In the Motor City’s great styling push of the 1950s for longer, lower, and wider cars, Ford created the distinctive cow belly chassis.
By far the major styling trend of the 1950s was the quest for lower and lower profiles, and this required some engineering changes. For example, one of the easier steps was the Detroit three’s switch to 14-inch wheels in 1957. General Motors adopted the controversial X-frame chassis that year (see our feature here), while Chrysler adopted torsion bar suspension, as its reduced stack height enabled a lower hood profile. At Ford, engineers took a different approach with an innovation that became known as the cow belly frame.
For the sake of comparison, the 1952 Lincoln chassis above represents standard practice for Motor City design in the early ’50s. Here was a double-drop ladder frame, often with a heavy X-member in the center to increase torsional rigidity on convertibles, hardtops, and heavier cars. The design was sturdy enough and inexpensive to manufacture, but it required a relatively high floor, which in turn required a tall roofline to provide sufficient headroom. It didn’t accommodate the low silhouette the styling studios demanded.
This was a special problem at Ford’s Special Products Division, where the 1956 Continental Mark II was then being developed. With a proposed height of just 56 inches, the Mark II was more than six inches lower than a production 1953 Lincoln. Chief engineer Harley Copp’s inventive solution was a new frame with the main rails bowed outward and downward and the crossmembers slung underneath, triggering the obvious nickname “cow belly.”
Special Products, soon to become the Continental Division, sold the prototype chassis (above) to Ford Styling for a reported $17,000, to be shipped off to Ghia in Italy for use on the 1955 Lincoln Futura dream car. The Futura, of course, was later customized by George Barris, Hollywood’s King of the Kustomizers, to become TV’s original Batmobile. And evidently, that chassis is still under Batmobile no. 1 to this day.
Two more cow belly chassis were sent to Hess & Eisenhardt of Cinncinnatti, a leading coachbuilder of the time, for the construction of two Continental prototypes under the direction of Continental body engineer Gordon Buehrig. These cars, a coupe and a convertible, used 1953 Lincoln bodies sectioned lengthwise by H&E to test the packaging. Known as the “cobbled cars” (in reality they were anything but), these prototypes demonstrated that with the cow belly frame, overall height could be reduced four inches without a significant reduction in passenger comfort.
Sent into production, the cow belly chassis was successfully used on the 1956-57 Continental Mark II, and then on Ford and Mercury cars starting in 1957 (above) and the Edsel in 1958. However, Lincoln and Ford Thunderbird from 1958 on went in a different direction, adopting full unit construction—but not without some manufacturing and quality problems, Lincoln in particular. However, the body-on-frame cow belly design on Ford, Mercury, and Edsel cars proved to be completely reliable, even with a rigorous test in the early years of NASCAR.
Ford even took a shot across the bow at General Motors and its X-frame configuration in a 1961 ad campaign (below). Without mentioning GM by name, the Dearborn carmaker noted that the cow belly frame, here labeled “guardrail construction,” offered more side impact protection than the X-frame (but without taking into account GM’s reinforced rocker sills). The cow belly chassis remained in production on full-sized Ford and Mercury passenger cars through 1964, when it was replaced by a full perimeter-frame design.
One of the best, most interesting & most engaging articles I’ve ever read here. Excellent, informative writing. Kudos.
Marvelous article! (By 1961, however, Pontiac had dropped the X-frame in favor of a perimeter frame.)
Early crash test video features a 59 Chevrolet sedan, results were unsurvivable.
IMHO, there was no engine, radiator or driveline in that rustbucket ’59, and the core support mounts, numerous fasteners and braces missing…
The ’59 Chevy sat in the lobby at IIHS for years and they still have it. It is totally complete and was in excellent condition pre-crash test. No rust. The reddish cloud that arises after impact is silt. It was a desert car. Over time, dirt and silt particles wash down into the doors, rockers, and body crevices. In a dry climate the dirt simply collects. In a wet climate the dirt captures moisture and the mud eats out the body from the inside. A dry car is a happy car.
Actually that is good to know and explains much of what I thought I saw. Having imported a few Utah and Arizona Mopars back to Ohio myself, surprised no scorpians were in the radiator. Be safe my friend…
That cowbelly chassis was a lighting send to those that raced stock cars. It was probably the most rigid out of the box factory stock chassis. A six point roll cage was more than enough for the bull rings of America. Those others had to add hundreds of pounds of additional bars in attempts to mitigate chassis flex with belt line and above triangulation.
Then why was the ’55-’57 Chevy perimeter frame the chassis of choice for building short track late models & modifieds for years, no matter the body on it? I grew up in the middle of stock car country just outside Charlotte, & well into the ’70s, the 55-57 Chevy chassis was what was used at the local bullrings, be it under a Camaro, Mustang, Chevelle, etc. Ed Howe & Ray Dillon were the 1st to make inroads with their custom built late model frames in the ’70s.
Back in the early ’80’s, I had the chance to buy the late-great Ohio stock car driver Vern Schrock’s unbeatable #10 dirt late model. It had ’76 Laguna body on a ’57 Chevy chassis that dominated midwest dirt ovals for almost two decades. Rebodied with newer Chevy sheetmetal uncounted times, that old ’57 chassis hooked up everwhere!
Had WAY too much fun in those days as volunteer crew for Mr. Schrock’s son, ASA driver Buddy Schock, when Shady Bowl was still on the ASA schedule. I can still feel the hangovers…
Ford and Mercury still employed an X-member in their convertibles during that period. Also the article fails to mention that the Continental employed a center torsional member that ran below the driveshaft as can be seen in that photograph. Ford always ran the driveshaft above the X-member in when they were used in convertible through the 1956 models.
Oh, I omit a lot of facts in these stories. I include the most relevant facts that will fit inside 500 words or so. Average internet page viewing time is around two minutes.
My uncle Feldi kept a flask under the front seat of his 1958 Mercury….
Ford also did a tv ad where a rolling chassis, with a front seat bolted in, was us ed. A “driver” was seat belted in. A huge concrete wrecking ball was on the end of a cable. The crane swung the ball back and then it hit the frame inches from where the driver was. The chassis was knocked several feet sideways, but the frame was not hurt nor was the driver. “Guardrail Construction”. There might have been a Chevy X-frame nearby for comparison.
I doubt the “reinforced rocker panels” of the ’59 would have performed better. It is a rule that if the frame is stout, the body sitting on it can be less-stout, So it is total strength that matters.
GM seemed to be “famous” for little real structure in the front of their cars, back then. Compared to a similar Chrysler product. In my ’68 Buick LeSabre, nothing between the front bumper and core support, many inches behind it. All the front bumper is doing is to hold the frame horns’ position.
My grandmother’s ’58 Fairlane is “built like a battelship” compared to 1958 GM cars. Even Edsels felt that way.