@devilred1971 thanks for commenting. Ford did avoid taking a direct cash handout but benefited greatly from the bailout because without it, Ford's, and every other car makers' supply network would have collapsed and so would the banking system that propped them all up. They also were given cash infusions for various R&D efforts and were the biggest winners in the so-called "Cash for clunkers" program. Ford execs are the first to admit that it saved them all.
@aleangelo ____lol....oh it's rare alright.....something like only 53 made. rent or buy the movie "tucker" a real good movie.....this will tell you all about it
I can empathize with a company being muscled out by larger established car makers but what's really great about this car? it's ugly overweight irrational non aerodynamic like many other US car models at the time and since.
sure credit is due for seatbelts but still. it's not like it was a fiber glass composite series hybrid electric car
@DanFrederiksen It's actually very aerodynamic--it has a drag coefficient of only 0.27, which is the same as the 2009 Honda Civic Hybrid and Lexus sedan. It had an aluminum rear-mounted engine and four-wheel independent suspension at a time when no other US cars did. If Tucker had more time to work it out, it would have had fuel injection and disc brakes, too.
@galoon 0.27 isn't particularly aerodynamic though, nor does it account for the massive size of the tucker nor is a claimed value of 0.3 the same as actual performance. I'd like to see good simulation or windtunnel data to believe that design has as good coefficient as a porsche
@DanFrederiksen Not aerodynamic compared to a Porsche of course (it wasn't designed as a sports car) but considerably more so than its rival sedans. Look at the car's body and profile compared to, say, a 1948 Ford or Chevrolet; you'll see how much lower and sleeker it is. It's big because it's a late 1940's family sedan; those were all big.
@galoon porsche drag coefficient is typically around 0.28 without spoiler and 0.31 with spoiler.
they claimed it was mathematically calculated. which seems unlikely at the time : )
probably more like pulled out of their ass : )
and yes aerodynamics is an absolutely critical parameter of a car when it comes to fuel efficiency and that all cars were that stupid large at the time is little excuse.
@DanFrederiksen The Porsche figures sound about right; drag is greater with a spoiler because it's there to reduce lift (and thus keep that speed machine on the ground LOL!) Low drag is one of the reasons why the Tucker's modified helicopter engine could get 20mpg at 50mph, which was pretty good for that time--all US cars were big; that's what most of the public wanted. It took the Oil Crisis to change their minds!
@DanFrederiksen The 0.27 C/d figure for the Tucker is based on Alex Tremulis's coast tests that he conducted on the car--he was somewhat skeptical of the results too, so he rounded it up to 0.3 as a figure to give the public. Today's passenger cars are between 0.3 and about 0.5, so this is a pretty darn good C/d. Most US manufacturers in the '40s ignored anything related to aerodynamics!
@galoon And Alex Tremulis, who designed the Tucker, is one of the most respected US auto designers. By the time he came to Tucker, he had extensive design experience with Auburn/Cord/Duesenberg, plus solid knowledge of aircraft design/aerodynamics, which he studied during WWII. He went to Ford after Tucker folded, and frequently published articles for Road & Track after retiring. He knew what he was doing when it came to aerodynamics, that's for sure!
@DanFrederiksen The drag coefficient is what it is, regardless of size--it's not the be all and end all of how aerodynamic a car is overall, of course--designers sometimes increase it to counteract lift. Looks can be deceiving when it comes to aero efficiency. Take the Lambo Countach: it looks streamlined, but is surprisingly unaerodynamic. Not sure if wind tunnel tests were ever conducted on the Tucker; designer Alex Tremulis may have done WT testing on models.
@neatoauctions: builders were more concerned by costs-revenues ratio,
marketing & sales.Safety,fuel consumption & environment and aerodynamics concepts on bodyworks were introduced (namely in USA) following state decrees & rules. Without Ralph Nader actions maybe car builders never reproject safe models,without the "moose hazard" complaint made by two Swedish journalists, Mercedes never fit EBD system on his class A models.
Enduring design and fascinating story behind the car. A yellow one sold in 2009 at Clars Auction Gallery in Oakland, CA for $750,000. My dad took me to see one in Brainerd, MN, in 1948, and I still remember it. The movie is also very interesting.
A car way ahead of it's time in safety and innovation. The first production car with disc brakes, seat (safety) belts, safety glass and a helicopter engine. And the BIG 3 hated it.
if you beat the big 3 they will put you out of business ''automaker mafia" at least ford didn't take the bailout though
devilred1971 6 months ago
@devilred1971 thanks for commenting. Ford did avoid taking a direct cash handout but benefited greatly from the bailout because without it, Ford's, and every other car makers' supply network would have collapsed and so would the banking system that propped them all up. They also were given cash infusions for various R&D efforts and were the biggest winners in the so-called "Cash for clunkers" program. Ford execs are the first to admit that it saved them all.
mrpitv 6 months ago
this car is rare? i dont know much about teh car....have a expectative how many have?
aleangelo 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@aleangelo ____lol....oh it's rare alright.....something like only 53 made. rent or buy the movie "tucker" a real good movie.....this will tell you all about it
inkey2 1 year ago
this car was so much ahead of its time...crazy what companies wuld do to get sales n drown small hardworking ppl like tucker
unitedwetrance 1 year ago
I can empathize with a company being muscled out by larger established car makers but what's really great about this car? it's ugly overweight irrational non aerodynamic like many other US car models at the time and since.
sure credit is due for seatbelts but still. it's not like it was a fiber glass composite series hybrid electric car
DanFrederiksen 1 year ago
@DanFrederiksen It's actually very aerodynamic--it has a drag coefficient of only 0.27, which is the same as the 2009 Honda Civic Hybrid and Lexus sedan. It had an aluminum rear-mounted engine and four-wheel independent suspension at a time when no other US cars did. If Tucker had more time to work it out, it would have had fuel injection and disc brakes, too.
galoon 1 year ago
@galoon 0.27 isn't particularly aerodynamic though, nor does it account for the massive size of the tucker nor is a claimed value of 0.3 the same as actual performance. I'd like to see good simulation or windtunnel data to believe that design has as good coefficient as a porsche
DanFrederiksen 1 year ago
@DanFrederiksen Not aerodynamic compared to a Porsche of course (it wasn't designed as a sports car) but considerably more so than its rival sedans. Look at the car's body and profile compared to, say, a 1948 Ford or Chevrolet; you'll see how much lower and sleeker it is. It's big because it's a late 1940's family sedan; those were all big.
galoon 1 year ago
@galoon porsche drag coefficient is typically around 0.28 without spoiler and 0.31 with spoiler.
they claimed it was mathematically calculated. which seems unlikely at the time : )
probably more like pulled out of their ass : )
and yes aerodynamics is an absolutely critical parameter of a car when it comes to fuel efficiency and that all cars were that stupid large at the time is little excuse.
DanFrederiksen 1 year ago
@DanFrederiksen The Porsche figures sound about right; drag is greater with a spoiler because it's there to reduce lift (and thus keep that speed machine on the ground LOL!) Low drag is one of the reasons why the Tucker's modified helicopter engine could get 20mpg at 50mph, which was pretty good for that time--all US cars were big; that's what most of the public wanted. It took the Oil Crisis to change their minds!
galoon 1 year ago
@DanFrederiksen The 0.27 C/d figure for the Tucker is based on Alex Tremulis's coast tests that he conducted on the car--he was somewhat skeptical of the results too, so he rounded it up to 0.3 as a figure to give the public. Today's passenger cars are between 0.3 and about 0.5, so this is a pretty darn good C/d. Most US manufacturers in the '40s ignored anything related to aerodynamics!
galoon 1 year ago
@galoon And Alex Tremulis, who designed the Tucker, is one of the most respected US auto designers. By the time he came to Tucker, he had extensive design experience with Auburn/Cord/Duesenberg, plus solid knowledge of aircraft design/aerodynamics, which he studied during WWII. He went to Ford after Tucker folded, and frequently published articles for Road & Track after retiring. He knew what he was doing when it came to aerodynamics, that's for sure!
galoon 1 year ago
@DanFrederiksen The drag coefficient is what it is, regardless of size--it's not the be all and end all of how aerodynamic a car is overall, of course--designers sometimes increase it to counteract lift. Looks can be deceiving when it comes to aero efficiency. Take the Lambo Countach: it looks streamlined, but is surprisingly unaerodynamic. Not sure if wind tunnel tests were ever conducted on the Tucker; designer Alex Tremulis may have done WT testing on models.
galoon 1 year ago
The Tucker, it's been said, was conceived with an emphasis on safety, yet the car was designed with "suicide" doors. I wonder , why?
neatoauctions 1 year ago
@neatoauctions the irony of it all.
mrpitv 1 year ago
@neatoauctions: builders were more concerned by costs-revenues ratio,
marketing & sales.Safety,fuel consumption & environment and aerodynamics concepts on bodyworks were introduced (namely in USA) following state decrees & rules. Without Ralph Nader actions maybe car builders never reproject safe models,without the "moose hazard" complaint made by two Swedish journalists, Mercedes never fit EBD system on his class A models.
patsematary 1 year ago
Enduring design and fascinating story behind the car. A yellow one sold in 2009 at Clars Auction Gallery in Oakland, CA for $750,000. My dad took me to see one in Brainerd, MN, in 1948, and I still remember it. The movie is also very interesting.
TomLibby100 2 years ago
this is a enginering legend
ogzsnr 2 years ago
beautiful..loved the movie too
fjbutch 2 years ago
A car way ahead of it's time in safety and innovation. The first production car with disc brakes, seat (safety) belts, safety glass and a helicopter engine. And the BIG 3 hated it.
jtrisgood 2 years ago
In my eyes, the Cherkovski helicopter engine, makes this car what it truly is.... along with styling
Sarcasticscum 2 years ago
Clearly the Tata influenced Tucker as did the streamlining fashion of the times.
mrpitv 3 years ago
I allways compare the tucker to the very elgant Czech Tatra streamline rear engined V8 cars of the same era
for comparing please go to
the video
Tatra 603 Motorsound
here on youtube.
Klottelitsch 3 years ago