I like details. Especially car details. The Volvo 1800 sports car – in P1800, 1800S, 1800E, or the shooting brake 1800ES forms – is a car that’s absolutely packed with good details. I want to talk about two of these details today, because I think they’re a great example of how much details like chrome trim can change the look of a car, and, in this case, I think the changes Volvo made were just excellent, even if those changes surprise me, a bit.
Well, I suppose one of those changes is to something more than just trim, and is more than just a detail, because it’s a pretty dramatic change to a bumper; still, it’s worth looking at.
I actually used to have a 1968 Volvo 1800S, and I loved that car; it was fun to drive, fairly easy to maintain, and I just felt fantastic in it.
It wasn’t perfect, of course, as the carbs leaked onto the exhaust manifold and the fuel filler wasn’t compatible with the trees in my life, and the beautiful body was, like a Volkswagen Karmann-Ghia, all one piece save for the bits that opened, so while it looked beautiful and seamless, any minor dent meant major bodywork. Still, I loved that car.
But back to the point! When the P1800 first came out, it looked like this:
The body of the car was primarily designed by Pelle Petterson, working under Pietro Frua’s design house. In fact, Volvo claimed this was an Italian Frua design until 2009, when they finally admitted it was really the work of Petterson, who was the son of Helmer Petterson, a consultant who was behind the design of the earlier Volvo PV544. No idea why they waited so long to officially acknowledge that!
Anyway, let’s start by looking at the front of the P1800, specifically That Bumper:
(photo: Hayman, LTD)
These “cow horn” bumpers (it’s not just bulls that get horns, it seems) are dramatic and striking, and they’re the sort of exuberant detail I feel like I should like, but I feel like they just don’t really fit the clean look of the car.
They don’t look bad, as such, but when Volvo simplified the front bumper in 1964, you can see the dramatic difference it made:
I think you have to admit, it looks so much better with the simpler bumper!
Again, it’s not a choice I’d have expected myself to like, replacing a unique part with a much more conventional one, but I have to admit it was very much the right call here.
The next bit I want to point out has to do with the 1800’s dramatic side trim and door handle:
See that swoopy strake of chrome that goes from the front of the car, follows that scallop shape in the door, then twists to ride along the rear quarter’s tailfin edge? It’s a dramatic bit of chrome trim, and it mostly works. The chrome door handle is pretty prominent there by the bend in the chrome trim, but unconnected.
This trim always sort of bothered me; it always felt like a bit too much, and the clunky interaction of that door handle and the trim there never felt quite right to me.
Volvo must have been thinking along the same lines, because in 1966, they made changes to that bit of chrome trim, turning it into this:
This trim, I think, is so much better! They split the trim into two bits: a low, straight chrome strip following the body crease, but going past the arch of the character line at the end of the door. Then, there’s an upper strip that starts as part of the door handle and then flows onto the top of the rear fin. Both chrome strips are narrower, too.
I think what really makes this so good has to do with how beautifully the door handle was integrated into the design. Just compare:
In the old one, that handle is just sort of stuck on there, but the re-design makes it part of everything, letting the line from the tailfins flow right into the handle with real grace. The lower straight strip from the front I think actually does more to highlight that beautiful upward swoop of the body’s character line than covering it with chrome did, because it makes it feel like more of a sculptural part of the body than some tacked-on bit.
I can’t think of a better example of how a couple small changes transformed and already lovely car into something really special. There’s probably something we can all learn from this, so I hope you’ve distilled exactly what that is, because it’s too early for me to be thinking that hard.
I 100% agree on both points, part of the reason I have a ’69 1800S as opposed to the earlier versions, although, I did backdate to the earlier aluminum square grate grill.
I prefer the horn bumper. And they seem to fetch a premium as well.
To my eyes, this really just boils down to the simpler, cleaner details often work better than the ornate ones. The snout just shows better without the Mutton Chops and the sides flow better without the swoops.
As a Texas-Ex, Matt should have informed you that the lady longhorns are just as horny as the males.
Also, I have to disagree with you on the bumper front, er, front bumper. I prefer the stubby T-Rex arms shoveling food (air?) into the car’s grille.
Torch, that is one you should have kept! I had no idea you ever had one. I looked into getting the wagon version a few times, but could never pull the trigger. Also, this was one of the first EFI vehicles IIRC, and so when you’re shopping for them it’s common to see them with over 200k miles.
I support you getting another one 😛
Thanks for this. What a lovely car, the P1800!
When I was a kid we went camping each year, up and down the eastern seaboard. I saw nice cars once in a while, either in the campground or in town. There were three that made an impression strong enough to my 6- to 12-year old self to remain to today.
One was, I think, an Austin-Healy Sprite. It was a tiny orange car, smaller than anything I had ever seen, and the windows snapped on! And the owner said they leaked. Crazy thing, it seemed halfway to a toy.
Second was a Cord that my dad pointed out to us, parked on the street. White or I think actually light cream colored. It looked like an old black and white movie car. I loved the corrugated exhaust pipes that stuck out thru the hood. Right Thru The Hood!
But the coolest one was a Volvo P1800(? letters?). It had the later side trim and it was amazing. That side body crease swept up perfectly to just behind the door handle, and the handle did this amazing thing — it swept back into the trim to the rear! The way the two features worked together just landed perfectly to me. the same curve (nearly), in two different planes, passing each other by just the right amount and melding. Like they were shaking hands. It’s probably the car that first got me interested in car design. Soon I had three car magazine subscriptions.
The bull horn bumper with the happy face reminds me of a cute anime character putting their hands in front of their smile while giggling.
Exactly!
Are we going to see more door handle coverage? Perhaps a celebration of the N.A. Miata door handles.
“I think you have to admit, it looks so much better with the simpler bumper!”
I think it only looks more generic. As for the chrome strips, yes, the integrated handle looks great, but I would’ve canned the front strip. And too bad they didn’t blend the rear strip into the taillight.
I like the straight bumper better, though I don’t love it, either. To me there are two problems with the horn bumper. One is that it focuses attention on the nose, when the beauty of the car is in what happens as your eyes sweep the sides from front to back. Those horns keep drawing backwards against the rest of the design flow. Second is actually two aspects of the bend. One is that their angle doesn’t work with the rest of the car – too sharp – and the other is that a straight with an upward or outward curve like that feels like we are swept along the straight main portion, followed by a flinging away by the bend. On the sides they work perfectly, but at the front it feels entirely backwards, drawing towards the center then flinging right into the high-pressure area if the front center of the car.
I had a 1971 1800E, same basic engine but with Bosch fuel injection and 4 speed manual with overdrive. While the bumpers were nice, they were effectively useless in my neck of the woods. The one accident I had was with a Chevy. I rear ended it at a fairly low speed, but it really mangled that grill, the chrome bezel and part of the body work. Never was able to afford to fix it. The thing was, the Chevy’s bumper was a good 6″ higher than the bumper of the Volvo, and likely most bumpers were. So it was more ticking off a box than functional.
Here’s another one, Jason.
The rear chrome bumper wrapped around on the sides to almost the wheel well in the older version. It makes it look like a “cattle gate”. The newer update cuts off the rear chrome bumper to adjust the edge of the car. It looks cleaner and “much lighter“ certainly. IMO.
And yet another – the grille was changed at the same time as the straight bumpers came in, adding a fussy note that wasn’t entirely fixed until they started blacking it out around 1970.
Yeah, sometimes it’s all in the details. Always astonishing how making such minor or even picayune changes can make major differences.
The early door handles are somewhat triangular-shaped, as if echoing the emblems used on the rear pillars of the Jensen-built 1800s as seen here:
https://www.classicargarage.nl/assets/images/1/volvo-p1800s-17-272a8381.jpg
One might think the change in door handles would have been partly due to the transition from Jensen’s manufacturing to Volvo’s in-house facilities but the change actually happened a few years after the move from Jensen. Maybe they were just using up a stockpile of Jensen’s door handles?
We’ll have to agree to disagree – The original bumpers had much more character than the simpler later bumpers, and the upward swoop functionally acted as their own overriders, as Volvo bumpers of that era had a tendency to be twisted downward when bumped.
IMHO, the swoop is more defined with the chrome on it – as opposed to being ignored and downplayed with the straight-line chrome.
I think I like the hockey stick style trim a bit more than the straight line trim. It makes it look like a more expensive car. Which was what Volvo wanted at the time. The looks of a Ferrari the price of a Volvo.
“distilled exactly what that is”
Embellishment should never confuse the design.
The original trim looks like it adds drag, the redesign expresses smooth flow.
The early P1800s were assembled in the UK by Jensen…
I poked around an early car in a junkyard once and remember thinking the door handle looked odd. I also remember considering buying the shell until I got to the side that had been in an accident 🙁
I love all variants of the 1800 but never noticed those design tweaks before. Thanks, Jason! Between that sweet body and my all time favorite dashboard, the 1800 is always in my top 5 of cars I want to own (or at least drive.)
The “cow horn” bumper kind of reminds me of how cats fold their front legs under their chests when they lay down. This has nothing to do with anything, but it just screams that at me.
An 1800ES is a dream car of mine. These are fantastic. Having a car that looks this good, has a reputation for reliability and comfort, and is reasonably priced for a collector is just amazing.
And fittingly, Roger Moore’s Simon Templar drove this version b/c definitely sleeker and suave-er, and a touch more Euro-looking.
I’m here for the new cold start graphic/decal. Quite good indeed, as is the P1800 of course.
One of my favorite automotive designs of all time. Simply timeless.