AutoPuzzles - The Internet's Museum of Rare Cars!

Puzzles, Games and Name That Car => Solved AutoPuzzles => 2009 => Topic started by: Paul Jaray on June 14, 2009, 12:32:27 PM

Title: Solved -PJ163- WWP Washington Water Power Electric Car N.1
Post by: Paul Jaray on June 14, 2009, 12:32:27 PM
Straight to the Pros...
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Arunas on June 14, 2009, 01:35:52 PM
French?
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on June 14, 2009, 02:43:12 PM
Not French...
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: hugo90 on June 14, 2009, 10:36:37 PM
Well it looks like a Crosley, so if it's rare, may it be the Crosmobile?
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on June 15, 2009, 05:27:44 AM
Not the name I have...
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Otto Puzzell on July 07, 2009, 08:00:33 AM
Is looks like a plain old Crosley Deluxe Sedan, circa 1949 or 50. So, is it a variant built or sold under a different name?
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on July 07, 2009, 08:21:54 AM
This car was a special project by a different company....
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Otto Puzzell on July 07, 2009, 08:26:36 AM
But is used a Crosley body, at least?
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on July 07, 2009, 08:28:47 AM
I'll check the article and report soon...
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on July 07, 2009, 08:32:10 AM
...but I believe You are right....
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: DynaMike on July 07, 2009, 08:37:33 AM
The company you're looking for isn't by any chance General Tire and Rubber ?
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on July 07, 2009, 08:39:38 AM
I'll check but I remember another name, with other interests...
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on July 07, 2009, 02:45:46 PM
Not General Tire and Rubber, but another company and the base is a Crosley...
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Otto Puzzell on July 08, 2009, 03:36:49 AM
Let's see. When the company sold out to General Tire, they ceased production, and didn't sell the tooling off, So this car must have been built concurrently with the Crosley. Was it purchased as a test-bed for the Crosley engine by another manufacturer? Siata, perhaps?
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on July 08, 2009, 04:41:23 AM
Quote from: Otto Puzzell on July 08, 2009, 03:36:49 AM
...Was it purchased as a test-bed ....
..sort of...
Not Siata.
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: DynaMike on July 08, 2009, 04:48:54 AM
The rights to build the engine were bought by a company in Ohio, that was going to build them as boat engine for the navy...
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on July 08, 2009, 05:00:44 AM
I don't want you to be mislead by this...
There was a company, who studied a sperimental car, and they took a Crosley to develop it...it was not about the Crosley engine, the car itself was the project.
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Otto Puzzell on July 08, 2009, 07:07:40 AM
Did Kaiser use it when developing the Henry J?
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on July 08, 2009, 05:23:59 PM
Not Kaiser...
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: metalshapes on July 08, 2009, 09:57:02 PM
Was it a mule for what later became the Nash Metropolitan?
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: D-type on July 09, 2009, 06:07:07 AM
It reminds me of the Ferguson 4-wheel drive prototype.  Any connection?
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on July 09, 2009, 08:25:46 AM
Not Nash or Ferguson...the company involved was not in the automotive field.
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Otto Puzzell on July 09, 2009, 08:50:36 AM
ConvAirCar, perhaps?
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on July 09, 2009, 08:51:52 AM
Not a flying car...
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Otto Puzzell on July 09, 2009, 08:57:22 AM
Please clarify - was the company that was using this car as a mule entertaining the idea of entering the business of building cars?
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on July 09, 2009, 09:02:43 AM
Exactly, but since there were made some significant modifications, I can't exclude that they were just testing those ...changes.. for their car...
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Otto Puzzell on July 09, 2009, 09:04:35 AM
The Playboy was about that size, and didn't use a Crosley engine...
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on July 09, 2009, 09:05:31 AM
It will be of a greater help to find this changes....
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Otto Puzzell on July 09, 2009, 09:13:02 AM
Was the builder-to-be a US concern?

If it's Bobbi-Kar or Keller, I'll kick myself.
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on July 09, 2009, 09:17:19 AM
American it was (not sure if it is still alive....)...
EDIT: still active at least till 1993.
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on July 09, 2009, 02:09:01 PM
A known (probably) still alive company, absolutely not in the automotive field, developed this project car, derived from a Crosley, to test a new car, for a later production or just as an experiment. It is much easier if your attention goes to the ...spirit... of this car....
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: DynaMike on July 09, 2009, 02:13:12 PM
Somehow it seems to fit in the Allstate philosophy by the Sears company. But they chose for the Henry J...
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on July 09, 2009, 02:16:29 PM
Quote from: Paul Jaray on July 09, 2009, 09:05:31 AM
It will be of a greater help to find this changes....
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on July 10, 2009, 01:04:54 PM
Take a look at a regular Crosley, then to this car...see any differences?
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: hugo90 on July 10, 2009, 02:03:47 PM
The Crosley Farm-O-Road was later produced by Crofton, so was this car also made by Crofton?
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on July 10, 2009, 02:11:17 PM
OK, nobody want to follow my clues, that's fine... ;)
Not a Crofton.
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Allemano on July 10, 2009, 02:14:43 PM
Are those changes clearly recognizable on that pic? I already compared a regular Crosley and that mystery car, but couldn't find any significant difference..
The white car seems to have slightly bigger doors, but that could depend on the camera's angle.
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Allemano on July 10, 2009, 02:19:51 PM
mmmh, it also looks broader...
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on July 10, 2009, 02:21:33 PM
Quote from: Allemano on July 10, 2009, 02:14:43 PM
.... but couldn't find any significant difference.....
And were's the point in taking a regular Crosley and test it if the appareance is absolutely the same?
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Allemano on July 10, 2009, 02:28:37 PM
......the inner parts are different!
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on July 10, 2009, 02:29:23 PM
 :thumbsup:
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Allemano on July 10, 2009, 02:31:21 PM
innovative engine concept?
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on July 10, 2009, 02:40:05 PM
Not so innovative...
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Allemano on July 10, 2009, 02:41:26 PM
Electromotor?
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on July 10, 2009, 02:48:02 PM
YES, that's it, an electric car.
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Allemano on July 10, 2009, 03:00:56 PM
...and that obscure company usually produced electric engines for non-automotive purpose and tested whether these would work for cars as well?
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on July 10, 2009, 03:08:01 PM
Not engine producer.
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Allemano on July 10, 2009, 03:09:34 PM
batteries?
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on July 10, 2009, 03:14:06 PM
Not batteries...
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Allemano on July 10, 2009, 03:16:01 PM
Electric products at all?
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on July 10, 2009, 03:30:42 PM
...indeed!
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Allemano on July 10, 2009, 03:38:58 PM
hmm... Radios?
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on July 10, 2009, 03:42:58 PM
...not an electric product of that kind....
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Allemano on July 10, 2009, 03:44:20 PM
I've asked before and you answered: "Indeed!"   :eyebrow:
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on July 10, 2009, 03:47:09 PM
You didn't notic the enphasis... it was an INDEED!!
It's the most electrical product available....
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Allemano on July 10, 2009, 03:51:25 PM
oh sorry, my fault.. I've read "...not an electric product of any kind....! (http://www.mysmilie.de/midi-smileys/frech/1/0009.gif) (http://www.mysmilie.de/smilies/frech/)
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Allemano on July 10, 2009, 04:02:44 PM
electric cables?  :scratch:
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on July 10, 2009, 04:12:40 PM
I hope I'm not misleading you...this big company, still alive in a different form, is not providing objects to the customers....
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Allemano on July 10, 2009, 04:15:06 PM
Okay, the penny has dropped... It's an electricity producer!
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on July 10, 2009, 04:20:37 PM
 :thumbsup:
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Allemano on July 10, 2009, 04:22:34 PM
Westinghouse Electric?
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on July 10, 2009, 04:33:58 PM
Not that...
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Allemano on July 10, 2009, 07:08:03 PM
may I ask you whether the source to reveal the mystery is to find on the internet?
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on July 10, 2009, 07:13:38 PM
Yes, not the picture, but the story is available in at least 2 different sites.
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Allemano on July 11, 2009, 05:35:17 AM
I'm afraid I'm at my wit's end.  :-[
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on July 11, 2009, 06:07:32 AM
In those days, many companies like that had a project like this...
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Allemano on July 11, 2009, 06:19:16 AM
Exactly that's my problem..

another try: Washington Water Power Company? At least I found it linked to an obscure electric Crosley project in 1957...

You've mentioned that the company had been supposably dissapeared in 1993. Did it went bust or was it a takeover by another company?
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on July 11, 2009, 07:01:00 AM
...
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Paul Jaray on July 11, 2009, 07:04:58 AM
That's correct!
Even if all the sources talks about a Crosley Wagon...Here's the car, well done!
Title: Re: PJ - 163
Post by: Allemano on July 11, 2009, 07:11:58 AM
Alright! Found it in the very same source about the Westinghouse-Electric-Crosley-project, but some passages below..
Title: Re: Solved -PJ163- WWP Washington Water Power Electric Car N.1
Post by: sixtee5cuda on January 25, 2017, 08:27:53 AM
Washington Water Power, founded in 1889, was renamed Avista in 1999.  The company still exists, providing electricity in parts of Oregon, Washington, and Idaho.