Ducktail Critique from an Industrial Design Perspective

[ADDvanced]

Reposting from another thread, thought it might be worth discussing more. So ducktails... from far away, I love them, but once I get close to the car, they just leave me disappointed 99% of the time, and I don't just mean the panel gaps/fitment, I mean the actual surfacing/design itself. My full time job is industrial design/surfacing in the transportation area, and this is how I see it:



The surfacing under the 'duck' portion doesn't match up with the rear fenders/chassis of the car and it always looks strange and not refined and there's always this vertical surface on the side for no reason, it's like they tried to transition the ducktail surface back down to the chassis but just gave up.

Also, the surface under the ducktail, on the edge of the panel, is never G1 or G2 (tangent or curvature continuous) to the surfacing on the fender above the taillight, so you get this bumped up inflated 'bangle butt' look, along with a weird crease in the highlights where they come together.

Functional aero, no doubt. I just don't think it was executed well in 99% of them I see.

Robert/Singer is also an industrial designer, and he has a very keen eye for surfaces and attention to detail. You can see on the singer execution of the duck, they bypassed all the problems with the 'traditional' ducks by letting the ducktail surfacing be completely separate from the decklid:



That looks so much better than the inflated bubble butt on most ducks, emphasized here by the decals:



Once I noticed this, I can't unsee it, and the only way my car is getting a duck is if I do it myself, correctly. I still think there'd be a way to blend/transition those surfaces to the decklid, but not have that vertical wall and bubble butt in the back.

Thanks for coming to my Ted Talk.

[ADDvanced]

Also, if the images are too wide for you and inhibit your ability to read, please leave a comment here:

What would it take for this forum to automatically resize images?

[shamrok]

Yes, totally agree!

So many enthusiasts treat the early Porsches as so sacred that they are unwilling to accept that a lot of it was haphazardly built or designed to field quickly for racing purposes. There’s so much potential for these cars to have new bumper and spoiler designs but everybody does the same stuff because “heritage”. These cars are a big enough niche that I think there’s room for improvement. There are outliers for sure (Singer ducks, Accumoto’s shorter IROC bumpers), but I’d love some variety.

[ADDvanced]

Don't even get me started on IROC bumpers, let's take one of the curviest cars and throw a GIANT RECTANGLE on the front of it. Barf.

[David Inc.]

I've noticed the same issues, but I still think it's an aesthetic improvement over the larger tails while still being a nod to the original.

I would not say no to a Singer decklid, though, that's for sure.

[darrin]

ADDvanced -- fyi, looks like the factory shared your aesthetic views https://rallyways.com/11256/porsche-ducktail-spoiler-history/

[kent olsen]

I've had mine for many years on my 72. When I first got the car, 23 years ago, it didn't have a ducktail but did have the front air dam. On my drive to work, 52 miles one way, I would pass thru this valley with an opening directly to the Pacific Ocean. The winter winds blew at an angle to the highway, about 45 degs headed south and 135 headed north. They really buffeted the car. After I added the ducktail I would only get a small jiggle vs before it would nearly blow me into the on coming lane.

[LJ851]

Agree 100% about the tail and bumpers. I can imagine a slightly narrowed ducktail bonded to a stock shaped decklid. Narrowed enough to provide some room to blend into the stock edge of the decklid/quarter panel and retain the stock decklid shape before and after the spoiler.

[David Inc.]

Originally Posted by LJ851

Agree 100% about the tail and bumpers. I can imagine a slightly narrowed ducktail bonded to a stock shaped decklid. Narrowed enough to provide some room to blend into the stock edge of the decklid/quarter panel and retain the stock decklid shape before and after the spoiler.

Kind of like the 997 era 911 Sport Classic? I didn't care for it on the 997 but I think they took the approach you're suggesting.

[RDM]

Interesting and well done post. I would love to see your take on a new ducktail.

[ADDvanced]

^ exactly what I'm talking about. The decklid surface is G2 to the fender surface, doesn't have a bubble up and flat sides for no reason. Either blending it like that, or truncating it and having it be a separate element like the Singer would be a better solution from a design standpoint.

Re: buffeting, I'm not trying to say the ducktail isn't functional. I think we all know why it was added, and that it was effective, I'm just saying from a design perspective there is a lot of funky stuff going on that just rubs me the wrong way.

[jrwilson]

I kinda like the simplicity of the duck but I agree with you, it looks awkward. But the 911 has a history of wild aero that really speaks to people and has become iconic, like the whale tail. I wouldn't switch my whale for a duck.

[group911@aol.co]

They dealt with the issue with the materials and technology they had.
Easy to second guess 50 year old design.

The duck part needed to be that size to accommodate the engine grill opening which I'm sure they had calculated to allow adequate air flow to the engine which bled over into how it blended into the quarter panels from a basically flat lid.
They did marginally better on the 75 Carrera tails but not much.

[LJ851]

Even a full width duck blended into a stock base height decklid would be a huge improvement. I personally find the decklid height of the duck tail far more visually offensive than the flat sides of the spoiler.

[AG81]

Love this conversation. From a design element I agree completely with the OP. I tried to fit a correct DT on a used clean lid and could never get it to look appropriate. I guess I never realized how poorly the design is. I went another direction.

[Bill Douglas]

Originally Posted by AG81

Love this conversation. From a design element I agree completely with the OP. I tried to fit a correct DT on a used clean lid and could never get it to look appropriate. I guess I never realized how poorly the design is. I went another direction.

More of a duckling than a duck.

[maxnine11]

Robert Singer is also an industrial designer, and he has a very keen eye for surfaces and attention to detail

Who is Robert Singer ??

[TRE Cup]

It is Rob Dickinson that founded Singer LOL

[ADDvanced]

Some famous singer songwriter lol whatever I got the first name right.

[almostordinary]

Before owning a 911 I loved every tail, the Duck in particular.

Now that I've been wrenching on my dream build, I am more a fan of the clean slick back look.

I'm also a lot older now than I was when just dreaming of a 911, so that may have something to do with it.

One thing I love about the car community is that there will always be an opinion on what's best, but as long as the car you've got keeps you looking back at it when you walk away... that's build is the one for you.