Ercol design, style and acceptance  

I get it...
Based on the non-response of this thread, I presume the Erocol brand is not highly topical. I was a little suprised that none of the brits chimed in. Either way, I enjoy the chairs and they will be handed down to my children when appropriate. Ciao

.
I think Robert knows a bit about them, got one here...its nice to have an example of Windsor construction on hand but for me they aren't the most comfortable or easiest on the eye.
The look of the dining chair is appealing though.

The rocker
seems to display sound construction, and it may be comfortable -- but there isn't much "style" there. Wegner it ain't !
The side chair, on the other hand, has both (or all three ?)

Educate me
OK, well it is comfortable, but how do you defign style. Is there a globally recognized definition.
I get that the danish modern furniture is applealing, but what is it about the design that makes it so.
I realize this may seem to be an elementary level question, but I am genuinely interested in other opinions.
Educate me...

.
Comfortable compared to a pile of rocks? 🙂 Mine doesn't rock so perhaps the angle of recline is different, I slide forward when sitting on mine.
IMO opinion the best design has resolved details from top to bottom, a consistent structure throughout with all surfaces finished..chairs like buildings should not have 'backs', areas that can be neglected because they are out of sight.
The Ercol chairs aren't bad by any means, they just lack that little extra attention, they are based on a vernacular model that was never meant to be produced with the finesse of a Wegner chair so it might not be fair to compare them.
Style is too easily confused with good looks, Memphis being a case in point. Some people are observant and articulate enough to crtitque a design in an objective way based on pretty defined criteria, I'm not one of them.

You slide
forward on the side chair, Heath ? That's usually a result of a seat that is too near level while the back tilts too far . . . back -- don't you think ? The included angle of the back and seat of an upright chair wants to be about 95 degrees or a bit more, in my experience -- depending in part on how much both deviate from true plumb and level.
I like the appearance of the side chair above -- though the shape of the back may be a bit exaggerated. Also, the struts supporting the back might be a bit springy, judging by their apparent thickness and width ?
As for the Windsor chair, maybe I need to see other photos; ones taken from above will tend to exaggerate the size of the part nearer the camera -- in a chair, that would be the back. My comment about style is mostly a matter of proportion. The back seems too big, or high, or wide, for the size of the chair. I know -- Wegner's big spindle-back chair might have the same thing said of it -- but in that case it seems to work. Another proportional matter is the spindles; there are both structural and aesthetic reasons why most Windsor chairs have turned spindles, which are thinner where they join with other members, and thicker in the middle -- both for comfort and for strength.
Of course, some formal choices could be the result of technical, or comfort, or cost issues. Successful, even masterful design, results when all the issues are dealt with in such a way that the result "looks right" while still satisfying the practical requirements.
I admire the way the arm post is stabilized, in this chair, and the extra back spindles at center which are likewise intended to stiffen the structure. Their divergence from the pattern of other spindles tends to muddle the appearance of the back, however.
I'd like to see a photo taken from a lower point of view, reducing the distortion present in these shots . . .

I have a chair like the origi...
I have a chair like the original posters, without the rockers. If I take the cushion off its not so bad but with it on its like teflon. Just went and had a closer look at it, there are some nice details like wedged spigots but other things like plugs covering screw holes and a pretty rough finish underneath.
But if only the pretty birds sang how quiet the forest would be...I wouldn't want to be one of these living breathing douchebags 😉 Enjoy them, they are well enough made and will last the distance and best of all are repairable, an under-rated quality.

Another Pic, Another chair
For me, comfort and quality are equally as important as looks. I'm a big dude and if it's not comfortable to me, it's a decoration or art.
Sorry about the hideous animal print fabric. Someone suprised me with this upholstery.

.
I don't think we're doing Ercol's output much justice here! Try these - studio couch, table nest and (my favourite) the bergere lounge armchair.

nice chair, that last...
nice chair, that last one!
I also like the sofa-bed, had the chance to buy one, but it had the smokey, dark stain and this realy puts me off.

The light elm
has been the finish of choice for a long time, but they have recently produced ebonised versions of some models which are proving popular.
(I didn't chip in ealier as I thought the OP was looking for an non-British overview of the brand)
http://www.ercol.com/ercoloriginalsblack.html

I like their
new blue loveseat too

and Matthew Hilton's Ercol Produced
chairs are worthy of mention.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/property/propertypicturegalleries/8603672/Des...

.
I always thought those Hilton Ercol chairs owe something to Paul McCobb as well as those lovely old Welsh country chairs?