datsun-roadsters
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: RE: Roadster styling (was originality thread)

To: "Gordon Glasgow" <gsglasgow@attbi.com>
Subject: Re: RE: Roadster styling (was originality thread)
From: fairlady <fairlady@telstra.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 14:51:27 +1100
Hi All.
Mr Iizuka's starting point for the design was the tail light concept. 
The rest in cluding the rear panel followed. BTW the panel isn't quite 
flat, it has a gentle curvefrom side to side.

Phill Brook

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gordon Glasgow" <gsglasgow@attbi.com>
Date: Monday, December 17, 2001 12:38 pm
Subject: RE: Roadster styling (was originality thread)

> If you look at Hidehiro IIzuka's early stying sketches as 
> reproduced in Phill
> Brook's (excellent) book, it appears that the tailights and 
> relatively flat rear
> panel were part of the design from the very beginning. I think the 
> taillightshave a rather jet-exhaust look, which was quite common 
> in that era.
> 
> Of course, the panel isn't completely flat but rather has some 
> interestingcontours, which I'm sure has caused no end of grief to 
> less-than-knowledgeable
> body men.
> 
> By 1969 Triumph had picked up the flat rear panel idea in the 
> Michelotti/Karmanndesigned TR6, which I always thought looked 
> great. In fact, at one time I
> painted the rear panel on my roadster flat black like the Triumph 
> (partly to
> hide corrosion).
> 
> Gordon Glasgow
> Renton, WA
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-datsun-roadsters@autox.team.net
> > [mailto:owner-datsun-roadsters@autox.team.net]On Behalf Of snyler
> > Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2001 5:08 PM
> > To: Mark Sedlack; roadster List
> > Subject: Roadster styling (was originality thread)
> >
> >
> > Mark Sedlack wrote
> >
> > >However, I personally have never liked the "flat" rear-end 
> panel on the
> > >Roadster, and have always suspected it was due primarily to 
> ease of
> > >manufacture, rather than a planned styling detail.
> > I've wondered about the back recently myself.  Perhaps it's a 
> cost thing,
> > perhaps the roadster was ahead of its time, anticipating the 
> Kamm-back
> > styling of the late 60s.  I used to think the taillights were stuck
> > on...items pulled from the Nissan parts bin, but they're unique 
> to the
> > roadster.  If they'd used Bluebird  (311) taillights of the era 
> (which> look like they might fit)  there'd be much more of an MGB 
> resemblance.  I
> > know the Roadster had its debut a year earlier, but it's hard 
> enough to
> > convince folks of the order of appearance as it is.
> > -Marc T.
> >
> > 
> 
========================================================================
==> Marc Tyler TDROC Sisterdale TX
> > 1970 1600 #SPL311-31016
> > 1965 L-320 #L320 013642
> > http://datsun_marc.tripod.com/cgi-bin/datsun_homepage.html
> >
> > ///  datsun-roadsters@autox.team.net mailing list
> > ///  Send admin requests to majordomo@autox.team.net  or go to
> > ///  http://www.team.net/cgi-bin/majorcool
> > ///  Send list postings to datsun-roadsters@autox.team.net
> 
> ///  datsun-roadsters@autox.team.net mailing list
> ///  Send admin requests to majordomo@autox.team.net  or go to
> ///  http://www.team.net/cgi-bin/majorcool
> ///  Send list postings to datsun-roadsters@autox.team.net

///  datsun-roadsters@autox.team.net mailing list


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>