Have a look at this excerpt from a channel 4 documentary of some years ago............
tinyurl.com/le9ne2
It always did perplex me the way the mini lasted for so long, I thought that it really shouldn't have outlived its stablemates at BMC, namely the 1100/1300 that Issigonis also penned. It stands to reason that a car launched in 1959 would not be up to the passive safety standards of the 90's, even with various upgrades, the mini ran with no crumple zones in an era where rivals had sophisticated survival cells.
How bad was the mini in an accident? The HJ write up states they have a very high fatality rate but I guess this is no surprise. I'd really like to see one subjected to a Euro NCAP style test, if only to show how far we've come. I imagine many backroomers will have experience of the original mini and possibly some horror stories too....
|
|
Good job I was young enough to be immortal when I owned one!
|
I was two years old when I last went into a mini, it was a 1968 F traveler. I don't remember it thankfully. My dad traded it in for a Commodore C64 and a bus pass.
However the idea of traveling in one scares me. They are moving death traps. I know my car isn't exactly the safest car in the world but I would like to think in a 20mph shunt I won't have any serious injuries.
I don't like to speak ill of the dead but from the things I have read Isogonnis was quite arrorogant at times and he was always right. He would hate the new mini with all the airbags etc and the bloatyness of it. I understand that, he was a genius but from what I have seen arrogant with it.
Edited by Rattle on 21/08/2009 at 23:59
|
Different times, different standards.
The main problem with the Mini I'd say is that, at the time it was designed there was not the huge numbers of ugly great 4x4s and the like infesting the roads.
A brand-new, 5-star Fiat 500 would be squished flat by such a vehicle. It's all relative. Of course the Mini would be squished still more -- but that isn't surprising.
Rattle, I don't understand this obsession with safety you have. The fix is simple -- don't crash.
I had a 30mph crash in a 2001 Hyundai Accent -- not exactly a Volvo -- and walked away with nothing more than a scratch on my nose from the airbag.
At 70mph I think I'd prefer to be in a Mini. I personally would rather be snuffed out in an instant than be mashed up and crippled but still existing.
|
How does it compare to a push bike, or a motorbike?
Neither have yet been banned to my knowledge.
|
As jase1 says above the roads were different in terms of traffic when the original Mini was designed. Not only would it not encounter something like an Audi Q7 but there were far fewer cars on the roads. The program about the motorways still makes me smile when I see it. Motorways didn't even have central barriers originally. Now they get to be reinforced concrete in places.
But would I travel far or at all in a BMC Mini. Probably not.
|
>>But would I travel far or at all in a BMC Mini. Probably not.
I agree wholeheartedly, but weren't they fun.
I hated working on them as well, Metros weren't much better!
|
This sums up the problem.
A Rover 100 the so called replacement for the Mini. The Rover 100 had crumple zones, airbags, side impact bars but still failed horribly.
www.euroncap.com/tests/rover_100_1997/11.aspx
Then there is my car. Not brilliant either and I would imagine I would suffer some serious injuries in that crash but its a city car and its rare that I go above 40. If I did a lot of motorway driving I would without a doubt get something bigger.
www.euroncap.com/tests/opel_vauxhall_corsa_2000/23...x
Then there is the modern supermini. The FIAT 500
www.euroncap.com/tests/fiat_500_2007/298.aspx
It is quite frightening how far we have come. I would imagine the original Mini would have been a lot worse than that Rover 100.
Thankfully since the credit crunch I have seen a lot less big 4x4 type vehicles on the roads :).
As for crashing I don't intend to crash and I am as careful as I can be but sometimes it is not avoidable.
|
Over many years, I have seen the results of real life crashes, many resulting in death.
the one constant over the years that I have never managed to figure out, is how sometimes the car (age/type not important) can be totally demolished, and the occupants get out with hardly a scratch, but at other times the car is hardly damaged, but contained a fatality.
We have moved on a long way with crumple zones, but lets not forget that we are still encased in a metal cage, and that the passenger section WILL yield, and hurt/trap up if the impact is hard enough.
also remember its not so much the speed of impact, so much as the mass we are impacting with......
|
the one constant over the years that I have never managed to figure out is how sometimes the car (age/type not important) can be totally demolished and the occupants get out with hardly a scratch but at other times the car is hardly damaged but contained a fatality.
I imagine, in the case of a strong vehicle without adequate crumple zones (eg. a Land-Rover), that the vehicle could appear relatively intact after an impact, but the deceleration forces caused by the lack of crumple zone would be enough to kill the occupants (basal skull fracture, brain bouncing around inside the skull etc) even if the cabin area was reasonably intact.
Conversely, a "totally-demolished" car may look like that because it has absorbed enough of the impact to reduce the deceleration experienced by the occupants to survivable levels - of course, other injuries cause by cabin intrusion etc. would have to be survivable too.
Edited by Typ 8L on 24/08/2009 at 12:53
|
|
|
|
As for crashing I don't intend to crash and I am as careful as I can be but sometimes it is not avoidable.
So of the billions of situations you could find yourself in when driving, perhaps you can name just three where a serious crash is unavoidable?
However the idea of traveling in one scares me. They are moving death traps. I know my car isn't exactly the safest car in the world but I would like to think in a 20mph shunt I won't have any serious injuries.
>>
In three words, lighten up, dude. You could have a 20mph shunt on a bicycle and walk away. If you really think you're in danger of death from driving your car, you need to take some extra training; not worry yourself into an early grave.
Edited by Garethj on 22/08/2009 at 11:41
|
Having banger raced many of these old cars, you wouldn't want to hit a Rover 90 P4 with a mini either, or a Standard Vanguard, mk2 Zodiac, Austin Westminster, Volvo 144 etc.
Size and weight are always factors, if you have a head on with a truck there's one winner.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Good job I was young enough to be immortal when I owned one!
So was I, hence I got away with no more than a few bruises despite wrteing ogg two of them.
I would still be temted to build one with a nice 160 or so bhp K series, reckon it would be fantastic in traffic. A good roll cage a proper belts of course as I am no longer immortal.
|
|
|
|
Thing is though, If I had the choice of crashing a push bike at 20mph or a BMC Mini, I'd probably choose the push bike. Mini's ARE lethal, all the energy of the crash is absorbed by the driver and even at that speed, you'd probably end up with an engine in your lap. With a bike you'll just fall off and skin your knees.
As Rattle says, the results of the crash test for the Rover 100 are absolutely horrific, subtract the crumple zones, airbags and impact bars and it doesn't bear thinking about. What I found unforgiveable about people's attitudes to the mini was the way its safety shortcomings were ignored because it was 'cute' and an 'icon'. Nonsense, it was a fifties design that would kill you at the slightest whiff of an accident. Great car for its time, just wish it had stayed there.
|
Nonsense it was a fifties design that would kill you at the slightest whiff of an accident.
Really? Because I've known a few crash theirs, my best friend even rolled his, and nobody died. Of course it's not as safe as a larger car or a newer car, but the comment above is clearly a fib.
|
|
is it true they started fitting lorry trailors with "mini bars" because they were being driven ( the minis) into the back of and getting stuck in the sides of the lorry trailors
|
If I had the choice of crashing a push bike at 20mph or a BMC Mini,
>>I'd probably choose the push bike..
Well, speaking as somebody who has done both when very much younger, believe me you'd want to be in the Mini.
The Mini accident was very firmly up the back of an MGB GT, and I can still remember the incident, and apart from a sore nose, sore knee, and inordinately dented pride, I was OK (seatbelt on).
The mini was written off.
However, the bike accident lost me 3 days before I remember anything about being in hospital, and a few minutes prior to the event are gone too - "retrograde amnesia". (no helmet).
The bike appeared OK.
It's really no contest.
|
|
|
|
|
Back in 1964 an acquaintance driving a Mini succeeded in ramming two cars through a junction and escaped with a minor cut on his forehead - just shows the devil looks after his own, only the reckless and drunk would willingly be his passengers.
|
I began driving in the '70s. The horror stories of what would happen to you if you crashed in a Mini were doing the rounds even then. Minis were the default young driver's car of the time. We just tried very hard not to crash them although of course some did anyway. They were quite a lot slower than modern cars and often running on crossplys which didn't give huge grip but at least they let go progressively.
Sometimes, and I confess purely subjectively, I think some of the modern safety aids such as ABS, airbags, crumple zones and so on instill a false confidence in the driver. When you knew that it was you and only you who was in control of your own destiny it rather focussed the mind. Well, it did mine anyway.
Still drove like an ignited witch mind........
;-)
|
Sometimes and I confess purely subjectively I think some of the modern safety aids such as ABS airbags crumple zones and so on instill a false confidence in the driver. When you knew that it was you and only you who was in control of your own destiny it rather focussed the mind. Well it did mine anyway.
Oi! that's what I said in another thread!
Im glad Im not the only one who sees the use of 'aids' that way!
|
Marc bolan used to like em , he said they were good "to die for"
www.findadeath.com/Deceased/b/marc%20bolan/Marc_Bo...m
rip marc
|
|
|
Sorry Swiiss, no intentional plagiarism !
I think it was Granadas which were one of the first mainsteam cars to feature ABS. There was a rumour at the time, almost certainly unsubstantiated of course, that they were constantly being rear ended because they could stop when others couldn't !
Wouldn't have fancied trying to get into the boot of a Granada using a Mini as a battering ram though......
;-)
|
|
|
|
I think some of the modern safety aids such as ABS airbags crumple zones and so on instill a false confidence in the driver.
I think Humph makes a good point here, it's very easy to forget in a modern car just how dangerous driving on the public roads can be. When you're belted up inside a strong survival cell surrounded by air bags, crumple zones, sturdy doors containing impact beams and thick A-posts along with an NCAP-style image in your head of how the car will perform in an accident, it does give the driver a remarkable sense of security that can lead to complacency among those with a less-than-perfect understanding of physics.
I find that if I take my seatbelt off when manouvering around car-parks, empty lanes and such, it does make me feel remarkably vulnerable, even if there is nothing to hit. The presence of a restraining device seems to cheat our minds into thinking that the laws of physics no longer apply. We are still propelling ourselves along the ground at a far higher speed than we were ever designed to do, so great caution must still be exercised.
When I look at the interior of an old car, it is very difficult to ignore the potential consequences of an accident, especially when we are all used to driving at (relatively) high speeds on very busy roads with minor accidents being quite frequent. Just looking at the exposed steering column, aimed squarely at the unrestrained driver's heart, is enough to make the modern motorist shudder! Of course the roads were very different back then in pre-motorway Britain. Speeds were very much lower and roads were very much quieter, still there were a great many more fatalities in those days, even though there were obviously fewer accidents.
|
|
Many years ago I saw a Mini rear end a volvo with a towbar, volvo unmarked, Mini with a hole punched in the engine block. A low speed traffic light shunt, Mini occupant seemed OK considering the circumstances.
|
|
|
I've told this story countless times but my mate had a G reg Fiesta Popular MK3 with ABS. ABS was an option on all Fords from around 1989. He set out to proof it could not skid it, so he went on an icy car park and slammed on his brakes, the car went side ways at 30mph and I refused to ever get in a car with him again.
I don't think about accidents when I am driving otherwise I would be paranoid. However I take pride in being the safest driver I possibly can be and I like to think I am well aware of my limits.
|
|
The Fiestas, Escorts and Orions of that period were fitted with a mechanical ABS system which could best be described as dire ! To my knowledge no other manufacturers used it.
|
|
Indeed this was a mechanical system.
|
|
Defensive driving is always the best option, an attitude that may have been eroded with advances in active an passive vehicle safety. These safety systems should be regarded as no more than an insurance against other's stupidity, not as a safety net for the driver's risk taking.
|
RIP Marc Bolan as said above, what a waste
|
|
On a separate note - interesting linked YouTube vids - the Official Rover videos describing new models to Technicians - The Rover 214 Cabriolet was particularly good -- proved how Heath Robinson the whole set up was !
|
|
I've been to many crashes over 27 years in the fire service. One of the worst for deformation of a cabin was a mini that hit another car almost head on on a 30mph busy town road. Completely fell apart. It was unrecognisable from a distance. The occupants landed on the carriageway. Late eighties, so the original shape.
|
|
One of the dangers with the mini and 1100 range was the chassis weakening with rust, I had an MG1100 in the early 70s that the headlights would lift up on acceleration, the cause was that the front floor of the car had rusted from bulkhead and was pivoting around the wing mountings.
|
>>the headlights would lift up on acceleration
That would also be an effect of the hydrogas (hydrolastic?) suspension.
|
|
Maybe Bathtub, but I only discovered the crack along the floor when my girlfriend complained about water hitting her face when we went through a puddle. Pulled the carpet up and could see the road.
|
When I was minicabbing south of the river in the seventies, a couple pulling out of an uphill side turning into Clapham Road in a coughing old Mini stalled in front of a thundering juggernaut which ran over the Mini, killing them both.
Of course you wouldn't have wanted to be in the same position in any car, however big and crashproof. The whole issue of crashworthiness is of interest mainly to people who are planning to crash, or afraid they may not be able to avoid it. Perhaps I am irresponsible or over-optimistic, but passive safety comes very low in my own list of priorities (as my ownership history shows).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In my early 70's police traffic days, I attended a fatal accident involving a Mini saloon and an 1800 which had been fettled at BL Special Tuning with roll bar and bars in the sills. Driver was wearing a full harness. The 1800 was travelling fast on a dual carriageway and the Mini pulled out from a minor road in front of him at right angles, resulting in the front of the 1800 hitting the driver's side of the Mini. Mini driver was killed and the car ended up no more than a foot wide. 1800 was still driveable and the driver cracked a kneecap on the parcel shelf. They were strong cars to start with but that thing was like a tank.
|
He was lucky.
There is no point in making a tank because the driver will then become the weakest object and all the energy will be transfered to them. A modern car will look far worse in an accident than 1800 but the modern car driver would probably come off a lot better.
The idea is to simple make the front absorb as much energy as possible but without touching the passanger compartment.
|
The idea is to simple make the front absorb as much energy as possible but without touching the passanger compartment.
Obviously still not enough for motorsport/rally purposes as the modifications for those purposes are still remarkably similar to those made to that 1800. I think the reinforced seat mountings and full harness worn may have had a bit to do with the driver protection too!
|
|
Yep I am not saying that, but in the old days it was all too much about a stronger car not enough about safety cells. 5th Gear did a clip where they crashed a Renault Magane (or something similar) into an old Volvo 740. The Volvo was the larger and heavier car, but the Renault completly destroyed it.
|
5th Gear did a clip where they crashed a Renault Magane (or something similar) into an old Volvo 740. The Volvo was the larger and heavier car but the Renault completly destroyed it.
Not quite destroyed it if I recall correctly? And if the impact had been head on instead of offset, the results may have been different...
I can't stress enough how much safer it is not to crash, I'm surprised more people don't take it on as a way of driving about, we'd all save loads of time and money ;-)
|
|
|
|
I seem to recall that Issigonis was roundly criticised for his attitude to safety in design, from the forward pointing door handles to the exposed filler cap. His attitude was that if you made a mistake you paid the price!!
JH
|
I well remember in, I think the early 70's, listening to the radio just north of Morpeth when I heard on it of an accident having just occurred on the notorious A1 single carriage way east of Alnwick. Apparently some car with an exposed petrol cap had skidded and wiped off this cap distributing burning petrol all over the place. People were burned to death in this accident and soon exposed caps were banned.
sq
Edited by Pugugly on 03/09/2009 at 16:42
|
|
|
|
>Have a look at this excerpt from a channel 4 documentary of some years ago
It was the series 'Crash' (3 episodes) which examined how vehicles and designers have progressed the ideas of increasing ones' survivability when involved in a crash, how cars behave in crashes, legislation, roadholding etc etc.
1998 I seem to recall. It also featured the ' most famous crash of all time' and an analysis into it (it occurred in a tunnel in Paris in Aug 1997)
I have them on DVD, lovingly transferred from VHS.
period clips of Jimmy Saville going "Clunk Click Every Trip".
an excellent series.
|
Quote:...""The main problem with the Mini I'd say is that, at the time it was designed there was not the huge numbers of ugly great 4x4s and the like infesting the roads.""
Just a sprinkling of Land Rovers - series 1 and a few early series 2 by then. If a Mini hit a Land Rover in those days the Mini would have come off much worse, but the unyielding Land Rover would have hurled its occupants against the metal dash, the exposed metal wiper motors, vent latches etc. etc.
|
|
|
|
In its defence, it was very difficult to overturn in a Mini; quite easy to do so in most of the opposition.
The most dangerous in this respect must have been the upright, swaying, black-box Ford Popular which was still being produced up to 1959: it was more or less the same car as the Ford 8 from 20 years before that.
|
The most dangerous in this respect must have been the upright, swaying, black-box Ford >> Popular
Despite their beam front axle and cart suspension - transverse spring at the front I think too -, those upright Fords weren't as ready to turn over as they looked. I know because a friend, still with us, had several and drove them like a raving nutter in the manner we all favoured in our youth back then (ahem). They understeered, oversteered and squirrelled, lifted the wheels one at a time and darted and plunged fairly unpredictably all over the road when cornered violently. But they didn't turn over.
|
|
Good to hear that. My comment stemmed from a childhood memory: at the age of about 6 I was being driven to school by a schoolmate's father in a Ford Prefect, vintage c. 1950, which overturned because he drove too fast round a corner. Maybe a skinny crossply tyre had a puncture. Fortunately no-one was hurt.
Edited by Avant on 27/08/2009 at 00:45
|
|
And when did the last Mini get made? I am guessing 1990s.
|
|
I think it was 2000 when the last Mini was made. Ironicaly the Mini was first introduced the year the Popular spoken about here seased production.
|
It was indeed. The new-shape Anglia came out at about the same time (summer of 1959) as the Mini, and the old 100E Anglia became the Popular with the old gutless side-valve 1172cc engine. I seem to remember Ford advertising this as 'a proper car for your money' - about £500, same as a standard Mini.
Totally different cars, but one inestimable advantage that the Mini had was the SU carburetter, which gave first-time starting hot or cold - something not shared by contemporary Fords, Vauxhalls or Hillmans.
The only exception was when a Mini's engine got wet, there being no radiator to protect the electrics from spray. The original Morris Mini-Minor was less susceptible than the Austin Seven as the grille slats were much closer together. SWMBO's first car when we got married was a Morris Mini-Traveller, and we never had this problem.
Going back to the OP's original point, surely the occupants of a Mini were more vulnerable only because it was smaller and lower than other cars. It was still a lot safer than a motorbike, a Reliant or a bubble-car.
Edited by Avant on 27/08/2009 at 21:54
|
|
|
|
" The most dangerous in this respect must have been the upright swaying black-box"
I had an E93A Ford Prefect built 1952? and side skidded and turned it over, as a witness said "You turned over four times". I climbed out OK but shaken and drove the blessed thing home!
Edited by Pugugly on 03/09/2009 at 17:31
|
|
|
|
|
