<VV> Corvair In the News - Honorable Mention

[Scott Morehead]

http://www.thedailyreview.com/articles/2009/08/05/sports/tw_review.20090805.b.pg2.tw05gregcars_s1.2716373_spo.txt

Edsel’s flop linked to gimmicks, name and design





Published: Wednesday, August 5, 2009 3:17 AM EDT

Q: Greg, I really liked your
Corvair articles recently, and wonder how you feel about the Edsel? It was a
new car, but failed miserably. What’s your thoughts?



Walt, Pennsylvania.



A: Walt, first let’s separate the Corvair from the Edsel in one big way: the
Corvair was a true innovation, with a rear mounted six cylinder engine and
transaxle and an all new, good looking, compact car design.



The Edsel, meanwhile, was nothing more than gadgets and gimmicks with new skin
on what was still basically the day-to-day Ford-Mercury chassis. Thus, the
Corvair will always be regarded in this column as an innovative car, while the
Edsel a non-innovative vehicle.

 

Edsel hoped to sell America and the consumer via slick
advertising campaigns and the “new” Edsel gimmicks, like pushbutton
transmission buttons in the center of the steering wheel and a rotary
speedometer. The American consumer was not sold by the design and gadgets, and
saw right through the ad campaign to what the Edsel really was.



Still, there was so much hyped advertising about this car, and even an “Edsel
TV Show,” you thought something “out of this world” was about to hit the dealer
showrooms. When it appeared in late 1957 as a 1958 model, it was a bust from
day one.



Another reason I feel Edsel failed was the name: Edsel. Now I’m sure Edsel
Ford, son of Henry Ford, was a nice person, but the name just doesn’t have the
rhyme to it like Lincoln-Mercury-Ford and its cars of the day, like
Thunderbird, Continental, Fairlane, Marauder, and so on. There were also many
internal problems associated with the naming of the new car, and many at Ford
did not want the Edsel name on it.



Meanwhile, the design was “way out there,” with the “in your face,” and
eventually disliked by consumers, “scoop nose,” “hangman’s noose” or “snorkel”
front end that didn’t seem to match what I feel was a nicely styled trunk and
rear headlight design. That front end was a killer.



As for marketing, Edsel was sold initially by a new Edsel-only division, which
didn’t last long. The Edsel eventually ended up at the Lincoln-Mercury dealers
in a move to raise the Lincoln brand to Cadillac and Imperial competition
status. Edsel would then compete for the Oldsmobile-Pontiac-Dodge-Desoto sale,
but probably impacted sibling Mercury more so than the competition it was
aiming to take sales from.



As sales dropped, so did Edsel’s “design ingenuity,” which relegated it to
front end facelifts and rear taillight tweaks on what was a noticeable Ford
body as it came to its last year in 1960. When all was said and done, the one
thing Edsel achieved from all of this was being labeled as the worst car
introduction and sales flop in motoring history.



Now, with all this said, when I see an Edsel nowadays at a car show, I’m one of
the first to go up and see it. Thus, the years prove that even a horrible flop
like the Edsel has its day in the sun, which happens to be right now at
collector car shows everywhere. I wouldn’t mind owning one, too.



———



(Greg Zyla welcomes reader inquiries on anything automotive, from the Edsel to
dead batteries. Write him at 116 Main St., Towanda, PA 18848 or e-mail him at
extramile_2000 at yahoo.com).