Article on John Chun

[DennyD]

Here's a link to a nice article about John Chun and his history with designing GT-350-500's.

https://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/a27376687/the-north-korean-designer-responsible-for-the-1967-shelby-gt500/

[FL SAAC]

Fantastic narative of a great American citizen John Chun.

To many, it may come as a surprise that such an iconic symbol of all-American automotive pride should have sprung from the pen of a North Korean immigrant who could barely speak English when he arrived here.

But perhaps it actually makes perfect sense, because John Chun's story is as American as it gets. He arrived in a land of opportunity, rolled up his sleeves, and put his shoulder to the wheel. He burned the candle at both ends, worked hard and started again and again, never complaining. He raised three children, two of whom are designers themselves. The restaurant he and his wife ran was a family place, a hub for the neighborhood.

He was, by all accounts, a humble, good, and worthy man. One who lived a long and happy life, proud of his past accomplishments, surrounded by family and friends.

[Richstang]

It's really a shame the Road & Track author didn't do any homework before publishing the article on what John Chun actually did at Shelby American. Perhaps if he contacted anyone a SAAC he would have written a more accurate story.

If I recall correctly, a previous issue of "The Shelby American" noted that Chun didn't start at SAI until February 1967. This was just after he graduated from the Art Center in Pasadena. The article noted John Chun was hired by Fred Goodell. Goodell did not start at SAI until December 1967 (this was also noted in a 12/2/1966 SAI memo).

Charlie McHose has already been established as the '67 Shelby GT350/GT500 designer. Charlie finished all the design work for the '67 Shelby by mid-August 1966. An interview with Charlie McHose was conducted by Greg Kolasa and published in another issue of 'The Shelby American'. It included photos and numerous details. There were also many Charlie McHose documents which are very clear on who was involved at LAX with the '67 Shelby design effort. Joe Ferrar did the clay modeling. Carl Nasson worked on the plaster molds. Chuck Cantwell helped with the engineering issues. That included the creation of the upper scoops, with Charlie and Chuck testing the design for the venturi effect on a 66 GT350. We all should know production of the '67 Shelby was well underway by October 1966 and well before Goodell or Chun had arrived at SAI.

The sketches I've seen from John Chun are dated from 2/67 and onward. That lines up with the dates in the Shelby American article. By February 1967, any sketches would likely be related more with the '68 Shelby than anything else. I could go on with more, but I'll leave it here for now.

[Road Reptile]

Hi all 67 fans!
Just a correction to the correction Fred Goodell was sent by Ford to SAI and was officially hired in Dec 1966 I think the 5th....he was there before hand and he corrected and sped up many of
the build procedures of the 67.....This is in the registry and the book on Cal. specials by Paul Newitt. hope this helps clarify.
R.R.

[Coralsnake]

Planning was typically two years or more. 1967 drawings would typically be 1969 designs.

John Chun was a definitely a contributor, but to what extent and on what designs will continue to be debated.   

[silverton_ford]

Buy some prints of his drawings - https://chuntekind.com/store

[Richstang]

Hi all 67 fans!
Just a correction to the correction Fred Goodell was sent by Ford to SAI and was officially hired in Dec 1966 I think the 5th....he was there before hand and he corrected and sped up many of
the build procedures of the 67.....This is in the registry and the book on Cal. specials by Paul Newitt. hope this helps clarify.
R.R.

No correction is needed here. We're both correct

The memo was written on 12/2/1966 (Friday).
It notes effective 12/5/1966 (Monday), Fred Goodell was appointed the Engineering Manager and replaced John Liefeld who resigned that day.

Goodell may have arrived a bit earlier, but his official start date is 12/5/66.

[Richstang]

Planning was typically two years or more. 1967 drawings would typically be 1969 designs.

John Chun was a definitely a contributor, but to what extent and on what designs will continue to be debated.

We know Shelby American didn't have the luxury of a two-three year design/development process, such as Ford did, It certainly didn't happen for the 65-66 GT350's, They weren't pushing the envelope in styling and focused more on the mechanical changes. For 1967 Shelby was pushing the design farther and overreaching on the time needed to meet the deadlines. Charlie McHose outlined all of this in numerous documents (Brian Styles has graciously offered to share these if need be). Some of this is outlined in "The Shelby American' article I mentioned previously. The McHose documents outline the entire '67 design effort with weekly reports back to his boss at Ford. It spells out exactly who did what, and when. John Chun is never mentioned anywhere in them.

The Chun drawings I've seen are dated 2/67 through 5/67. This is almost 6 months after Charlie McHose returned to Ford. They likely never met. The timing of the Chun drawings are more fitting for use on the '68 Shelby Models, as no work likely had been started at SAI prior to that.

[Richstang]

Buy some prints of his drawings - https://chuntekind.com/store

I've got a bug about the '67 drawings on this website John Chun's son is selling. Take a close look at them, the dates, and the signatures!
https://chuntekind.com/store/1967-gt350-concept-sketch-front-designer-signed
https://chuntekind.com/store/1967-gt350-design-concept-sketch-front
https://chuntekind.com/store/1967-gt350-design-concept-sketch-rear


The John Atzbach collection featured at Mecum 2020, in the Indy Road art, shows two authentic original drawings of the '67 Shelby design proposals. The dates written on them are both the same and very clear, 5/26/66. That date falls in line with the arrival of Charlie McHose at SAI. Negatives of these same 2 authentic original drawings from a Shelby Employee (Bill Silver) were recently shared with Brian Styles and confirm the matching dates on each sketch.
https://www.mecum.com/lots/RM0520-430203/1967-shelby-american-factory-prototype-framed-illustration/
https://www.mecum.com/lots/RM0520-430204/1967-shelby-american-factory-prototype-framed-illustration/


Compare the 5/66 originals from the Atzbach collection, noting the illustration style and details, to the 2/67 - 3/67 Chun drawings.

Draw your own conclusions...

[2112]

Buy some prints of his drawings - https://chuntekind.com/store

I've got a bug about the '67 drawings on this website John Chun's son is selling. Take a close look at them, the dates, and the signatures!
https://chuntekind.com/store/1967-gt350-concept-sketch-front-designer-signed
https://chuntekind.com/store/1967-gt350-design-concept-sketch-front
https://chuntekind.com/store/1967-gt350-design-concept-sketch-rear


The John Atzbach collection featured at Mecum 2020, in the Indy Road art, shows two authentic original drawings of the '67 Shelby design proposals. The dates written on them are both the same and very clear, 5/26/66. That date falls in line with the arrival of Charlie McHose at SAI. Negatives of these same 2 authentic original drawings from a Shelby Employee (Bill Silver) were recently shared with Brian Styles and confirm the matching dates on each sketch.
https://www.mecum.com/lots/RM0520-430203/1967-shelby-american-factory-prototype-framed-illustration/
https://www.mecum.com/lots/RM0520-430204/1967-shelby-american-factory-prototype-framed-illustration/


Compare the 5/66 originals from the Atzbach collection, noting the illustration style and details, to the 2/67 - 3/67 Chun drawings.

Draw your own conclusions...

Pretty damning.

[propayne]

I apologize - brain is a bit foggy this morning (not quite thru my first cup of coffee).

What conclusion are you drawing?

Both the prints that Chun's son is selling and the original artwork that sold at the Atzbach auction are attributed to John Chun.

Original art is dated 5-26-66 and print (slightly altered version of the original art) is dated 3-67, which I assume is when the art was altered?

- Phillip

[propayne]

Here is the one image I have in my files (can't remember where I snatched it from) that is labelled as by Mr. McHose.

- Phillip

[roddster]

  I can tell you that the Lucas "Flame Thrower's" (center high beams) would certainly get the headlight circuit breaker shutting off the headlights after about 30 seconds

[Richstang]

I apologize - brain is a bit foggy this morning (not quite thru my first cup of coffee).

What conclusion are you drawing?

Both the prints that Chun's son is selling and the original artwork that sold at the Atzbach auction are attributed to John Chun.

Original art is dated 5-26-66 and print (slightly altered version of the original art) is dated 3-67, which I assume is when the art was altered?

- Phillip

The top drawing is not John Chun's work, he was not working at SAI in May 1966 as noted in the previous "The Shelby American' article.
The Mecum auction incorrectly lists him as the artist. (I'm told Vern tried to get that point corrected, but Mecum did not follow through.)
This original art at the top is not signed. All of John Chun's work is signed, although not originally in script. Those script signatures were likely added later.

As we can see, the line art for the second drawing is identical to the authentic original from 5/66.
What purpose would the same artwork serve SAI 9 months later after the '67 was already in production?
Why would anyone render the upper side vents that were rejected 9 or 10 months earlier for anyone at SAI to see again?

The rendering style is not the same between the two drawings compared here. The colors of the later '67 dated drawing is more vibrant and the shadows / fades are very different as well. Are the fades marker airbrushed?  When did artists start using that tool?

The Chun front view is dated from 2/67 and the rear view is dated 3/67. That seems a bit off, but could be explained as the end of Feb and start of March.

Comparing all of Chun's artwork, we can see very different styles of rendering. They include two of the vibrant '67 drawings and the dull / aged versions of the '68 drawings. Their are more dull / aged detail drawings not shown in the Chuntek link. Even the 'CHUN' signatures are different in the '67 vibrant appearing drawings versus the aged '68's. Compare them for yourself.

[propayne]

Thanks Rich (and Brian Styles, who I have been emailing with behind the scenes).

Original renderings, concept drawings plus advertising/marketing materials are of particular interest to me.

Pretty sure the airbrush was around (airbrushed t-shirts became popular in the early '60s) but to my eye (and this is only my opinion) the changes to the signed artwork on the bottom look digital.

Looks to have been made on a copy of the 5-26-66 art, not an original piece of art.

- Phillip