PDA

View Full Version : What is that little car?



GTP1960
03-09-2017, 10:29 PM
47604

This is a pic of Myrtle Beach in the 50's I think.
anybody recognize that little car moving down the lane?


thanks.

JPSmit
03-09-2017, 10:31 PM
What is Nash Metropolitan for $100 Alex.

Boink
03-09-2017, 10:42 PM
What is Nash Metropolitan for $100 Alex.

I agree.

NutmegCT
03-09-2017, 10:58 PM
Not convinced. I'm pretty sure the "continental" rear tire on the trunk lid was standard on the Metropolitans. I don't see one on the car in the old photo.

Also, the two-tone paint patterns seems wrong where the rear roof joins the body.

So ... ?

JPSmit
03-09-2017, 11:23 PM
Not convinced. I'm pretty sure the "continental" rear tire on the trunk lid was standard on the Metropolitans. I don't see one on the car in the old photo.

Also, the two-tone paint patterns seems wrong where the rear roof joins the body.

So ... ?

agree about the continental kit - what I see is where the rear of the roof touches the body between rear window and door - and the shape of the fender wells.

GTP1960
03-09-2017, 11:50 PM
Trabant? (Be surprised if they would let the "red threat" into SC in the '50's though)

4761247611
47612

SaxMan
03-10-2017, 12:03 AM
It looks like maybe the camera distorted the shape of the car. The dimensions seem too square for a Metropolitan, which was fairly narrow. Front fender skirts do suggest a Nash product, though.

Basil
03-10-2017, 01:05 AM
Another vote for a Nash Metropolitan

Gliderman8
03-10-2017, 01:20 AM
A Metropolitan

3798j
03-10-2017, 07:30 AM
Not convinced. I'm pretty sure the "continental" rear tire on the trunk lid was standard on the Metropolitans. I don't see one on the car in the old photo.

Also, the two-tone paint patterns seems wrong where the rear roof joins the body.

So ... ?


It looks like maybe the camera distorted the shape of the car. The dimensions seem too square for a Metropolitan, which was fairly narrow.
I'm with these guys...try squishing the 1956 Oldsmobile in your mind...

https://www.misterw.com/Oldsmobile/56Oldsmobile03.jpg

https://www.misterw.com/Oldsmobile/56Oldsmobile03.jpg

GTP1960
03-10-2017, 08:06 AM
It looks like maybe the camera distorted the shape of the car. The dimensions seem too square for a Metropolitan, which was fairly narrow. Front fender skirts do suggest a Nash product, though.

circus clown car?
(there appears to be a carnival in the background.)

47614

coldplugs
03-10-2017, 08:29 AM
..try squishing the 1956 Oldsmobile in your mind...

That was my reaction too. '55 or '56 Olds

GTP1960
03-10-2017, 09:20 AM
It looks like maybe the camera distorted the shape of the car. The dimensions seem too square for a Metropolitan, which was fairly narrow. Front fender skirts do suggest a Nash product, though.

I remember our class picture back in high school.
The camera rotated slowly thru an arc, on a tripod, to make a panoramic image of all of us on bleachers.
(slow enough where one guy was in the picture twice, by allowing the camera lens to pass & then running to the opposite side before the camera got there.)
If that was how the photographer took the pic, That might explain the distortion of a moving car, while all the stationary cars are normal.

NutmegCT
03-10-2017, 09:23 AM
Wow - never thought of that. A "slow pan" with one car actually driving past.

But ... still doesn't explain front wheel "skirts" and lack of Continental spare.

The mystery deepens.

CaptRandy
03-10-2017, 10:43 AM
Metro also.

Popeye
03-10-2017, 11:05 AM
Not sure if it is camera distortion - the objects in-line with the car seem "normally" proportioned.

PAUL161
03-10-2017, 11:43 AM
Because the quality of the photo is so poor, it make it hard to distinguish what model it is, but saying that, we had two Metros in the 70s and there are a couple discrepancies I see. First I've never seen a Metro without a spare tire mounted, second, the rear fender well looks like a teardrop shape, metros were square. The hood looks too short. The tail light area looks odd also. Hard to tell. Reluctantly, I would vote no, But?? J

47616

NutmegCT
03-10-2017, 11:53 AM
Thanks Paul - agree with you.

Also, doesn't it look like the two-tone paint change is too far back, almost vertical to the rear window? The Metropolitan had the paint drop line much closer to the front window.

47617

And the rear bumper of the mystery car looks like a two-stage chrome bumper - not like the one above.

Plus, the rear quarters of the roof seem much narrower in the Metropolitan, than the one in the original photo.
T.

Basil
03-10-2017, 01:58 PM
Thanks Paul - agree with you.

Also, doesn't it look like the two-tone paint change is too far back, almost vertical to the rear window? The Metropolitan had the paint drop line much closer to the front window.

47617

And the rear bumper of the mystery car looks like a two-stage chrome bumper - not like the one above.

Plus, the rear quarters of the roof seem much narrower in the Metropolitan, than the one in the original photo.
T.


I retract my vote for the Metro. Also, notice the trail light orientation is different. (Vertical on the Metro, horizontal on the mystery car)

PAUL161
03-10-2017, 02:09 PM
Looking at the back of the car, it definitely isn't a Metro. I seem to remember a car that that was sold through an American car dealer that looked like that, back in the late 60s, but for the life of me, I can't remember the name or what franchise sold it. It looks like a little car my brother in law had when he came back home from Germany. ??? PJ

coldplugs
03-10-2017, 03:51 PM
Focal plane shutters can distort dramatically. Consider all those early shots of tall racing cars (e.g. Fiats around 1910-1920) where the car looks like it's leaning forward. That's from the shutters with the slit traveling vertically and the car moving laterally. The car's roof is photographed at a different instant than the lower parts. That's not exactly what happened in this photo but I'd bet it's an Olds combined with a shutter aberration.

NutmegCT
03-10-2017, 04:06 PM
John - I'd never even thought of that. Wow - "rolling shutter aberratin" could be the explanation.

47628

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/49/Rolling_shutter_SMIL.svg

Thanks.

Basil
03-10-2017, 04:10 PM
But what would cause the wheel base to be so short? A very slow shutter speed would not cause the wheel base to appear shorter (if anything I'd think it would cause the wheelbase to appear longer) I agree there is some shutter distortion going on, but I don't think it's a car as large as an olds.

coldplugs
03-10-2017, 05:16 PM
Do you think it's distortion from a wide angle lens? Some of the wide angles of that era were primitive compared with today - e.g. the tiny Leica Hektor 28mm f6.3 was about 3/8" diameter. I doubt we'll find a definitive answer to this one.

pdplot
03-10-2017, 11:23 PM
Bad distorted picture of an Ivory-Billed Woodpecker combined with Sasquatch, Yeti and the Loch Ness Monster.
Cameras lie. Bigly. It has to be a Metropolitan. Look at the roofline and the wheel arches. No other car that looked anything like that was around then.

GTP1960
03-11-2017, 12:05 AM
Three things in favor of the metro:
The cut of the door seems correct.
the spare tire may simple be in use, therefore off the trunk.
the top may be a convertable. ( I noticed at least 3 different styles, granted they were on cars today.)

47644
47645

(Suddenly.....I really want a metro???)

NutmegCT
03-11-2017, 08:05 AM
Still not convinced it's a Metropolitan. Look at the two-tone paint and where it "drops" below the rear window.

Also, the height compared to the standard sedans all along the road.

Just sayin ...

Basil
03-11-2017, 02:09 PM
Still not convinced it's a Metropolitan. Look at the two-tone paint and where it "drops" below the rear window.

Also, the height compared to the standard sedans all along the road.

Just sayin ...

The bullet shaped extrusion along the side near the rear tail lights reminds me of a 50 Ford tail light.

47650

JPSmit
03-11-2017, 09:06 PM
Ok next guess: Delorean

NutmegCT
03-11-2017, 10:17 PM
oh c'mon - it's a rat-rod Pobeda.

(and somebody stole the spare tire ...)

pdplot
03-11-2017, 11:35 PM
A customized Henry J. Or a customized Trabant. C'mon guys - it's a GD Metro...Maybe some owner futzed with it like I did with my 1952 Ford with a Pontiac grille.

coldplugs
03-12-2017, 11:58 AM
Oh I'm sorry, is this a five minute argument, or the full half hour?

NutmegCT
03-12-2017, 12:35 PM
This isn't an argument! It's just contradiction!

47668

Basil
03-12-2017, 01:53 PM
This isn't an argument! It's just contradiction!

47668

No it isn't!

NutmegCT
03-12-2017, 02:06 PM
Yes it is!

Of course ... I *could* be arguing in my spare time.

GTP1960
03-12-2017, 07:09 PM
A customized Henry J. Or a customized Trabant. C'mon guys - it's a GD Metro...Maybe some owner futzed with it like I did with my 1952 Ford with a Pontiac grille.

There was a "production" concept Metropolitan called a NXI. it did not have a trunk mounted spare.

I'm not sure how to embed the youtube video, but I think this is the link to a marketing promo spot.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBVz8RXKWlU&t=29s