1955 Panhard Dyna 55 Luxe Spécial [Z1]
1955 Panhard Dyna 55 [Z1] in Afrique sur Seine, Short Movie, 1955
Class: Cars, Sedan — Model origin: 
![1955 Panhard Dyna 55 Luxe Spécial [Z1]](/i798159.jpg)
00:12:24 ![[*]](/res/star.png){kind=small}
Background vehicle
Comments about this vehicle
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
◊ 2015-03-21 00:27 |
An early 1954 Tout alu (i.e. aluminium body) or a 1955 steel body? -- Last edit: 2015-03-21 00:27:34 |
|
◊ 2015-03-21 00:43 |
It was only in September 1955 that the steel body appeared (still with aluminium doors, bonnet and boot lid), so in a 1955 movie it's almost sure a Tout alu .gif ";)") This is a 1955 Luxe Spécial: The quarterlights in the front doors came in June 1954, but the gutter onto the front indicator (to prevent water coming inside through the door) was new in January 1955. The overriders on the bumper were dropped in August 1955. |
|
◊ 2015-03-21 01:41 |
Ouahouh ! |
|
◊ 2015-03-21 02:40 |
@ DynaMike I think that the model year (Dyna 54, 55, etc) shouldn't be given as part of the name. In addition to sounding like stuttering, it looks more to have been a kind of advertising gimmick for the cover of the brochures, as the inner mentions of the car are just Dyna... More over, this car is mostly known as Dyna Z (just search for Panhard Dyna 1955 with your preferred search engine), but it (almost) can't be found with that name in the IMCDb, unless knowing how to "play" with the special fields of the search page. I find it really disturbing, and I just wonder how someone not aware of the IMCDb habit (i.e. most of the visitors of the site) could find these cars. Wouldn't be a generic Dyna Z name (with the accurate Z1 to Z18 chassis code) precise enough and more "user friendly" at the same time? About the "Tout alu" models, this page (fr) gives Spring 1955 for appearance of the steel body, and I read it in at least another page (but didn't keep the link) while "preparing" the page for this Dyna. As I didn't find any other precise source (most of pages say just "1955") I found that an "all steel" model was a possible option for a Dyna in a 1955 movie -- Last edit: 2015-03-21 02:44:24 |
|
◊ 2015-03-21 17:39 |
I agree with you, eLMeR. Dyna Z (and Dyna X) would be easier and user friendly. On the other hand: we try to be as exact as possible in giving the correct names. On a Dyna Z (the car itself) the only name to be found is Panhard, Dyna isn't mentioned, not even om de 'plaque d'identification'. (Well, on my late 57 Grand Standing the name Dyna is stanced in the aluminum stone guards.) So we'll have to rely on the name used in brochures and ads. We've had the same discussion on this matter before; I thought the name Dyna Z would be better but I accepted the reasons why Dyna 54 etc. is used... I found the facts about the date in several books by Bernard Vermeylen, who is regarded as the historien par excellence in the Panhard community. He did thourough investigations in the Panhard archives (now in the Mulhouse car museum) and many other archives. He wrote (together with Yann Le Lay) "Panhard Dyna Z & PL17; Historique - Identification - Evolution, Restauration - Entretien - Conduite", "Panhard & Levassor - entre Tradition et Modernité", and a numéro spécial of Flat-Twin (the Belgian Panhard club magazine): "La Dyna Z1 a 60 ans", and many other books and articles about Panhard. According to these books the mixed structure (steel body frame with aluminum mobile parts) was introduced mid-September 1955, and the all steel version came 10 September 1956. These facts match with the Dyna Z's I ahd the honour to meet in real. |
|
◊ 2015-03-21 22:45 |
About the Tout alu / Tout acier change, I don't question the date you gave: I just explained why, with what I knew when preparing the page, I thought this car could have been a Tout acier .gif ":)") Back to the Dyna name: as said just before, the idea for me is to know for whom we identify the vehicles: if we just "play" among (more or less) specialists used to the IMCDb habits, then there's no trouble about it. But I don't see the use of a site that just exists from and for its contributors. In my mind, Dyna Z would not be not an incorrect identification, it would just be an entry point that could allow to show to curious people that there were several models in this car line (Z1 to Z18). But I think we can't expect "simple visitors" to remember any model name with the current identifications, as most people usually run away as quickly as possible when numbers are at stake  And even if I like accuracy, a 1954 Dyna 54 or a 1957 Dyna 57 sounds really too much repetitive to my ears. One of the 2 model year should not be given, as it seems so obvious to have one when having the other (Talking about accuracy: what about the X84 to X87 codes of the Dyna X? Is it a choice not to use them in the IMCDb?) |
|
◊ 2015-03-22 11:53 |
The rule on IMCDB is to fit with the exact commercial name given to the vehicles when they were in production, not to match with the friendly used name, or somewhat "known as" name, for the "grand public" as for the specialists.... That's why, Citroen Traction are named 7, 11B, 11BL or 15 and Traction as nickname Dyna 54,55,56,57... and not Z Mercedes 220, 220S, 220SE and not W111 That's also why we did this Chassis code field. Good new! it's also a more scientific way of classification! I must admit just a point, in the case of Citroën 2CV. I think all names A, AZ, AZL, AZLP, AZU, AZAM ...etc perhaps might be in the chassis code field? |
|
◊ 2015-03-22 11:57 |
I totally agree. I think we'd reopen the discussion with Sixcyl and Antp... The Dyna X are often only referred to as X and not X84-X87 because these different codes only reflect different engines and these differences are not visible at the exterior of the car. |
|
◊ 2015-03-22 11:58 |
Ha, there's Sixcyl already |
|
◊ 2015-03-22 12:21 |
Concerning the 2CV codes: I think that aoart apart from the A (and AZLP?) all codes were used in brochures and ads. |
|
◊ 2015-03-28 22:26 |
Thanks Mike |
