<< The K series engine in its intended size (sub 1400cc) was a great design. The Metro they put it in was a joy too, a brilliant thing to drive and far superior to rivals of the time even the Pug 205. >>
The K-series engine may well have been better than the chain-driven one in the Mk.1 205, but I doubt that the Metro shell was better. After the 1988 revamp the 205 must have been the better car.
It was longer lived but the K series Metro was the nicer car to drive and that was saying something as the post facelift TU series 205’s were near perfect.
|
|
Totally agree with the proposition that at one stage they made some world leading designs.
Mini, 1100/1300, Maxi, Princess, Rover 2000/3500 in the 1960s and 70s. Even the Allegro, Montego were fundamentally good designs. All as good as or better than their competitors (generally)
Thereafter they drifted downhill and the relationship with Honda only served to prolong the decline. Poor quality, assembly, rust treatment were the external signs - I had a TR7 bought new in 1979 - within three years the sills were rusting. A later Rover 800 suffered leaking head gaskets and poor quality trim.
BL were blessed withleading designs in the mid-60s. They truly fouled up from the mid70s onwards. Whether it was the fault of unions/workers or govt/management can be debated endlessly - although IMHO both were thoroughly inadequate
In 1978 BL had around 40% of the UK market. By 1988 this had slumped to about 15%. They clearly had the market position to be very profitable and failed miserably. As well as product faults they maintained far too many badge engineered brands with a high cost dealership network
|
I hired a Maestro just after they had been launched, a lot of people asked me how it was and whether I liked it.
It was fairly pleasant to drive, with really good visibility and comfortable seats / suspension, it also went better than I expecting from a old design 1.3 engine. I didn’t however think it looked good, particularly the 1.3 base model in brown! that I’d been using for a weekend.
I drove it from Kings Lynn area to my brothers place in Kent, using the A1 and M11, and at speed I could not believe that a brand new car could have so many rattles and constant vibrations from the dashboard, it really was unbelievable.
If it had been mine, I’d have been straight back to the dealers, but suspect I’d have had to join a long line of other new owners with the same problem. Maybe this one was one of the better built quieter ones!
|
One of my favourite cars is/was (and I know it was a Honda) the Rover 216Gsi, cracking car with a superb engine.
|
|
Rust was the killer for older BL designs, but they were hardly alone, i think BL suffered the loathing of old Britain by the new generations as much as any institution.
A mate and i on a contract used to travel 50 miles each way every day for 2 years in a new Ital company van with the A+ 1.3 engine, far better than we expected, fast enough frugal and reliable, what more could you want.
Rover 827 one of the best cars i owned and i have fond memories of previous LandCrabs and Rover P6 V8's, Honda was the best thing that happened to the company and the end for Rover was etched in stone the day they were sidelined for BMW, and look at the durability of either modern MINI, or LR products come to that, arguably back to the bad old days minus the rust issues.
Edited by gordonbennet on 19/04/2020 at 09:21
|
|
|
Under BL they created the Montego which may make some laugh that I’d suggest it was a good car but it was. I sold plenty of these in the 90’s and not a problem was had and if you look up period road tests from the 80’s you’ll find the Montego in the top tier of all of them. The closely related Maestro wasn’t as good plus the styling didn’t work as well as the saloon.
I know at least one person who would take issue at this comment SLO, my brother!. He had a (Rover) Maestro Clubman 2.0d back in the mid-late 90's, and remains to this day his favourite of the many cars he has owned (and that does include a couple of Montego's). I remember it well, and give him fair due, it did look good after a few minor mods. It was non metallic blue (ascot i think it was called). Maestro's of that era had the lower body done in a dark grey protective film. He removed this, and the rubbing strips. He also had the windows tinted, which along with removing the two tone effect had the effect of 'cleaning up' the lines and made it look sleeker. He also got a set of MG Maestro 15" cross spoke style alloys, along with the front and rear spoiler. And of course, it was kept meticulously clean and polished. It was his 50th birthday recently and his wife and son had seriously looked into getting him another Maestro, but sadly far too difficult to find a decent one!.
If you see the original plans for the Allegro it was actually quite a good looking car. It was spoiled by cost cutting and a need to use existing engines that were too tall for the design
Yes indeed, this is one of Harris Mann's styling proposals for what became the Allegro,
classiccarmag.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Harri...g
The earliest styling proposal Mann came up with, for what became the Princess, was also pretty radical!,
www.britishmotormuseum.co.uk/hubfs/BritishMotorMus...g
Pininfarina came up with this fantastically modern and elegant design which they offered to BL, who declined!. The design went on to inspire the Citroen CX and GS.........
www.britishmotormuseum.co.uk/hubfs/BritishMotorMus...g
This is what BL decided to go with instead!
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/82/Austin...g
Hmm!
|
classiccarmag.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Harri...g
The earliest styling proposal Mann came up with, for what became the Princess, was also pretty radical!,
www.britishmotormuseum.co.uk/hubfs/BritishMotorMus...g
Pininfarina came up with this fantastically modern and elegant design which they offered to BL, who declined!. The design went on to inspire the Citroen CX and GS.........
www.britishmotormuseum.co.uk/hubfs/BritishMotorMus...g
This is what BL decided to go with instead!
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/82/Austin...g
Hmm!
Roy Axe improved the initial design of the Montego, I believe he called it too sp****.
Harris Mann, IIRC styled the TR7 as a joke, the rest of course is history.
Pininfarina's proposal for the 1800 was just too radical for conservative BMC.
|
|
Comments on those images.
1) I think I'm right in saying that the styling of the Allegro was originally intended for a bigger car, and was made to fit a smaller one, which is why it looked dumpy.
2) That's a new one one me! I haven't seen that sketch before.
3) This car was actually built, alongside a smaller version based on the 1100/1300. https://www.aronline.co.uk/facts-and-figures/carrozzeria-designs/carrozzeria-designs-pininfarina-1800/
. . .and the 1100 version . . . http://www.carstyling.ru/en/car/1968_pininfarina_blmc_1100/images/36075/
As you say these styling exercises influenced the Citroen CX and GS, which were less elegantly detailed.
4) Didn't those styling exercises come after the original 1800, with its Issigonis "non-styling"?
Edited by Sofa Spud on 20/04/2020 at 18:49
|
Comments on those images.
1) I think I'm right in saying that the styling of the Allegro was originally intended for a bigger car, and was made to fit a smaller one, which is why it looked dumpy.
Nicked from aronline website.
The initial designs for the Allegro were rakish, curvy and stylish. However, the need for the car use existing engine/gearbox packages, as well larger components from the BL parts-bin, resulted in design compromises being introduced.
In 2002, Harris Mann explained the process: ‘We wanted to make a far more modern version of the 1100/1300, keeping the long, sleek look. Then a lot of other things affected it. A heater was developed at astronomical cost which was very deep. That had to go in. Then we had to put in the E-Series engine, which was more suitable for putting in a Leyland truck.’
Packaging compromises kill sleekness
This forced the bonnet line to be raised, making the glass-house shallower. The gentle curves of the initial design were also exaggerated, as it was felt by the Engineers lessons learned in packaging and panel-strength from the pre-ADO74-supermini concept known as Ant and nicknamed the Barrel-car could be incorporated. The wheelbase was only slightly lengthened over the 1100, but overhangs were increased in order to improve under-bonnet access and boot space, two major criticisms of the ADO16.
With the packaging and style compromised, the ADO67 was mutating into a caricature of Mann’s original design, ‘…so the whole car gained in height. That made it look shorter and stumpier. Thicker seats were added inside, which cut down on interior space. It was getting bulkier inside and out, and lost the original sleekness. That was what happened unfortunately.’
The body design was finalised by the BLMC board on 19 September 1969 (at a cost of £21m) and this final incarnation was accompanied by a sense of unease, certainly by Harris Mann, who felt that his design had been corrupted too much by the Production Engineers. However, the Allegro’s design was okayed for production by George Turnbull and it was felt the offbeat styling was exactly what the Austin needed to be: a flag-bearer for the go-it-alone spirit that was prevalent in the company at the time.
|
|
|
|
“ I know at least one person who would take issue at this comment SLO, my brother!. He had a (Rover) Maestro Clubman 2.0d back in the mid-late 90's, and remains to this day his favourite of the many cars he has owned“
I quite liked the post facelift Maestro when they fitted the better interior. They were comfortable and well made but the 1.3 petrol struggled and the Perkins diesel was tough but slow - I used a very rusty example to jump start everything in my yard on cold mornings, it never failed to go. The Montego 1.6 and 2.0 turbo diesels were great cars. All sadly were poorly rust treated.,
|
|
|
|
|
Thumbs up from me too for Rover 216GSi. It was right-sized, prompt and had plenty of leather and ‘wood’. I was disappointed when Honda went out of the picture.
|
|
|
|
I hired a Maestro just after they had been launched, a lot of people asked me how it was and whether I liked it.
After the Maxi ended in the late 70s I looked around for something to replace my fifth and final one, so tried a Maestro as the closest relative. That was all I needed to switch to the chain of Pug 205s that followed. Like many other people I never looked back. I reckon part of the problem for BL was that there were too many Friday cars.
Edited by Andrew-T on 19/04/2020 at 09:43
|
|
As i mentioned in the Dad mobiles thread, mine had a Rover 414 SLI for a few years. It was a lovely thing, so much nicer and classier than the Orion he had before that. Plenty fast enough with that sweet 1.4, with such a comfortable and airy interior, he only got rid of it because of the arrival of a couple of dogs and the need for an estate.
|
As i mentioned in the Dad mobiles thread, mine had a Rover 414 SLI for a few years. It was a lovely thing, so much nicer and classier than the Orion he had before that. Plenty fast enough with that sweet 1.4, with such a comfortable and airy interior, he only got rid of it because of the arrival of a couple of dogs and the need for an estate.
I loved the R8 and the money I earned from flogging boatloads of the things. They were by far the best small family car until the Pug 306 arrived but even then it was still far better built and classier.
|
|
|
|
|
My Dad had 3 Maxis in a row, well, nearly in a row as there was a gap for a Lancia Beta 2000 Sedan, which went the same way as most. We looked at the Maestro when it was launched, it lacked the space of the Maxi, so one was never bought.
Edited by Random on 19/04/2020 at 12:08
|
|
Looking back I had some decent cars from makers who became part of BMC/BL later on. I had a Mini in 1968, a Spitfire in 1969 a 1.8 Marina in 1973, a TR5 in 1975 then lastly a Montego Mayfair in 1986. All petrol in those days and to be honest I don't recall any major trouble with the cars at all. As SLO states, the Montego was a surprising good and reliable car. I enjoyed them all in some ways but the marina was probably the most 'ordinary' of the bunch. Went fine, good engine and comfortable. Had to watch the roadholding at speed but not too bad overall. After the Montego had a series of Honda Accords, every mark until we went diesel and Honda did not have one at the time. Pity they could not make the partnership with BL work, Honda really knew what they were doing. Actually so did BL but being underfunded and strikebound did not help a good engineering pedigree survive.
Cheers Concrete
|
|
Like SLO76, I don't want to trigger a discussion about the politics of BL, but I remember watching a (black and white) TV documentary about the company. In one part, an ex-employee was talking about how tedious it was to work on the production line. He ended by saying something along the lines of "At least some of us had World War 2 to take us away from it". I thought that was so, so sad.
|
|
BL learned so much from Honda about running a company, producing cars properly and looking after the work force. Following success of the R8, and the helping hand from Ford in the early 90's, they through all that good work away with badly marketed follow ups and poor product choices. At least they went out on a high with the 'Z' cars, sadly by then the coffin had too many nails in it.
|
|
BL cars weren't all that bad. Even the Allegro sold quite well despite the back window being the only nicely styled part of the car!
Renault survived, and yet their cars were no better made and certainly no better looking that BL's offerings. They were probably saved by the Renault 5 in a way that BL wasn't saved (for long) by the Metro.
British Leyland ended up with lots of brands: Austin-Morris, Rover, Triumph and Jaguar, all of which were run as separate empires building different designs with little in the way of common components. This was the opposite of what BL's predecessor, BMC, did, which was to badge engineer the same model for its sub brands. The BMC 1100/1300 was sold as Austin, Morris, MG, Wolseley, Riley and Vanden Plas versions, all basically the same car but with different grilles and trim.
Nowadays manufacturers go in for platform sharing, which is a half-way house between standalone designs and badge engineering.
|
|
While BL/Rover undoubtedly produced many lemons and not that many good cars I only had ownership experience of two.
The first was an Austin 2200 automatic, quite a rare car but a lemon as far as I am concerned. It was very comfortable with a leather front bench seat and the auto gear lever unusually located in the dashboard. That gearbox gave me many problems and eventually had to be replaced with a reconditioned one at great cost to me, Then some months later the hydrolastic suspension on the passenger side kept failing and that signalled me moving the car on.
My other BL/Rover car was the Rover 75. Mine was a Connoisseur SE with the BMW 2 litre common rail diesel engine. I loved its retro styling and thought it was one the best looking cars around. It was a true executive class car being very well equipped, comfortable and made effortless progress on the road. Mine is obviously long lived as I checked it against the MOT records and see that is still running – not bad for a 2001 registered car!
|
|
“ My other BL/Rover car was the Rover 75. Mine was a Connoisseur SE with the BMW 2 litre common rail diesel engine. I loved its retro styling and thought it was one the best looking cars around. It was a true executive class car being very well equipped, comfortable and made effortless progress on the road. Mine is obviously long lived as I checked it against the MOT records and see that is still running – not bad for a 2001 registered car!”
I did like the 75, especially the estate with leather and an auto box and the BMW diesel motor, both of which suited the relaxed nature of the car. I liked the image Rover had in the 80’s and 90’s. The Diesel engine was actually far more reliable in the Rover than in BMW’s own products as it didn’t have the rather notorious swirl flaps fitted which all too frequently broke and were ingested by the turbo destroying it and sometimes the engine too. It was less powerful but proved very robust if looked after.
Sadly though the big seller, the 1.8 and 1.8T petrols were the weak link especially the turbo which could pop a head gasket before 30,000 miles, not something the buyer of an expensive executive car expected. The 1.8 non-turbo was also sluggish but the cars reputation was lost due to HGF but it could’ve been so different had BMW rectified the head gasket issue which was known about by the time the 75 appeared. It was a simple fix with an upgraded gasket but why didn’t they do it? You’d almost believe they wanted Rover to fail. Had it arrived with a 4cyl Honda motor under the hood it would’ve been a fantastic car or had BMW allowed the use of their own 4cyl engines.
It was also a bit of a confused model being in-between a BM 3 series and the 5 series in size. The V6 although smooth, was thirsty, it lacked torque and it ridiculously had three timing belts which were hugely expensive to change and were thus neglected by most owners which killed off many examples.
|
|
You wouldn't find BMW replacing the 3 and 5 series with a car in between. The 75 was too large on the outside and too small inside. Alfa came up with the same silly trick of replacing two with one. The 156 and 166 made way for the 159, which never sold as well as the 156.
|
You wouldn't find BMW replacing the 3 and 5 series with a car in between. The 75 was too large on the outside and too small inside. Alfa came up with the same silly trick of replacing two with one. The 156 and 166 made way for the 159, which never sold as well as the 156.
Agree. Didn’t help that Alfa removed the magic by using Vauxhall engines from the Vectra. The 2.2 petrol used to eat timing chains and even the V6 was a GM motor with a fancy plastic cover.
|
Then some months later the hydrolastic suspension on the passenger side kept failing and that signalled me moving the car on.
The hydrolastic suspension failure was often a leak in the hose. A very easy fix. You just saw off the fitting on the hose and braze the connector to a reusable hydraulic hose connection. The rubber pot has a tube coming out. You cut the old hose off that and braze on another reusable hydraulic hose connector. You can then put on a new steel braided hydraulic hose to replace the old leaky one and have reusable fittings in case it ever happens again. Unlikely with steel braided hose. Simple. I had no trouble doing my 1800 and I have no mechanical ability. Takes about half an hour and costs peanuts.
|
BL cars weren't all that bad. Even the Allegro sold quite well despite the back window being the only nicely styled part of the car!
Renault survived, and yet their cars were no better made and certainly no better looking that BL's offerings. They were probably saved by the Renault 5 in a way that BL wasn't saved (for long) by the Metro.
British Leyland ended up with lots of brands: Austin-Morris, Rover, Triumph and Jaguar, all of which were run as separate empires building different designs with little in the way of common components. This was the opposite of what BL's predecessor, BMC, did, which was to badge engineer the same model for its sub brands. The BMC 1100/1300 was sold as Austin, Morris, MG, Wolseley, Riley and Vanden Plas versions, all basically the same car but with different grilles and trim.
Nowadays manufacturers go in for platform sharing, which is a half-way house between standalone designs and badge engineering.
Replying to my own post -
Of course even if Renault cars of the 1970's were no better than BL cars, I forgot to mention that Renault might have been in a better position because they operated as a single entity, with a single range of models, while BL was operating as several divisions with competing models.
|
|
I think you're right there, Sofa Spud.
As a newly-qualified chartered accountant in the early 1970s I assisted on the 'Ryder team' -o one of several not very fruitful investigations into BL. I seem to remember that BL had 19 different models, whereas Ford and Renault had 5 or 6.
Badge engineering worked all right at first, as with the Farina saloons and the 1100/1300, largely because William Morris (Lord Nuffield) knew how to run a business. But it all fell apart after him, and when BL took over Jaguar-Rover-Triumph in the late 60s it didn't know what to do with it. There was a minimum of integration: I remember hearig the story of how even in the 1970s the night-watchman at the main Jaguar-Rover-Triumph HQ in Coventry still answered the phone 'The Standard'.
Edited by Avant on 24/04/2020 at 11:18
|
There was a minimum of integration: I remember hearig the story of how even in the 1970s the night-watchman at the main Jaguar-Rover-Triumph HQ in Coventry still answered the phone 'The Standard'.
Yes, I think BL suffered from being a conglomerate which never came properly together, A bit like the railways in 1948 - the GWR kept going almost unaltered for years, building the same locos with shiny brass bits, when trimmings had been abandoned everywhere else (actually I rather liked that when I was a kid). But the NIH syndrome (not invented here) has ruined many a potentially useful merger.
|
|
Ah - thank you Trilogy: seeing references to the R8 above I was wondering which one that was.
I think that model was the sweet spot. I remember liking a 214i courtesy car, and was even more impressed by having a 220i pool car for a week or so in the mid-1990s after someone drove into my company Renault. That was a lovely car, and it seemed well-built too.
With the family long grown up, a 2-litre engine in a medium-sized car designed for a smaller engine is my ideal. My current Q2 2.0 TFSI is one such - one of the best cars I've had.
|
... a 2-litre engine in a medium-sized car designed for a smaller engine is my ideal. My current Q2 2.0 TFSI is one such - one of the best cars I've had.
That's why I always liked a Pug 205 with a 1.4-litre engine - a car designed for a 1.1 or a 1-litre.
|
|
Looks great and this was the most reliable combination and best value spec in my opinion. They were quite heavy things and needed PAS which was only fitted as standard on the GSi initially. I liked the 1600 petrols and 1800 PSA Turbo diesels. Both were tough, classy, comfy and well made.
|
I remember hearig the story of how even in the 1970s the night-watchman at the main Jaguar-Rover-Triumph HQ in Coventry still answered the phone 'The Standard'.
I did hear that during the 1960s the poor girl answering the telephone at the Hillman assembly plant in Australia had to say " Hello. Rootes group". Those of you who are familiar with Australian slang will guess the kind of replies that she got.
|
|
As well as the problems already mentioned concerning BL cars, their commercial vehicle operation got into difficulties too. At first that also had several partially competing brands - AEC, BMC, Guy, Leyland-Albion and Scammell. Even after rationalisation there were still two competing ranges - Leyland Redline, based on former BMC designs and Leyland Blueline, based on Leyland / AEC designs. There was also Scammell which concentrated on specialist heavy haulage vehicles but also continued to build their popular Routeman 8-wheeler that competed with the Leyland Octopus. By the time BL really got their act together with a single range of up-to-date new models in the early 1980s, the big continental manufacturers had become well established in the UK. Not only that, they'd become established in former BL export markets too.
Edited by Sofa Spud on 29/04/2020 at 11:25
|
|
Work apparently began in 1983 just as it’s predecessor (the SD3) was due to arrive.
|
|
6 years gestation! A shame the next joint venture to replace the R8 went so badly.
|
|
The rot set in as far back as the original Mini, if not before. As one domino fell it was only a matter of time.............
|
|
|
|
|
