Absolutely beautiful, Mr. Brock!
Photography courtesy Barrett-Jackson
I recently had the rare and wonderful opportunity to build and refine the design of a 1963 split-window Corvette Stingray for last year’s SEMA Show. Having created the original design for Bill Mitchell, GM’s VP of Styling, clear back in 1957, it was interesting to look back on what was then a groundbreaking direction in design by Mitchell.
When Mitchell’s Stingray finally hit the street after five years of constant internal evaluations, it became the success that firmly established Mitchell’s reputation as one of the greatest designers of American automotive design. The now iconic split-window Corvette is one of the world’s few production models that keeps increasing in market as well as aesthetic value.
[Without Bill Mitchell, the Chevrolet C2 Corvette May Never Have Happened]
I used this occasion to reinterpret the split window by following our very limited practice at GM of building what internally we called a “Studio Concept,” a one-off version of a design that was specially built for favored executives who had admired or backed a concept or design in its initial stages. Each was built with unique upgrades in performance and aesthetic form with careful attention to detail, resulting in subtle versions that looked almost exactly like a regular production version.
In creating my Studio Concept Stingray for the SEMA Show, it was important to retain as much of the car’s original form as possible. The radical changes, as seen in so many recent restomods, built for a new generation with little understanding of historical background, tend to go far beyond the car’s original lines, thereby destroying much of the car’s subtle visual aesthetic.
This car’s appearance at SEMA was important. It confirmed my belief in a restoration direction that prioritizes form and function over such obvious modifications as minimum ground clearance or oversized wheel-and-tire combinations that demand reshaping the fenders.
Having designed the original form for Mitchell, I still remember Zora Arkus-Duntov’s highly publicized rejection of Mitchell’s split window because of its limitation of rearward vision. My original sketches for Mitchell had emphasized driver visibility with a larger glass area. Mitchell’s demand for the split had won Chevrolet’s approval for its first year, 1963. So, my goal with my Studio Concept was to resolve that enigma in such a way that few would notice, yet increase visibility.
Another aesthetic modification was to deemphasize distracting bright work (chrome) so that the car’s form and function became priorities. Fake vents and scoops that Mitchell had added as visual “surface entertainment” were retained but now fully functional.
Cost considerations for production had killed function in ’63, but Mitchell’s demand that these minor details be retained for “sales appeal” were approved. Being able to make these openings fully operational made my version far more honest without changing Mitchell’s basic design.
Same with the car’s new headlights: I was able to smooth the design’s original nose and eliminate the complicated flip-up lights that have been a constant source of problems for those who demanded perfect cut lines while retaining full operation. The use of black chrome on the full original bumper set enabled me to retain originality while again emphasizing overall form over distracting bright work.
Best of all and completely invisible is this car’s focus on performance. Underneath the car’s iconic form is a special, newly refined, exclusive Art Morrison chassis with C7 production suspension components, a larger, improved braking system, and a fully port-injected induction system on a new LS3 Corvette engine. All these mechanical upgrades provide today’s best in performance and handling while retaining all of the car’s original lines.
I’m so pleased with the result that I’m building another for myself. It’s a new trend I call resto-refinement.
Displaying 1-1 of 1 commentsView all comments on the CMS forums
You'll need to log in to post.