Help identifying a strange little car

[FourWheelDrift]

poing said:

Are we sure we can see the front lights? It could be a spare wheel carrier on the car on the left if you change the perspective slightly.

It would have to be the biggest spare wheel carrier in the world, perspective would suggest (because most of it would be behind the car out of view) if it was then it carried at least 3 spares.

[poing]

In that case lets call it a luggage carrier

[Gary C]

Beutler macio 550 I think

Have a look at the 500 in this list

http://www.oldtimer.400.pl/beutler.html

Edited by Gary C on Monday 25th January 22:23

18th one down. Very similar slope to the bonnet and the rear, as coach built models, likely to have detail differences

Edited by Gary C on Monday 25th January 22:26

[M1C]

Similar but I'm not sure it is the answer.

[Jimmy Recard]

Not a bad suggestion. Closer than most at any rate!

[33q]

On many cars of this era there was tendency to use standard wheels and standard wheel trims or disc etc

Can anyone enhance the wheel area?

[saaby93]

Gary C said:

Beutler macio 550 I think

Have a look at the 500 in this list

http://www.oldtimer.400.pl/beutler.html

18th one down. Very similar slope to the bonnet and the rear, as coach built models, likely to have detail differences

rear arches not square enough

[groomi]

The really odd thing about this car is the very thick A-pillars. Just about every 50's coupe is going for slender pillars - yet this is really hefty. Why? Could it be fibreglass/plastic, and therefore needs to be thick for rigidity? There's nothing in the way of chrome trim disguising panel lines or visible panel lines - which is quite unusual for that age of car.

[saaby93]

groomi said:

The really odd thing about this car is the very thick A-pillars. Just about every 50's coupe is going for slender pillars - yet this is really hefty. Why? Could it be fibreglass/plastic, and therefore needs to be thick for rigidity? There's nothing in the way of chrome trim disguising panel lines or visible panel lines - which is quite unusual for that age of car.

there are a few.
Do you think it has side 2 windows in the door with a thin pillar?

Another random with square rear arches

[galro]

groomi said:

The really odd thing about this car is the very thick A-pillars. Just about every 50's coupe is going for slender pillars - yet this is really hefty. Why? Could it be fibreglass/plastic, and therefore needs to be thick for rigidity? There's nothing in the way of chrome trim disguising panel lines or visible panel lines - which is quite unusual for that age of car.

I think it is because it was made by someone not used to be working with metal. A lot of the homemade cars seems to suffer from the same.

[Gary C]

saaby93 said:

Gary C said:

Beutler macio 550 I think

Have a look at the 500 in this list

http://www.oldtimer.400.pl/beutler.html

18th one down. Very similar slope to the bonnet and the rear, as coach built models, likely to have detail differences

rear arches not square enough

But as coach built models, likely yo have detail differences ?

Seems to have been designed with very similar ideas ?

[galro]

Gary C said:

But as coach built models, likely yo have detail differences ?

Seems to have been designed with very similar ideas ?

The 1957 one off prototype you showed is likely a much later car than one in the picture. The picture probably dates from the mid '50s and the car appears to be old and tired on it, so I would guess it dates from the early '50s. That also seems to fit with the style of the car. The Beutler coupe also have much thinner and slender pillars. And it is a much smaller car - it's a rebody of later version of this car:

[jammy_basturd]

Something coachbuilt based on this:



Besides the very front and the very back, the rest of the proportions seem to be spot on.

[lostkiwi]

jammy_basturd said:

Something coachbuilt based on this:



Besides the very front and the very back, the rest of the proportions seem to be spot on.

The leading edge of the door is in the wrong place relative to the windscreen as well. On the original pic the door shut line is immediately below the A pillar, on the Porsche its significantly further forward.

[Dr Interceptor]

Not to mention the a-pillar to front axle angle is completely different.

[jammy_basturd]

Hmmm, maybe. Look at the same car from a similar angle to the original photo though and the A-pillar arrangement looks a lot closer to what it needs to be:

[MarshPhantom]

vixen1700 said:

From the classics forum, the little coupe second from the left.

Could somebody with good computer skills blow it up a bit or hone in on it a bit. It's got us all stumped over there.

One thing that has occurred to me looking back at the original pic is how big the mystery car is. People have been mostly posting small sports cars. The mystery car dwarfs the Renault 4CV in the picture and looks about the same size as the Citroen DS. Maybe the "strange little car" is a "strange large car".

Nothing more to add unfortunately other than when I see this thread pop up again I get that feeling.

[lostkiwi]

There are aspects of the Darl'mat Peugeot 403 about it too (B pillar forward):

[nicanary]

I'm rather hoping that someone who is interested in this puzzle will take the photo with them if they attend the vingt-quatre this year. There may be some older habituees of the hotel who can remember if somebody local built the car.

[galro]

I still think it is a homebuilt special similar to say this Peugeot by Roger Tunesi. There were quite a few such specials at the time. In fact so many that I have thought about starting a thread where information about various old homebuilt specials could be collected.

Edited by galro on Sunday 14th February 00:46