 190 (W120 & W121) variants, the sacrificed length all accounted for by the shorter rear-doors (and thus wheelbase).  It was one of the more elaborate “de-frilling” exercises seen around the world, the variations including a lower cost version of an existing model (Citroën ID vs DS, Cadillac Calais vs De Ville or Chevrolet Biscayne vs Bel Air & Impala) or an existing body with a smaller engine substituted (Humber Hawk vs Super Snipe).  The 219’s designation was unusual in that it was the only occasion the familiar three numerals featured something other than a “0” as the last digit and it’s notable also because the factory, in a blatant attempt to evade the taxes levied on cars with 2.2 litre engines, slightly reduced the displacement.  The FRG (Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Federal Republic of Germany; the old West Germany) 1949-1990) government must have decided this was “un-German” trickery (dieselgate was decades away) because eventually they informed Daimler-Benz the 219 would be taxed as a 2.2 litre vehicle,  This brought production to an end because the effect of the tax increase would have negated the advantage the 219 had enjoyed.

The winning Mercedes-Benz 300 SE, Spa-Francorchamps 24 Hour, 1964.  Note the absence of the chrome trim which usually adorned the W112, the same weight-saving measure not always applied to the rally cars.

Although not obviously a machine built for the circuits, the Heckflosse did win enjoy success on the track, a 220 SE in 1961 winning the second Armstrong 500 in Australia, the event which became the annual Bathurst 1000.  It was even less obviously a rally car but the 220 SE enjoyed a remarkable record in the Poland Rally, winning four successive titles between 1960-1964 and the car also won the 1962 Liège-Sofia-Liège, the factory taking the title in the same event in 1963 with the new 230 SL (the W113 “Pagoda”, 1963-1971).  The Heckflosse also won the Acropolis Rally in two successive years, a 220 SE taking the chequered flag in 1962 and a 300 SE (W112) the following year.  The 300 SE was very much a luxury model which used the then still novel engineering of air suspension which provided a smooth ride but added to weight and complexity, neither quality sought by teams using cars in competition although the system did have the advantage of permitting ground clearance easily to be adjusted; to compensate for the added mass, the 300 SE used a variant of the 3.0 litre straight-6 from the 300 SL (W198; 1954-1963) Gullwing and roadster, a powerful, robust unit.  However, by 1963 it was obvious the days of the big sedans being effective rally cars was drawing to a close; the greater power of the 300 SE had permitted the Heckflosse quite an Indian summer but the immediate future clearly belonged to lighter, more nimble machines such as the Alfa Romeo Giulia, Mini Cooper, Saab 96 and Volvo 122.

Ewy Rosqvist with 220 SE Heckflosse.

However, whether on the circuits or the rally course, there was in the early 1960s nothing unusual about men winning trophies but something of note happened on November 4, 1962 when two Swedish women (driver Ewy Rosqvist (1929–2024) & co-driver Ursula Wirth (1934–2019)), in a 220 SE Fintail (Heckflosse) won the VI Gran Premio Internacional Standard Supermovil YPF (Sixth Touring Car Grand Prix of Argentina), conducted over five days and 2,874 miles (4,625 km) on some of the country’s gruelling, mountainous roads.  The women not only won but dominated the event; for the first time, a single vehicle won all six stages and they set a new race record.  To rub it in, all other competitors were men.  Ewy Rosqvist’s only complaint about the 220 SE was that when driving in the mountains, she’d have preferred one with power steering.  According to company lore, the rough road and hot weather testing of one of the competition department's Heckflosses was conducted in the Australian outback (a good place to find both qualities) and, as test drivers, the factory sent with the car the Ott brothers (dubbed by the locals “Crash Ott” and “Red Ott”); the report from the two burly Bavarians assured head office power assistance was “not needed” because the steering was  “acceptably light”.  

220 SE Heckflosse with spotter plane above.

Working as a veterinary assistant travelling between remote farms, Ewy Rosqvist was brought up on a diet of twisty, often icy roads of dubious quality and it was on those she learned the finer points of rally-style driving, travelling sometimes up to 200 km (125 miles) in a day.  With animals to care for, speed was required (in her bag was often some “time-critical” bull semen) and she took to keeping a log-book in which she recorded how long it took to go from one farm to the next; these entries she regarded as her “lap times”.  Later, she would recall the “unpaved roads, gravel paths and farm roads” with some gratitude because they honed techniques which proved good enough for her to win several European rally championships; she called her memoir Fahrt durch die Hölle (Driving through Hell (1963)).

Argentine Turismo Standard Grand Prix, 1962.

Victory celebrations: Ewy Rosqvist (left) with Ursula Wirth (right).  Between them (in sunglasses) stands Mercedes-Benz team manager Karl Kling (1910–2003) who was a factory driver in 1954-1955, driving both the W196R F1 cars and W196S (300 SLR) sports cars.

Although Daimler-Benz was not unaware of the publicity which would be generated by having a women driving for their competition department, when in 1962 the factory offered her a seat in the Mercedes-Benz works team, genuinely the appointment was on merit and with what was achieved in South America, she justified her place.  The team had appeared in Argentina with a four-car entry (two 220 SEs (W111) and two 300 SEs (W112)), the operation run with the sort of thoroughness which had characterized their Grand Prix campaigns in the 1930s & 1950s and, given the conditions encountered, it was just as well: of the 286 vehicles which started only 43 would finish.  Immediately the women made an impression by winning the first stage and they repeated the feat on the subsequent five, eventually finishing three hours ahead of the second-placed Volvo and setting a new record average speed of 126.87 km/h (78.84 mph).  Undeniably, the women were the most glamorous and photogenic in the field and they captured the country’s imagination, German language newspaper Freie Presse (published in Buenos Aires) reporting: “It was not the Cuban missile crisis [16-28 October 1962], but rather the two blondes from Scandinavia who dominated the headlines in the country’s daily newspapers.”