The car on the home page

[Phantomrig]

I appologise if this is someplace else on here but i wouldnt even know where to look. what is the car in the picture on the lower left corner of the home page. you can only see the rear half of the car, it resembles a Tucker but what is it. are there any other pics available. any history and knowledge would be appreciated.

[John K.]

That photo is of a model of an early artist's conception of the Tucker car. George Lawson made the scale model, photographed it in a natural setting, and sent it to Preston and his associates. They were not happy with it, but had nothing better to use. You can read more about this in The Indomitable Tin Goose by Charles Pearson.

[tatraman]

Yes, this is the final variation of the original Tucker design as submitted by George Lawson. Lawson created a quarter-scale model of the design, and it was photographed and placed in a realistic background to make it look as real as possible. This was a common process done in that era, but the general public was not aware of this process. So, when Preston Tucker published some of these realistic photographs of the model, many people were given the false impression that he had a running prototype car. Tucker's publishing of these photographs before an uninformed public has been used by many as "proof" that Tucker was a fraud.

The "production" Tucker is a direct descendant of this Lawson design, being further developed by Alex Tremulis and then by a five man team from J. Gordon Lippincott and Associates (Hal Bergstrom, Read Viemeister, Budd Steinhilber, Tucker Madawick, and Phil Egan). The Lippincott team's design was the design chosen for production.

The story in Charles Pearson's Indomitable Tin Goose book needs to be examined closely. First of all, Lawson worked on the design of the Tucker automobile for two-and-a-half years - which is much longer than any of the other designers (yes, including Tremulis). If Preston didn't like Lawson's design , why did he have him work on the design for so long? Lawson was also named the first "Chief Stylist" of the Tucker Corporation. Again, why would Preston Tucker name Lawson the head of the Tucker Corporation's styling department if he wasn't pleased with his work?

On the flip side, if Preston Tucker did knowingly promote Lawson's design without any intention of using it, and asked people to invest their life's savings based on that design, what does this say about Preston Tucker?

Interestingly, according to the SEC trial transcripts, Lawson and Pearson worked hand-in-hand on creating brochures for promoting the Tucker "Torpedo", as it was called during Lawson's term. Also, Lawson was the first witness in the SEC trial and Pearson the second witness in that same trial. Their names were published together in newspapers all across the US, yet Lawson's name doesn't appear anywhere in Pearson's book.

[Tuckerfan1053]

I thought Pearson did mention Lawson in his book, but I could be wrong. Of course, it wouldn't be the only strange thing that Pearson left out. Why, for example, does he not mention this article he wrote?

http://usera.imagecave.com/tuckerfan/russell01.jpg

http://usera.imagecave.com/tuckerfan/russell02.jpg

http://usera.imagecave.com/tuckerfan/russell03.jpg

http://usera.imagecave.com/tuckerfan/russell04.jpg

It was written around the time that Pearson had started talking to Tucker, and seems to match some of Tucker's planned ideas for the car, if it wasn't where he got the idea to begin with (assuming, of course, that Russell worked for Ford, as the article hinted).

[tatraman]

Pearson actually already worked for Tucker at the time this article was written, having started with Tucker in the Summer of 1945 (Indomitable Tin Goose, page 23). Tucker definitely didn't get the idea for the hydraulic drive from this article, as George Lawson was already designing such a hydraulic drive as early as Nov. 30, 1945 (the date found on one of his hydraulic drive renderings, a few dozen of which still exist). Lawson's SEC trial transcript show that he began working with Tucker in the Summer of 1944. My guess is this article was written as a teaser for the upcoming Tucker fluid drive.

At the 2002 TACA Convention in Las Vegas, Preston Tucker's son, John, described Pearson as being a shady character. I thought that was pretty funny.

[Tuckeroo]

I don't believe Lawson was mentioned by name in The Indomitable Tin Goose, possibly because there was derision toward his design. Not that it was seen as unattractive, but to fanciful to be usable. I'll have to go back to the book and read the actual passage, but as I recall Pearson describes Preston Tucker turning green upon seeing the photos of what the unnamed designer produced, but that owing to time constraints they were used in press releases anyway.

[tatraman]

I don't believe Lawson was mentioned by name in The Indomitable Tin Goose, possibly because there was derision toward his design. Not that it was seen as unattractive, but to fanciful to be usable. I'll have to go back to the book and read the actual passage, but as I recall Pearson describes Preston Tucker turning green upon seeing the photos of what the unnamed designer produced, but that owing to time constraints they were used in press releases anyway.

Tuckeroo, you remember the story correctly. However, if you read my previous post you will realize there was no "turning green" as Charles Pearson claimed. Lawson worked on the design of the Tucker for 2.5 years, longer than any other designer. He also was publicly named the Chief Stylist of the Tucker Corporation in February of 1946. Would Preston Tucker have kept Lawson working on the design for 2.5 years and also name him the Chief Stylist in national publications if he was not satisfied with Lawson's work?

Another problem with the Pearson story is the fact that the "production" Tucker design is a direct descendant of the Lawson design. Tremulis did not start new, and he testified such in the SEC trial. Tremulis also testified that when he arrived in December of 1946 that a full-size rendering of the Lawson design was on the wall and that the engineering department was working on the blueprints to produce the Lawson design. Thus, Preston Tucker had every intention of producing the Lawson design and did not publish the Lawson design because he was forced to, as Pearson claimed.

Also, the fact that Preston Tucker planned to produce the Lawson design indicates that he did not consider the Lawson design impractical any more than the fluid drive or the 589 engine.

So, why did Pearson make up the "turning green" story? There are a many possibilities. The first is that Lawson had patented the Tucker Torpedo design in his name and then sued Preston Tucker for payment for his 2.5 years of work on that design. I bet that didn't make Lawson popular with the Tucker camp. (If you'll notice, the second Tucker patent is in Preston Tucker's name, not Tremulis and the Lippincott team. Preston obviously learned his lesson on that one.) Lawson was also the first witness in the SEC trial because as the original designer of the car he was, in essence, the first Tucker employee, the case being presented chronologically. Lawson testified against Tucker in that trial, another reason he wasn't popular with those who supported Preston Tucker - people like Charles Pearson.

Let's not forget that Preston's publishing of the realistic photos of Lawson's Torpedo model gave the public the false impression that he had a running prototype car. This instance has often been used by people as "proof" that Tucker was a fraud. Pearson's story that Preston Tucker only used those photos because he was forced would discount those claims. However, the facts show that Pearson's story is false.