Login Register Sign up for the GRM e-newsletter

Login to post Forums » Grassroots Motorsports » Death by 1,000 cuts, the demise of the British auto industry. « 1 2 3 »
  • NOHOME

    Dec. 26, 2009 10:29 a.m. NOHOME Reader

    ddavidv wrote:

    NOHOME wrote: Actually, the cars you show are a good example of why the Brits ended up under the bus all on their own. Those cars represent the culmination of British technology. The styling was great and marketing worked. However, all they really were was 30 year old (or older) technology that had been assembled in an admirable fashion.

    With no real research having been conducted to advance the cause, there was no place to go but downhill.

    Ehhhh, not sure I completely agree. Been around a lot of LBC's over the years, and the Mini is the first one I've owned. My impression is thus: The British had some ingenious designs, frequently created with little in the way of new componentry due either to frugality or the unwillingness of the manufacturer to spend proper funds on newer base equipment. Execution in design was frequently pretty good (wiper linkage cited above), but construction was frequently lackluster.

    Leaving out the bit about build quality. I think we are saying the same thing? The brits were doing some neat cars using obsolete technology. The downfall of the industry was that they let the development pipeline run dry. That is a very difficult situation to recover from. The US did the same and it caught up in the 70s. Recent events prove that they are about to suffer the same fate as the British builders due to this oversight.

    The wipers that everyone keeps mentioning are a POS even by 1960s standards. Yes they fit every car the brits built and yes they were cheap to make, but they are noisy and problematic in that they tend to leak where they exit the cowl. They need to be removed cleaned and regreased every five years or so else they seize up. Great 1950s design. Lousy when put into a 1970s context, especially when the Japanese came along with fresh hardware and a commitment to develop it on an ongoing basis.

  • Appleseed

    Dec. 26, 2009 1:58 p.m. Appleseed Dork

    NOHOME wrote:

    Actually, the cars you show are a good example of why the Brits ended up under the bus all on their own. Those cars represent the culmination of British technology. The styling was great and marketing worked. However, all they really were was 30 year old (or older) technology that had been assembled in an admirable fashion.

    With no real research having been conducted to advance the cause, there was no place to go but downhill.

    Isn't that a good description of GM in the 70s and 80s? Hell, even the 90s?

    WE ARE GM. BUY IT OR ELSE.

  • Keith

    Dec. 26, 2009 2:08 p.m. Keith SuperDork

    NOHOME wrote: The wipers that everyone keeps mentioning are a POS even by 1960s standards. Yes they fit every car the brits built and yes they were cheap to make, but they are noisy and problematic in that they tend to leak where they exit the cowl. They need to be removed cleaned and regreased every five years or so else they seize up. Great 1950s design. Lousy when put into a 1970s context, especially when the Japanese came along with fresh hardware and a commitment to develop it on an ongoing basis.

    The wiper mechanism on my Miata don't fit any other car. Heck, the wiper mechanism on my 1966 Cadillac doesn't fit any other car. Where's the benefit of a system that needs to be customized for every application over one that's flexible by design?

    If the Lucas wipers do leak, then that's just a matter of some better seals - not the strong suit of the Brits. I don't see how the fundamental design of the Lucas bits would be any different than any other wiper pivot from that respect. Noisy is simply a matter of waterproofing the motor and mounting it outside the passenger's compartment. I'll have to go try the wipers in my Mini and see how loud they are when the car's parked, I honestly don't remember.

    I think there should be a whole lot more standardization in automotive design. Nobody wins with incessant unnecessary redesigns. The amount of cost, manpower and manufacturing capability that goes into new taillights for the All New! 2011 Pontiac Grand Prix (or whatever) should be spent elsewhere, like actually improving the car.

  • mel_horn

    Dec. 26, 2009 3:06 p.m. mel_horn Dork

    Keith wrote:

    I've never understood the British inability to come to grips with fluids, either keeping them in or keeping them out. Wasn't the British Empire built on their navy? How did they not sink?

    A few years ago at the Giants' Despair Hillclimb my friend was trying to diagnose an ignition problem in his MGA when he started screaming "The Germans should have won the damn war! How could a Spitfire with this damn Lucas ignition keep running long enough to stay in the air and shoot down a Messerschmitt?"

  • mad_machine

    Dec. 26, 2009 3:07 p.m. mad_machine SuperDork

    simple.. they got rebuilt after every flight

  • JeepinMatt

    Dec. 26, 2009 10:35 p.m. JeepinMatt Reader

    ddavidv wrote:

    American cars are the class bullies of autodom. Big, burly, loud but frequently when pushed reveal their inherent flaws and inability to succeed against their lesser peers.

    Yes, cars like the Viper, Corvette, Panoz, GT40 (alright, Anglo-American), Cobra, Daytona Coupe, S7 etc... have never been competitive in racing

    Even in lower classes you've got Mustangs, Camaros, Solstices, Corvairs that fight imports with a good track record.

    I won't gloss over American cars' flaws just as I wouldn't any other, but they really are the Rodney Dangerfield of the automotive world. If they were so irredeemable as their reputation suggests, then I would expect them to show it in their racing history. It hasn't been popular to defend or say a kind word about American cars at all, but I'm finding it tougher to keep silent.

    Heck, just look at what the Ford Galaxies did in England during the 60s. Even after they severely penalized them, they were kicking ass on tracks a big car shouldn't even be on.

  • JeepinMatt

    Dec. 26, 2009 10:41 p.m. JeepinMatt Reader

    ddavidv wrote:

    Asian cars are like major appliances. Generally well built, but with few user-servicable parts inside. They perform admirably, but in 20 years you won't fondly remember most of them any more than you do your last toaster oven.

    I'm not picking on you You just wrote a lot and I'm picking out a couple of your points.

    I can't speak for you or anyone else, but I have fond memories of lots of Asian cars well over 20 years after their last-built rolled across the assembly line. Just off the top of my head, RX-7s (all of them), the Z cars, the 2000GT, the Starion, the original RX series, old Supras etc... Plus, if we're talking trucks, the early Land Cruisers, as in FJ-40s, 70s- and 80s-series, plus the early Toyota pickups and the first-gen 4Runner get big points in my book.

    And I'm sure that when it hits the 20-year mark, I'll still be loving RX-7 FDs, MkIV Supras, NSXs, and S2000s. And GRM will have built some sort of memorial to the Miata

  • Keith

    Dec. 26, 2009 11:20 p.m. Keith SuperDork

    Actually, the Miata celebrated 20 years in 2009. Hard to believe!

  • JeepinMatt

    Dec. 26, 2009 11:27 p.m. JeepinMatt Reader

    Keith wrote:

    Actually, the Miata celebrated 20 years in 2009. Hard to believe!

    The thought ran across my mind, but I'm too lazy to edit

    I'll just say that I was considering the NB and NC models. Yes, that's what I did.

« 1 2 3 »  
Tire Rack- Revolutionizing Tire Buying

You'll need to log in to post.