Showing posts sorted by date for query Plausible. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query Plausible. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Friday, September 4, 2026

Cheater

Cheater (pronounced chee-ter)

(1) A person who cheats.

(2) Specifically, an adulterer (although used in the same sense of infidelity generally, even when neither party is married). 

(3) A device or component used to evade detection of non-compliance with rules or regulations (such as the (Dieselgate) mechanical and electronic devices used by Volkswagen and others to cheat emissions testing programmes).  As a mechanical device a cheater is thus "a modifier" and the word is also often used as one.

(4) Slang (in the plural) for eyeglasses or spectacles (archaic).

(5) In mechanical repair, an improvised breaker bar made from a length of pipe and a wrench (spanner), used typically to free screws, bolts etc proving difficult to remove with a ratchet or wrench alone; any device created ad-hoc to perform a task not using the approved or designated tools.

1300-1350: From the Middle English cheater from cheat, from cheten, an aphetic variant of acheten & escheten, from the Old French eschetour, escheteur & escheoiter, from the noun; it displaced native Old English beswican.  The -er suffix was from the Middle English –er & -ere, from the Old English -ere, from the Proto-Germanic -ārijaz, probably borrowed from the Latin -ārius.  The adoption was reinforced by the synonymous but unrelated Old French –or & -eor (the Anglo-Norman variant was -our), from the Latin -(ā)tor, from the primitive Indo-European -tōr.  The suffix was added to a person or thing that does an action indicated by the root verb, thereby forming the agent noun.  The noun cheatery is now rare, existing only in old texts.  Escheat refers to the right of a government to take ownership of estate assets or unclaimed property, most often when an individual dies without making a will and with no heirs.  In common law, the theoretical basis of escheat was that (1) all property has a recognized owner and (2) if no claimants to ownership exists or can be identified, ownership reverts to the King (in modern terms the state).  However, in some circumstances escheat rights can also be granted when assets are held to be bona vacantia (unclaimed or lost property).  The original sense was of the "royal officer in charge of the king's escheats," and was a shortened form of escheater, agent noun from escheat.  The meaning “someone dishonest; a dishonest player at a game” emerged in the 1530s as the Middle English chetour, a variant of eschetour following the example of escheat + -er which evolved in English in the modern form cheater (cheat + -er).  Cheater & cheatery are nouns; the noun plural is cheaters.

Cheater cars are a frequent sight on several social media platforms, posted presumably by impressed spectators rather than victims or perpetrators.  Techniques and artistry vary but there does seem to be a trend whereby the more expensive the car, the larger and more lurid will be the lettering.  Red, pink and fuchsia appear the colors of choice (the connotation perhaps "scarlet") except where the automotive canvas is some hue of red; those artists adorn mostly in black or white; the use of upper and lower case characters seems to vary.  Like many trends on social media, all may not be what it appears and it's believed some of the "cheater cars" posted are "fake", daubed just as click-bait.

Although the consequence of having violated the the Seventh Commandant, those suffering a "cheatered" care are in a sense "victims" so the following notes are provided as a courtesy to cheaters: If the philandering cheater is (obviously undeservingly) lucky, they’ll find the attack on their car has been symbolic rather than destructive in that the paint is water-based.  If so, if discovered soon after application, it may be possible for it to be dissolved and washed away without having to resort to strong chemicals.  Specialists recommend cleaning the car with just mild, soapy water (thereby removing anything abrasive) and then soaking microfiber towels in the same mix.  Place a wet towel over the affected area for 5-10 minutes (obviously more difficult with vertical surfaces so some improvisation may be demanded) and then gently wipe away the softened paint (do not scrub aggressively because some grit may be embedded; if possible use water spray from domestic garden hose).  If some time has elapsed and the paint fully has dried, usually it's safe to use a rubbing alcohol (such as Isopropyl); this should break down the latex or acrylic binder without harming the paint beneath.  Pour a small quantity of rubbing alcohol onto a clean microfiber cloth, hold on the paint for a few seconds and then gently rub with a circular motion.  Also potentially effective are the citrus-based solvents but these must be used with caution because they’re remarkably strong (left on some plastics, they can melt the surface!) so fluid should be tested on some small, hidden part of the vehicle (such under the hood (bonnet) or beneath carpets).  There are also dedicated clay-based lubricants (they come as conveniently sized bars) that can be “glided” across dampened paint to lift what’s atop without damaging the paint below.  The clay works on as similar basis to rubbing compounds and these may be necessary for any “stubborn spots”.  If the paint used is oil-based or something just as “sticky”, an expert should be consulted because aggressive solvents (industrial paint strippers, acetone, lacquer thinner etc) quickly can eat through to bare metal or whatever material was used for the bodywork.

An sinner's Audi: A Trotskyesque death by pick-axeBurgas, Bulgaria, September 2005.  Press reports suggested this attack was a "business matter" but it could have been the work of a S5C-APC.

So that’s of paint which is bad enough.  However if one had cheated on a S5C (stage-five clinger, a breed always prone to using paint) who is also APC (actual psycho-chick), the consequences may be worse and S5C-APC may resort to fire-bombing car, attacking it with a baseball bat, slashing tyres or leaving a half-dozen pick-axes buried in the bodywork.  That may sound extreme but the S5C-APC can be exactly that and, after all, cheaters have only themselves to blame and all that can be recommended is following either (1) the Seventh Commandant (Thou shall not commit adultery) or (2) the unwritten eleventh (Thou shall not get caught).  As a technical point, it's acknowledged that suggesting all cheaters are men and all painters (or axe-wielders) are women is sexual stereotyping may be wrong but probably only to the extent almost all cheaters are men and almost all painters (or axe-wielders) are women.

Hell also hath no fury like a woman cheated upon.   

Because it sounds Shakespearian (a construct in literature), the (anyway incorrectly quoted) phrase “Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned” often is attributed to William Shakespeare (1564–1616).  That's thought plausible because it seems to be in "his voice" and in modern use, often about the only time the Middle English “hath” is seen is in some Shakespearian quote so the association sticks.  The real author however was Restoration playwright William Congreve (1670–1729) who coined the phrase for his 1697 play The Mourning Bride, the protagonist of which, although becoming a bit unhinged by the cruel path of doomed love, doesn’t resort to leporidaecide (bunny boiling).  Congreve’s line, “Heav'n has no rage, like love to hatred turn'd, nor Hell a fury like a woman scorn'd.” was good but actually was a more poetic rendition of a similar but less elegantly expressed version another playwright had used a year earlier.  The Mourning Bride is the source also of another fragment for which the bard is often given undeserved credit: “Music has charms to soothe a savage breast” although that’s often bowdlerized as “Music has charms to soothe a savage beast”.  Politicians notoriously are liars and cheaters, some even cheerfully admitting it (usually when safely in their well-provided for retirement) but in the privacy of their diaries, they're fond of happily (and usually waspishly) admitting it of others.  Although he has a deserved reputation for telling not only lies but big lies, no one has ever disputed Joseph Goebbels’ (1897–1945; Reich Minister of Propaganda 1933 to 1945) assessment of a fellow cabinet member, foreign minister Joachim von Ribbentrop (1893–1946; Minister of Foreign Affairs 1938-1945) of whom he said “He bought his name, married his money and cheated his way into power”.  Goebbels was a serial adulterer and in his home town was known as "Die Ziege von Berlin" (the goat of Berlin). 

Volkswagen: Cheating as a science 

Guilty as sin.

Oliver Schmidt (b 1969; inmate number 09786-104 in US Federal, York Township, Michigan. right) received a seven year sentence for his involvement in the Volkswagen diesengate scandal.  Herr Schmidt (right) is pictured here receiving a Ward’s “Best Engine” award in 2015.  In US$ terms, dieselgate is thus far the most expensive of the many "gates".  In falsifying things so its diesel engines appeared to be less polluting than they were (certain particulates emitted at up to 40 times the volumes claimed with some 11 million "cheating" vehicles built) Volkswagen certainly gave cheating a bad name and, in addition to the hefty fines imposed in the US and EU (European Union (1993)), the multi-national aggregation which evolved from the EEC (European Economic Community), the Zollverein formed in 1957), in May 2022 the company announced an out-of-court settlement of Stg£193 million (US$242 million) with UK regulators, following the Aus$125 million (US$87 million) imposed by the PVA (Federal Court of Australia).  To date, Dieselgate has cost the company some US$34 billion with guilty verdicts handed down in criminal cases including two former Audi executives: head of engine development Wolfgang Hatz (b 1959) and lead diesel engineer Giovanni Pamio (b 1963) who were handed suspended jail sentences of 24 months and 21 months, respectively.  Hatz was fined €400,000 (US$437,000) and Pamio €50,000 (US$55,000).  All three were guilty as sin so the verdicts were unsurprising.  Volkswagen suffered greater consequences for having be "caught cheating" than did Pontiac in 1973 but that was a single vehicle submitted for testing so really was a case of "attempted cheating".

1971 
Volkswagen Karmann Cheetah prototype.

Before they became the industry’s most notorious (although not only) cheats, Volkswagen flirted with the idea of producing a “Cheetah”; designed by Italy’s Italdesign and built by German coachbuilder Karmann, the Volkswagen Karmann Cheetah first appeared in March 1971 at the Geneva Motor Show.  Reflecting the view there were still developmental possibilities in the company’s long-running and highly successful platform used first for the Type 1 (Beetle, 1938-2003), the Cheetah was thought a way to wring one last drop from what had begun life in 1938 as an attempt by the Third Reich (1933-1945) to produce a "people's car".  Over the decades, the approach had yielded much success with the Beetle’s underpinnings yielding military applications and utility vehicles as well as the famous Type 2 (1949-1979, as Microbus, Kombi etc in a wide range of configurations and the lovely Karmann Ghia (in two series, Type 14: 1955–1974 & Type 34: 1961–1969) coupé and cabriolet.  Additionally, conventional (in the then current European style) coachwork had been used for the Type 3 models (1961-1973), built as two door sedans, (including a fastback) and station wagons, the market responding well to more spacious and modern bodies being placed atop the Beetle’s famously reliable and durable drive-train.


1980 Triumph TR8 (left) and Triumph Bullet design study (circa 1970, right).  The "wedge" design language is evident but the lines of the earlier Bullet design study  are even closer to those of the Cheetah; the Volkswagen didn't enter production but many wedges appeared in the 1970s & 1980s.  Like not a few ventures from the doomed British Leyland (1968-1986), as a successor to the highly regarded TR6 (1968-1976), the Triumph TR7 (1974-1972) should have been a success but corporate and governmental ineptitude saw it added to Leyland's large scrapheap.  The TR8 (1977-1982) transformed the TR7's dynamics by use of Rover's 3.5 litre (215 cubic inch) V8 but, as was emblematic of the corporation, just as the concept had been perfected, production ended.  There has been much analysis of the UK's motor industry in the 1970s and 1980s and while conditions (internal and external) often were "difficult", most published accounts conclude Leyland "deserved to fail".  

The idea of the Cheetah was a variation on the theme that had produced the Kombi, Karmann Ghia and such: a low-cost roadster suitable for mass production on existing assembly lines using a 1.6 litre version of the Beetle’s familiar flat-four engine, the power output of 50 HP judged “adequate” because of the light weight and slippery aerodynamics.  In a sign of the times, anticipating US regulations, not only were the front and rear sections designed to accommodate large bumpers but rather than a classic roadster, from Giorgetto Giugiaro's (b 1938) drawing board came a targa, the modernist wedge-shape then highly fashionable.  Because it was then anticipated the traditional convertible would in the US be outlawed, the there was a built-in roll-over bar, integrated into pillars designed to resemble a roadster’s detachable hardtop and the clever targa mechanism was the work of Karmann, the soft-top featuring a translucent sunroof panel above cockpit; it slid down the length of the top's sidebows, tucking neatly between the seats.  However, Volkswagen’s management were by the late 1960s not disconnected from reality and understood the days of mass-market machines with air-cooled rear-engines were coming to an end.  Although still a success, the writing was on the wall for the Beetle and the attempt to translate the concept into larger, four-door form had failed, the 411 (1968–1972) & 412 (1972–1974) ranges never coming close to meeting expectations.  By 1971, work was already advanced on what would be the template to carry the company into the next century (FWD (front wheel drive) with water cooled front-mounted engines) and that program would by 1974 begin to yield the new generations (Sirocco, Passat, Golf, Polo etc).

1972 publicity still for Fiat X1/9.  Because of the juxtaposition of (1) lime green paint and (2) a model in orange hot-pants, no knowledge of automotive history is required to date this photograph from the 1970s.

But the Cheetah seemed compelling because there was rear-engined, air-cooled hay to be made while the sun still shone and the formula (a small, economical, sports car able to be mass-produced at low cost by using components from high volume models) had long been a staple of the UK’s industry (MG, Triumph and Austin Healy all booking good profits through big export sales, especially to the lucrative US market.  On paper, the Cheetah thus made sense and although, (given the 50 HP) the name might have been at least optimistic, the Karmann Ghia sold well despite never having been a high performance car despite the glamorous lines (indeed, slightly heavier than a Beetle, acceleration suffered although the shape added a little to the modest top speed).  Anyway, the Triumph Spitfire’s pace hardly lived up to its illustrious name and the Cheetah was envisaged as something that would sell to those who valued the Beetle’s virtues (economy of operation, reliability, resale value) but would be drawn to its avant-garde looks; at a time when the phrase still could be used, it was a “lady’s car”.  As it was, the decision was taken not to proceed and not long after the debut in Geneva, the Cheetah faded into obscurity although Fiat would in 1972 release the similar-looking X1/9 using the same concept of parts-sharing although with contemporary engineering (water cooled, mid-engined, no swing axles) and it was a success, needing only minimal updates until production ended in 1989.  Volkswagen doubtlessly was right not to proceed with the Cheetah; the historic moment had passed.

Smokey Yunick: Cheating as an art  

Smokey Yunick’s 1966 Chevrolet Chevelle (1963-1977) #13 that some alleged was a 7:8 or 15:16 rendition, here aligned against a grid with a stock body.

In simpler, happier times, cheating could be an accepted part of the process and just something of a contest between poacher and gamekeeper.  In the 1960s, NASCAR (National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing) racing in the US was a battle between scrutineers amending their rule-book as cheating was detected and teams scanning the same regulations looking for loopholes and anomalies.  The past master at this cheating was Henry "Smokey" Yunick (1923–2001), a World War II (1939-1945) bomber pilot whose ever-fertile imagination seemed never to lack an imaginative venture aimed at securing some advantage while remaining compliant with the letter of the law (at least according to his interpretation).  His cheats were legion but probably the most celebrated (and there were some who thought this one legitimate) concerned his interpretation of the term “fuel tank capacity”.  NASCAR's rulebook specified the maximum quantity of fuel a tank could hold but said nothing about the steel fuel line running from tank to engine so Mr Yunick replaced the modest ½ inch (12.5 mm) tube with one 11 feet (3.6 m) long and two inches (50 mm) wide, holding a reputed 5 (US) gallons (19 litres) of gas (petrol).  That was his high-tech approach.  Earlier he’d put an inflated basketball into an oversized tank before the car was inspected by scrutineers: when they filled the tank, it would appear to conform to regulations; these days it’d be called “inflategate”.  After passing inspection, Mr Ynuick would deflate the ball, pull it out and top-up his oversized tank for the race.  Pointing out there was nothing in the rules about basketballs didn’t help him but did lead to the rule about a maximum “fuel tank capacity”, hence the later 11 foot-long fuel line.

NASCAR's letter of approval.

Mr Yunick’s 1966 Chevrolet Chevelle was different from the stock models but by the mid 1960s, all NASCAR’s "stock" cars were, the days long gone when what were raced were essentially "stripped-out versions of showroom-stock cars".  The difference certainly was perceptible to the naked eye and an urban legend arose it was a 7:8 (some said 15:16) scale version.  The body’s external dimensions were however those of a stock Chevelle although the body was moved back three inches for better weight distribution, the floor was raised with the underside smoothed to improve the aerodynamics, the same reason the bumpers were flush-fitted to the fenders.  The first car passed inspection (after making the modifications decreed by NASCAR) and took pole position at the 1967 Daytona 500.  He built another imaginative Chevelle for the 1968 race but it never made it past inspection.  In 1990, Smokey Yunick was inducted into the International Motorsports Hall of Fame, a recognition as richly deserved as it was overdue.

The speedy cheetah

Singer and dancer Josephine Baker (1906–1975) with Chiquita, her pet cheetah.

A true homophone of cheater, cheetah (the plural cheetahs) wholly is unrelated.  Cheetahs are large cats (Acinonyx jubatus) of south-western Asia and Africa, resembling a leopard but noted for certain dog-like characteristics which is why they’re sometimes been trained for hunting game (deer, antelope etc) and they have even occasionally been fully domesticated as pets; they're said to be "affectionate and protective but never fully house trained".  Dating from the early eighteenth century, cheetah was from the Hindi चीता (cītā (leopard, panther), from the Sanskrit citraka (leopard) & citrakāya (tiger) the construct being चित्र (citra) (multicoloured; speckled) + काय (kāya) (body, thus “beast with a spotted body”).  The Sanskrit citra was akin to the Old High German haitar (bright), the German heiter and the Old Norse heiðr (bright) and ultimately was from the primitive Indo-European kit-ro-, from the root skai- (to shine, gleam, be bright).  Kāya ultimately was from the primitive Indo-European kwei- (to build, make).  The now archaic alternative spellings were cheetah & cheetah and historically, the creatures were known also as the guepard, hunting cat or hunting leopard.  Understandably, given their size and predatory nature, it’s not uncommon for cheetahs to be referred to as “big cats” but in zoological taxonomy, felinologists restrict the “big cat” classification to the genus Panthera (lions, tigers, leopards, snow leopards & jaguars) and one defining feature of the Panthera cats is their ability to roar, made possible by a specific structure in their larynx.  Lacking the anatomical feature, cheetahs can purr, chirp & hiss but not roar.

A female cheetah at speed.

According to Dr Anne Marie Helmenstine, computer modelling suggests a cheetah should be able (briefly) to attain a speed of 75 mph (120 km/h) although its hunting technique is to maintain an average of 40 mph (65 km/h), sprinting to the maximum only when making a kill.  Cheetahs have been verified as attaining 60 mph (96.5 km/h) and if required, the quick cats can go from 0-60 mph in 3 seconds (three strides), putting them in the class of the quickest Lamborghinis, Ferraris and such but they're sprinters with little endurance, able to sustain top speed for little more than a quarter-mile (400 metres).  Like engineering, nature imposes trade-offs and although pronghorn antelopes have been recorded running at a slightly slower 55 mph (88 km/h), they're able to sustain that for around a half-mile (800 metres) although 40 mph (70 km/h) can be maintained for several miles and their "natural cruising speed" of 30 mph is possible for as much as 20 miles (32 km) depending on the terrain and weather conditions.  The speed and endurance differentials between cheetahs and antelopes explains why the cat's tactic is to get as close as possible before closing for a kill; if the prey is not caught within 300-400 metres, it'll likely escape although, in the wild, not every encounter is one-on-one; a antelope seeking to outrun one cheetah runs the risk of running into the path of another.

Easily, cheetahs can out-sprint humans, the men’s world record for the 100 metre dash standing a 9.58 seconds, compared with an eleven year-old cheetah (in captivity) clocked at 5.95 and her top speed of 61 mph (98 km/h) remaining the highest verified.  For now, the cats remain quicker than even robots, the record at the 2026 World Humanoid Robot Games in Beijing set at 9.39 seconds but while the cheetah probably has reached its evolutionary peak, humanoid robots are still (in evolutionary terms) in an early stage of development so one going quicker then 5.95 may be just a question of whether resources are devoted to the quest; it does seem more likely the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) will direct companies to focus instead on making humanoid robots more "useful" such as for military purposes (neutralizing other machines or killing people).  So for now the pace of the cheetah remains impressive but it's still not the fastest creature on the planet.  In the ocean, Black Marlin have been clocked at 82 mph (132 km/h) while sailfish can for periods swim at 70 mph 110 km/h.  Land and sea creatures are how ever slow compared with birds, the “calculated maximum theoretical speed” of the “ideal Peregrine Falcon” being between 250-388 mph (400-625 km/h) depending on altitude (and thus air density) and while many are sceptical about that, Guinness World Records has accepted the bird’s speed being recorded at 242 mph (389 km/h) in a dive.  Despite that, there are ornithologists who doubt such a velocity has been reached and claim a top speed around 150 mph (240 km/h) is likely more realistic.  Still, that makes them the fastest known animal in the universe.

The Bill Thomas Cheetah

Cheetah cutaway, published in Sports Car Graphics, November, 1963.  Not many front-engined cars had space sufficient to for a usefully-sized frunk.

A contemporary of the Shelby American AC Cobra (1962-1967) and very much in the same vein, the Cheetah (1963-1966) was designed and constructed by California-based race car builder Bill Thomas (1921-2009).  As part of his work as an engineering consultant, Mr Thomas undertook projects for GM (General Motors), his focus on the somewhat clandestine motorsport activities of its Chevrolet division and he parlayed this influence into securing corporate support for the concept that became the Cheetah.  The support was practical in that it yielded most of the mechanical components needed for a prototype including a Chevrolet Corvette's 327 cubic inch (5.3 litre) V8 engine, Muncie four-speed gearbox, independent rear suspension and a miscellany of stuff from the GM parts bin.  It was obviously the pre-CAD (computer-aided-design) era but Mr Thomas didn’t trouble himself with drawing boards or blueprints, instead laying out the drive-train components on the floor of his workshop in what seemed to his practiced eye an ideal arrangement and, with white chalk, he then sketched on the concrete the outline of the chassis frame members.  At that point, a draftsman (with tape measure) was brought in and blueprints were rendered; remarkably, Mr Thomas with great success for decades used this novel design technique (don't try this at home, it needs a gifted engineer).  Once the chassis dimensions were finalized, a body was designed and it’s important to note the project was initially envisaged only as a “concept car”, built for the purpose of impressing GM and thus securing further contracts.  So, conceived as something to be admired rather than used for any serious purpose, it was only as construction continued Mr Thomas sort of “fell in love” with his creation and decided to use it in competition, something to which its low weight and prodigious power should have made it well-suited.  However, the compromises in chassis design which mattered not at all for a concept car meant some structural rigidity had been sacrificed and that was a quality essential in race cars; later rectification work would be required.  The first two Cheetahs were fabricated in aluminum (later models used GRP (glass reinforced plastic, better known as fibreglass) and one was sent to the Chevrolet Engineering Center for testing and evaluation.

1964 Cheetah with clamshell hood open.

The layout was not so much radical as extreme, the conventional F/R (front engine-rear drive) approach taken to a kind of logical conclusion with the engine located so far back the driver’s legs were alongside the block.  In the same way the “mid-engine” configuration was being defined as “engine behind the driver and in front of the rear axle line”, the Cheetah’s variation was “engine in front of driver and behind the front axle line”, already familiar in race cars and in a handful of exotic machines but in the early 1960s still.  As well as offering most of the weight-distribution and handling advantages offered by a mid-engine, the Cheetah’s layout avoided the complication of a transaxle but the drawbacks included inefficiencies in packaging (ie a cramped cockpit) and extraordinary heat-soak, the latter a familiar issue in an era when small, low volume coupés were fitted with large displacement US V8 engines, the elegant AC 428 “Fura” (1965-1973) an exemplar of the phenomenon.  When the Cheetah was tested prior to being used on the track, it was found to be prone to over-heating, largely because the body had been designed to look decorative and no vents had been installed to extract hot air from under the long hood.  That was addressed by the use of a larger radiator and the addition of various vents & ducts, along with a full-length belly pan, meaning subsequent versions lacked the visual purity of the original, the effect not dissimilar to the way the addition of this and that to provide for heat management meant the production versions of the Lamborghini Countach (1974-1978) lacked the sleek starkness of the original prototype, first shown at the 1971 Geneva Motor Show (attracting rather more attention that that other prototype wedge, the Volkswagen Karmann Cheetah).  Still, compared with how subsequent versions of the Countach (1978-1990) would be adorned, the elegance of the early run 160-odd of the LP400 Periscopios remains compelling.

1964 Cheetah, note the cut-outs and vents, subsequent additions to handle the heat generation.  As might be guessed, AC (air conditioning) was not on the option list.

The Cheetah’s dubious structural rigidity was a result of the original chassis being merely a quickly-assembled platform on which the striking body could be mounted to be admired but it was marginal for use even as a road car, let alone one subjected to the stresses of competition; even before testing it was anticipated substantial changes would have to be made.  Because so little triangulation had been incorporated in the original build, the chassis was susceptible flex as the loads imposed by lateral forces increased as high-speed curves were negotiated, meaning the suspension geometry changed, challenging even skilled drivers accustomed to rigid frames that guaranteed the point at which characteristics became frightening was at least predictable.  Additionally, for the testing, the Cheetah was provided with more power (perhaps not the car's most most obvious need) which exacerbated the alarming tendencies, including the rear suspension’s trailing arms bending, slighting altering (sometimes while at high speed!) the location of the wheels.  Adding gusseting and triangulation to the frame and redesigning the trailing arms ameliorated the worst of the characteristics but some vices were inherent in DNA so subsequently, some owners of Cheetahs, seduced by its many virtues, undertook what was essentially a re-engineering of the underpinnings; most of the many replicas and "continuation" editions differ significantly from the originals.  So it was flawed but it was an age of charismatic, imperfect machines and whatever the quirks, the Cheetah was powerful, light and clearly aerodynamic for in a straight line, few could match its pace; the name was chosen for a reason.

Unfortunately, the early 1960s were the end of an era in sports car racing because in addition to the regulatory body (the FIA (Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile (the International Automobile Federation) already on its descent to becoming world sport's dopiest regulatory body) changing the rules for the class for which the Cheetah was intended so that 1,000 rather than 100 would be required for homologation, in the top flight, the days of the classic front-engined roadsters and coupes in top-line competition were nearly done and the future lay with the rear-mid configuration.  Given all that, Chevrolet withdrew its support although small-scale production continued and some two-dozen were constructed before the last was built in 1965.  The survivors are now high-priced collectables and there have been dozens of replicas although in the twenty-first century, this cottage industry was stalled by a dispute over ownership to the intellectual property associated with the design.  Predictably, although the Cheetah wasn’t obviously a car in need of more power, some owners of the replicas have (commendably) concluded exactly that and fitted a variety of engines including big-block V8s while others have added forced aspiration (turbochargers or superchargers).  Fundamentally, what this approach meant was the “handle with care” injunction wisely applied to the original remained; just more so.

1929 Mercedes-Benz SSK (left) and 1964 Cheetah (right)

The distinctive lines of the Cheetah, its driver sitting over the rear wheels behind a long nose, recalled the pre-war roadsters that provided the model for most of the era’s grand prix cars, the motif lasting into 1960 when (in the unusual circumstances prevailing for Italian Grand Prix at Monza), a Ferrari secured one last win for the front-engined anachronisms.  The Mercedes-Benz SSKs (W06, 1928-1932) & SSKLs (WS06RS, 1931) were classic examples and among the last of the road cars able to win top-flight grand prix events.  The red example (above left) is a 1929 model SSK (one of 33 built) and although the hue is untypical of the breed, in fashion and on the highways, the interwar (1919-1939) years were more colourful that the impression left by the volume of monochrome and sepia images making up so much of the photographic record.  Interestingly, although Mercedes-Benz race cars are much associated with white (the racing color originally allocated to Germany) and silver (adopted by the factory racing team in the 1930s although in not quite the circumstances once claimed) there was a precedent for the use of red because that was the paint applied to the Mercedes Tipo Indy 2.0 used to win the 1924 Targa Florio (setting a race-record time which would stand for a decade), chosen because of the habit of the Sicilian crowds to pelt with rocks any car not painted in Italian Racing Red.  Not since 1920 had a non-Italian car won so it was a wise precaution.

1969 Pontiac Grand Prix Model J.  The name was opportunistic, the big Pontiac having as much in common with a grand prix as the Volkswagen Karmann Cheetah had with speed.

Such is the appeal to stylists of the “long nose” that over the years many have ignored the packaging inefficiencies its use imposes.  It was one of the most commented-upon aspects of the Jaguar E-type (1961-1974) and probably it’s rare for an analysis of that shape to have been written without the word “phallic” appearing at least once.  Even when the effect is not so exaggerated it can be effective, the third generation Pontiac Grand Prix (1969-1972) the last of the memorable designs to emerge from the golden years of GM’s PMD (Pontiac Motor Division) during the 1960s.  Intended to be evocative of the aspect ratios of machines such as the big Duesenbergs of inter-war years, PMD even purloined the “J” & “SJ” designations although with its apple-green straight-8 engines a Duesenberg really did need a long nose; under the hood of the exclusively V8-powered Grand Prix, there was much empty space.

Sublime to ridiculous 

Modified 1973 Volkswagen 1303 Super Beetle.

Nor was it just manufacturers with a fondness for the style.  In Canada, somebody with the requisite skills decided the “Cheetah look” was what a 1973 Volkswagen Super Beetle really needed and while it’s obvious the body extensively has been modified, the distorted dimensions are deceptive because the (presumably unique) project sits on an unmodified chassis, the wheelbase unchanged.  Unfortunately or not, the opportunity was not taken to install up front a straight-8 or V16, the car still running the modest, rear-mounted, 1.6 litre (97 cubic inch) flat-4 fitted by the factory (ie underneath, it's the same specification as the abortive Karmann Cheetah prototype).  As well as the curved windscreen, the 1303 featured the 1302’s improved front suspension (an enhancement one tester claimed made it faster point-to-point than a 1963 Porsche 356), the design of which allowed the capacity of the frunk to be increased and this one will be more capacious still; given it’s now a two seater, luggage capacity should be adequate although the front bucket seats have been replaced with a full-width bench so three adults could be accommodated, BMIs (body mass index) and a willingness to rub shoulders permitting.  Because it’s on the same wheelbase, any increase in weight should be minimal and the handling (anyway improved by the revised suspension) presumably will be affected (for better or worse) only by the change in weight distribution.  That said, given the thing is now more tail-heavy, the Beetle's inherent tendency to oversteer (somewhat tamed by 1973) might be more apparent but with the power available, even if it behaves something like an early Porsche 930, should a situation drama occur, probably it'll be at a lower speed.

Ridiculous to absurd     

1980 Cadillac Eldorado “Valentino” by the unimaginatively named Conversions Incorporated, a Michigan-based customizing house (left) and 1981 Cadillac Eldorado "Regal Coach" by Florida's International Coach Works Company, a selling point the Rolls-Royceish “flying lady” hood ornament, said to make it a “real head turner” (right).  Heads can of course turn for reasons good and bad.

In the sometimes weird world that was the ecosystem of modified PLCs (personal luxury coupe) in the US of the 1970s and 1980s, the “long nose” style didn't exist in isolation.  It was one of a number of design elements part of the “neo-classical” movement that included also side-exit, flexible exhaust pipes (referencing the often supercharged pre-war machines (a la the Mercedes-Benz SSK but by the 1970s almost always fake), upright chrome-plated grills (Rolls-Royce the preferred inspiration), T-roof assemblies (a modern take on the old sedanca de ville coach-work), fake wire wheels and external spare tyres, the rear one in a "Continental kit" (a look that to this day refuses to die), the fender-mounted pair taking advantage of the eighteen-odd inches (460 mm) spliced between A-pillar and front wheel.  The spares used the space where sometimes sat the external exhaust pipes so it was a choice to be made by customers although some builders just left the expanse of sheet metal, emphasizing the elongation.  For all its foibles, the US is one of the most remarkable nations ever created and, having the the previous quarter century mastered nuclear fission & fusion, produced the Bill Thomas Cheetah and sent a dozen men to walk on the Moon, other Americans turned to doing this to Cadillac Eldorados.  It's a cliché to say "American has the best of everything and the worst of everything" but the phrase endures for good reason. 

Monday, August 17, 2026

Lettrism

Lettrism (pronounced let-riz-uhm)

A French avant-garde art and literary movement established in 1946 and inspired, inter alia, by Dada and surrealism.  Situationism is listed by some as a coordinate term but that can be misleading, lettrism being a strand of situationism.

1946: From French lettrisme, a variant of lettre (letter).  Letter dates from the late twelfth century and was from the From Middle English letter & lettre, from the Old French letre, from the Latin littera (letter of the alphabet (in plural); epistle; literary work), from the Etruscan, from the Ancient Greek διφθέρ (diphthérā) (tablet) (and related to diphtheria).  The form displaced the Old English bōcstæf (literally “book staff” in the sense of “the alphabet’s symbols) and ǣrendġewrit (literally “message writing” in the sense of “a written communication longer than a “note” (ie, something like the modern understanding of “a letter”)).  The –ism suffix was from the Ancient Greek ισμός (ismós) & -isma noun suffixes, often directly, sometimes through the Latin –ismus & isma (from where English picked up ize) and sometimes through the French –isme or the German –ismus, all ultimately from the Ancient Greek (where it tended more specifically to express a finished act or thing done).  It appeared in loanwords from Greek, where it was used to form abstract nouns of action, state, condition or doctrine from verbs and on this model, was used as a productive suffix in the formation of nouns denoting action or practice, state or condition, principles, doctrines, a usage or characteristic, devotion or adherence (criticism; barbarism; Darwinism; despotism; plagiarism; realism; witticism etc).  Letterism is listed by some sources as an alternative spelling but in literary theory it used in a different sense.  Lettrism and lettrist are nouns; the noun plural is letterists.

Letters and the lettrists

Letter from letterist Lindsay Lohan (2003).

A Lettrist was (1) one who practiced Lettrism or (2) a supporter or advocate of Lettrism.  Confusingly, in the English-speaking world, the spelling Letterist has been used in this context, presumably because it’s a homophone (if pronounced in the “correct (U)” way) and the word is “available” because although one who keeps as diary is a “diarist”, even the most prolific of inveterate letter writers are not called “letterists”.  The preferred term for a letter-writer is correspondent, especially for those who writes letters regularly or in an official capacity.  The Letterist International (LI) was a Paris-based collective of radical artists and cultural theorists which existed 1952-1957 before forming the Situationist International (SI), a trans-European, unstructured collective of artists and political thinkers which eventually became more a concept than a movement.  Influenced by the criticism that philosophy had tended increasingly to fail at the moment of its actualization, the SI, although it assumed the inevitability of social revolution, always maintained many (cross-cutting) strands of expectations of the form(s) this might take.  Indeed, just as a world-revolution did not follow the Russian revolutions of 1917, the events of May, 1968 failed to realize the predicted implications; the SI can be said then to have died.  The SI’s discursive output between 1968 and 1972 may be treated either as a lifeless aftermath to an anti-climax or a bunch of bitter intellectuals serving as mourners at their own protracted funeral.  In literary theory, while “Lettrism” has a defined historical meaning, the use of “letterism” is vague and not a recognized term although it has informally been used (often with some degree of irony) of practices emphasizing the use of letters or alphabetic symbols in art or literature and given the prevalence of text of a symbolic analogue in art since early in the twentieth century, it seem surprising “letterism” isn’t more used in criticism.  That is of course an Anglo-centric view of things because the French Lettrists themselves are said to prefer the spelling “Letterism”.

Jacques Derrida deconstructing some tobacco.

The French literary movement Lettrism was founded in Paris in 1946 and the two most influential figures in the early years were the Romanian-born French poet, film maker and political theorist Isidore Isou (1925–2007) and his long-term henchman, the French poet, & writer Maurice Lemaître (1926-2018).  Western Europe was awash with avant-garde movements in the early post-war years but what distinguished Lettrism was its focus on breaking down (deconstruction was not yet a term used in this sense) traditional language and meaning by emphasizing the materiality of letters and sounds rather than conventionally-assembled words.  Scholars of linguistics and the typographic community had of course long made a study of letters, their form, variation and origin, but in Lettrism it was less about the letters as objects than the act of dismantling the structures of language letters created, the goal being the identification (debatably the creation) of new forms of meaning through pure sound, visual abstraction; additionally considered was the "aesthetic form" of letters, by which the Lettrists meant something other than the now familiar "font design".  Although influenced most by Dada and surrealism, the effect the techniques of political propaganda used during the 1930s & 1940s was noted by the Lettrists and their core tenet was an understanding of the letter itself as the fundamental building block of art and literature.  Often they would break down language into letters or phonetic sounds, assessing and deploying them for their aesthetic or auditory qualities rather than any conventional meaning(s).  In that sense, the Lettrists can be seen as something of a precursor of post-modernism’s later “everything is text” orthodoxy although that too has an interesting origin.  The French philosopher Jacques Derrida (1930-2004) made famous the phrase “Il n'y a pas de hors-texte” which often is translated as something like “there is no meaning beyond the text” but “hors-texte” (outside the text) was printers’ jargon for those parts of a book without regular page numbers (blank pages, copyright page, table of contents etc) and Derrida’s point actually was the hors-texte must be regarded as a part of the text.  There was much intellectual opportunism in post modernism and, for their own purposes, it suited many to assert what Derrida said was “There is nothing outside the text” and what he meant was “everything is part of a (fictional) text and nothing is real” whereas his point was it’s not possible to create a rule rigidly which delineates what is “the text” and what is “an appendage to the text”.  Troublingly for some post modernists, Derrida did proceed on a case-by-case basis although he seems not to have explained how the meaning of the text in an edition of a book with an appended "This page is intentionally left blank" page might differ from one (1) with no such page or (2) with a literally blank page without the helpful disclaimer.  However, modern literary studies leaving no page unturned, there may be some earnest student of post-modernism who has written an essay convincingly explaining exactly that.

The Lettrism project was very much a rejection of traditional language structures and the meanings they denoted; it was a didactic endeavor, the Lettrists claiming not only had they transcended conventional grammar & syntax but they could obviate even a need for meaning in words, their work a deliberate challenge to their audiences to rethink how language functions.  As might be imagined, their output was “experimental” and in addition to some takes on the ancient form of “pattern poetry” included what they styled “concrete poetry” & “phonetic poetry”, visual art and performance pieces which relied on abstraction, the most enduring of which was the “hypergraphic”, an object sometimes describe as “picture writing” which combined letters, symbols, and images, blending visual and textual elements into a single art form, often as collages or as graphic-like presentations on canvas or paper.  This wasn’t a wholly new concept but the lettrists vested it with new layers of meaning which, at least briefly, intrigued many although it was dismissed also as “visual gimmickry” or that worst of insults in the avant-garde: “derivative”.  Despite being one of the many footnotes in the history of modern art, Lettrism never went away and in a range of artistic fields, even today there are those who style themselves “lettrists” and the visual clues of the movement’s influence are all around us.

The Zinoviev Letter

Comrade Zinoviev with some (presumably authentic) letters, Illustrated London News, 1 November, 1924.  The fetching hat is a traditional papakha (in the taller, slightly conical Caucasian style, often crafted from curly karakul sheepskin).

In the twenty-first century, misinformation & disinformation campaigns can be large scale, multi-media efforts but in 1924, a single (forged) letter was enough to produce political effects that would linger for decades.  The “Zinoviev letter” was a document purported to have been written by comrade Grigory Zinoviev (1883-1936), a Russian Bolshevik who between 1919-1926 was predsedatel (chairman) of Comintern (the Communist Third International (1919-1943)) and its release by the UK's Foreign Office (after a tabloid newspaper had threatened to publish a "leaked" copy) on the eve of the 1924 general election was the most sensational event of the campaign.  The incendiary contents of the letter were what would now be called “foreign interference”: An instruction from Moscow to the CPGB (Communist Party of Great Britain) to engage in seditious activities, destabilizing the country and radicalizing the working classes.  The intention of all this was not merely to influence the course of the upcoming election but to create conditions that would be a prelude to a Bolshevik-style revolution to spread throughout the British Empire, then at close to its geographical peak.  Led by the Daily Mail to which the document had been leaked, the right-wing press (an institution that had been warning of the dangers of working class revolution since the emergence of the Labour Party a quarter-century earlier) ran a smear campaign, accusing Labour of being a tool of Moscow and agents of a foreign, communist subversion of British politics.  Historians debate the extent to which the letter influenced the outcome of the 1924 election but Labour soundly was defeated, the Liberal Party’s decline continued and the Conservatives enjoyed a decisive victory.  For years after, the document generally was thought to be authentic and, beyond the election result, the most profound effect was on the the Labour Party, a kind of “siege mentality” infecting the membership the feeling being they were the victims of “a vast, right-wing conspiracy” that would use any manner of foul play to deny them office.

Zinoviev letter, page one.

Just who wrote the Zinoviev letter has never been determined although most historians suspect it was a forgery by White Russian émigrés, then spread mostly between Berlin and the Baltic States but what’s of greater interest is the alleged complicity of the UK’s intelligence services, possibly in commissioning the document but certainly in “leaking” it to the press.  What does seem clear is that regardless of the origin, both MI5 and the SIS (MI6) were aware the letter was a forgery but, as both organizations stridently were anti-communist and viewed the Labour Party government as a “thin edge of the communist wedge”, opted to leak the document, knowing the likely effect.  The extent to which other officials (notable those in the Foreign Office among whom a copy had been circulating for almost three weeks before the election) were aware of the provenance has long intrigued historians, many of who have concluded there was at least a “willing suspension of disbelief” and certainly a resolve to take advantage of the “windfall”.  Although long a favorite of conspiracy theorists, the evidence is scant the leaking was a deliberate decision by the upper echelons in Whitehall or the intelligence community and a government enquiry in 1998-1999 concluded the passing of the letter to the Daily Mail was probably the result of politically motivated “rogue operatives” within SIS “freelancing”, probably on the basis of “working towards” what they knew their superiors really wanted.  So, they got both the desired result and plausible deniability, their ultimate “win-win situation”.  In that sense, whether those who organized the leak knew or suspected the letter was a forgery (and it’s clear from the records there were some in SIS and the Foreign Office with at least “serious reservations”) had become irrelevant; all that mattered was it was good enough to be thought authentic for the four days it would be publicized before the election and would thus serve its operational and political purposes.

Comrades Stalin (far left), Alexei Rykov (1881–1938, centre left), Lev Kamenev (1883-1936, centre right) and Grigory Zinoviev (far left).

While comrades Rykov and Kamenev opt for Leninesque “worker's caps” (a nice touch) comrade Stalin is wearing a lower profile lower-profile, darker version of the papakha that in the West became well-known after 1941 because it was by then the winter hat for high-ranking officers in the Red Army.  The four are walking to a meeting of the Central Executive Committee of the Communist Party and it was at this point (in the aftermath of the death of Vladimir Lenin (1870-1924; Russian revolutionary & theorist, founder of the Bolsheviks and head of government in Russia or the Soviet Union 1917-1924)) comrade Stalin (1878-1953; Soviet leader 1924-1953) began to assert control of the party machine, marginalizing Zinoviev and others; by 1929, he had complete control of the vast party apparatus and thus the Soviet state.  All comrade Stalin's companions on this fateful walk would be executed during the Great Purge, as would many once prominent in the “Stalin faction”.

For comrade Zinoviev, things ended badly.  By the mid-1930s comrade Stalin had decided the best way to ensure his version of Bolshevik history would become the uncontested orthodoxy was to eliminate any of his “old revolutionary comrades” likely to contradict his versions of events and comrade Zinoviev was on the list.  In the great purges of the late 1930s, many besides the party’s luminaries were eliminated but the demise of comrade Zinoviev was emblematic of the way Moscow’s “show trials” were run.  Although ruthlessly dictatorial, comrade Stalin put much emphasis on “form and appearance” (his 1937 Soviet Constitution reads like the description of a genuine utopia) and confessions to charges (however manifestly false) were prized as an example of “due process” having taken place.  Accordingly, comrade Zinoviev agreed to plead guilty on the condition he’d not be handed a death sentence.  To this, comrade Stalin agreed, apparently with the words: “That of course goes without saying. The trial thus concluded but comrade’s Stalin’s interpretation of “goes without saying” appears to have meant he didn’t “say it” and, within hours of the conviction being recorded, he ordered comrade Zinoviev taken outside and shot.  The exact number who died during the Great Purge (1936-1938) will never be known (there was much “collateral damage”) but estimates range between 650,000-1.2 million.  Not until 1988 when then comrade Mikhail Gorbachev (1931–2022; Soviet leader 1985-1991) instituted perestroika were comrade Zinoviev (and many of the condemned) formally “rehabilitated” by the Military Collegium of the Supreme Court of the Soviet Union.

Chrysler’s letterism: The Chrysler 300 “letter series” 1955-1965.

The “letter series” Chrysler 300s were produced in limited numbers in the US between 1955-1965; technically, it was a high-performance version of the luxury Chrysler New Yorker and the first in 1955 was labeled C-300, an allusion to the 300 horsepower (HP) rating of the 331 cubic inch (5.4 litre) Hemi V8, then the most powerful engine offered in a production car.  The C-300 was well received and when an updated version was released in 1956, it was dubbed 300B, the annual releases appending the next letter in the alphabet as a suffix although in 1963 “I” was skipped when the 300H was replaced by the 300J, the rationale being it might be confused with a “1” (ie the numeral “one”), the same reasoning explaining why there are so few “I cup” bras, some manufacturers filling the gap in the market between “H cup” & “J cup” with a “HH cup” but there’s no evidence the corporation’s concerns ever prompted them to ponder a “300HH”.  Retrospectively thus, the 1955 C-300 is often described as the 300A although this was never an official factory designation.  While in the narrow technical sense not a part of the “muscle car” lineage (defined by the notion of putting a “big” car’s “big” engine into a smaller, lighter model), the letter series cars were an important part of the “power race” of the 1950s and an evolutionary step in what would emerge in 1964 as the muscle car branch and the most plausible LCA (last common ancestor) of both was the Buick Century (1936-1942).  The letter series was retired after 1965 because the market preference for high-performance car had shifted to the smaller, lighter, pony cars & intermediates (neither of which existed in the early years of the 300) though the “non letter series” 300s (introduced in 1962) continued until 1971 with a toned-down emphasis on speed, the marketing shifting to style and bundled "value for money".

1955 Chrysler C-300 (300A).

All C-300s were two-door hardtops (although there are unverified reports of a C-300 station wagon built for a Nevada casino operator to use as a high-speed "cash van"; the tale is likely apocryphal).  Although expensive, the C-300 featured less chrome trim than other models in the range and there were no two or three-tone color combinations as was then fashionable; only Black, Tango Red or Platinum White could be ordered while the wire wheels were made by Motor Rim & Wheel Service, not Kelsey-Hayes as often is assumed.  Although initially the wheels could be ordered on all models in the 1955 Chrysler range, the take-up rate was not high although many C-300s and some Imperials & New Yorkers have subsequently had them (or reproductions) retro-fitted.  Despite the impression the company liked to convey in the advertising, the wire wheels were not "limited production" items, their rarity explained by costing US$617.60 for a set of five (there are various ways to calculate the modern day equivalent value but none put it at less than several thousand dollars).  Restorers seeking to emulate authenticity have to pay attention to the part numbers because there were two variants of the wheels: Most Chryslers and DeSotos were fitted with the 5 × 15 inch 48-spoke units while the option for the heavier Imperial was the 5½ × 15, 52-spoke wheel, most 300s using the latter (deleted from the Imperial's option list after the C-300 was announced).

1955 Chrysler C-300.

For a machine that became so storied and was so successful in competition, corporate expectations for the C-300 were modest, management’s timidity revealed by the minimal budget in 1954 allocated to a project designed to demonstrate the true potential of the Chrysler Hemi V8 in a road car able to match the finest from Europe.  Paradoxically, that fiscal parsimony probably ensured a better car emerged, the team compelled to spend available funds on essential elements, encouraging even the deletion of some “decorative stuff” from the New Yorker body used as a base.  Compelled to “mix and match” from the corporate parts bin, the front clip (the “doghouse” in assembly-line slang) came from the top-of-the-line Imperial while the rear quarter panels and trim were borrowed from the base-model Windsor; defying what was then an industry trend verging on a fetish, the use of embellishing chrome trim and badgework was minimized.  What this “quick & dirty” way of conjuring something “new” at relatively low cost meant was the bulk of the budget could be allocated to what lay beneath and it was that specification on which the machine’s reputation was built.  The 331 cubic inch (5.4 litre) “FirePower” Hemi V8 was anyway a solid foundation and to these were bolted cylinder heads (part number 1556157 (often stamped with a “-1” suffix)) that came to be dubbed the “triple nickel” or “555”; because of their adaptability to high performance enhancements, they became the most sought-after of the factory’s early iron castings.  The approach in designing the heads was conventional in that the goal was “better breathing”: (1) a 103 cm3 combustion chamber, (2) larger diameter valves (2 inch (50 mm) intake & 1¾ inch (44.45 mm) exhaust), (3) larger ports and a solid lifer camshaft ground with what was, by road car standards, a radical degree of lift and overlap.

Chrysler FirePower Hemi V8 with "dual-quad" induction and "batwing" air cleaner in 1955 C-300.

The object was a power curve more familiar to racing drivers.  With fuel delivered through a pair of Carter WCFB four-barrel carburetors (topped by a low-profile “batwing” air cleaner, Chrysler rated the C-300 V8 at 300 HP (horsepower) @ 5,200 RPM and 345 lb-ft of torque @ 3,200 RPM.  That made it the most powerful V8 available in 1955 but the “300” number was chosen for marketing purposes, the engines more potent still; that “under-rating” would be a feature of the first two generations of Hemis.  The engine was powerful enough to propel the 4,000-odd lb (1815 kg) C-300 to speeds higher than any other sedan then available so the suspension accordingly was stiffened, the front anti-roll bar thickened with up-rated shock-absorbers (dampers) fitted while the ride height was lowered by 1½ inches (38 mm).  Making a virtue of necessity, Chrysler’s briefing to the press described the ride as “firm” (in private the engineers would admit “truck-like”) but it made for a better handling machine although even with the 12-inch (300 mm) power-assisted drum brakes from the 5,000-lb (227 kg) Imperial, braking could in sustained use become marginal.  Reflecting (1) what was available from the parts bin and (2) the target market, the only transmission offered was the PowerFlite two-speed automatic.

1955 Chrysler C-300 in NASCAR competition.  The C-300 competed during the brief era in which cars genuinely close to "stock" (ie what could be purchased from the showroom floor) ran as "NASCAR stockers".

That it “rode like a truck” was at least tacitly noted by the press but it did little to curb their enthusiasm for what all acknowledged was the “world’s most powerful sedan” and clearly one built with race tracks in mind.  Very much in the tradition of the big, powerful grand-touring cars of the 1930s such as the Duesenberg SJ, it was something that with a few minor modifications could be used in competition; from the earliest days of motoring, such machines greatly have appealed to certain men, some of whom in 1955 were motoring journalists.  It was obvious the justification for the thing’s existence was to fulfil the homologation requirements of NASCAR (National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing) that stipulated a certain number of various components be sold to the public before a car could be defined as a “production” car (ie a “stock” car, a term that shamelessly wouldbe prostituted in the years to come) and used in sanctioned competition.  That potential quickly was realized, the C-300 setting a number of speed records in timed distance-trials and the model won 27 of the 45 top-line events NASCAR staged in 1955, securing the championship.  The C-300 was an expensive niche product but 1,725 were sold and although the profits from the project were barely a blip on the balance sheet, the company scheduled a 300B for the 1956 season and such had been the publicity value gained by what would now be called a “halo product”, there’d likely have been a encore even had fewer left the showroom.

1956 Chrysler 300B (left) and Highway Hi-Fi phonograph player (right).

The 300B used a updated version of the C-300s body so visually the two were similar although, ominously, the tailfins did reach a little higher.  The big news however lay under the hood (bonnet) with the Hemi V8 enlarged to 354 cubic inches (5.8 litres) and available either with 340 (HP) (254 kW) or in a high- compression version generating 355 (365), the first time a US-built automobile was advertised as producing greater than one HP per cubic inch of displacement.  It was a sign of the times; other manufacturers took note.  The added power meant a top speed of around 140 mph (225 km/h) could be attained (something to ponder given the retardative qualities of the not much improved braking system) but also of note was the season's much talked-about option: the "Highway Hi-Fi" phonograph player that allowed a limited range of vinyl records to be played when the car was on the move; the sound quality was remarkably good but on less than smooth surfaces, experiences were mixed.  Success on the track continued, the 300B wining the Daytona Flying Mile with a new record of 139.373 mph (263.932 km/h), and it again dominated NASCAR, repeating the C-300’s Grand National Championship.  Despite that illustrious record, only 1,102 were sold.  In deference to the increased power and pace, wider wheels were fitted, 6 x 15 inch units on which were mounted Goodyear's new "Blue Streak" tyres although, in a departure from the usual practice, race teams tended to prefer the narrower 5½ × 15 versions because the wider rubber was subject to overheating at sustained high speed.  In an indication this was a serious "dual purpose" machine able to be used as a fast road car or entered in competition, while the standard final-drive ratio was a typical 3.36:1, 12 options between 3.08:1 - 6.17:1 could be ordered.

1955 Chrysler C-300 (top left), 1970 Mercedes-Benz 280 SE 3.5 Coupé (top right), 1972 Rover 3.5 Coupé (bottom left) and 1969 Rover 3.5 Saloon (bottom right).

On sale only during the 1955-1956 seasons, the restrained lines of Chrysler’s elegant “Forward Look” range didn’t last long in the US as extravagance overtook Detroit but the influence endured longer in Europe, both the Mercedes-Benz W111 (1961-1971) & W112 Coupé (1962-1967) and the Rover P5 (1958-1967) & P5B (1967-1973) interpreting the shape.  The Rover was a tale of two rooflines: the “Establishment” Saloon and the rakish Coupé, the latter the first of the "four-door coupés" although the motifs had been seen during the inter-war years (1919-1939). 

1957 Chrysler 300C.

The 1955-1956 Chryslers had a balance and elegance of line that could have remained a template for the industry but there were other possibilities and these Detroit choose to pursue, creating an era of chrome-laden macropterous extravagance; it proved a stylistic cul-de-sac but undeniably was memorable.  The 1957 300C undeniably was dramatic and featured many of the elements so associated with the US automobile of the late 1950s including the now (mostly) lawful quad-headlights, the panoramic “Vista-Dome” windshield, lashings of chrome and, of course, those tailfins.  The Hemi V8 was again enlarged, now in a “tall deck” version out to 392 cubic inches (6.4 litres) rated at 375 HP; first time a convertible version was available.  By now the power race was being run in earnest with GM (General Motors) offering fuel-injected engines and Mercury solving the problem in the traditional American (there’s no replacement for displacement) way by releasing a 430 cubic inch (7.0 litre) V8 although it was so big and heavy it made the bulky Hemi seem something of a lightweight; the 430 did however briefly find a niche in in power-boat racing.  For 300C owners who wanted more there was also a high-compression version with more radical valve timing rated at 390 HP (290 kW) and this was for the first time able to be ordered with a three-speed manual transmission.  Few apparently felt the need for more and of the 2,402 300Cs sold (1,918 coupes & 484 convertibles), only 18 were ordered in high-compression form.

Chrysler 300C advertising.  In publicity material, the hyphenated form (in this case "300-C") sometimes was used.  The “lightning-bolt” symbol was popular when promoting many products and appeared even on the valve cover of the 235 cubic inch (3.9 litre) “Blue Flame” straight-six used in the C1 (1953-1962) Chevrolet Corvette between 1953-1955.  The Blue Flame was rated at 150 HP so the lightning bolt may have been optimistic.

Upon release, the motoring press noted, with some regret, the 300C would be the last of its breed, the AMA (American Manufacturers Association) having on 6 June, 1956 published a resolution banning “…factory participation in speed contests and forbidding references to power, performance and speed in advertising and sales literature.  Politicians had become concerned some vehicles now roaming the streets were more powerful than many racing cars of only a few years earlier and while the resolution had come too late for the new releases for the 1957 season to be cancelled, it was at the time thought the bold advertising copy: “The Mighty Chrysler 300C.  America’s Most Powerful Car - 375 HP!” might be a swansong for a brief era.  Given that, it was little wonder SCI (Sports Car International) lamented: “It's hard to see much of a future for projectiles like the 300C.  As things turned out, the manufacturers soon worked out there was much demand for power and speed and ignored the AMA’s resolution so displacement and power continued to grow meaning SCI’s anticipation of a “Suddenly it’s 1974” moment was premature but the magazine’s concluding requiem for the 300C was at least half-right: “The AMA resolution puts it in a taboo class, but its status as an American classic is assured.

1958 Chrysler 300D.

Again using the Hemi 392, now tuned for a standard 380 HP, there was for the first time the novelty of the optional Bendix “Electrojector” fuel injection that raised output to a nominal 390 although its real benefit was the consistency of fuel delivery, overcoming the starvation encountered sometimes under extreme lateral loads.  Unfortunately, the analogue electronics of the era proved unequal to the task, the unreliability was both chronic and insoluble, thus almost all the 21 fuel-injected cars being retro-fitted with the stock dual-quad induction system; it's believed only one 300D retains its original Bendix apparatus.  Also rare was the take-up rate for the manual transmission option and interestingly, both the two known 300Ds so equipped were ordered originally with carburetors rather than fuel injection.  The engineers also secured a prized victory over the stylists.  After testing on the proving grounds determined the distinctive, forward jutting “eyebrow” header atop the windscreen reduced top speed by 5 mph (8 km/h), they managed to convince management to authorize an expensive change to the tooling, standardizing the convertible’s compound-curve “bubble windshield”, a then rare triumph of function over fashion.  Although the emphasis of the letter series cars was shifting from the track to the roads, the things genuinely still were fast and one (slightly modified) 300D set a new class record of 156.387 mph (251.681 km/h) on the Bonneville Salt Flats.  In a difficult year marked by a brief but sharp recession, production declined to 810 units (619 coupes & 191 convertibles).

1959 Chrysler 300E.

With the coming of the 1959 range, the Hemi was retired and replaced by a new 413 cubic inch (6.8 litre) V8 with wedge-shaped combustion chambers.  Lighter by some 100 lb (45 kg) and cheaper to produce than the Hemi with its demanding machining requirements and intricate valve train, the additional displacement allowed power output to be maintained at 380 HP (280 kW) while torque (something more significant for what most drivers on the street do most of the time) actually increased.  The manual transmission option was also deleted with no market resistance and, despite the lower production costs, the price tag rose, something probably more of a factor in the declining sales than the loss of the much vaunted Hemi.  With the economy still in the throes of recovery, just as the 300D (and most of the rest of the industry) had suffered the season before, demand remained subdued and Chrysler probably did well to shift 690 units (550 coupes & 140 convertibles).

1960 Chrysler 300F Convertible.

Although the rococo styling cues remained, underneath now lay radical modernity, the corporation’s entire range (except the exclusive Imperial line) switching from ladder frame to unitary construction.  The stylists however indulged themselves with more external flourishes, allowing the tailfins an outward canter, culminating sharply in a point and housing boomerang-shaped taillights.  Even the critics of such things found it a pleasing look although they were less impressed by the faux spare tire cover (complete with an emulated wheel cover!) on the trunk (boot), dubbing it the “washing machine lid” or “toilet seat”.  The interior though was memorable with four individual bucket in leather with a centre console between extending the cockpit’s entire length and there was also Chrysler’s intriguing electroluminescent instrument display which, rather than being lit with bulbs, exploited a phenomenon in which a material emits light in response to an electric field; the ethereal glow was much admired.

1960 Chrysler 300F engine with Sonoramic intake (short-ram tubes) in red.

Buyers in 1959 may have felt regret in not seeing a Hemi in the engine bay, but in 1960, after lifting the hood of a 300F they wouldn’t have been disappointed because, in designer colors (gold, silver, blue & red), sat the charismatic “Sonoramic” intake manifolds, a “cross-ram” system that placed the carburetors at the sides of engine, connected to the ports by long tubular runners.  What the physics of this did was provide a short duration “supercharging” effect, tuned for the mid-range torque most used when overtaking at freeway speeds.  Also built were a handful of “short ram” Sonoramics with half the tubes (the overall length remained the same) re-calibrated to deliver top-end power rather than mid-range torque.  Rated at a nominal 400 HP, these could be fitted also with the French-built Pont-a-Mousson four-speed manual transmission used in the Chrysler V8-powered Facel Vega range that was France's finest car of the post-war years.  Created purely for the purpose of setting records, a half-dozen 300Fs so equipped were dispatched to that year's Daytona Speed Week where they took the top six places in the event’s signature Flying Mile, crossing the traps at between 141.5-144.9 mph (227.7-233.3 km/h).  The market responded and sales rose to 1217 (969 & 248 convertibles) and the 300F (especially the handful fitted with the “short ram” Sonoramics) is the most collectable of the letter series.

1961 Chrysler 300G.

The 300G gained canted headlights, another of those styling fads of the 1950s & 1960s that quickly became passé but now seem a charming period piece.  There was the usual myriad of detail changes the industry in those days dreamed up each season, usually for no better reason that to be “different” from last year’s model and thus be able to offer something “new”.  As well as the slanted headlights, the fins became sharper still and taillights were moved.  Mechanically, the specification substantially was unaltered, the Sonoramic plumbing carried over although the expensive, imported Pont-a-Mousson transmission was removed from the option list, replaced by Chrysler’s own, heavy-duty three-speed manual unit, demand for which was predictably low.  The lack of a fourth cog didn’t impede the 300G’s performance in that year’s Daytona Flying Mile where one would again take the title with a mark of 143 mph (230.1 km/h) and, to prove the point, a stock standard model took the one mile acceleration title.  People must have liked the headlights because, in an again buoyant economy, production reached 1617 units (1,280 coupes & 337 convertibles).

1962 Chrysler 300H.

Perhaps at least a season too late, Chrysler undertook a corporation-wide “de-finning”, prompting their designer (Virgil Exner (1909–1973)) to lament his creations now resembled “plucked chickens”.  For 1962, the 300 name also lost some of its exclusivity with the addition to the range of the "300 Sport" series (offered also with four-door bodywork) and to muddy the waters further, much of what was fitted to the 300H could be ordered as an option on the new variant so externally, but for the distinctive badge, there was visually little to separate the two (since 1962, the verbal shorthand to distinguish between the ranges has been “300 letter series” and “300 non-letter series” cars).  Mechanically, the “de-contenting” (something the accountants had begun to impose as the industry chase higher profits (short-term strategies to increase “shareholder value” being nothing new)) was felt as the Sonoramic induction system moved to the 300H’s option list with the inline dual 4-barrel carburetor setup last seen on the 300E now standard.  With the in-line carburetors, the 413 was rated at 380 HP; this rose to 405 when the Sonoramic option was chosen.  Because of weight savings gained by the adoption of a shorter wheelbase platform, the specific performance numbers of 300H actually slightly shaded its predecessor but the cannibalizing of the 300 name and the public perception the thing’s place in the hierarchy was no longer so exalted saw sales decline to 570 (435 coupes & 135 convertibles), the lowest annual total to date.  The residual magic of the name must however have had tangible appeal because the "non-letter" Chrysler 300 Sports in the four available body styles (2 door convertible, 2 & 4 door hardtop & 4 door sedan) sold 25,578, exceeding expectations.  The accountants had been right, an ominous sign for the engineers. 

1963 Chrysler 300J.

Presumably in an attempt to atone for past transgressions, a spirit of rectilinearism washed through Chrysler’s design office while the 1963 range was being prepared and, for better or worse, it would persist until the decade’s end when new sins would be committed.  Unrelated to that was the decision to skip a 300I because of concerns it might be read as the wholly numeric 3001.  The de-contenting (now an industry trend) continued with the swivel feature for the front bucket seats deleted while full-length centre console was truncated at the front compartment with the rear seat now a less eye-catching bench.  The 413 V8 was offered in a single configuration but the Sonoramics were again standard and the three-speed manual transmission remained optional, seven buyers ticking the box. The 300J was still a fast car, capable of a verified 142 mph (229 km/h) although the weight and gearing conspired against acceleration but a standing ¼-mile (402 metres) ET (elapsed time) of 15.8 was among the quickest of the cars in its class.  Still, it did seem the end of the series might be nigh with the convertible no longer offered and the sales performance reflected the feeling, only 400 coupes leaving the showrooms.

The BUFF: The new version of the Boeing B-52 Stratofortress (replacing the B-52H) will be the B-52J, not B-52I or B-52HH.   

Like Chrysler and most bra manufacturers, the US Air Force also opted to skip “I” when allocating a designation for the updated version of the Boeing B-52 Stratofortress (built 1952-1962 and still in service).  Between the first test flight of the B-52A in 1954 and the B-52H entering service in 1962, the designations B-52B, B-52C, B-52D, B-52E, B-52F & B-52G sequentially had been used but after flirting with whether to use B-52J as an interim designation (reflecting the installation of enhanced electronic warfare systems) before finalizing the series as the B-52K (after new engines were fitted), in 2024 the USAF announced the new line would be the B-52J and only a temporary internal code would distinguish those not yet re-powered.  Again, the “I” was not used so nobody would think there was a B-521.  Although the avionics, digital displays and ability to carry the HACM (Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile, a scramjet-powered weapon capable exceeding Mach 5) are the most significant changes for the B-52J, visually, it will be the replacement of the old Pratt & Whitney TF33 engines with new Rolls-Royce F130 units that will be most obvious, the F130 promising improvements in fuel efficiency of some 30% as well as reduction in noise and exhaust emissions.  Already in service for 70 years, apparently no retirement date for the B-52 has yet been pencilled-in.  In USAF (US Air Force) slang, the B-52 is the BUFF (the acronym for big ugly fat fellow or big ugly fat fucker depending on who is asking) and from BUFF was derived the companion acronym for the LTV A-7 Corsair II (1965-1984, the last in active service retired in 2014) which was SLUFF (Short Little Ugly Fat Fellow or Short Little Ugly Fat Fucker).

1964 Chrysler 300K.

Selling in 1963 only 400 examples of what had once been the corporation's “halo” car triggered management to engage in what in US management jargon (by then a burgeoning lexicon) had come to be called an “agonizing reappraisal”.  The conclusion drawn was from Economics 101 lectures: To stimulate demand, lower the basic entry price to essentially ownership of "the name" and if buyers really wanted the fancy stuff once fitted as standard, they could order it from an option list.  That approach was becoming familiar and although it meant adding a layer of complexity to a process that decades earlier had begun as a "standardized unit" production line, it was manageable because of the use of main-frame computers that translated (1) the boxes (ticked in ink) on a dealer's order form, (2) via the fingers of a data-entry clerk (that profession an early victim of "office automation" that over the decades would evolve into AI (artificial intelligence)) onto, (3) a punch card, read by a machine that would send the structured data to (4) an impact (dot-matrix) printer that would generate, (5) a "build-sheet".  It was on these build-sheets the options to be fitted were itemized and from this assembly-line workers configured each car as it moved along the production-line.  While there was the odd glitch (database corruption, printer problems, human error etc), the system worked well and the specific configuration of almost all vehicles reflected what was on the build-sheet.

1964 Chrysler 300K.

The "squircle" (ie a circle with "squared-off" corners) shaped steering wheel had appeared on the 300J the previous season and the corporation had earlier used the idea in other divisions.  While not welcomed with conspicuous enthusiasm, it wasn't greeted with the derision British Leyland would a decade later encounter when it included a "quartic" wheel in the early version of the Austin Allegro (1973-1982).  On the Allegro, the quartic wheel was in 1974 replaced by a circular device and the 300K was the last appearance for the squircle.  In the brave new world of option lists, leather trim and many power accessories joined AC (air-conditioning) in being relegated to the "available at extra cost" list.  So the system worked with muscular efficiency but that success ultimately was the cause of its demise.  As well as generating individual build sheets, once aggregated, all this information formed what would now be called a "big data" set and that meant "data analysts" could be employed.  What these walking pocket calculators worked out was it was possible to predict much of what would be ticked on the dealers' order forms and it was thus more profitable to produce runs with certain "bundles" of options and sell it as a model line, the classic example of the 1970s & 1980s the many "executive" packages which included power-steering, automatic transmission and AC.  It was the beginning of the death knell of the long option list for mass-produced vehicles although in the twenty-first century the concept has re-appeared (writ large and very high priced) by the "special divisions" of outfits like Rolls-Royce, Ferrari, Porsche and such.  Those who observe industry trends have noted buyers of such machines are to some extent "captives" of the option list because the resale value of their purchase does suffer unless it was ordered with an array of "extras", the price tag of which could extend into six (US$) figures.  Capitalism can be criticized but it's certainly dynamic.       

The ancestor of the main-frame computer were the "computational machines" used during World War II (1939-1945) to calculate the trajectories or artillery shells.  A generation on, progress in electronics meant buyers could "custom build" their 300K.

The 300K's base engine was now fitted with a single four barrel carburetor although for an additional US$375, the dual-quad Sonoramic could be ordered and combined with Chrysler’s new, robust four-speed manual transmission.  Surprising some observers, the convertible coachwork made a return to the catalogue.  With the the de-contenting (the leather trim for example now a US$93 option), the price cut (down from the 300J's US$5,260 to US$4,056 for the coupe (the convertible was US$4,522), the market responded with text book case-study of price elasticity of demand and despite being some US$600 more than the 300 Sports with the same bodies, the 300K booked record sales, production spiking to 3647 (3,022 coupes & 625 convertibles).  Interestingly, defying an industry-wide trend, 84 were fitted with the four-speed manual gearbox (50 hardtops & 34 convertibles).  With the coming of 1964, the distinctive "push-button" controls for the TorqueFlite automatic transmission were retired, the 300K's shitter moving to the centre console while elsewhere in the corporation, steering column-mounted assemblies also began to appear.  The selection order on automatic transmissions had been standardized (L-D-N-R-P) by federal regulation after some years of manufacturers using variant patterns but, despite the persistent myth, the push-buttons have never been outlawed although Chrysler may have sniffed the regulatory breeze and anticipated a ban, deciding to jump before being pushed.  Chrysler's basic engineering remained sound (in some ways it was an industry leader) but stylistically, all the corporation's divisions in the era suffered because the lines lacked the flair offered by GM or the segment-defining innovations of Ford.

1964 Chrysler Silver 300 (a non-letter 300): The "targa-look" without the targa.  Not until 1966 would Porsche AG trademark "targa" bit there's nothing to suggest the Germans were influenced by the Silver 300.

It could be ordered for the 300 Sport and 300K two-door hardtops, a reputed 2,152 of the former and 255 of the latter attracting buyers.  A mid-season promotion, the Chrysler Silver 300 was a “bundle” including “special metallic silver paint, vinyl canopy roof and custom interior with a reclining passenger seat”.  So it was distinctive though hardly likely to create anything like the impact of the C-300 in 1955 or the Sonoramic induction system in 1959 but participating dealerships were provided with a “promotional kit” including posters for showroom windows, postcards, floor-mat advertisements and “display collateral” (“themed” material for the showroom floor).  According to the corporation’s marketing department, the Silver 300 would be “the biggest spring promotion in Chrysler history” and while that may seem a lot of effort for what was a very modest “package” for a model mid-way through its life, the industry has on many occasions re-cycled the approach and it did make sense, buyers perhaps drawn by a “Silver 300K” eventually driving off in a “Silver 300” that was US$600 cheaper and, to most, indistinguishable from its more expensive stablemate.  Some models of the 300 Sport also continued to use the dash-mounted, push-button selectors for the transmission (a modernist look and undeniably a convenience liked by many) and, if so minded, even the performance of the 300K could be matched because the standard 383 cubic inch (6.3 litre) V8 could be “optioned-up” to the 413.

Promotional poster for 1964’s mid-year Silver 300 package.

In the US, car advertising in the 1960s was a vibrant sector in graphic art and there were memorable exponents, most notably the oeuvre Art Fitzpatrick (1919–2015) & Van Kaufman (1918-1995) rendered in the 1960s for GM’s PMD (Pontiac Motor Division), their simulacra tending to mannerism without quite becoming surrealist.  Dimensionally, Chrysler’s agency eschewed that approach and stuck to realism but the staging certainly was imaginative although some of the “messaging” in the advertising for the Imperial line to this day remains curious.  For the Silver 300, the agency presumably had in mind a couple having dashed off up the stairs to “enjoy themselves”, the young lady so anxious not to miss a moment she kicked-off her stilettos, not even pausing to close the door.  Modern interpretations are darker and include “murder-suicide” (the female usually the victim) or the unfortunate driver having fallen to his death after parking too close to the cliff’s edge.  In the latter scenario, her imagined tale varies but in all, she ends up dead, dashed on the rocks below.

1965 Chrysler 300L (four speed manual).

Despite the stellar sales of the 300K, even before the release of the 300L, the decision had been taken it would be the last of the letter series.  The corporation has moved the "performance orientated" models to the Plymouth and Dodge divisions while the tastes of those who wanted high performance had shifted to the smaller, lighter pony cars and intermediates, neither segment envisaged when the C-300 had made its debut a decade earlier.  Additionally, the letter series had outlived its usefulness as a corporate image-maker now they were no longer the fastest in the fleet and production-line rationalization meant it was easier and more profitable to maintain a single 300 line and allow buyers to choose their own mix of options; in other words, after 1965, it would still be possible to create a 300 in the spirit of the letter cars in most aspects except the badge and the now departed Sonoramics of fond memory.  When the last 300L was produced it was configured with a single four barrel carburetor and few would have noticed the differences between it and most other 300s.  The lower price though continued to attract buyers and in its final year 2845 were sold (2,405 coupes & 440 convertibles) and an again perhaps surprising 97-odd buyers opted for the four-speed manual but on the full-sized lines the configuration approaching extinction after a brief life; the 1970 Ford XL would be the last of such machines listed with the option although no XLs were so-equipped after the 1969 season.

1966 Chrysler 300X show car.

That no 300M appeared clearly was a surprise to the motoring press because the magazine Car and Driver, in a road test of a 300 Convertible, published in the November 1965 edition, mentioned the latest (ie 300M) iteration of "...the more expensive, more exotic 300 letter-series [was] still unannounced for 1966."  That announcement would of course never come (although there was the forgettable FWD (front wheel drive) 300M sold between 1999 to 2004) but there was in 1966 the 300X.  Based on a 300 Convertible, despite the appended letter, it was not in the tradition of the just-retired letter series but was a "show car", mechanically unchanged but featuring a cockpit packed with “futuristic” ideas, some of which did eventually enter mainstream use (although the swivelling front seat remained one of history’s unwanted orphans).  Rather than a conventional steering wheel, the driver used handgrips and the “steering unit” included button controls for lights, wipers, turn signals, and door locks, enabling use of all functions with a finger or thumb, all the while keeping a both hands on the mechanism.  Door handles were replaced by a keypunch card used also for the ignition while a truck-lid mounted TV camera and monitor on the dashboard replaced the rear-view mirrors.  Rear-seat passengers (and the front-occupant when “swivelled”) were able to enjoy watching a small television, mounted on a bracket allowing it to be stowed away when not in use. Construction of the 300X was out-sourced to the prolific customizer and fabricator Roger Winfield (1927–2025) whose creations became well-known from their appearances in film and television including Blade Runner (1982) and Get Smart (1965-1970).  The 1965 Sunbeam “Tiger” be built for Get Smart was actually a visually almost identical Sunbeam Alpine, chosen because its compactfour-cylinder engine left sufficient under-hood space for the “special accessories” (including a retractable machine-gun) whereas the Tiger’s Ford V8 filled the space to the brim.  To solve the “aural deficit”, the distinctive burble of a Tiger’s V8 was added during the editing process.  The “swivelling seat thing” must have been exerting a powerful influence in Chrysler’s design offices because also shown that year was the Imperial "Executive Suite" (complete with an on-board fax machine).  The fax didn't make it to the assembly line but the swivelling passenger seat did, offered for two seasons (1967-1968) in the intriguing but unsuccessful "Mobile Director" package, available exclusively (and bizarrely) in the Imperial Crown Coupe. 

1970 Chrysler 300-Hurst.

There was an unexpected semi-coda to the 300 letter series.  Although “surprise” is sometimes a tactic in marketing, what was strange about the release of the Chrysler 300-Hurst (introduced in February 1970 at the Chicago Auto Show) was it being a surprise to the dealers receiving one to display in their showrooms.  Improbable as it sounds for a product released in the citadel of modern capitalism, the accepted orthodoxy is the management at Chrysler and Hurst both believed the other corporation would be handing the promotion so consequently, none was done.  Given the market dynamics of the time, it’s debatable whether advertising would much have stimulated demand for such a machine and, as things worked out, only some 500 were built, the model never replaced.  In the era, there was little consistency in how the thing was described with publications variously using “300-H”, “300 Hurst” and “Hurst 300” but the preferred use now seems to be “300-Hurst” to distinguish it from the original 300H of 1962.  Based on the Chrysler 300 built on the corporate C-Body (with the so called “fuselage” bodyshell introduced for the 1969 season) conceptually, the 300-Hurst was very much in the tradition of the later letter-series cars and featured the combination of the more powerful of the two four-barrel versions of the 440 cubic inch (7.2 litre) V8 (rated at 375 HP in a dual-exhaust configuration), the TorqueFlite (727) automatic transmission and an opulent leather-trimmed interior from the Imperial line.  Although often listed as a footnote, purists decline to include the 300-Hurst in the letter-series lineage.

1970 Chrysler 300-Hurst.  The leather trim and power-adjustable seats came from the Imperial line.

All were finished in Spinnaker White with Satin Tan color accents & Medium Brown pin-striping, the H70–15 Goodyear Polyglas tyres mounted on 15 x 6-inch wheels in Saturn Iridescent paint.  Although the high (numerically low; the final-drive ratio a conservative 3.23) gearing was indicative of a machine was built for high-speed cruising on freeways rather than ¼ mile runs along a drag-strip, there were a few visual clues borrowed from muscle car genre, each 300-Hurst equipped with a fibreglass hood including a then-fashionable “power bulge” in the centre and a rear-mounted fresh air intake although, unlike the muscle cars, this fed cold air not to the engine but the passenger compartment.  The trunk lid (“rear-deck” in US terminology) was also a fibreglass piece with an integrated spoiler (then referred to usually as an “airfoil”).  The fibreglass mouldings were fabricated by two different companies and although the hoods were well-engineered, the rear decks lacked the internal stiffening required by a panel of such size and, over time, proved prone to deformation, the warping most severe if sitting for any length of time in heat; a 300-Hurst in an Arizona summer had to be parked with care.

1970 Chrysler 300-Hurst.

By 1970, the 300-Hurst must have seemed anachronistic because the market for high-performance variants of full-sized cars had evaporated as buyer preferences switched to the smaller intermediates and pony cars, by then available with the biggest, most powerful power-plants in Detroit’s inventory.  GM had withdrawn from the segment and although Ford listed the option of a four-speed manual gearbox for big XLs with 429 cubic inch (7.0 litre) V8, none were built while the 1969 Mercury Marauder X-100 (essentially a cosmetic package) was automatic-only and lasted for only two seasons of dismally low sales.  Chrysler’s Plymouth division still offered the 440 in the big Sport Fury and although in 1970 a pleasing 666 left the factory, only only 61 or 64 (the sources differ) lived up to the "number of the beast" tag by the buyer specifying "six barrel" option (with triple two barrel carburetors), rated at a healthy 390 HP.  It’s worth remembering the C-300 & 300B of 1955-1956 were essentially the same size as the intermediates of the mid-1960s that became so popular and were the platform which defined the “muscle car” during its brief and crazy vogue; the size was “right” in a US context and what the full-sized lines had grown to was not.  As the fuselage Chryslers came to exemplify, the huge, full-sizers would prove ideal as “land yachts” a breed particular to the 1970s in which occupants, isolated as never before (and rarely since) from the outside “floated” down the freeways, consuming fossil fuel and expelling pollutants in volumes that now would astonish most and appal Greta Thunberg (b 2003).

There was a one-off 300-Hurst convertible, used as a promotional vehicle for their famous shifters, often accompanied by Ms Linda Vaughn (b 1943) who stood on a platform mounted atop the rear deck, between giant models of shifters.  Ms Vaughn was for more than two decades a welcome adornment to drag-strips, noted usually for noise and brutishness.

In 1970, Chrysler 300s tagged for conversion to 300-Hurst specification came down the assembly line in Detroit's Jefferson Avenue plant before being freighted to Hurst’s facility in Warminster, Pennsylvania, there to undergo a process that differed from the original plan: Instead of deeper oil pans, upgraded ignition systems and the Hurst shifters with which the company had built its reputation, the cars received mostly cosmetic enhancements although the suspension was stiffened.  About the only variations in configuration was some used a column-shift for the transmission and some a floor-shift with a console, the later combination used with bucket seats.  Despite the 7.2 litre V8, the gearing and bulk conspired against muscle-car like acceleration although the ET (elapsed time) of 15.5 seconds for the standing ¼-mile was impressive, all things considered.  However, with a MSRP (manufacturer's suggested retail price) of US$5,939 (without any options) it was the corporation’s most expensive offering (except for the Imperial line) and this, combined with the absence of promotion and the anyway declining interest in the segment meant there wasn’t a second batch beyond the original 500-odd (the total quoted variously between 485-501), many of which lingered on dealers’ lots.  According to internal documents, the initial projections had anticipated first-year sales of 2000; the 1970 300-Hurst was living in a world that had passed it by.

A Hurst Jaws of Life used between 1977-2012 by the fire department in Carlsbad, New Mexico, now on display at the National Museum of American History.

The 300-Hurst was the biggest of a number of cars to bear the Hurst name although internationally, George Hurst’s (1927-1986; founder of his eponymous company), greatest legacy to the world was the “Jaws of Life”, a hydraulic cutter he first developed in 1961 after being shocked how long sometimes it took to extract the driver from the crumpled wreck of a race car.  The great advantage of the “Jaws of Life” was that it worked like a powerful pair of scissors, avoiding the showers of sparks produced by mechanical saws, always a risk to use in areas where fuel is likely to have been spilled.  The basic design came to be used in hydraulic rescue devices worldwide and quite how many lives have been saved by virtue of its availability isn’t known but it would be a big number.

Ms Linda Vaughn on the move.

It’s said one 300-Hurst was dealer-fitted with Chrysler's fabled 426 cubic inch (7.0) Street Hemi V8 but, like many such tales from the era, the veracity of that is uncertain and most find the story improbable.  Chrysler certainly never considered using either the Hemi or the six barrel version of the 440 because, given the market segment at which the thing was aimed, AC was thought likely to be an often chosen option and the factory never offered AC with either the Hemi or the triple carburetor 440, the systems of the era not suited to the high-revving units.  It’s thus an orthodoxy in the collector community that “no cars with the 426 Hemi or 6 bbl 440s were fitted with AC by the factory” and while that’s true of Chrysler’s factories, it not the case for every factory because Jensen in the UK offered AC in their Interceptor SP (Six-Pack, 1971-1973) which used the triple carburetor 440 and the boutique Swiss manufacturer Monteverdi did include AC in the single mid-engined Hai (1970) fitted with a Hemi.