Paul Jaray was a genius. And I don’t throw that term around lightly, usually limiting it to whomever invented the corn dog or whoever had the idea to shit into a bowl of water. But when it came to aerodynamics, Jaray was definitely a genius. A simple Cold Start isn’t really the place to go into everything he’s done, but there’s some fascinating images here we can enjoy, like that picture up there of Jaray’s streamlined prototype for the Ley company in 1922, the Ley T6. I chose that one because there’s something about that car that reads like a small car, but as you can see by the person by it, it was sort of and strangely large, and large in proportions that we’re not really used to in a car.
Jaray was born to a Hungarian-Jewish family in 1889 and seems to have been interested in aerodynamics all his life. His career started with designing zeppelins and airships, and later moved into the area of auto body design, with a focus on aerodynamics. Jaray licensed designs to Tatra, and was hired to design bodies (or had his ideas used by) for companies like Chrysler, Adler, Audi, Dixi, Maybach, Mercedes-Benz, Ford, and others.
Even though Jaray designed many revolutionary body designs and pushed the science of aerodynamics further than ever before, the situation in 1930s Germany wasn’t exactly friendly to a Jewish aerodynamicist, which severely impacted his career.
But for now, let’s just look at some of these fascinating images. Like the patent image for the Ley T6:
The unusual proportions of the car can be seen in these drawings as well; Jaray was something of an aerodynamic purist, striving to make cars that came as close to the aerodynamic ideal of a water droplet as possible, even at the expense of the packaging and interior space of the car. Scaling up was one possible solution to this issue.
The patent is also interesting because it was Jaray’s patents on streamlined cars that forced Chrysler to settle with him and license his designs for the Airflow, whose design was initially found to be in violation of Jaray’s patents.
Jaray had a neighbor named Hans Erni, an artist, who created this lovely diagram showing the benefits of a Jaray-streamlined car compared to a conventionally designed automobile:
I like how you can see the white paint used for corrections and changes now that the underlying paper has yellowed over time.
I just love the almost cartoon-like look of this thing; it really was quite aerodynamic, so it’s not just aerodynamically-styled, it actually does cut through the wind. At some point we should cover Jaray and his work in more detail; but for now I’m just appreciating these machines, aesthetically.
Seeing the car in motion is even more fascinating; look at this:
What an amazing machine; the 1540cc inline-four engine only made about 20 hp, but the not-light (2,500 lbs) car could still go over 65 mph. That’s impressive stuff, especially for over a century ago!
what great racer the folks who made the Cars films could have made out of these
Looks like a Minion’s car here.
This car I’ve designed and helped a friend work on(he did 99% of the actual work) is called The Minion:
https://i.imgur.com/p5FcTMG.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/Rx92V7Y.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/82gCI0U.jpg
Old photos from 2 years ago. It’s not yet finished. We’re making a streamlined body for it. It’s getting a hubmonster PMDC hub motor, to be run around 80 kW peak. Which in a vehicle that will be under 300 lbs complete, will go quite nicely.
The original Clown Shoe.
I’m getting more baby shoe vibes.
Not sure if people caught it, but the scenes of is on the dusty road, with the other cars following it, was meant to show how little dust it kicked up (just the tires) vs the regular cars (from the air turbulence)
And the Ley T6 is a damn sight better looking than another example of deceptive-looking scale-wise:
https://www.topgear.com/sites/default/files/2022/08/_DSC7488.jpg?w=1784&h=1004
With a person next to it for scale:
https://lede-admin.lataco.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/ku-xlarge.jpg
Whoa. Talk about blind spots. No rear window or rear view mirrors. Don’t worry I guess because nothing ain’t going to pass this rig.
I love the slot by the driver’s door for the spare tire! Excellent space usage.
That is the most Richard Scarry looking car to ever exist IRL.
The exhaust spewing out the tail pipe just makes that video so much funnier and “old-timey” to me.
Certainly odd-looking from most angles. I do like the 3/4 overhead shot, it has a bit of Stahlhelm/Hot Wheels “Red Baron” thing going on with its greenhouse.
Why is the floor so high compared to the body? Is it the world’s first skateboard EV? Was it an OEM rum-runner’s false floor/secret compartment? What were they hiding???
I mean, it was 1930s Germany : grimace:
It was still a 1920s straight-rail chassis under that teardrop body.
You sure those are t circus folk standing by the car? Could fit a lot of clowns in this car.
Kinda gives me Chevy Spark. With the strangely bulbous and vertical cabin and droopy nose.
A deep dive on why old cars all rode on pizza cutters would be really cool. I’m guessing it’s because there’s less friction on a skinny tire and they were used to narrow wheels and solid, small tires from carriages. But it always looks bizarre, especially when an older vehicle has a more modern body style.
Outside of cities, roads were pretty much wagon trails in rural areas for quite a while into the early 20th century
Some quick Googling tells me that chunky tires didn’t come along until the ’70s and old Jeep pictures seem to bear this out. I guess the skinny tire is superior in mud the same way they are in snow, and the huge tires are more useful on like rocks and obstacles and stuff? I am absolutely not an offroad enthusiast 🙂
Looking at that aero drawing they were -this close- to discovering ground effect… Really cool.
The scale model had a drag coefficient of 0.245, and the built car pictured, a 0.29.
The original Chrysler Airflow prototype in streamliner form actually improved upon this and got a 0.21 IIRC, but the marketing guys decided to add trim and reshape the official version until its Cd value was 0.5. The car, being absurdly expensive in the middle of a depression, didn’t sell well, and Chrysler executives blamed the aerodynamics and subsequently unusual shape as for why. The Lincoln Zephyr of th time was actually more streamlined than the Chrysler Airflow, and sold relatively well.
I thought the Airflow didn’t sell because they didn’t build it properly and by the time they figured it out it’s reputation for falling apart was already set in stone.
That also.
But ever since then, streamlined designs have always been shot down by the industry with excuses such as “We’re not about to make the most aerodynamic vehicle that nobody would buy“(Rick Anieros of Chrysler). This continued through multiple fuel crisis and the malaise era.
We could have had double the highway fuel economy that we did for nearly a century without really sacrificing anything of substance. The average new car has only recently caught up to the 1921 Rumpler Tropfenwagen or the above pictured Jaray body when it comes to Cd value, and that’s about twice as much drag as what is possible in a usable/practical road-going vehicle in the present day.
We should/could have midsized sedans exceeding 70 mpg highway and diesel sports cars approaching or exceeding 100 mpg, musclecars with big NA V8s exceeding 40 mpg highway, and EV sedans/wagons/sports cars that get 300+ miles highway range on under 40 kWh. We could even have massive full-sized 6,000+ lb SUVs approaching 40 mpg highway(even if they’d look different).
I hadn’t even considered it in terms of the Airflow killed the streamliner but it makes sense.
There’s many things to consider that usually go against a low Cd value such as space, practicality, stability, cooling, intake requirements or simply subjective aesthetic preferences. Modern cars are incredibly good for what they are and it’s amazing we have such a variety of shapes that still are all amazing at aero because of clever little touches and tricks you’ll never see. Also Cd is only half of the story and nobody ever talks about frontal area. Not many people would want to daily an XL1, being obsessed with making the most aero car won’t get you anywhere useful.
You can get a Cd value in the 0.1X range keeping in mind space, practicality, stability, cooling, intake requirements and such. Subjective aesthetic preferences are one of the large drivers of unnecessary drag in modern cars(oversized wheels, oversized grilles, unneeded creases, plastic cladding, fake vents/openings, ect.). The styling zeitgeist dujour is costing people tens of thousands of dollars cumulatively over the vehicle’s life span with multiple owners. Such a silly waste.
Frontal area is largely determined by vehicle size. This is why some classic cars with terrible drag coefficients are still efficient by modern standards(Triumph Spitfires, VW Beetles, ect.).
I bet people would daily an XL1 if it came with a TDI engine, could accelerate like a Corvette, hit 200+ mph, get 80+ mpg highway, and cost under $50k. But they won’t build a car like that to even test the waters.
The XL1 Had/has a 2 cylinder tdi engine + an electric motor making it a rare diesel electric hybrid.
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a15112331/2014-volkswagen-xl1-first-drive-review/
I get what you mean though, imagine if it was built today as an ev only or like the i3 ev for traction power and a tiny tdi as a range extending generator
Casey Putsch’s Omega sports car uses a 1.9L TDI 4 cylinder, able to do 0-60 mph in around 4 seconds and gets over 100 mpg:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idF6qQR_ws4
The XL1 should be similarly efficient as a platform.
IMO, either would be even better as a pure EV with a 35-40-ish kWh battery pack and a Tesla drive system swap.
Totally I love the Omega bc Casey specifically wanted to prove (and he did) that an aerodynamic sports cat could be made to be fast And efficient!
The Lincoln Zephyr launched a design revolution of its’ own, for reasons dictated by technical necessity. Its’ flathead V12 – basically a Ford V8-and-a-half – had terrible cooling problems exacerbated by the original model’s trendy tall, narrow prow-like grille since the radiator was set low in the chassis with the fan run directly by the crankshaft.
Bob Gregorie, Ford’s chief stylist, came up with the fix – a low and wide grille opening, originally split by the “prow”, for the ’38 model. By 1940 practically every American car had a grille wider than it was tall.
Chrysler’s follow-on design, the 1935 Airstream, also sold very well. Buyers were crazy for streamlined, or at least streamlined-looking, designs in the ’30s, the Airflow went just a little too far for most people.
Especially for the Chrysler and DeSoto brands, which by virtue of their price and positioning, were always going to sell to a somewhat older and more conservative clientele, but the new bodies were expensive to build and had to be sold under the most expensive brands to have any chance at making money. They hedged their bets by leaving Chrysler’s normal models in production alongside the Airflow, but DeSoto sales took a bloodbath by going all-in on the new body
I love that the turbulence diagram shows not only a wide range of currents, but that even the wheels of the open-top motor will kick up more dust than those on the streamliner. Check out the positively Pig-pennian tire dust clouds on the ‘vert.
I wonder what would have happened if he had moved to England and started a British Ley-land.
That thing is WILD! Every photo is from a different angle, and the proportions look weirder in each one! From a design perspective, it’s all kinds of wrong. That illustration showing how the driver sits with the body contour following his head shoulder line is just crazy! Are you taller than average? Guess you have to look elsewhere. Also, normal people can’t tilt their head outboard while driving.
Weirdly “old woman who lived in a shoe” -like. Can’t unsee.
And now neither can I!
Fun fact: the woman in the picture is 7 feet tall