Help identifying a strange little car
Discussion
Some similar cars here: http://harrysportcar.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/glas-1...
marshalla said:
Can we all agree that there are lots that look "about right" for the rear half, but the troublesome areas are the proximity of the A pillar to the front wheel arch, and the steep slope on the bonnet ?
Those are the troublesome areas if we assume this is a re-bodied special.If not then the distance that the roof-line extends above the top of the windscreen is unusual, and very few cars match the front end e.g. bonnet scoop and flat nose.
Another day, another thing it isn't:
MEP Daphné. 7 built, 3 photographed, 1 known survivor (in the pic), and the story goes that Fangio helped out with prototype testing. Apparently at least one was customised by the coachbuilder, by customer request. It's therefore ever so tempting to suggest that one of the others might have had a much shorter bonnet, a square rear arch...well, ok. But a shorter wheelbase?
Wishful thinking is pernicious.
Such a frustrating thread!
MEP Daphné. 7 built, 3 photographed, 1 known survivor (in the pic), and the story goes that Fangio helped out with prototype testing. Apparently at least one was customised by the coachbuilder, by customer request. It's therefore ever so tempting to suggest that one of the others might have had a much shorter bonnet, a square rear arch...well, ok. But a shorter wheelbase?
Wishful thinking is pernicious.
Such a frustrating thread!
Fastdruid said:
Although if you combine this and this you get our strange little car
No. I wish that were true, believe me, but I'm afraid it just isn't. Look again at my picture of the red Daphné compared to your picture of the red Daphné - it's the same car, Daphné 7 001, the surviving example. The angle of your photo makes the front wheels look almost aligned with the A-pillar, my photo shows that in reality they are anything but. The wheelbase is way out compared to the mystery car.As for "a smaller prototype"...well, there's that tempting wishful thinking again. It doesn't wash. You've got Maurice Pezous, who is an engineer first and a businessman second. He runs one of the biggest and most prestigious Citroën dealerships in France at the time. He's not fabulously wealthy but he's doing ok, and he's a proper petrolhead who takes advantage of his position to get Citroën parts. Apart from building the few Daphné 7s based on a Citroën platform, which he sells at a loss (his daughter said of the Daphné: "sometimes when you're truly passionate about something, making a profit is the last thing you think about. Dad only sold them because he had no choice, otherwise he'd have kept them"), he also builds single seater race cars, and once again sells them at near-zero margins so that local kids can go racing. He puts Citroën engines in his race cars. This man likes Citroën, and he's got ready access to Citroën bits. So why build a smaller prototype for future Citroën-based cars using what appears to be either a rear-engined Renault chassis or a Panhard boxer engine?
Your first photo is interesting because it shows one of the customised Daphnés (002 I think?) with the square rear arch, which I hadn't seen before, and is another element that points to our mystery car "possibly being a Daphné". Or at least created in the same workshop. The trouble is you've then got to look at Albert Mazel, who was apparently a damned fine coachbuilder - a genius by some accounts - which would explain why he was an inevitable choice for Pezous, who's seeking perfection and no doubt doing some pretty furious man-maths to justify the cost. The Daphné 7 was a gorgeous little car, built by a craftsman with an artists's eye for proportion who was at the top of his game. Our mystery car, whatever else it may be, does not appear to be that (...and I really hope I won't end up eating those words)
I posted the Daphné 7 because I didn't know about it before and thought it might be of interest, and because I'm hoping it might remind someone of some other car that's even closer, but I'm about 90% sure we're not looking at a Daphné. Not even a prototype.
A shonky copy of a Daphné built on the wrong platform, maybe
The red model is MEP DAPHNE 007 n°1, the only remaining one.
You can have a look at the website with all the relevant information.
Don't hesitate to ask in case you need further elements.
www.mep-daphne.fr
You can have a look at the website with all the relevant information.
Don't hesitate to ask in case you need further elements.
www.mep-daphne.fr
Just being picky, the front wheel arch is square'ish and the rear arch is the same height as the front, the mystery car's rear arch is lower than the front which is a smooth curve. Distance betweeb rear of front wheel arch and door line is longer on this that the mystery car as well.
FourWheelDrift said:
Just being picky, the front wheel arch is square'ish and the rear arch is the same height as the front, the mystery car's rear arch is lower than the front which is a smooth curve. Distance betweeb rear of front wheel arch and door line is longer on this that the mystery car as well.
I vote that we stop being picky and just assume its a trick of the light. I'm not sure I can stand it anymore!
L100NYY said:
It is v v close but the one in the mystery picture has a round front wheel arch and thicker C pillar.
It's significantly different if you look at it from a different angle. Look at the distance between the A pillar and front wheelarch, and the rear window and boot form a distinct angle compared to the fastback look of the unknown car.
The Skoda isn't a million miles away, but the overall styling is more modern than the unknown car, especially the thin pillars.
Gassing Station | Classic Cars and Yesterday's Heroes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff