World War II changed Europe. It was more than shattered buildings and bomb-cratered fields, though those mattered. It was more than lost time and misdirected lives, though those matters even more. It was more than row on row of chalk white stones, the soldiers last parade, though those mattered most of all.
World War II changed the very fabric of wealth in Europe. And that wealth consisted not of money, but ownership, the means of production and what was left of the aristocracy that had weathered The Great War little more than a score of years earlier.
France, at the epicenter, was indelibly altered. Swept away was an entire class whose power and prestige would be replaced by bureaucrats and functionaries. France needed organization and control; all hands must pull in unison to rebuild from the rubble. No effort must be wasted.
Automobile manufacture was addressed by “Plan Pons,” name for P.-M. Pons, the directeur adjoint des industries méaniques et électriques who implemented it. The five-year plan limited the number of models which were to be produced by five automobile builders: France’s “big three” –Citrõen, Peugeot and Renault—plus Simca and Rovin. The four older marques at upstart Rovin were to build the types of automobiles most needed by France. Peugeot reinstated its most inexpensive prewar model, the 1100cc 202, in 1946, followed by the new – though still humble – 203 the next year. Citroen, owned by Michelin, was allowed to keep its larger cars but painted them drab colors like matte black, then introduced the 2CV which had been in development since before the war. Nationalized Renault brought forth the 760cc four-door 4CV. Simca resumed production with the Fiat-based 5 (500cc) and 8 (1100cc) it had built before the war. Robert Rovin began building austere 260cc microcars in the Delaunay-Belleville factory at Saint Denis in 1946.
Notably missing were the grand marques, the makers of the grand routiers. France had no need for baubles like Bugatti or Belleville-Belleville, which faltered and failed after the war. Delahaye and Delage were in decline. The elegant Paris coachbuilders also blinked out like embers of a dying fire. Even upper-middle-class automobiles such as Hotchkiss which faded in the Fifties, or Berliet, which would build only trucks after the armistice, were in disfavor. And so, apparently, was Panhard.
The origins of Panhard et Levassor
Despite its status as the doyenne of France’s automobile industry, Panhard was omitted from Plan Pons. The firm of Panhard et Levassor antedated the automobile, springing from an alliance between Renée Panhard and Emile Levassor to make woodworking machinery. The company completed its first automobile on February 17, 1890, and was in production by 1891. Before the turn-of-the-century it was building cars in the systeme Panhard, with a front-mounted longitudinal engine and transmission driving the rear wheels –actually Levassor’s invention.
Panhard would gain fame in road racing, though the Paris-based firm would withdraw from the activity in 1908 and become primarily known for large and elegant touring machines. The 1937 Panhard Dynamic was the ultimate prewar era car to wear the P&L badge on its stylish radiator. The sleek grand tourer had headlamps faired into its front fenders and unusual curved glass front quarter windows replacing the typical massive A-pillar. The Dynamic’s chassis, a true six-passenger design with centrally located steering wheel, was of unit construction with a front subframe and independent front suspension with torsion bars. It had hydraulic brakes and a constant-mesh four-speed transmission with freewheel and helical teeth on all gears. A choice of six-cylinderKnight sleeve-valve engines, either 16 or 27 CV (horsepower), was available. (For more pictures of prewar Panhards, go here).
Though the Dynamic lived up to its name mechanically, it did not reverse the slide in Panhard’s automobile fortunes resulting from the worldwide economic depression in the Thirties. However, with war imminent, Panhard et Levassor threw itself into the production of armaments in 1939, particularly trucks, artillery tractors and armored cars. Paul Panhard, at the helm of the firm bearing his uncle’s name, often put in 14-hour workdays.
Yet after Dunkirk and in the face of the German blitz, Paul Panhard decided to withdraw from Paris, leading a convoy that reached Tarbes where Panhard had facilities. The German occupation of Paris followed shortly, with a detachment stationed at Panhard’s factory. Paul Panhard himself was recalled to Paris to oversee the manufacture of war material, though this time for the Wermacht. Panhard complied, though at such a deliberate pace that a special envoy was to be sent from Berlin to correct the situation. Liberation, however, arrived first.
Dyna Panhard Postwar prototypes
During the liberation, however, fire destroyed the model of a small car scheduled for production after the war, when a large and luxurious Dynamic would be even less appropriate than before. Only photos survive of this rather conventional 2.5-liter four-cylinder sedan. Another car design survived, however. It dated from 1941, and the drawings bear the signature of Louis Bionier, who Panhard had left in Tarbes when he returned to Paris. This design was a smaller car yet. It looks something like a Renault 4, with enough room for four but powered by a horizontally opposed twin driving the front wheels. Two prototype engines of 250 cc and 350 cc were made by Panhard engineer Louis Delagarde. Ten months prior to the liberation of Paris, Delagarde and Jean Fauchére returned to the city in a charcoal gas-fueled Dynamic with complete plans for a Panhard “VP.”
Jean-Albert Grégoire pursued a similar line of study during the war. Already the dean of front-wheel-drive with Tracta automobiles and the Amilcar Compound to his credit, Gregoire also envisioned a small flat-twin front-drive car. With the cooperation of the l’Aluminum Francais, Grégoire built a prototype appropriately named the Aluminum Francaise- Grégoire. It was a small two-door car with a front-drive 600cc flat-twin engine and, as l’Aluminum Francais wished to encourage the use of aluminum in automobiles, it was predominantly built in the lightweight metal. Weight was a mere 880 pounds. The prototype, which had a top speed of 55 mph, was built in either 1942 or 1943.
With the war over and Plan Pons announced, Paul Panhard had no intention of allowing his firm to be left out in the cold. He prevailed upon the bureaucrats to include France’s first automobile manufacturer in their scheme. But there were conditions. The postwar Panhard must be a small car of aluminum construction, and it must have four doors. A prototype l’Aluminum Francaise- Grégoire was sent to the Panhard factory as an example, all the more remarkable as l’Aluminum Francaise had intended the car merely as a design study, not for series production the AF-G prototype was so similar to Panhard’s own VP design that it was able to choose the best features of both.
Having the AF-G prototype greatly accelerated Panhard’s development of its own design, designated “VP2.” Bionier had responsibility for body and structure, while Delagarde developed the engine. The body was, true to Plan Pons, all aluminum even to the point of using cast aluminum for the chassis and scuttle – to the front of which was attached the engine/transmission in a unit cantilevered out to the front – and the front suspension, which was comprised of upper and lower transverse leaf springs.
The rear suspension was a semi-independent arrangement, undeniably French in its novelty and cleverness. The un-driven rear wheels were connected by a V-shaped tube attached to the chassis at its midpoint at wheel center height. Trailing arms on either side provided excellent location and three torsion bars were interlinked to provide not only springing but role resistance – so much so that in hard cornering the later production cars would appear to hike up on the inside rear wheels in the effort.
The little prototype looked very much like a Renault 4CV but with headlights curiously mounted on stalks. It had four doors, as per the directive, both pairs hinged on the B-pillar. When describing the interior, even Panhard enthusiasts modify “spacious” with “relatively,” and though Panhard historian by Benoit Pérot called it “Une carrosserie ‘Louis XV’ trés habilite,” suggesting a comparable car of overly ornate design, that too might be a relative term.
Louis Delagarde designed a new 610cc air-cooled flat twin that produced 25 horsepower instead of the AF-G prototype’s 15, presuming the production Panhard would be heavier than the AF-G. Body designer Bionier maintained otherwise, but was overruled by Paul Panhard who was stranded when a connecting rod broke on the AF-G he used for a weekend trip. Delagarde’s motor would be used.
Delagard’s little engine was a gem with ingenious features including special “everlasting” roller bearings for the connecting rod’s big end. These bearings separated the large main rollers with smaller rollers that rotated in the opposite direction didn’t slide; they rolled against each other, minimizing friction and wear. The aluminum cylinder and head were one piece, thus eliminating blown head gaskets. Similarly, Panard’s aluminum crankcase, unlike the horizontally-opposed Volkswagens, was also one piece. The built-up crankshaft, connecting rods and pistons were inserted through an oval opening.
To reduce the overall width of the engine, torsion bars were used on the valves instead of coil springs, thereby allowing shorter valve stems. On the prototype and early production engines, each valve had its own bar which was actually outside the engine. The engine was mounted ahead of the four-speed non-synchronized transmission (with overdrive in fourth) which itself was ahead of the axle line, though the entire unit was so compact it barely protruded beyond the front tires. The precise tolerances and calculation of stress left little margin for error in the transmission, which would be a weakness for the car.
The VP2 prototype underwent trials during 1945. It was given the model designation X84, in sequel to the Dynamic’s model designation of X82. The new car would be marketed as the Dyna, an obvious reference to the earlier model. The Dyna made its official debut at the Paris auto show in 1946, sharing the spotlight with Renault 4CV, the only other truly new car on display. Though the Dyna received popular rave reviews, Grégoire did not appreciate the fact that, due to its development work, Panhard did not credit him for the original prototype. Furious, he sued Panhard unsuccessfully.
Debut of the Panhard Dyna
Pre-production of 50 Dyna’s began in 1947, with testing and refinements continuing. Actual production began in 1948 and a total of 1,350 Dyna’s were built in that model year. While hydraulic front brakes were used, the rear brakes were mechanical; four-wheel hydraulics did not debut until February 1949. A single twin-blade cooling fan replaced the original arrangement of two four-bladed fans.
Running changes continued during 1949, but for 1950 the Dyna saw new models, including a two-door cabriolet, a four-door “soft-top berlin” (berlin découverable, essentially a sedan with a sliding fabric top) and an estate car. A rather unusual grill, making the little car look like it was sucking a lemon, marked the new model, which had its headlights faired into the fenders.
Most significant however, was an essentially new engine, advancing the model designation from Dyna 100 type X84 (for 100 kmh) to Dyna 110 type X85. Though there were a number of changes, the most notable was a new valve arrangement, with single torsion bar (now undercover) for both valves, which were set at an angle instead of parallel. The angle, interestingly, was limited by the fixed-head construction of the engine, as the valves had to be installed through the cylinder; too great an angle would result in interference with the cylinder wall during installation. New cam timing and a revised induction system increase engine output from 22 horsepower (the initial production engine rating) to 28 horsepower.
In April 1950, a 750cc engine (actually 745cc) was released to compete with the popular Renault 4CV, the larger displacement giving the Panhard the same legal horsepower rating as its rival. It actually produced 34 horsepower. The model designation, Dyna 120, reflected the cars new speed potential and in kmh (or about 72 mph). A 750 Sprint engine offered a true 38 hp.
The Dyna X series reached its peak in 1951, with 14,219 cars built. In midyear, however, Panhard began replacing some of the aluminum castings with steel. Production slipped to 9,645 for 1952, In 1953, the model’s final year, production was down to 5,964, though this was arguably the best of the series. In mid-1952, the Dyna 130, with an 851cc engine rated at 40 hp, appeared and output was raised to 42 HP for 1953.
Tests proved the 130 lived up to its name just as L’Auto Journal had found with the earlier 110: testing at Monthléry a clocked the car at 111.873 kmh (67 mph). The French car magazine was impressed with the small car’s speed, suppleness and road holding. However, the magazine’s tester found the engine to be less than smooth and noted flat spots in his power curve. He also noted that the cacophony of its air cooled motor was much more noticeable to those outside the car than inside.
Panhard use the phrase “La Dyna ces’t aurtre chose’ as this byword in marketing the Dyna. Taking a swipe at arch-rival Renault, the slogan loosely translated as “it’s something else,” and the Dyna certainly differed from every other automobile on the market. Yet in appearance it was conventional, something that could not be said about it successor. Revolutionary would be more like it.
The Panhard Dynavia and Dyna Z
Revolutionary was indeed the word that was used for the Panhard Dyna 54. It had its origins in the aerodynamic studies of Louis my Bionier which progressed from a model made during or war to the Dynavia, the star attraction of the Panhard stand at the 1948 Paris Auto Show. The Dynavia was a teardrop on wheels, albeit with a greenhouse and a heavily chromed front bumper, looking like what Buck Rogers would drive if he was French and inclined to drive cars.
But the Dynavia was no mere styling exercise. Built on a full Dyna chassis, it was capable of 130 kmh (78 mph) with the standard 28hp 610cc engine. The Dyna X would later require twelve force power more to attain that speed. The Dynavia, however, was narrow and appeared hard-pressed to accommodate four, while the exterior design was perhaps too avant-garde even for Panhard. It’s not surprising that the design of the production model was more conservative. In theory Bionier was reaching for an elliptical solid, although compromised by – as with the Dynavia’s teardrop – the need for a greenhouse. The shape that went into production in 1954 is perhaps the arch typical “jellybean” of the current aerodynamic design. A one-fifth scale model was wind tunnel tested at the Aerotechnical Institute at St. Cyr, and a prototype was road tested arrayed with tiny wind vanes and driven against headwinds and side winds while being photographed with a movie camera.
The new Panhard was introduced to the press in June 1953, and made his public debut as a 1954 model at the Paris Auto Show that fall; it would be known as the Dyna 54. As the previous Dyna was the “X,” the new Dyna would be the Z1, the number advancing with each model year. It was, as one observer noted, a car that “no other designer in the universe, except perhaps another Frenchman, could have designed… And nobody but a Parisian would have shown such little respect for acknowledged customs and conventions of the modern automobile age.”
The comment was a bit hard on the Gallic race, perhaps, but the Dyna 54 was different ; the rounded bustle was unusual, but from the front the Dyna appeared to be holding a fog lamp in pursed lips. It was different structurally as well. For maximum efficiency with minimum horsepower and fuel consumption, low mass was as important as aerodynamics. Panhard used its extensive experience with aluminum in a unit body. No castings were used as on the first Dyna, just a carefully designed, rigid floor pan with sturdy side rails joined to the front and rear substructures. Six bolts attached to front unit which was comprised of engine, clutch, transmission and drivetrain, steering, suspension and wheels. The rear unit, including suspension and wheels and related parts, was secured by five bolts. Curb weight for the six-passenger car was listed as 1,430 pounds.
Furthermore, chassis strength was concentrated in the floor, and along with the low-placed mass of the flat-twin engine and the low seats, the Dyna 54 had an exceptionally low center of gravity for a sedan.
Although the engine itself had been little change for the new model, a new mounting system with thick rubber bushes would let the little when rock to its little hearts content while transferring little of those shakes back to the chassis and the passengers.
One critic called the car “the most perfect product of cold logic…ever seen on the road,” and it was the antithesis of the V-eight-thumping horsepower race going on in the United States at the time. But even cold logic had its price, and for the Dyna it was the aluminum platform that was replaced by steel as a cost-cutting move during the 1955 model run (the Dyna 55 or Z2 model).
Alliance with Citröen
Alliance, panhard with Citröen
Panard was the Little Fifth to France’s Big Four and did not have the financial resources of its larger rivals. Despite the initial success of the Dyna 54 – it sold 13,585 units in its first year – Panhard was, in fact, obligated to turn to Citröen for financial assistance. Citröen received a 25-percent share in Panhard le Levassor which acquired the right to make Citröen 2CV bodies and also gained access to Citröen sales outlets for Panhard cars. The liaison between the two companies would in the long run limit Panhard in the development of models which might have competed with Citröen, but the deal did solve Panhard’s short run problems in 1955.
Improvements in design continued in the interim. In mid-1955, the front engine mounts were moved to the exhaust manifolds as a means of further damping transmission of the engine’s vibrations to the chassis. Shortly thereafter, a new design connecting rod was added, called “Tour Eiffel” (“Eiffel Tower”) for its resemblance to the Paris landmark; it formed a tapered I-beam with a hole through the wider end of the shaft. Because it could be slipped over the crank pin when the crankshaft was assembled, there was no need for the big end to be split.
Along with new connecting rods, the Panhard twin gained hydraulic valve lash adjustment which was rare for European cars at the time. Oil pressure pushed the ball pivot into the socket of the rocker arm, decreasing maintenance needs and eliminating one source of noise from the air cooled engine.
The Paris show in autumn had another surprise: only the Dyna’s hood, doors and trunk lid were made of light alloy, while steel was used for the chassis and body. An inevitable weight gain was countered by maintaining a price which was competitive with the Simca Aronde and Peugeot 203. A sales increase during 1956 led to what was perhaps inevitable – the complete use of steel throughout the Dyna beginning in September 1956 for the 1957 model year. It was an unfortunate but practical eventuality for Panhard. The original concept of an aluminum alloy unit body was certainly brave but perhaps too advanced for what was in the final analysis in economy automobile. The added economy of operation was not offset by the higher original cost. Weight with the all-steel body was still less than 1800 pounds for a six-passenger car
Panhard dyna junior
Panhard did not limit the Panhard Dyna to sedan status, however. Even during the Dyna X era there were variations. Panhard built the Dyna Junior, and a variety of coachbuilders use Panhard flat twin and sometimes complete engine/chassis to build competition or special models. The Dyna Junior began as a prototype by the Paris-area body maker Di Rosa. It was a spare and profoundly simple two-seater which Panhard revised for production, most notably by installing the grill from sedan, later simplified to an oval opening with a crossbar. The Junior was powered by the 750 Sprint engine when production began in March 1952. Either roadster or cabriolet (with wind-up windows) versions were available. The 850 Sprint engine was an option first available in October 1952, though before long it became standard through the model’s run, which lasted into 1956. And M. A. G. supercharger was another option, pumping power up to 60 hp and top speed to near 90 mph.
The French magazine L’ Auto-Journal criticized the Junior’s fit and finish and thought the steel-bodied roadster heavy for sports car, while the convertible top was so low it was sure to give owners premature balding! But for the young enthusiast who put performance above comfort, the Junior was just the thing.
The Junior was brought to the United States in small numbers and was tested by Road & Track. The magazine found the 1,620-pound Panhard to be “a car full of surprises,” with unorthodox controls and feel. Though the engine “soars to 6000 RPM quickly and smoothly,” acceleration was “good, though hardly bombastic.” Zero-to-60 took, in fact, 26.2 seconds, the quarter-mile 23.3 seconds. On the other hand, overall fuel mileage was 44.8 mpg.
Panhard Dyna, variations and modifications
Two independents often associated with Panhard are DB – or Deutsch-Bonet – and Monopole. While the Dyna sedan racked up a surprising record of competition victories – class wins in the Monte Carlo rally in 1950, 1951 in 1953, for example – Panhard-Monopole streamliners won the index of performance at Le Mans in 1951 and 1952 and would score victories across Europe during the Fifties. Charles Deutsch and Renée Bonnet first discovered the Panhard twin in 1949, using it to power the DB that won the 1950 Bol d’Or. Class wins for racing specials followed at Le Mans, Sebring and the Mille Miglia, including the index at Le Mans in 1953, ’53, ‘54, ‘56, ‘59, 60 and 1961. However perhaps more remarkable was the DB HBR5 sports coupe. A few of the road-legal coupes were produced with steel or aluminum bodies. However, beginning in 1955, the definitive DB was produced with a fiberglass body over a custom tube frame to which the standard front and rear Dyna units were bolted. The 850cc engines could be modified to produce more than 70 hp. With only the sleek DB profile and 1,470 pounds (curb weight) the haul about, it’s no wonder the Gallic bolide became the scourge of the SCCA’s H-production class behind such drivers as Howard Hanna, Ray Heppenstall and Dick Toland – at least until the Sprites took over in the Sixties.
The Dyna also attracted the attention of Europe’s coachbuilders who, in a postwar era of increasing use of unit construction, were able to use the cast aluminum framework of the Dyna X or the rigid floor pan of the Dyna Z for a variety of designs. The list of builders who used the humble Dyna as a foundation reads almost like an honor roll of the craft, though some, such as Pichon-Parat, are little known in the United States. But Henri Chapron, Frua, Zagato and Alemano all produced designs on the Dyna chassis. Veritas, in Germany, built 176 Panhard-Veritas cars with roadster, cabriolet or sedan coachwork. Pichon-Perat built a series of “Dolomite” coupes, as well as a concept station wagon based on the Dyna Z. Out of Morocco came the Reac, and from Switzerland the Ghia-Aigle works produced an array of Dyna-based coupes and roadsters. And in Los Angeles, Howard “Dutch” Darren styled a fiberglass body for the Junior “that almost went into production.” Particularly prolific was France’s own Raymond Gailard, said to have been the first to re-body a Panhard Dyna. He built a number of cars dubbed Calista, Ranelagh and Arista.
Upscale Panhard Dynas
Panhard was not unaware of possibilities for the Dyna Z and was not long in producing special versions. The company equipped the Dyna both for taxi service and with special luxury touches. The standard “Luxe” version was followed by the “Luxe Special” and “Grand Luxe.” Top of the line was the “Grand Standing,” equipped with more luxurious fittings as well as exterior embellishments such as chromed trim and full wheel covers instead of hubcaps. The name was a Frangalis phrases suggesting one’s position in society, i.e., In “grand standing.” An option on the Grand Standing was a two-tone paint scheme of dubious merit.
A Dyna cabriolet was also available. Unlike the earlier Dyna Junior, the Dyna Cabriolet was fully equipped, had a full back seat and was available in Grand Standing trim at the other end of the Dyna spectrum was a van with an amazing 1,400-pound load capacity.
Up until 1958 model year, Dynas had relied on a propeller-like fan for cooling the engine, which had its finned cylinder barrels wholly exposed under the hood. While this approach had generally proved effective, it was virtually impossible to warm the Dyna with engine heat. Former Buffalo, New York, Citröen/Panhard dealer Andre Garnier recalls that catalytic gasoline heaters were popular accessories for those who braved snow belt winters in the Dyna – which, he adds, handle very well in snow. Heat was a problem, however, for models made of aluminum after autumn1957, when the new Aerodyne forced-air cooling system was added. The cylinders were shrouded and a squirrel-cage fan installed. The cooling systems exhaust air could be directed to the cabin, as on air-cooled Volkswagens. Noise reduction work continued on the Dyna, with a quieter air cleaner and a dual chamber muffler being incorporated.
Racing spawned a special engine first installed in March 1959. This was the remarkable Tigre version of the flat twin. Changes were actually minimal, limited to a two-barrel carburetor (reverting later to a single throat with no loss in power), high-performance cam, new distributor, and stronger crankshaft and lighter connecting rods. Compression was unchanged at 7.2:1, as in the standard 47 hp engine, but the Tigre was rated at 50 hp at 6200 RPM. With a displacement of 850 cc (52 cubic inches), it was just short of the vaunted one horsepower per cubic inch, achieved by very few cars in the 50s.
Panhard Dyna soars in the United States
Dynas were first brought to the United States on a regular basis by French Motors of Los Angeles. Following the Citröen accord, American distribution shifted to Citröen’s offices in New York. The Dyna was tested by Road & Track in 1956 and 1959. Interestingly, the earlier test cited 50 horsepower from the 850cc engine, noting parenthetically that the rating was “for export models,” though the later test quoted output at 42 hp. Performance actually differed little with 0-60 mph times of 23.7 and 24.0 seconds for the earlier and later models, respectively. The earlier car also had a slim edge in the quarter-mile, at 23.0 versus 23.7 seconds. Road & Track found the “Dyna-Panhard,” as it called the model in 1959, improved over the “Panhard Dyna sports sedan,” its 1956 name for the model.
But Road & Track’s praise was not without equivocation: “the Panhard is a most unusual package. A description can make it sound like the US car of the future, or like something best forgotten.” It was compact yet “astonishingly roomy,” and “astonishingly economical” while “satisfactorily lively in traffic,” and it could “cruise all day at high speeds without strain.” On the other hand, “it is noisy; it vibrates; and it has several truly exasperating features…” The magazine noted that the Dyna’s front doors were still hinged at the rear, a safety concern. As for the interior, “plastics in great variety glow, shimmer and even smell.” The instrument panel was “evidently a small replica of the Hollywood bowl,” which the writer seemed to like but found that it reflected in the windshield at night.
The engine, said Road & Track, “ran much more smoothly than on previous models” which had persistent “shivers and thumps,” still a gear or throttle change was often required to smooth out the later car’s engine. The gearbox was called a maze of contradictions with first and second easy to use, third “a fuzzy path through neutral” and overdrive fourth wholly unsynchronized. The gearshift itself was “somewhat willowy.” The ride was much better than most small cars’, while handling was “great fun.”
All in all, a Dyna in the United States was best suited for “lovers of ingenuity,” said Road & Track, who would be willing to endure the Dyna’s idiosyncrasies. Panhard sales literature claimed that “throughout the world over 6,000 dealers are at your service,” though the truth was that Dyna service was more likely to be found in Cairo, Egypt, then Cairo, Illinois. Sales literature from 1959 also mentions the availability of the “Jeager coupler.” Said the ad, “this very progressive electro-magnetic device is a highly perfected automatic clutch which does away with the clutch pedal, while keeping the use of the engine is a brake. It needs no adjustment or maintenance.”
Addendum. The next generation of Panhard would begin with the 1960 model year without the Dyna, but it would be mostly the name that would be changed. Instead of Dyna, the new Panhard would be known at the Panhard PL 17. For the continuing story of Panhard, click here. (Originally the Dyna Panhard story was published as one article. I’ve broken it in two for internet publishing purposes).
