67-72 Development/Concept Photos Galore!

[factorystock]

Thanks agian for posting the second installment of photos. Truly a time capsule experience, taking us back to what happened and what could have been. Luckily, we got the better designs. IMO, the earliest clay designs resemble a station wagon with an open box.

[68panelman]

Very cool, thanks for all your work on this

[57taskforce]

Thanks for continuing to share!

[cleszkie]

I love the smell of modeling clay in the morning........

[68bowtie]

so cool. thanks for sharing. i love the action shots like the farm scene and the surveyor. i thought i recognized that 68 shortbed pic from somewhere...

[68bowtie]

also, those are some SKINNY tires on those 67/68's! what are those 185-series?!?

[joeydurango]

Cool stuff. Thanks for posting up more things to look at. Really like the "action glamour" shots - 4x4 on the Cali coast, surveyor, forklift and combine...

And I concur with Factorystock - if they'd ended up with the station wagon design, I'll hazard a guess that very few of us would currently have 67-72 Chevy trucks as a hobby.

[hewittca]

Originally Posted by joeydurango

Cool stuff. Thanks for posting up more things to look at. Really like the "action glamour" shots - 4x4 on the Cali coast, surveyor, forklift and combine...

And I concur with Factorystock - if they'd ended up with the station wagon design, I'll hazard a guess that very few of us would currently have 67-72 Chevy trucks as a hobby.

I agree with both of you. Maybe since they were reintroducing the El Camino, they felt this concept was too close in scale and car-like styling to release it as a serious next generation truck.

[hewittca]

For those of you that are interested and don't visit the 60-66 board much, the 60-66 development/concept photos have now been posted here.

[Trackbar]

Very good reading on the history of these trucks.

Correct me if I am wrong. Over the years I have heard from different sources that GM bought the plans for these trucks from Studebaker before the went under. Has anyone else been told this?

[hewittca]

Aside 1, Studebaker Concept Rumor

Originally Posted by Trackbar

Very good reading on the history of these trucks.

Correct me if I am wrong. Over the years I have heard from different sources that GM bought the plans for these trucks from Studebaker before the went under. Has anyone else been told this?

Interesting. I have never heard of this before now. I did some digging on this and from what I found I think it was speculation based on a Studebaker concept photo that surfaced. User Ryan68 posted a thread about this on the original boards that claimed this concept photo was of a Studebaker design that was purchased by GM. The photo and original thread are gone, however, there is this thread from 2002 that discusses the original thread, and the consensus is that the concept purchase was purely speculation based on subtle similarities between the Studebaker concept and production '67 C10. It is also mentioned that the whole rumor was started as a joke by Ryan68, but I could not substantiate this claim. In that thread, there is a nice post by user billogna that adds a bit of relevant information to this thread, along with an interesting concept drawing from '65. I will quote his post here:

"The original '67 was designed by Harry Bentley Bradley. There was an interesting interview with him in the Jan '01 issue of Sport Truck mag, in which he talks about how he pushed for the small back window, and how GM thought the overall design was too car-like so they changed the hood in '69 to make it more truck-like, but he was working with the Cadillac team by then, and had no say in the new design. Anyway, this is the most convincing pic, to me, that suppports the non-Studebaker theory. It is obviosly a '67 Chevy design. I like the Chevelle body line on the forward front fender. It is signed by Bradley and dated 8/65. He had been with GM since '62."


If someone has a copy of the Harry Bentley Bradley interview that billogna mentioned, that would be an awesome addition to this thread.

[hewittca]

Aside 2, Harry Bentley Bradley Interview

Well look at that, I found the article! It was posted on the boards by the original author Jim Aust (board member CircusWagonJim) here. There's some interesting information in the article and enlightening discussion of it in the original post. For the sake of completeness, I will withhold my own summary and include the full article here.











Credit goes to CircusWagonJim for these original scans of the article from the May 2003 issue of Classic Trucks. Admittedly, they were somewhat hard to read, so I edited the scans so that they are much easier to read. I have to thank Jim for his retroactive contribution to this thread!

[Sixteen Tons]

Very cool sir ! Thanks !!!

[hewittca]

I have just found another large set of photos that I plan on adding to this thread and I realize that this thread is quickly becoming information overload and will become an organizational disaster with the linear post format. That being the case, I have gone back and edited the original post to include a Contents section that logically organizes all the photo sets and links you to each section for quick reference. It also assures that each new photo set does not get lost within the discussion (which I fully encourage and enjoy!). At one point, I may try to conglomerate everything I've collected (over all generations) and create a chronological pictorial history of the development of GM trucks. For now, however, I will continue to add new photos in installments for your viewing pleasure!

[joeydurango]

Super interesting stuff! So... when's the coffee table book coming out?

[hewittca]

Originally Posted by joeydurango

Super interesting stuff! So... when's the coffee table book coming out?

Wouldn't that be nice to look through! Trust me, I have already tossed around that idea as the volume of photographs continues to grow and everything gets somewhat separated and disorganized on the board. There are several hurdles to accomplishing this though, so it may not happen. We'll see...

[hewittca]

I have decided to move any photo sets that have dedicated boards to the appropriate board.

Part 5, Suburbans and Panels

This photo set can be found on the 67-72 Suburbans & Panels Board.

[hewittca]

I also decided to move the production line photos to their own post in the off chance that I do find more. With these rearrangements I have made sure not to disrupt the linear progression of the discussions contained within the threads.

Aside 3, Production Line Photos

I originally wanted to include a detailed post on assembly line photos, but sadly there are only two photos that the GM Heritage Center was able to find for me. I assume this is because cameras were technically not allowed in the production areas, so very few authorized photos from GM are available. For now, I will just share what I do have.

-1969 Assembly Line
A fresh line of '69 C10s rolls off the line.



-1971 Assembly Line
I'm not sure what is meant by "The Last Truck" because this is a '71 model. Maybe it was the last truck to be built at Tarrytown.

[Sicklajoie]

Originally Posted by hewittca

I also decided to move the production line photos to their own post in the off chance that I do find more. With these rearrangements I have made sure not to disrupt the linear progression of the discussions contained within the threads.

Aside 3, Production Line Photos

I originally wanted to include a detailed post on assembly line photos, but sadly there are only two photos that the GM Heritage Center was able to find for me. I assume this is because cameras were technically not allowed in the production areas, so very few authorized photos from GM are available. For now, I will just share what I do have.

-1969 Assembly Line
A fresh line of '69 C10s rolls off the line.

Funny how 69 trucks are rolling down the line with 68 Caprices alongside.

[57taskforce]

Love it!!! Keep them coming!!!

[68panelman]

The "last truck", wonder who got that one, or was it just for that particular plant?

[cleszkie]

I'm not sure how the full-size conceptual models are made these days. I'm guessing its through the use of CAD and huge CNC-type machines to carve out the shapes. However, back in the day, these guys were frickin' artists! Shaping the models out of massive blocks of clay by hand. True craftsmanship.

[hewittca]

Part 6, Blazers

The photo set for Blazer development can be found here on the 67-72 Blazer/Jimmy board.

[nibulus]

Originally Posted by cleszkie

I'm not sure how the full-size conceptual models are made these days. I'm guessing its through the use of CAD and huge CNC-type machines to carve out the shapes. However, back in the day, these guys were frickin' artists! ...

Your guess is quite close to reality. At least for OEMs with larger volume, since the modeling machines are not that cheap (less surprising).

Here's an example of one. As you can see, details/changes are often modelled manually.

To reduce cost, one option is to use the frame of an existing vehicle, on which sort of "clay sheets" or thin "blocks" are mounted and then modelled either by machine or hand, depending on availability of 3D-data.

Another option is to make a completely new frame for the clay model, made of whatever material is reasonable. It could theoretically be made of wood, polymer, metal or whatever, depending on the purpose of the full-size model (exterior only, interior, engine bay etc.). Sometimes the models have to be driveable.

Originally Posted by cleszkie

... Shaping the models out of massive blocks of clay by hand. True craftsmanship.

I'd say those models in this thread weren't made of one massive clay block either. Not only to reduce cost.

Either way, it was and still is true craftmanship. And art. Funny to see that the challenges at the time (regarding cost, industrialization, marketing etc.) were pretty much the same as nowadays.

Speaking of challenges, it'd be really interesting to get some in-depth info about GM's product development / industrialization process back then.

[Keith Seymore]

Originally Posted by nibulus

Your guess is quite close to reality. At least for OEMs with larger volume, since the modeling machines are not that cheap (less surprising).

Here's an example of one. As you can see, details/changes are often modelled manually.

To reduce cost, one option is to use the frame of an existing vehicle, on which sort of "clay sheets" or thin "blocks" are mounted and then modelled either by machine or hand, depending on availability of 3D-data.

Another option is to make a completely new frame for the clay model, made of whatever material is reasonable. It could theoretically be made of wood, polymer, metal or whatever, depending on the purpose of the full-size model (exterior only, interior, engine bay etc.). Sometimes the models have to be driveable.



I'd say those models in this thread weren't made of one massive clay block either. Not only to reduce cost.

Either way, it was and still is true craftmanship. And art. Funny to see that the challenges at the time (regarding cost, industrialization, marketing etc.) were pretty much the same as nowadays.

The surface is created in the Design Studio via computer software (typically a modeling software that is "friendly" to creating smooth curves and blended surfaces).

The data can then be transferred to the clay modelers and the surface created in clay for review. This can be full size, half scale, quarter scale, as desired. You are also correct that it is not a "giant block of clay", but a layer of clay added over an "armature", that is, a structure of metal, wood and/or Styrofoam.

After there is agreement that the surface meets Studio expectations then it is sent over to engineering for evaluation, to make sure the panels can be formed and establish details like door cut lines, "B" surface details like what you see when you open the doors and such, material thickness and component packaging. Once that's done then the engineering team can start designing up the individual parts and details in earnest, in a different software that is more conducive to part detail and manufacturability.

It would be easy (...easier...) if this was just a straight flow through process but naturally it is an iterative process, as engineering learns that certain items won't work or can't be made. The Studio is also characterized by changing their mind or wanting to add content late in the game because they just saw the latest whiz bang thing or because they want to introduce the latest styling theme on the product just before it launches.

It is a constant game of give-and-take as a result of the creative tension between the two groups and their requisite personalities.

K