Listers -
This has been going on the British Car List:
Dear John,
It's not that I'm saying that your observations are not accurate but give
us some slack here! Don't be so hard on the British Auto Industry. Sure
there were some big problems over the years and sure some of the designs
were hopelessly outdated but THERE WERE GOOD REASONS and when compared to
whatever was being made in other countries from era to era the British iron
stands up to the test of time. For example, ALL, and I mean ALL, postwar
small car technology was in one way or another, based on the designs of
British engineer/designer Alec Issigonis who penned both the Morris Minor
and the BMC Mini. The Minor would have really blown the small car world
apart it there had been the money available to fully engineer it as
designed but post war finances forced Nuffield to use prewar mechanicals
yet the car really came into its own after the BMC merger in 1952 with the
addition of Austin OHV power and brakes.
Where would the Japanese be without the Mini's transverse engine design and
come to think about it MacPhearson strut suspension (also an English
invention)? Ever see what they were building in the Fifties and early
Sixties? Datsuns that were ugly restyled Austin A40 Somersets built under
license to BMC, Toyota was building 7/8 scale 1954 Plymouths with 1500cc
tractor engines and Honda was still bolting motors to push-bikes! In
Germany, VW was cranking out millions of evil handling, roll-over machines
that could make a Corvair blush and BMW was building enclosed motor
scooters with one door - on the front no less! And let's not forget us
Americans. All of that happy days shit like fins and acres of chrome and
aluminium trim on 22 foot long cars was the laughing stock of the
international automotive press. Sure Jags and Aston Martins contained lots
of antique low-tech engineering, but they won alot of races with it over
the years.
And the Italians and French?
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhhhhhhhhhhhh!
There is charm and nostalgia as well as humour and insane design elements
in all old cars. Have you ever noticed that the weirder the car, the more
it is taken to heart by large groups of enthusiasts? Why are there so many
British car meets and so few French, Italian and German get togethers?
Give it a rest. People, countries, and cars all have their good points, bad
points, shining moments and dark secrets. Who cares! Have as much fun as
you can with the good parts and get a good laugh from the rest.
Rick Feibusch - Venice, CA
Automotive Journalist/Appraiser
******************************************
John McEwen writes:
My concern was that the "bread and butter" of the British auto industry -
which was world class in
production - was comprised of automobiles which were simply produced long
after their technological time had passed. The industry was "guided" by a
group of disinterested profit-takers who couldn't accept that competition
from Japan would ultimately destroy their tidy industry. Take an arrogant
attitude, an inventory of obsolete technology and a workforce which had
been ignored too long and poof it was all gone.
Who would by a BMC Farina when for about the same money they could have a
Ford Cortina, or a Vauxhall with modern engines and drivetrain. No amount
of wooden dashboards and leather (imitation or otherwise) seats could make
up for the '30s engine and chassis.
As for American technology - flatheads were in limited use throughout the
'50s but by 1959 only Chrysler continued to offer its flathead six which
was the best of all of the sixes of the period. GM built its last in '54
as did Ford (in Canada). In Britain, the Ford Popular continued to offer a
flathead until 1963. Non-synchro first gear was last used in 1962 in
Chrysler heavy-duty 3-speed transmissions which were almost never installed
in cars and were really left-overs from the mid-fifties where they were
used in pickups. America had superb automatic transmissions by 1957 but
such things were never built in Britain.
OHC engines were never found in the basic automobiles in Britain. In fact
only Jaguar built any in quantity and Jaguar was never an inexpensive car
no matter what the apologists suggest. If you check prices during the '50s
you will find that Jaguars cost more than most Cadillacs and the Cadillac
was a vastly superior vehicle in terms of performance, economy, reliability
and longevity.
Note that Chrysler offered disk brakes in 1949 which predates their
availability on any LBC. The Chrysler Fire Power hemi engine introduced in
1951 was simpler than any OHC layout and offered great power and economy.
It was simply superior to any engine of the time in smoothness, power and
reliability.
One of the biggest problems of innovation in LBCs and to a lesser extent in
some American cars was the tendency to put things into production without
properly testing and refining them thus letting the customer do the testing
at his expense. One only has to think of the Rootes electromagnetic
transmission, the Imp, the Rover P6, the MGA twin cam.... Why was it that
"quality" British automobiles of the '50s and early '60s offered coachbuilt
bodies which were structurally inferior, infinitely more complex and
costly-to-repair, and far more subject to weather and road deterioration
than the simple steel body-on-frame construction of the "cheap" cars? Take
a close look at any Rolls which was driven year-round in North America
during this period - if you can find one.
A further consideration was that even when a problem was known no real
attempt was made to rectify the situation. LBCs in the '50s and '60s were
famous for things which would have simply broken American manufacturers if
they had persisted in attempting to sell cars with these defects. I refer
to inadequate heating/ventilation systems, lack of air conditioning, poor
windshield wipers, noisy underpowered overgeared engines which required
elaborate servicing and had short life expectancy, poor ergonomics,
design/construction faults which encouraged premature rusting, and inferior
chassis with indifferent steering and braking. Drive any Austin built
after WWII and you will see what I mean. This includes Austins of the '70s
which were astonishingly uncompetitive in a world market.
Britain had a grand tradition of building quality automobiles which were
simple and reliable but a combination of the effects of two major wars,
indifferent management, greedy shareholders, lack of forward planning, an
uneducated and unhappy workforce coupled with an intrusive government
quickly destroyed the tradition and left the country without a single major
British-owned automobile producer - all in the space of a decade. What a
great pity.
John McEwen
|