115 replies to this topic

[Ethel]

I'm sure I've heard the body got a little wider with a similar legend to the engine changes - the performance of the prototypes was too awkward for the marketing dept when compared to other models.

 

 

...I can agree about DNA and appeal, but that's looking from this side of history. "What you've never had, you'll never miss", or something like that. Nowadays they'd probably engineer the tranny whine artificially if they thought it'd sell.

[DeadSquare]

"What you've never had, you'll never miss"

 

Huh !...... what about toothache ?

[Mite]

While understanding the argument of those suggesting BMC would have been better off with a clean sheet replacement of the A-Series (or those embracing the sentiment of the grass not always being greener on the other side to justify not changing a single thing when speculating on how Mini or A-Series could have been updated or replaced by evolutionary successors of either), the fact is neither they nor BL could afford to bring such an engine to production. It is also said the 9X engine could not be developed for production in its present form and am inclined to agree, the ideal clean-sheet A-Series replacement would IMHO resemble something along the lines of the Volkswagen EA111 had BMC or BL been in a position to develop and produce its own equivalent such an engine. Where instead of a 750-1000cc 4-cylinder and curious 1125-1490cc 6-cylinder, an alternate 9X engine would at most instead feature capacities of around 750-1200cc 3-cylinder and 900-1600cc 4-cylinder like the EA111 (that was itself capable of being reduced to 771cc in 4-cylinder form for Swedish markets) over a long production run  (along with dieselized versions).

 

However it can be said that part of BMC and even BL's problem was the lack of a linear development program (basically largely entailing further developing what one already has or building upon what has gone before) such as for example from Issigonis's post-war Minor/Oxford/Six to the Mini/ADO16/ADO17 and Maxi, with BMC and BL instead hopping here or there seeking costly clean-sheet miracle solutions and only out of desperation belatedly embracing an evolutionary approach with the likes of the Metro, etc. The same can also be said of the engines as well since an evolutionary approach certainly did not hurt Nissan during the latter's rise from originally building licensed built Austins and Austin-based engines (to become both the biggest selling Japanese marque in Europe by the early-1980s as well as the world's 6th largest carmaker), until much later on they were in a position to opt for truly clean sheet solutions to developing their engines with no direct relation to Austin's A-Series and B-Series engines. 

 

Obviously the original Mini was not in a position to accept an end-on gearbox, due to both its dimensions as well as the need to get the car into production. Yet a case could be made for a Mini successor along the lines of barrel car aka Project Ant (that in some respects appears to be similar to the later Minki-II prototype in terms of a slightly larger evolutionary Mini replacement) to eventually embrace such a layout or at least initially use an in-sump 4-speed with overdrive if not a 5-speed in-sump manual and 5-speed AP automatic. 

 

 

As far as one-off conversions go there is the Andy Saunders 1750cc Mini, where the tall and heavy 1750cc E-Series (that featured a 76.2mm bore along with the later R/S-Series) was somehow made to fit into a Mini. In addition to the odd 1500cc E-Series Mini conversion and experimental prototype (e.g. wide-body Clubman reputedly derived from SWB Allegro platform).

Edited by Mite, 26 July 2019 - 05:02 AM.

[mab01uk]

Found this while searching for something else and thought it might be of interest to some....

AROnline Archive : Mini proposals
BLMC investigate a comprehensive re-jig of the ADO20 Mini, giving it a full tailgate, folding rear seats and wrap around bumpers.
Also a 2 door model without the tailgate. Also a 5 door Clubman fronted saloon sitting on a wheelbase 10 inches longer than the estate.
The plans were finally killed off by the 1975 Ryder report.
https://www.aronline...mini-proposals/

The 1975 British Leyland Ryder Report (84 pages)
http://filestore.nat...3-c-75-53-3.pdf

 

Note below: Far too many BL Part Numbers compared to Ford UK!  

Edited by mab01uk, 26 July 2019 - 08:23 AM.

[Mite]

The notion of an updated A-Series or linear A-Series successor is inspired by the following quote from the AROnline Essay on BMC vs Renault - The Engine Story, where the lesson of Renault's engine strategy is further reinforced by Nissan's example that just happened to be derived from the A-Series.

 

The lesson of Renault’s engine strategy is that BMC’s interests may have been better served by developing a more generously sized engine based on A-Series principles to power the ADO16. The best evidence is the extraordinarily long stroke 1098cc engine – the 1275cc unit had a shorter stroke and 9.3 per cent larger bore diameter. A new engine to fit between the A and the heavy and physically bulky B-Series may have set the ADO16’s launch back a couple of years, but it would still have been two years ahead of the Simca 1100, Peugeot 204 and Autobianchi Primula, and more able to be expanded to a natural limit of around 1600cc.

 

In roughly the same time Nissan brought out the Nissan A engine in 1966 and Renault the C-Type engine in 1962, it took BMC until 1965 to recognize the need for what became the underdeveloped E-Series (after the V4/V6 blind alley). However it was well within BMC's ability to adopt both Nissan's and Renault's engine strategy in developing and producing a linear A-Series successor in the early/mid-1960s to its benefit, Renault after all to this day is still producing the K-Type engine which traces its roots back to the C-Type.  

[r3k1355]

Would they have even had to develop the engine though?  Nissan had already done the heavy lifting, why not just licence the Nissan A engine?

If that didn't seem palatable they what about a joint venture or technical collaboration?

 

Otherwise you're basically doing the same job all over again, and with hindsight I'd have to say that Nissan's development efforts were far better than BMC.

[Albino_Hedgehog]

<iframe src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fcraftedclassicstuning%2Fposts%2F2316785271708796&width=500" width="500" height="776" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowTransparency="true" allow="encrypted-media"></iframe>

Has anyone seen this?

Edited by Albino_Hedgehog, 26 July 2019 - 08:15 PM.

[Spider]

Sorry for going a little off topic here guys, but just wanted to say it's been quite an interesting discussion - thanks Mite for kicking it off.

[Spider]

<iframe src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fcraftedclassicstuning%2Fposts%2F2316785271708796&width=500" width="500" height="776" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowTransparency="true" allow="encrypted-media"></iframe>

Has anyone seen this?

 

 

Yes, it was posted up on the MKI forum.

 

It's interesting and a curiosity, one I'm happy to watch from the sidelines.

We did look in to something similar a few years back and while we could see that it was fairly 'easy' to do (not inferring cheap!) we also came to the conclusion that there was no pluses only minuses, unless you wanted to crank some serious HPs with very high levels of boost.

[Mite]

Would they have even had to develop the engine though?  Nissan had already done the heavy lifting, why not just licence the Nissan A engine?

If that didn't seem palatable they what about a joint venture or technical collaboration?

 

Otherwise you're basically doing the same job all over again, and with hindsight I'd have to say that Nissan's development efforts were far better than BMC.

 

Despite Nissan themselves likely being receptive to the idea given their pre/post-war ties with Austin, it would be difficult to sell such a proposal to BMC short of the Nissan A engine somehow being part of a joint-venture (that benefits the former (via an additional clause to the 1952 licence agreement where BMC can make use of Nissan's improvements to their engines at their own discretion)*. Being loosely similar to BMC's deal with Rolls-Royce for the FB60 6-cylinder (used in the Vanden Plas Princess and at one point for the unbuilt Austin-Healey 4000) and other unrealised models.

 

Otherwise of the view it is still within BMC's ability to develop a similar engine early on had their ill-utilized research department been tasked with it (along with helping to bring down the costs of the Mini, ADO16, etc) instead of the V4/V6 project (and any other BMC projects that amounted to nothing), BMC's efforts especially if backed by their research department (and without Issigonis's meddling) should be able to produce their own comparable version of 1000-1600cc Nissan's A and (Series 2) E engines featuring early elements of the 1000-1300cc South African A-Series and A-OHC engines (which in this case could later filter down to the A-Series if the latter remains in production).

 

Whether a linear A-Series successor akin to Nissan's A / (Series 2) E engines could have slotted into the original Mini or a hypothetical (Project Ant / Minki-II like) Mini II's engine bay is another matter, though certainly possible (if Rover K-Series, Nissan CG/CR, Suzuki G and Honda B conversions are anything to go by) and a few decades later eventually leads to BMC/etc either replacing it with their own version of the Nissan CG engine used in the K11 Micra (that as noted elsewhere has a similar soul/feel to the Mini / A-Series) or following Renault's example with their own British A-Series descended analogue of the K-Type (petrol/diesel) engines or a composite of both.**

 

*-) Austin were certainly within their rights to add an additional clause to their undoubtedly profitable post-war license agreement with Nissan for their benefit (given a number of Nissan's engines could trace their ancestry to both the A-Series and B-Series), though obviously BMC underestimated the Japanese marque not seeing their monumental rise to become both their competitor as well as the world's 6th largest carmaker. Even Rootes could have probably benefited as well from a similar clause to their own license agreement with Isuzu (in addition to a possible joint-venture).

 

**-) Another rough modern parallel to a British A-Series descended analogue of the Renault K-Type (petrol/diesel) would be both the larger Rover T-Series petrols as well as Rover L/G-Series and Land Rover Td5 diesels (that in turn trace their roots to the O/M/L-Series / Perkins Prima and in turn themselves trace their roots back to the B-Series).

 

Sorry for going a little off topic here guys, but just wanted to say it's been quite an interesting discussion - thanks Mite for kicking it off.

 

Likewise, thanks to all who have contributed to discussing a little explored aspect of the A-Series and its connection to the Mini.

Edited by Mite, 28 July 2019 - 12:55 AM.

[mab01uk]

 

<iframe src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fcraftedclassicstuning%2Fposts%2F2316785271708796&width=500" width="500" height="776" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowTransparency="true" allow="encrypted-media"></iframe>

Has anyone seen this?

 

 

Yes, it was posted up on the MKI forum.

 

It's interesting and a curiosity, one I'm happy to watch from the sidelines.

We did look in to something similar a few years back and while we could see that it was fairly 'easy' to do (not inferring cheap!) we also came to the conclusion that there was no pluses only minuses, unless you wanted to crank some serious HPs with very high levels of boost.

 

 

 

The link below from Mk1 Forum:-

 

 

Behold the Specialist Components 5 bearing A-Series billet block!!

https://www.facebook...tO-&__tn__=kC-R

 

https://www.facebook...istcomponents1/

[Black.Ghost]

For me, it wasn't that the A-series should or could have been developed differently. I really believe they should have made the K-series work in a Mini. They didn't need to put a high powered version in there, but they had an engine that was in use through the rest of the range, why not carry that on?

[Mite]

 

 

<iframe src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fcraftedclassicstuning%2Fposts%2F2316785271708796&width=500" width="500" height="776" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowTransparency="true" allow="encrypted-media"></iframe>

Has anyone seen this?

Yes, it was posted up on the MKI forum.

It's interesting and a curiosity, one I'm happy to watch from the sidelines.

We did look in to something similar a few years back and while we could see that it was fairly 'easy' to do (not inferring cheap!) we also came to the conclusion that there was no pluses only minuses, unless you wanted to crank some serious HPs with very high levels of boost.

The link below from Mk1 Forum:-



Behold the Specialist Components 5 bearing A-Series billet block!!
https://www.facebook...tO-&__tn__=kC-R

https://www.facebook...istcomponents1/

Interesting

 

For me, it wasn't that the A-series should or could have been developed differently. I really believe they should have made the K-series work in a Mini. They didn't need to put a high powered version in there, but they had an engine that was in use through the rest of the range, why not carry that on?

A K-Series Mini at least in originally conceived yet unbuilt 973cc 3-cylinder form might have been viable (however remote) had both the Maestro and Montego been sales successes, allowing for possibly an introduction in 1990 as an alternate early Minki version of the Mark VI Mini to put it in line with the Metro's switch from the A-Series to K-Series engines (despite the company wanting to discontinue the Mini prior to it becoming a fashionable retro icon). Otherwise a Mini equipped with a 4-cylinder K-Series would have only been possible had the Mini been succeeded by a slightly larger Mini II in the late-1960s reminiscent of the Project Ant (aka Barrel Car) and the later Minki-II prototype as a different form of ADO20.

A 74 hp 1120-1496cc K-Series Mini would have made for an interesting comparison with both earlier/later 76-78 hp 1275cc A-Series Mini Cooper S models (the same with a hypothetical 73-81 hp 998-1248cc 3-cylinder derived from the KV6), otherwise in spite of the 9X unit of the view the 59-102 hp 1120-1396cc K-Series seems to ultimately be a product of Triumph thinking (e.g. Triumph Sabrina, etc) as opposed to something thought up by Austin/BMC, which IMHO would have instead likely resembled some form of the 54-100 hp 997-1386cc Nissan CG/CR engines.

Edited by Mite, 29 July 2019 - 03:43 AM.

[Casino]

Regrading the sc componets 5 bearing.

Is there gonna be a market for new standard cast iron blocks and heads in the future as bits get rare.

Nearly every part of a mini can be got new now....

[Spider]

Is there gonna be a market for new standard cast iron blocks and heads in the future as bits get rare.
 

 

Yes, they are coming, just don't hold your breath.