Sunday YouTube Cinema: The Dymaxion Struts Its Stuff

Paul Niedermeyer
by Paul Niedermeyer
We’re committed to finding, researching, and recommending the best products. We earn commissions from purchases you make using links in our articles. Learn more here

The news that Norman Foster has finished building a Dymaxion replica had me checking to see if there are any good films of the Dymaxion in action. The pickings are slim, but this clip, without voice over but well chosen music, is pretty much it. One doesn’t really need that typical pedantic news reel voice over from the thirties anyway, to appreciate the Dymaxion’s qualities, including picking up a speeding ticket.

Here’s the newly built replica Dymaxion. Since the frame is an old ’33 Ford frame turned front to back, that probably wasn’t too hard to come up with, including the ford flathead V8 that drove the front wheels. The single steering rear wheel was a no-starter, as far as eventual public acceptance since in various situations, like a cross-wind, it required counter-intuitive inputs. But the Dymaxion was very efficient for the times, although it didn’t achieve many of designer Buckminster Fuller’s original claims, including a 120 mph top speed (90 actually), and a $200 price. A crash injured Bucky’s daughter, and he pulled away from the project, which quickly collapsed in bankruptcy.

Paul Niedermeyer
Paul Niedermeyer

More by Paul Niedermeyer

Comments
Join the conversation
3 of 7 comments
  • John Fritz John Fritz on Nov 01, 2010

    Many years ago I had a landscaping job where I drove a huge three-wheeled mower configured like the Dymaxion. Bad, bad things would happen to you if/when that rear steered wheel got out of its comfort zone. Especially at high speeds.

    • Hyundaivirgin Hyundaivirgin on Nov 01, 2010

      I think technology available today (ESC) may be able to fix any issues with three-wheel stability. Certainly with something that could turn within its own length, you wouldn't want to turn the wheel hard when going 60.

  • Uncle Mellow Uncle Mellow on Nov 01, 2010

    Interesting the way the flat glass is made to follow the shape of the body.

  • Carsofchaos The bike lanes aren't even close to carrying "more than the car lanes replaced". You clearly don't drive in Midtown Manhattan on a daily like I do.
  • Carsofchaos The problem with congestion, dear friends, is not the cars per se. I drive into the city daily and the problem is this:Your average street in the area used to be 4 lanes. Now it is a bus lane, a bike lane (now you're down to two lanes), then you have delivery trucks double parking, along with the Uber and Lyft drivers also double parking. So your 4 lane avenue is now a 1.5 lane avenue. Do you now see the problem? Congestion pricing will fix none of these things....what it WILL do is fund persion plans.
  • FreedMike Many F150s I encounter are autonomously driven...and by that I mean they're driving themselves because the dips**ts at the wheel are paying attention to everything else but the road.
  • Tassos A "small car", TIM????????????This is the GLE. Have you even ever SEEN the huge thing at a dealer's??? NOT even the GLC,and Merc has TWO classes even SMALLER than the C (The A and the B, you guessed it? You must be a GENIUS!).THe E is a "MIDSIZED" crossover, NOT A SMALL ONE BY ANY STRETCH OF THE IMAGINATION, oh CLUELESS one.I AM SICK AND TIRED OF THE NONSENSE you post here every god damned day.And I BET you will never even CORRECT your NONSENSE, much less APOLOGIZE for your cluelessness and unprofessionalism.
  • Stuki Moi "How do you take a small crossover and make it better?Slap the AMG badge on it and give it the AMG treatment."No, you don't.In fact, that is specifically what you do NOT do.Huge, frail wheels, and postage stamp sidewalls, do nothing but make overly tall cuvs tramline and judder. And render them even less useful across the few surfaces where they could conceivably have an advantage over more properly dimensioned cars. And: Small cuvs have pitiful enough fuel range as it is, even with more sensible engines.Instead, to make a small CUV better, you 1)make it a lower slung wagon. And only then give it the AMG treatment. AMG'ing, makes sense for the E class. And these days with larger cars, even the C class. For the S class, it never made sense, aside from the sheer aural visceralness of the last NA V8. The E-class is the center of AMG. Even the C-class, rarely touches the M3.Or 2) You give it the Raptor/Baja treatment. Massive, hypersophisticated suspension travel allowing landing meaningful jumps. As well as driving up and down wide enough stairs if desired. That's a kind of driving for which a taller stance, and IFS/IRS, makes sense.Attempting to turn a CUV into some sort of a laptime wonder, makes about as much sense as putting an America's Cup rig atop a ten deck cruiseship.
Next