first to use a v10

[culver]

"Air suspension, which Lincoln ballyhooed for some models in 1984 was introduced in 1909 by the Cowey Motor Works of Great Britain. It did not work well because it leaked.

The first practical air suspension was developed by Firestone in 1933 for an experimental car called the Stout-Scarab. This was a rear-engined vehicle that used four rubberized bellows in place of conventional springs. Air was supplied by small compressors attached to each bellow"

http://www.motorera.com/history/hist08.htm

Actually, airspring suspension dates back into the 1800s. (I’ve been researching this for a project I’m working on). However, GM was the first company to introduce a practical airspring automotive suspension. It was released in something like ’57. GM and Firestone went through great lengths to solve many problems that hadn’t been worked out before. In other words, they came out with the first practical automotive implementation. Their work was feed into the later system used by Lincoln. Again, Lincoln worked with Firestone to solve many of the leakage issues with the original systems. Those solutions lead the way for Lexus and MB. No, GM wasn’t the first to use the idea but they with Firestone did much of the trail blazing. Ford and Firestone solved the leakage issue and made the system truly viable. Unfortunately I don’t have the book at hand so I can quote the title and author but I think it was something like “The History of Air Suspension.” It was written by a guy who worked on those projects while at Firestone.

[nota]

Actually, airspring suspension dates back into the 1800s. (I’ve been researching this for a project I’m working on). However, GM was the first company to introduce a practical airspring automotive suspension. It was released in something like ’57. GM and Firestone went through great lengths to solve many problems that hadn’t been worked out before. In other words, they came out with the first practical automotive implementation.

Actually I cast doubt on your particular boast for the US auto industry (re air suspension) which initially was 'innovative' then since devolved into 'practical' and now a 'practical implementation'

[culver]

The innovative part was the particular geometry they used (solved the need for large air reservoirs used on earlier designs). They also did a great deal of work on the control systems (Caddy, Chevy, Buick and Pontiac were all developing their own systems, they didn't collaborate).
It was an innovation because they got it to work. Others had tried but failed. They invented the airsprings that are in use today. They solved the problems that kept it from working in the past. I would call that innovation.

Another innovation I forgot (but isn't related to suspension) was the first turbo production car, the Corvair. GM was the first to release a turbo car but SAAB and Porsche (I think SAAB mostly) really laid the ground work for other automakers to follow. This case would be the opposite of what I cited above. In this case GM was first but others really solved the issues of practical implementation. In the case of air springs Firestone/GM solved all but the leak down issues in the 1950s. Ford and Firestone solved the leak down issues in the '70s for installation in cars during the '80s. Firestone came out with the rolling sleeve design used on both cars and trucks today.

[Matra et Alpine]

valid points culver, the problem is when to draw lines on what is "innovation" and what is copying ! even if with slight improvement. There was an "interestgin debate" before on hwo the Japanese "just copy". One mans copy is another mans innovation.

For example Turbos had been used in production plane engines for decades before applied in the Corvair ( the Oldsmobile beat it to market btw ). So where's the "innovation" ?

It's best not to use manufacturers material, books or web sites as reference on history as they all claim THEY invented something when in reality they often only contributed one step along the long develompent path

I've never quite understood the need to claim "inventor". Is it to influence the gullible buyer ? To build the company ego ? To claim "superiority" ??

[henk4]

just wondering where the Mercedes 300SE comes in that was presented in 1962. Does that use the GM/Firestone system?

[nota]

One mans copy is another mans innovation.

For example Turbos had been used in production plane engines for decades before applied in the Corvair ( the Oldsmobile beat it to market btw ). So where's the "innovation" ?

Indeed & Renault seems to have patented the turbocharger in 1902

[Matra et Alpine]

Indeed & Renault seems to have patented the turbocharger in 1902

supercharger ( which Daimler had a version of already from 1885 )

it was another Frenchman who first turbo'ed a plane engine in 1916

[culver]

valid points culver, the problem is when to draw lines on what is "innovation" and what is copying ! even if with slight improvement. There was an "interestgin debate" before on hwo the Japanese "just copy". One mans copy is another mans innovation.

For example Turbos had been used in production plane engines for decades before applied in the Corvair ( the Oldsmobile beat it to market btw ). So where's the "innovation" ?

It's best not to use manufacturers material, books or web sites as reference on history as they all claim THEY invented something when in reality they often only contributed one step along the long develompent path

I've never quite understood the need to claim "inventor". Is it to influence the gullible buyer ? To build the company ego ? To claim "superiority" ??

Well, I stand partly corrected, both the turbo Corvair and Olds came out in '62. As for the innovation, well AiResearch and GM were the first to get the system on a street car. The turbo and supercharging solutions used on aircraft engines would not have been practical on a car. As I haven't studied it in detail I can't say what all they did. Needless to say to get it to market they had to attack a lot of little problems.

As for the air shocks, I wasn't using a manufacture's book. Since my last post I found the information, Riding on Air: A History of Air Suspension by Jack Gieck, published by SAE Press. Firestone, more than GM, came up with many of the key innovations in air suspension. Not a bad read if you want a fairly technical history of the subject.

For all of this discussion of details and semantics, I think we all can agree that the US auto industry most certainly has generated many automotive innovations be it in original ideas or in idea refinement.

[henk4]

Well, I stand partly corrected, both the turbo Corvair and Olds came out in '62. As for the innovation, well AiResearch and GM were the first to get the system on a street car. The turbo and supercharging solutions used on aircraft engines would not have been practical on a car. As I haven't studied it in detail I can't say what all they did. Needless to say to get it to market they had to attack a lot of little problems.

As for the air shocks, I wasn't using a manufacture's book. Since my last post I found the information, Riding on Air: A History of Air Suspension by Jack Gieck, published by SAE Press. Firestone, more than GM, came up with many of the key innovations in air suspension. Not a bad read if you want a fairly technical history of the subject.

For all of this discussion of details and semantics, I think we all can agree that the US auto industry most certainly has generated many automotive innovations be it in original ideas or in idea refinement.

so what does that book say about the Mercedes system and actually the Borgward P100 was the first German car to use, I think in 1959 or 1960

[culver]

Here's an interesting link with a few milestones, some US, some not.
Can't vouch for the information, just offering the link:
http://www.parttrackers.com/library/1/131/137/

[culver]

so what does that book say about the Mercedes system and actually the Borgward P100 was the first German car to use, I think in 1959 or 1960

II know it mentions the work in Europe but I don't remember the details. I was actually reading it for the technical content, not the historical content. Regardless, GM's system was on the market in '57.
It did give specific credit to Citroen for their hydro pneumatic system.

Beyond any of this, my fundamental point was in response to a claim that the US auto industry did not produce innovations. I think I have provided plenty of evidence to the contrary.

[Matra et Alpine]

Well, I stand partly corrected, both the turbo Corvair and Olds came out in '62. As for the innovation, well AiResearch and GM were the first to get the system on a street car. The turbo and supercharging solutions used on aircraft engines would not have been practical on a car.

Care to explain why NOT ?
Yes it was larger on a plane BUT it's not really "innovation" to make somethgin a little smaller is it ???

As for the air shocks, I wasn't using a manufacture's book. Since my last post I found the information, Riding on Air: A History of Air Suspension by Jack Gieck, published by SAE Press. Firestone, more than GM, came up with many of the key innovations in air suspension. Not a bad read if you want a fairly technical history of the subject.

You told us earlier the authior of this book worked for Firestone.
See the point made earlier about "trusting" books written by a company or it's employee

For all of this discussion of details and semantics, I think we all can agree that the US auto industry most certainly has generated many automotive innovations be it in original ideas or in idea refinement.

As have every other company and industry.
You were the one claiming innovations which people have pointed out were actually invented/developed/in production elsewhere

[Matra et Alpine]

Here's an interesting link with a few milestones, some US, some not.
Can't vouch for the information, just offering the link:
http://www.parttrackers.com/library/1/131/137/

Dangerous also to use random lists created on web sites.

Especially as some of those are "introduced" which is really only sayign it happened. NOT that it was innovative, invented or unique or world class etc.

You're tryign too hard

[Matra et Alpine]

Beyond any of this, my fundamental point was in response to a claim that the US auto industry did not produce innovations. I think I have provided plenty of evidence to the contrary.

Reviewing the thread - some of us do - it's really a response to CLAIMS about US innovation which were shown to be erronerous or inflated.

NOBODY SAID the US didn't produce innovations - that woudl be stupid stance.
What WAS said was that soem of the innovations YOU claim for the US wre "thin".

[Bob]

I invented the turbocharger. Ricers owe me millions in royalties.