MAKO SHARK I
The story of Mako Shark II can’t really start without saying a few words about Mako I. After all, the whole “shark” theme was Mitchell’s idea and many of the ideas found on Mako II were also on Mako I. The “shark” theme was such an influence on Bill that it just had to carry-on for several years. This was the start of the famous story about the paint guys having to repaint Bill’s fish to match the car, too. But since I’ve told that one so often, I’m not going to repeat it here. It is enough to say that the iridescent blue top body fading to a white underbody was a real challenge for the paint technology of the day but, when you look back, it was really a show-stopper.
So, if I can recap briefly, in 1962 the design work on the new 1963 Sting Ray was already done. GM wanted something to promote the new car and build some excitement. I did a couple of sketches of the 63 with the back clip of the XP-700 (double-bubble roof) added. At first it was about as incongruous as a guy in a tuxedo wearing a pair of tennis shoes but we worked on it a little more until it met Bill Mitchell’s approval. This was Mako Shark I, or XP-755.
Everyone had a different opinion on some of the features we put on the car. Bill was very excited about the double-bubble roof, the side pipes and the periscope rearview mirror. Some of us argued against the lexan roof but Mr. Mitchell insisted. Ed Wayne to do the actual engineering for the roof. It was quite advanced technically, with a vaporized aluminum coating on the inside to cut down on heat gain and the periscope rearview mirror built right into it. I wasn’t really enthused about it but I think it would be fair to say that, at least in design terms, the roof had some roots in the bomb-shaped headrest that I had done for the StingRay SS. So I guess I can take some consolation in that.
I don’t want to dwell on this, but the prism-type periscope rearview mirror was really a big item with Bill and it appeared in several other subsequent cars up to ASTRO I. Maybe the most interesting story about the periscope mirror relates to its application to that car. ASTRO I was originally supposed to meet a 31 inches total overall height. Engineering couldn’t meet that target but they did get it down to 33 1/2 inches. After that, they added the periscope rearview mirror and the highest point on the car was now about 35 1/2 inches. Because it was still under 36 inches, GM designed yardsticks with the 35 1/2 inch mark prominently displayed as one of their promotional give-aways for the New York auto show, to emphasize the fact that it was so low. I’ve got another story about the same mirror on ASTRO III, but I’ll save that for the right article.
The Mako I had a lot of other design features that inspired some of us. First, the car came with a Latham supercharger. Wally Wyss wrote about Mako I and called it a “Roots-type” supercharger and suggested that it was made by GM’s Detroit Diesel Division. I think that there is a lot of similar technology reflected in these brands, but as I recall it was a Latham. In either case, this was quite an elaborate set-up, with the side draft carburetors and all. So to show off this little bit of exotica, we developed some very fine detail for the hood bulge. The radial chrome fin arrangement let you see the supercharger as you eye moved over the hoodline. This feature got a lot of play in the magazines.
In more technical terms, the car was built on a 1961 chassis and made its debut in 1962. The nose of the car was heavily customized with headlights hidden in the grille area and almost 12 inches of extra length. The tail was upswept and that meant that we had to move the rear-most cross-member forward a little bit.
The Mako Shark I had a number of features that re-appeared on Mako Shark II, as I said. A lot of these were ideas that Bill had developed and that, depending on your outlook, either added to the design or fell in the category of gadgets. This was the first time we did the pop-up brake flaps, which were mirrored panels which raised (electrically) when you applied the brakes. The mirrored coating reflected a second set of upward pointing brake lights and gave additional warning of the fact that you were slowing down. There have been many variations on this theme since and now even the federal government is in the act with its CHMSL. A lot of show cars also use different intensity LED’s in the brake light package to show things like the intensity of braking.
I did most of the original design work for this car in the basement studio that they now call the skunk works in Chevy Design III. Bill gave the overall direction and I did a lot of the exterior work.
MAKO SHARK II and MANTA RAYI can tell you more about mako I another time, Right now let’s talk about Mako II. The year was 1965 and we were already looking forward to showing-off a design exercise for the introduction of the 1968 car at the New York show.
This one was truly a Bill Mitchell inspired car with the narrow waist or coke-bottle shape and pronounced fenders. Bill and Zora didn’t agree on the design at first. But this was in the era when design came first and engineering then got to work within the major parameters we set.
Actually, Zora thought that the shape imposed some limitations on the passenger pod. But I think he changed his mind a little one day at the track. He was driving the new car at the proving grounds when there was a tire failure. Zora held it up against the wall until he ground the fenders off right down to the door line and wheels. By the time it got down this far, the car had stopped. After that, I think he changed his mind about the utility of the wider fender area.
There is always some confusion about the Mako Shark II based on different photos, too. There were, in fact, two primary versions of the Mako Shark II and then the Manta Ray version. So three basic versions with quite a few re-paints and minor changes over the years.
Mako Shark I, as shown at the New York show in January 1965 was a non-running model with the outside side pipes rising up into the front fenders. Mako Shark II, first shown at the Paris Auto Salon in October of the same year, was now a running model with more conventional rear-exiting exhaust system. The exposed ends of the exhaust were quite highly styled in a boxed and finned arrangement much like I had done for the SS Racer.
Speaking of models, I should also mention the young girl who is often seen in the GM photos of the day posing with this car. That was Connie van Dyke and she was Miss Teen America just two years before. She was found by Myron Scott (the guy who named the Corvette) and he got her into a lot of the shoots. She was really a nice girl and reflected the style GM was looking for. Myron is still around Detroit and you can talk to him, but he won’t travel.
The were several core design elements which were common to both the non-running and running models, of course. The basic design included the chopped roof, hinged roof panel which raised to permit easier entry, the sharp-edged fender lines, highly styled front clip, hood bulge and upswept tail. There were lots of other gadgets thrown on the car as repeats from Mako I, including the prism-type periscope rearview mirror, the pop-up brake flaps, James Bond retractable bumpers, and the louvered rear window treatment. When the car was converted to Manta Ray the louvered window concept was dropped in favour of the more conventional sugar-scoop arrangement.
Now, going back to the inception of the Mako Shark II, I think that it is fair to say that the design for what turned out to be the 1968 was not so far locked-in that public reaction to this show car was not going to have some effect. In fact, even as we were drawing the two of them there were perceptible differences in the sharpness of the lines and the exaggeration of major features like the wheel bulges. There was certainly no shortage of reaction in the automobile media to some of the “added” features that Bill had requested even when some of it might have been just a little short-sighted. But that’s the purpose of some of these cars. The public reaction has to be interpreted, you don’t just take it at face value. People, by and large, tend to think “right now” while we are supposed to think “in the future”. As I look back on the articles which have been written about the cars 20 years later, I see a lot of retrospection. The authors now recognize the fact that some of the original criticisms were off-base, the core ideas have been realized.
The interior of the Mako Shark I got a lot of criticism, particularly the steering wheel which was a small rectangular piece with controls for turn signals and transmission built-in. By the Paris show this was changed to a more conventional wheel with the main controls moved to stalks o the steering column. Does anything sound familiar here?
Most of the ‘informational” gauges were placed on the passenger side of the instrument pod, while the drivers side instrument panel had only the tach and speedometer. In addition to the gauges, there was also a system of warning lights for all major fluid levels and another series of lights to warn of open doors and the like.
The interior was comfortably molded in vinyl to provide a wrap-around feel. This was the beginning of a design theme which, looking back, could have been pushed much harder. We (the whole industry) were slow to pick-up on ergonomics and the “safety-cell” concept.
There were other interior features which may yet come to pass as standard features. In Mako Shark I and II, the seats were fixed and the accelerator/brake pedals moved on a one-piece control board. Adjustable pedals have since been used on race cars and show cars; they may yet find their way to street cars as a way of increasing the “fit” for a wider range of driver sizes, especially as we come closer to acceptance of drive-by-wire features.
The original Mako Shark I was powered by a 425 HP 396 big block; it was later changed to a ZL-1 style 427. And the cars have been driven. You will know from your own experience that GM was fairly generous in putting these cars out on display. That’s part of the reason they had so many touch-ups and minor changes.
Looking back, I don’t know of many other show cars of that era which made such an impact or have stood the test of time so well.
