Soviet Cars: History of the Copy-and-Paste Industry

[CrzRsn]

Got this off http://www.realussr.com. Thought it was interesting enough to post here.

Once some music com?poser said that ?There are only seven notes which com?pose all the music in the world. No wod?ner some songs sound alike?. Undoubt?edly, all cars have got four wheels, so pla?gia?rism in the auto?mo?bile indus?try is hard to pinch. In this arti?cle we delib?er?ately ignore a pop?u?lar Soviet point of view that a steam loco?mo?tive, an air?plane and the radio were not invented in Rus?sia. All we attempt here is to make a small digres?sion into the his?tory of Soviet auto?mo?bile indus?try in order to iden?tify its ori?gins and its development.

https://pic.armedcats.net/c/cr/crazyrussian540/2009/09/15/1.jpg
Zis-110

A Russ?ian philoso?pher Vasiliy Rosanov once noted that in Rus?sia every sin?gle case of wealth orig?i?nates from theft or extor?tion. His?tor?i?cally, the econ?omy of the Russ?ian Empire before the 1917 was so deeply inte?grated into the Euro?pean econ?omy that the exchange of ideas, some?thing, which now would have been hugely copy?righted, was very com?mon. Like, in 1901 in St Peters?burg the car?riage fac?tory Freze and the Riga bicy?cle fac?tory Leit?ner suc?cess?fully assem?bled the French oil engines De Dion Buton as part of Russ?ian car?riages. Another fac?tory Aksai in Rostov-on-Don pur?chased the license for the pro?duc?tion of the Amer?i?can Oldsmo?bile Carved Dash. In 1906 a Russ?ian engi?neer Boris Lut?skoy organ?ised the assem?bling of Mer?cedes cars for the Russ?ian mar?ket. At last, the main pride of Rus?sia???the auto?mo?bile Russo-Balt???was made from for?eign parts???the chas?sis with four-cylinder engine was adopted from a Bel?gian com?pany with a Swiss name Fondu.

The Octo?ber rev?o?lu?tion of 1917 cre?ated a pop?u?lar in Rus?sia myth that all things have been invented in, well, Rus?sia. The rea?sons for that would be merely ide?o?log?i?cal: the new born coun?try needed new morale. Accord?ing to an old Soviet joke, even ?ele?phants come from Rus?sia?. The most pro?gres?sive coun?try in the World, as coined by the rev?o?lu?tion?ary com?mu?nists, should strike the rest of the world with advanced tech?nolo?gies, the pro?pa?ganda advised. In order to cre?ate the real Soviet cars, the com?mu?nists estab?lished the Research Auto?mo?bile Lab?o?ra?tory (later known as NAMI). The very first Soviet motor car NAMI-1 was actu?ally a grad?u?a?tion project by a young engi?neer Kon?stan?tin Shara?pov. The car turned out to be so suc?cess?ful that it was put into pro?duc?tion right away. Later, in 1979, Kon?stan?tin con?fessed to copy?ing the charts for NAMI-1 off the Czech Tatra-11.

https://pic.armedcats.net/c/cr/crazyrussian540/2009/09/15/2.jpg
The noto?ri?ous NAMI-1

Dur?ing the period from 1927 to 1930, the fac?tory assem?bled 403 NAMI-1 mod?els. Despite all its advan?tages, this car was not planned for the mass pro?duc?tion. At the same time, any man?ager of the robust mind realised that the Soviet Indus?tri?al?i?sa?tion needed mass pro?duc?tion. The Soviet Rus?sia wanted giant fac?to?ries, but what would be the product?

In 1929 the USA was stricken by a severe eco?nomic cri?sis. As the result of this cri?sis, the pro?duc?tion of Chevro?let halved, the pro?duc?tion of Ford dropped three times! Despite the absence of diplo?matic rela?tions between the USSR and the USA, both Chevro?let and Ford offered their pro?duc?tion to the Soviet gov?ern?ment. No need to guess, shortly after?ward the awfully cracked Russ?ian roads were voy?aged by the daz?zling Amer?i?can beau?ties of all kinds. The long rally was won by Ford A and, con?se?quently, this car was put into pro?duc?tion in the USSR.

https://pic.armedcats.net/c/cr/crazyrussian540/2009/09/15/3.jpg
The Soviet Ford

The first auto?mo?biles under the brand GAZ left the fac?tory in Decem?ber, 1932. Quite rapidly these cars got nick?named as ?Soviet Fords?. Even the logo was very sim?i?lar???blue oval with the brand GAZ instead of Ford. The car was not a suc?cess, how?ever, as the open body and the lack of boot turned to be its main down?sides. Within 5 years the new car GAZ M1 replaced the old model. Now the body was copied from 1934 model of Ford, although the model was adapted to suit the severe Russ?ian con?di?tions. The front sus?pen?sion was based on two springs rather than on one, unlike in the Amer?i?can ver?sion, and the wheels were of a dif?fer?ent shape. Later on, the design charts for GAZ M1 were utilised for almost all Soviet-made cars.

https://pic.armedcats.net/c/cr/crazyrussian540/2009/09/15/4.jpg

In early 1930s with?out any licens?ing arrange?ments the Soviet engi?neers copied the first lim?ou?sine car for the Com?mu?nist party exec?u?tives. In 1932 six lim?ou?sines were copied off the Amer?i?can Buick 90L. How?ever, later the fac?tory pro?duc?tion line was switched to pro?duc?ing cater?pil?lar tractors,so the lim?ou?sine busi?ness was shifted to Moscow Stalin Factory.

https://pic.armedcats.net/c/cr/crazyrussian540/2009/09/15/5.jpg
Zis-101

The car, based on the engine of the Buick and the body copied off the Cadil?lac, was given another non-poetic name, ZIS???101. It also had Buick radi?a?tor bars.

By the begin?ning of the Sec?ond World War there were three huge car fac?to?ries in the USSR. Despite the fact that the USSR already had its own highly edu?cated and tal?ented engi?neers, the very first post-war lim?ou?sine ZIS-110 was also a copy of an obso?lete Amer?i?can car. When mak?ing a deci?sion about the launch of a new car, the engi?neers selected four mod?els???Packard 180, Packard Clip?per, Cadil?lac 75 and Cadil?lac 63. Stalin him?self was to make the deci?sion, and he picked the Packard 180.

https://pic.armedcats.net/c/cr/crazyrussian540/2009/09/15/6.jpg
Chaika

In August 1945 the Soviet gov?ern?ment issued a decree on the open?ing the Moscow Fac?tory of Small Capac?ity Cars. The same decree estab?lished the tech?ni?cal fea?tures of the new car as well as the com?mence?ment dates for the pro?duc?tion lines. The pat?terns for the new car were also selected by Stalin. The Soviet leader liked the pre-war Ger?man Opel Cadette. In order to please Stalin, the Soviet engi?neers urgently found sev?eral tro?phy C-38. The cars were dis?man?tled and the designs of the parts were sketched. The first five engines were made by Novem?ber 1946 and the cars were on the road by the end of the same year. Inter?est?ingly enough, thenext gen?er?a?tion of cars under the brand ?Moskvich? was made on the basis of Amer?i?can Ford Pre?fect and Ford Tau?rus rather than the Ger?man range. The sam?ples of those cars were pur?chased abroad.

https://pic.armedcats.net/c/cr/crazyrussian540/2009/09/15/7.jpg

The denounce?ment of the Stalin cult and a new seven-years plan to develop the Soviet econ?omy for the period of 1959???1965 had inspired the Soviet engi?neers to cre?ate more cars. The flag?man cars of that time were the ZIL-111 and GAZ-13 ?Chaika? devel?oped after the trial runs of best Amer?i?can exec?u?tives cars. The ambi?tions towads the rapidly chang?ing Amer?i?can fash?ion had made the ZIL-111 obso?lete by the begin?ning of 1960s. That is why this car was later redesigned in the Cadil?lac style of 1960???1961. Nev?er?the?less, the pro?duc?tion of GAZ-13 ?Chaika? was con?tin?ued with?out any changes in its design till the 1979.

https://pic.armedcats.net/c/cr/crazyrussian540/2009/09/15/8.jpg

A good exam?ple of how the ideas to make a new car were born is the story of the fac?tory ?Com?mu?nar?. The Min?is?ter of Car Man?u?fac?tur?ing made a call to the fac?tory where design?ers thought over the scheme of a new Ukrain?ian car and lit?er?ally said: ?I heard you were going to make a spring sus?pen?sion from the ?Volk?swa?gen? but I actu?ally like the Ital?ian Fiat-600?. Shortly the fac?tory com?menced the pro?duc?tion of ZAZ-965 ?nearly the exact copy of the Fiat.

https://pic.armedcats.net/c/cr/crazyrussian540/2009/09/15/9.jpg
ZAZ-965

By the way, the next model of ZAZ was the replica of Ger?man NSU Prinz 4. This car was remem?bered by the nick?names ?Soap Box? and ?Big-eared?.

The car for the mid?dle class which replaced ?Pobeda? was labelled in the hon?our of the great Russ?ian river ?Volga?. The design of the car was very much iden?ti?cal to the design of Ford Main?line, 1954, pur?chased by GAZ as a pat?tern along?side with Chevro?let Belair and Ply?mouth Savoy. Even before the new car was put into pro?duc?tion, the pop?u?lar Soviet mag?a?zine ?Ogo?niok? awk?wardly pub?lished pic?tures of these three cars with an arro?gant head?line: ?New Soviet cars for the mid?dle class?.

https://pic.armedcats.net/c/cr/crazyrussian540/2009/09/15/10.jpg
Volga

https://pic.armedcats.net/c/cr/crazyrussian540/2009/09/15/11.jpg

Despite the pop?u?lar?ity of Volk?swa?gen around the world their Soviet copy was not really pop?u?lar among the con?sumers. To pro?duce another mass car the Soviet gov?ern?ment signed the con?tract with Ital?ian Fiat. The capac?ity of the fac?tory allowed to pro?duce about five thou?sands cars per year.

https://pic.armedcats.net/c/cr/crazyrussian540/2009/09/15/12.jpg
Ital?ian Fiat 124

At the time, Leonid Brezh?nev was rul?ing the coun?try: he was pas?sion?ate about cars and rac?ing. In 1965 he got an exclu?sive Amer?i?can Lin?coln Con?ti?nen?tal sent to USSR right from the Car Exhi?bi?tion in New York. The car was pur?chased by the Soviet Ambas?sador and was built by the com?pany Lehman & Peter?son. This had brought stretch lim?ou?sines into the fash?ion. Lin?coln was sent to ZIL where the engi?neers made a copy which was sent to pro?duc?tion by the anniver?sary of the Great Octo?ber Social?is?tic Rev?o?lu?tion in 1967. No doubt, the orig?i?nal Lin?coln was much more ele?gant and grace?ful than its replica ZIL-114. Nev?er?the?less, the new Soviet limo was not that bad. In early 1970s the car was redesigned, based on another Amer?i?can sam?ple. A Cadil?lac Fleet?wood 75 was turned into a ZIL-115???to serve the aged and weak-minded Soviet leader.

https://pic.armedcats.net/c/cr/crazyrussian540/2009/09/15/13.jpg
ZIL-114

Right up to the col?lapse of the USSR the Soviet car indus?try used the same pro?ce?dure of shame?less copy?ing. In order to build ?Moskvich-1241?, the engi?neers slightly dis?fig?ured Chrysler 1501. Famous ?Zhiguli? was copied from Nis?san Sunny 1978 although later they were slightly mod?ern?ized by the engi?neers of Porsche.

Prob?a?bly, ?Niva? were the only excep?tion???it was made in a way to make peo?ple to cry. That car was ?too-Russian? to be good.

 

[2Billion]

There's something slightly deranged about copying a Nissan Sunny.

 

[Hemihead]

Most of the parts from the Fiat 124 fits on the VAZ 2101-21023 range. Including the Twincam engine.




I really should put some more work into my old 21023 soon.

 

[_HighVoltage_]

Yes the twincam engine fits perfectly...but in the end it's still a Zhiguli.

 

[CrzRsn]

There's something slightly deranged about copying a Nissan Sunny.

:lol:


You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to 2Billion again.

 

[BlaRo]

Somebody's really got it in for the Soviet Union.

 

[KaJuN]

I wish I would have known this sooner for the "Guess That Car Game". A lot of people would have been very confused. :lol:

 

[public]

There's something slightly deranged about copying a Nissan Sunny.

IIRC, the Samara (VAZ-2108) copied the Golf Mk1 more closely, if not design-wise.

 

[Ladamaha]

It's an interesting topic.

I mean they weren't that backwards in sciences, so how on earth they had to copy others to make (bad) cars? Which, at least on face value, is rather less complex than putting a dog to space. Or was it just because all their top level engineers were working on the space and arms programs, so the car production was left for the non-talented engineers who could barely use tracer paper?

 

[_HighVoltage_]

It's an interesting topic.

I mean they weren't that backwards in sciences, so how on earth they had to copy others to make (bad) cars? Which, at least on face value, is rather less complex than putting a dog to space. Or was it just because all their top level engineers were working on the space and arms programs, so the car production was left for the non-talented engineers who could barely use tracer paper?

The Russians were by no means technologically advanced. Their weapon and spacecraft designs were very obsolete and couldn't compete with their Western rivals. The only reason they were somewhat competitive is because what they lacked in technology, they compensated with size.
Case in point: the Tsar Bomba. Yes, it was the most powerful nuclear device launched in the atmosphere, but it was also the largest. Its size rendered it completely impractical. It couldn't even be dropped from a regular bomber. They had to modify the Tu-95 to fit the enormous bomb. They also had to put a massive parachute to slow down the fall and give the pilots a chance to escape.
The Tsar Bomba couldn't be used in a real battle situation. Unless it was a suicide mission...
The technology of it was nothing fancy. They relied solely on size.

It was a similar story with most of their other technologies. Let's not forget Chernobyl...

 

[Ladamaha]

But still. Building a car of your own design isn't on the same scale like rocket engineering. Even how crude the rockets were they went to space and they were first.

I guess the Soviets just lacked the motivation as you couldn't make profit in a planned communistic economy. Japan restarted their economy with the same principle after the war, but they could make their lives better if they improved. Just goes to prove how doomed communism was in the long run.

 

[matyas]

The Russians were by no means technologically advanced. Their weapon and spacecraft designs were very obsolete and couldn't compete with their Western rivals.

On the contrary. Their shuttle design was waaaaay ahead of the American one. It had an automated landing option, something that the Americans still don't have. Not to mention a host of various other features that the U.S. shuttle didn't have in 89. Don't diss the Russian aviation, it was on top of it's game.

 

[_HighVoltage_]

The Soviet Union had no interest in profit or improving quality of life. Everything was done according to the grand plan - to be prepared for WW3. As an idea, it wasn't so bad - all parts of the Soviet Union working together as a team, supporting each other, and establishing a large economy that would be sustained by many countries, so that if one fails, the rest will remain stable.

The execution of the plan wasn't so brilliant though...and we have to add the fact that the Soviet Union was still operating under the obsolete presumption that the country with the largest number of soldiers is the strongest. Unfortunately, they didn't have enough food or supplies to support that massive army of soldiers.

And yes, you are right - the budget was mostly delegated for military purposes. So the USSR produced abundant amounts of weapons, which didn't make any profit. Soon, they realized they NEEDED to profit, so they started selling those weapons to the middle east...another bad idea, as we can see now.

All Soviet cars were appalling heaps of junk! No exceptions!

On the contrary. Their shuttle design was waaaaay ahead of the American one. It had an automated landing option, something that the Americans still don't have. Not to mention a host of various other features that the U.S. shuttle didn't have in 89. Don't diss the Russian aviation, it was on top of it's game.

My question is...DID it work? And I can't find any information stating that the Russian space shuttle program was ahead of the US one. In fact, I think the Russian program was once again(like with cars) copying the American ideas and employing them in the Buran, with a few improvements.

 

[Labcoatguy]

On the contrary. Their shuttle design was waaaaay ahead of the American one. It had an automated landing option, something that the Americans still don't have. Not to mention a host of various other features that the U.S. shuttle didn't have in 89. Don't diss the Russian aviation, it was on top of it's game.

The automated landing option was there because they couldn't get the life support installed in time. Also, it's not a coincidence that the Buran, put into service years after the American shuttle, looks suspiciously like it. Add to that the incredibly high failure rate of Soviet probes, rockets, satellites, and other spacecraft like the friggin Polyus, and it's hard to consider them a technological frontrunner.

 

[leviathan]

The automated landing option was there because they couldn't get the life support installed in time. Also, it's not a coincidence that the Buran, put into service years after the American shuttle, looks suspiciously like it. Add to that the incredibly high failure rate of Soviet probes, rockets, satellites, and other spacecraft like the friggin Polyus, and it's hard to consider them a technological frontrunner.

That is all true, and they also admitted that some Buran design features were copied off the US Shuttle, for they were good and worked. Still, the Buran design was very effective in its own way, had higher payload than the Shuttle and many other interesting points to it.

Meanwhile, nowadays the Russian Soyuz-TMA rockets are the most reliable personnel carriers in use, and the Proton freighters are one of the main workhorses of the ISS. If not for the breakdown of financing that happened when the USSR collapsed on itself, Soviet space program could probably have been miles ahead of where the world is now have now and motivated the others to improve, too.

 

[EyeMWing]

On the contrary. Their shuttle design was waaaaay ahead of the American one. It had an automated landing option, something that the Americans still don't have. Not to mention a host of various other features that the U.S. shuttle didn't have in 89. Don't diss the Russian aviation, it was on top of it's game.

Actually, Endeavour was equipped with full autoland during its last trip in to the shop. It's now the only space shuttle on earth capable of landing on any runway of sufficient length (which is also equipped with CAT3 ILS), rather than just specially prepared (typically military) airstrips. They've never used it because it's bloody expensive to move a shuttle back to the prep facilities from a PREPARED airfield, nevermind the costs of moving it from a facility WITHOUT the equipment. Oh, and Endeavour has completed a whole one or two flights since then. It's an emergency system. On Buran, the autoland was because they couldn't put people on it so there wasn't exactly any other way to land it.

The American shuttles didn't have a lot of features in 1989 because they were built well before 1989. When they built Endeavour, it was better equipped than Buran save a few points here and there, and the rest of the fleet has been modernized to similar spec.

 

[nammedijus]

my father had vaz 2108

(well i dont remember it i was very litle but i can see in pictures )
and my grandfather had one like this :

but yelow i can remember it was very slow and the front suspensio colapsed all the time....

 

[Posmo]

Those twin headlighted 2106 are getting quite rare and expensive here. A good condition stock one of those will fetch well over 1k?

 

[nammedijus]

Those twin headlighted 2106 are getting quite rare and expensive here. A good condition stock one of those will fetch well over 1k?

here you can get a one in great nick for mm about 500 euros maximum

 

[Hemihead]

here you can get a one in great nick for mm about 500 euros maximum

I want one in either dark blue or the ES trim with white vinyl roof. You ship them to Sweden?