In message <t3oro2$7h9$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:45:05 on Wed, 20 Apr
2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:

>The mini was probably the first British car to completely break away
>from the traditional method of construction.

I remember my Uncle mocking my dad's decision to buy one of the first
off the production line (he was an early adopter too) on the grounds it
didn't have either a chassis or running boards.
--
Roland Perry

Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 22:24:27 -0000 (UTC)
>>>>>>>>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 16/04/2022 14:11, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 15:19:39 -0000 (UTC)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Water between bottom of railhead and top of railhead, 5mph.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Between top of sleepers and bottom of railhead, NR say linespeed, gWr say
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 20mph (143 150 769) 50mph (158 16x 387 57/Sleeper HST) or linespeed (IET).
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why the difference between classes? Are some more waterproof than others?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The ones which are 20mph, I think the problem is water ingress into
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> axleboxes.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IETs, presumably modern sealed-unit traction motors and other electronics
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allow a less cautious approach.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> What causes their problems when they get a minor salt water spray at
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dawlish? They do seem to dry out and can be restarted after a couple of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> hours.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure, other than that I think it's engine-module related rather
>>>>>>>>>>>> than traction motors etc.; the software 'fix' which has been partly
>>>>>>>>>>>> successful, apparently involves the on-board computer systems trying 10
>>>>>>>>>>>> times to restart the engines, rather than only three times in normal
>>>>>>>>>>>> circumstances.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Given it was known they were going to operate right next to the sea often in
>>>>>>>>>>> stormy weather it sounds like Hitachi didn't do their design or testing
>>>>>>>>>>> properly. Again.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I don't think the original IETs were planned to run along that sea wall, so
>>>>>>>>>> Hitachi probably didn't take sea spray into account when designing them.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Really? What were DfT expecting gWr to be using into Devon and Cornwall?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> HSTs.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But they were expected to go eventually weren’t they? (I mean services
>>>>>>> starting at London)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, but the DfT's original IET contract was part of the GWR
>>>>>> electrification project. The train was intended to take advantage of the
>>>>>> fully electrified (801) or mainly-electrified (800) routes, with
>>>>>> HST-matching/beating performance only required on electrified sections.
>>>>>> Diesel operation of the 800s was only intended on short, slower
>>>>>> non-electrified sections. So the train was simply not intended or designed
>>>>>> for the Devon and Cornwall routes. Later, when the scope of the
>>>>>> electrification was curtailed, the 801s were cancelled, replaced by more
>>>>>> 800s.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Later, GWR ordered 802s (with better diesel performance) to replace its
>>>>>> remaining HSTs (instead of life-extending them or ordering some other
>>>>>> diesel train), under a different contract, with more power allowed from the
>>>>>> same donks. But it would appear that while Hitachi focused on matching HST
>>>>>> performance on diesel, it didn't (or wasn't asked to) also consider how to
>>>>>> resist the sea spray on the west country routes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So when the 802s were ordered nobody considered Dawlish? Wasn’t it well
>>>>> known by then that Voyagers (I think it was they) came to grief at Dawlish?
>>>>
>>>> I'd speculate that they ensured that the 802s didn't have the same specific
>>>> weakness as Voyagers, but didn't fully consider all the other ways that sea
>>>> water and spray could knock out a very complicated diesel-electric train.
>>>> This would just have been just one consideration on a long list of
>>>> potential issues with using trains designed for London-Bristol/Swansea on
>>>> the west country routes.
>>>>
>>>> I don't suppose electric A-Trains run on that sort of route in Japan or
>>>> anywhere else, so Hitachi didn't have relevant experience of all the things
>>>> that can happen to a diesel-electric train in those salty, amphibious
>>>> conditions.
>>>
>>> Can it really be that Japan has no stretches of line like Dawlish or
>>> Saltcoats?
>>
>> I suspect not, not on an almost entirely electrified mainline network. I
>> have been on DMUs there, but they tend to run on minor, privately operated
>> branches. I think all A-Trains other than our IETs are electric.
>
> <https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/130534089183830096/>
> <https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/japanese-tourist-train-running-next-coast-797771422>
> <https://www.visit-kyushu.com/en/plan-your-trip/getting-around/>
>
> It’s entirely possible that none of these lines runs in bad weather, or the
> climate and topography don’t make for big splashes, or the trains are
> suitably weatherproofed, but the images suggest there’s at least a
> possibility of there being the same kind of situation. Perhaps Anna or
> someone else who’s been to Japan might have more info.
>
>

There are plenty of other coastline railways in the UK which aren't as well
known as Dawlish/as problematic as Dawlish; even Saltcoats which also gets
the big wave pictures doesn't get reported as having cancellations/delays.

So I suspect that the situation in Japan (and other countries, Taiwan I
know for one) will be similar; there are spectacular coastline railways
which just don't get the waves which cause high-profile problems at
Dawlish.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> Are there any places, I guess primarily in Europe, where a tram network
> will have fast trams? Tram-trains don't count.
>

Do you mean fast as in high-speed, or fast as in limited-stop?

Poznan has a line which is called "Fast Tram"; 70km/h maximum speed and on
an alignment away from roads, like most 2nd-gen UK tramways
<https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poznań_Fast_Tram>. Milan also had some
interurban tram lines with some non-road alignments; one still operates,
the rest were either replaced by the metro system or had sections
incorporated into the metro system.

Lyon has Rhonexpress airport link which although it's sometimes called
'tram-train' it really isn't (it doesn't run through onto any heavy rail
system, it just runs beyond the city tram network on a non-road alignment);
on the section it shares with the city tram network, it misses most of the
stops, at some locations the tram stop is on a loop off the main running
line.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On 20/04/2022 00:12, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>> On 19/04/2022 23:54, Marland wrote:
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> What's very unusual currently is that it applies to all cars, cheap or
>>>> expensive, fashionable or not. Normally, there's surplus production
>>>> in the
>>>> auto industry, with most manufacturers scrambling for sales. I've never
>>>> known a time when a shortage of one class of component hit every
>>>> manufacturer.
>>>>
>>> Though it  once happened before most readers of this group were born
>>> when
>>> there was a similar shortage of new vehicles post WW2 with the main
>>> “component” being the steel to build them with, and those that were built
>>> largely directed  to  the export market to earn badly needed foreign
>>> currency.
>>> Another factor was although mass car ownership was still over a decade
>>> away
>>> enough ordinary  people found they could run one having been taught to
>>> drive and maintain vehicles in the forces to increase demand for any
>>> second
>>> hand vehicle that was available that could move. Many were cars that were
>>> already 10 to 25 years old that had seen little or no use during the war
>>> years do to petrol rationing etc so had relatively low milage for
>>> their age
>>> so commanded prices higher than that would normally have justified.
>>> No MOT check until introduced in 1960 so some of these old vehicles whose
>>> mechanicals though they did not have the longevity of modern vehicles
>>> were
>>> easy repaired with a good toolkit and basic skills  meant they were kept
>>> going far too long as the chassis and bodies corroded making them death
>>> traps.
>>>
>>> GH
>>
>> Did MoD try to sell any suitable old vehicles to the civilian market
>> after the war or did they all wind up as ferrous scrap for open-hearth
>> furnaces?
>
> Many logistics companies started up with ex WD lorries bought cheap.
>

Also the bus services which started killing off smaller tramway systems
after WW1.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote:
> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 20/04/2022 00:12, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>> On 19/04/2022 23:54, Marland wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Did MoD try to sell any suitable old vehicles to the civilian market
>>> after the war or did they all wind up as ferrous scrap for open-hearth
>>> furnaces?
>>
>> Many logistics companies started up with ex WD lorries bought cheap.
>>
>
> Though the wartime vehicles had almost all disappeared from public roads by
> the 1970’s
> I still used to see quite a lot AEC crane vehicles in use in scrapyards
> forestry work etc.
>

I regularly see one still in use at a small scrapyard in a former railway
goods yard.

Clarification: I've never actually seen it being used when I'm passing, but
it regularly changes position within the yard.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote:
> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 20/04/2022 00:12, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>> On 19/04/2022 23:54, Marland wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Did MoD try to sell any suitable old vehicles to the civilian market
>>> after the war or did they all wind up as ferrous scrap for open-hearth
>>> furnaces?
>>
>> Many logistics companies started up with ex WD lorries bought cheap.
>>
>
> Though the wartime vehicles had almost all disappeared from public roads by
> the 1970’s
> I still used to see quite a lot AEC crane vehicles in use in scrapyards
> forestry work etc.
> The introduction of the MOT had seen off many older vehicles from the
> early 1960’s and also by that
> time British manufacturers had got under way again with new designs like
> the Mini and Cortina.
> Though most had introduced new models in 1950’s as shortages eased they
> were largely new bodies
> still using mechanicals derived from 1930’s production with performance
> rapidly being eclipsed.

I remember Scammel tractor units (as used for tank transporters) still in
use for heavy haulage in the 1970s.

--
Jeremy Double

On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 12:45:05 +0100, Graeme Wall
<rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>On 20/04/2022 09:25, Marland wrote:
>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 20/04/2022 00:12, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>>> On 19/04/2022 23:54, Marland wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Did MoD try to sell any suitable old vehicles to the civilian market
>>>> after the war or did they all wind up as ferrous scrap for open-hearth
>>>> furnaces?
>>>
>>> Many logistics companies started up with ex WD lorries bought cheap.
>>>
>>
>> Though the wartime vehicles had almost all disappeared from public roads by
>> the 1970’s
>> I still used to see quite a lot AEC crane vehicles in use in scrapyards
>> forestry work etc.
>> The introduction of the MOT had seen off many older vehicles from the
>> early 1960’s and also by that
>> time British manufacturers had got under way again with new designs like
>> the Mini and Cortina.
>> Though most had introduced new models in 1950’s as shortages eased they
>> were largely new bodies
>> still using mechanicals derived from 1930’s production with performance
>> rapidly being eclipsed.
>>
>
>The mini was probably the first British car to completely break away
>from the traditional method of construction.
>
Morris Minor cars (but not the vans or pickups) were also monocoque
construction. The main extra difference in a Mini was mounting the
engine sideways but apparently that had already been done in Germany
in the 1930s with a DKW (and later in the USSR with tanks).

Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 12:45:05 +0100, Graeme Wall
> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 20/04/2022 09:25, Marland wrote:
>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 20/04/2022 00:12, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>>>> On 19/04/2022 23:54, Marland wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Did MoD try to sell any suitable old vehicles to the civilian market
>>>>> after the war or did they all wind up as ferrous scrap for open-hearth
>>>>> furnaces?
>>>>
>>>> Many logistics companies started up with ex WD lorries bought cheap.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Though the wartime vehicles had almost all disappeared from public roads by
>>> the 1970’s
>>> I still used to see quite a lot AEC crane vehicles in use in scrapyards
>>> forestry work etc.
>>> The introduction of the MOT had seen off many older vehicles from the
>>> early 1960’s and also by that
>>> time British manufacturers had got under way again with new designs like
>>> the Mini and Cortina.
>>> Though most had introduced new models in 1950’s as shortages eased they
>>> were largely new bodies
>>> still using mechanicals derived from 1930’s production with performance
>>> rapidly being eclipsed.
>>>
>>
>> The mini was probably the first British car to completely break away
>> from the traditional method of construction.
>>
> Morris Minor cars (but not the vans or pickups) were also monocoque
> construction.

That's interesting, and a surprise to me!

> The main extra difference in a Mini was mounting the
> engine sideways but apparently that had already been done in Germany
> in the 1930s with a DKW (and later in the USSR with tanks).

Putting the gearbox in the sump was probably novel, however?

On Thu, 21 Apr 2022 00:40:09 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
<recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:

>Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 12:45:05 +0100, Graeme Wall
>> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> On 20/04/2022 09:25, Marland wrote:
>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On 20/04/2022 00:12, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>>>>> On 19/04/2022 23:54, Marland wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Did MoD try to sell any suitable old vehicles to the civilian market
>>>>>> after the war or did they all wind up as ferrous scrap for open-hearth
>>>>>> furnaces?
>>>>>
>>>>> Many logistics companies started up with ex WD lorries bought cheap.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Though the wartime vehicles had almost all disappeared from public roads by
>>>> the 1970?s
>>>> I still used to see quite a lot AEC crane vehicles in use in scrapyards
>>>> forestry work etc.
>>>> The introduction of the MOT had seen off many older vehicles from the
>>>> early 1960?s and also by that
>>>> time British manufacturers had got under way again with new designs like
>>>> the Mini and Cortina.
>>>> Though most had introduced new models in 1950?s as shortages eased they
>>>> were largely new bodies
>>>> still using mechanicals derived from 1930?s production with performance
>>>> rapidly being eclipsed.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The mini was probably the first British car to completely break away
>>> from the traditional method of construction.
>>>
>> Morris Minor cars (but not the vans or pickups) were also monocoque
>> construction.
>
>That's interesting, and a surprise to me!
>
>> The main extra difference in a Mini was mounting the
>> engine sideways but apparently that had already been done in Germany
>> in the 1930s with a DKW (and later in the USSR with tanks).
>
>Putting the gearbox in the sump was probably novel, however?
>
Even without that, the particular combination of features was maybe a
"first" ?

Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 12:45:05 +0100, Graeme Wall
> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 20/04/2022 09:25, Marland wrote:
>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 20/04/2022 00:12, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>>>> On 19/04/2022 23:54, Marland wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Did MoD try to sell any suitable old vehicles to the civilian market
>>>>> after the war or did they all wind up as ferrous scrap for open-hearth
>>>>> furnaces?
>>>>
>>>> Many logistics companies started up with ex WD lorries bought cheap.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Though the wartime vehicles had almost all disappeared from public roads by
>>> the 1970’s
>>> I still used to see quite a lot AEC crane vehicles in use in scrapyards
>>> forestry work etc.
>>> The introduction of the MOT had seen off many older vehicles from the
>>> early 1960’s and also by that
>>> time British manufacturers had got under way again with new designs like
>>> the Mini and Cortina.
>>> Though most had introduced new models in 1950’s as shortages eased they
>>> were largely new bodies
>>> still using mechanicals derived from 1930’s production with performance
>>> rapidly being eclipsed.
>>>
>>
>> The mini was probably the first British car to completely break away
>> from the traditional method of construction.
>>
> Morris Minor cars (but not the vans or pickups) were also monocoque
> construction. The main extra difference in a Mini was mounting the
> engine sideways but apparently that had already been done in Germany
> in the 1930s with a DKW (and later in the USSR with tanks).
>

The Morris wasn’t alone , its Austin rival the A30 ,some Fords,and
Vauxhalls of the 1950’s
also had adopted monocoque construction so that was fairly old hat by the
time the Minis
first branded as an Austin 7 arrived. It was the other features that made
it really different though
most had been tried on other makes such as front wheel drive being used by
Citroen, it was combining them together that made the Mini a mould
breaker.

GH

Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Apr 2022 00:40:09 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 12:45:05 +0100, Graeme Wall
>>> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 20/04/2022 09:25, Marland wrote:
>>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> On 20/04/2022 00:12, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>>>>>> On 19/04/2022 23:54, Marland wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Did MoD try to sell any suitable old vehicles to the civilian market
>>>>>>> after the war or did they all wind up as ferrous scrap for open-hearth
>>>>>>> furnaces?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Many logistics companies started up with ex WD lorries bought cheap.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Though the wartime vehicles had almost all disappeared from public roads by
>>>>> the 1970?s
>>>>> I still used to see quite a lot AEC crane vehicles in use in scrapyards
>>>>> forestry work etc.
>>>>> The introduction of the MOT had seen off many older vehicles from the
>>>>> early 1960?s and also by that
>>>>> time British manufacturers had got under way again with new designs like
>>>>> the Mini and Cortina.
>>>>> Though most had introduced new models in 1950?s as shortages eased they
>>>>> were largely new bodies
>>>>> still using mechanicals derived from 1930?s production with performance
>>>>> rapidly being eclipsed.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The mini was probably the first British car to completely break away
>>>> from the traditional method of construction.
>>>>
>>> Morris Minor cars (but not the vans or pickups) were also monocoque
>>> construction.
>>
>> That's interesting, and a surprise to me!
>>
>>> The main extra difference in a Mini was mounting the
>>> engine sideways but apparently that had already been done in Germany
>>> in the 1930s with a DKW (and later in the USSR with tanks).
>>
>> Putting the gearbox in the sump was probably novel, however?
>>
> Even without that, the particular combination of features was maybe a
> "first" ?

Yes, I think monocoque construction and transverse engine,
front-wheel-drive was probably a first at the time. It set the new standard
for small cars that lasted till the end of the ICE era, 70 years later.
Pretty amazing!

Plus you got tiny wheels, an amazingly compact four-seat body and very good
handling. That's why it stayed in production for four decades with
remarkably little change. The one thing it didn't achieve was
profitability.

On 21/04/2022 01:40, Recliner wrote:
> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 12:45:05 +0100, Graeme Wall
>> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> On 20/04/2022 09:25, Marland wrote:
>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On 20/04/2022 00:12, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>>>>> On 19/04/2022 23:54, Marland wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Did MoD try to sell any suitable old vehicles to the civilian market
>>>>>> after the war or did they all wind up as ferrous scrap for open-hearth
>>>>>> furnaces?
>>>>>
>>>>> Many logistics companies started up with ex WD lorries bought cheap.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Though the wartime vehicles had almost all disappeared from public roads by
>>>> the 1970’s
>>>> I still used to see quite a lot AEC crane vehicles in use in scrapyards
>>>> forestry work etc.
>>>> The introduction of the MOT had seen off many older vehicles from the
>>>> early 1960’s and also by that
>>>> time British manufacturers had got under way again with new designs like
>>>> the Mini and Cortina.
>>>> Though most had introduced new models in 1950’s as shortages eased they
>>>> were largely new bodies
>>>> still using mechanicals derived from 1930’s production with performance
>>>> rapidly being eclipsed.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The mini was probably the first British car to completely break away
>>> from the traditional method of construction.
>>>
>> Morris Minor cars (but not the vans or pickups) were also monocoque
>> construction.
>
> That's interesting, and a surprise to me!

Surprise to me too.

>
>> The main extra difference in a Mini was mounting the
>> engine sideways but apparently that had already been done in Germany
>> in the 1930s with a DKW (and later in the USSR with tanks).
>
> Putting the gearbox in the sump was probably novel, however?

Also the adoption of front wheel drive was unusual at th time.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 21/04/2022 02:17, Recliner wrote:
> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 21 Apr 2022 00:40:09 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 12:45:05 +0100, Graeme Wall
>>>> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 20/04/2022 09:25, Marland wrote:
>>>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 20/04/2022 00:12, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 19/04/2022 23:54, Marland wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Did MoD try to sell any suitable old vehicles to the civilian market
>>>>>>>> after the war or did they all wind up as ferrous scrap for open-hearth
>>>>>>>> furnaces?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Many logistics companies started up with ex WD lorries bought cheap.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Though the wartime vehicles had almost all disappeared from public roads by
>>>>>> the 1970?s
>>>>>> I still used to see quite a lot AEC crane vehicles in use in scrapyards
>>>>>> forestry work etc.
>>>>>> The introduction of the MOT had seen off many older vehicles from the
>>>>>> early 1960?s and also by that
>>>>>> time British manufacturers had got under way again with new designs like
>>>>>> the Mini and Cortina.
>>>>>> Though most had introduced new models in 1950?s as shortages eased they
>>>>>> were largely new bodies
>>>>>> still using mechanicals derived from 1930?s production with performance
>>>>>> rapidly being eclipsed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The mini was probably the first British car to completely break away
>>>>> from the traditional method of construction.
>>>>>
>>>> Morris Minor cars (but not the vans or pickups) were also monocoque
>>>> construction.
>>>
>>> That's interesting, and a surprise to me!
>>>
>>>> The main extra difference in a Mini was mounting the
>>>> engine sideways but apparently that had already been done in Germany
>>>> in the 1930s with a DKW (and later in the USSR with tanks).
>>>
>>> Putting the gearbox in the sump was probably novel, however?
>>>
>> Even without that, the particular combination of features was maybe a
>> "first" ?
>
> Yes, I think monocoque construction and transverse engine,
> front-wheel-drive was probably a first at the time. It set the new standard
> for small cars that lasted till the end of the ICE era, 70 years later.
> Pretty amazing!
>
> Plus you got tiny wheels, an amazingly compact four-seat body and very good
> handling. That's why it stayed in production for four decades with
> remarkably little change. The one thing it didn't achieve was
> profitability.
>

That was down to managerial incompetence.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Am 21.04.2022 um 09:18 schrieb Graeme Wall:
> On 21/04/2022 01:40, Recliner wrote:
>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 12:45:05 +0100, Graeme Wall
>>> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 20/04/2022 09:25, Marland wrote:
>>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> On 20/04/2022 00:12, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>>>>>> On 19/04/2022 23:54, Marland wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Did MoD try to sell any suitable old vehicles to the civilian market
>>>>>>> after the war or did they all wind up as ferrous scrap for
>>>>>>> open-hearth
>>>>>>> furnaces?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Many logistics companies started up with ex WD lorries bought cheap.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Though the wartime vehicles had almost all disappeared from public
>>>>> roads by
>>>>> the 1970’s
>>>>> I still used to see quite a lot AEC crane vehicles in use in
>>>>> scrapyards
>>>>> forestry work etc.
>>>>> The  introduction of the MOT had seen off many older vehicles from the
>>>>> early 1960’s and also by that
>>>>> time British manufacturers had got under way again with new designs
>>>>> like
>>>>> the Mini and Cortina.
>>>>> Though most had introduced new models in 1950’s as shortages eased
>>>>> they
>>>>> were largely new bodies
>>>>> still using mechanicals derived from 1930’s production with
>>>>> performance
>>>>> rapidly being eclipsed.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The mini was probably the first British car to completely break away
>>>> from the traditional method of construction.
>>>>
>>> Morris Minor cars (but not the vans or pickups) were also monocoque
>>> construction.
>>
>> That's interesting, and a surprise to me!
>
> Surprise to me too.
>
>>
>>> The main extra difference in a Mini was mounting the
>>> engine sideways but apparently that had already been done in Germany
>>> in the 1930s with a DKW (and later in the USSR with tanks).
>>
>> Putting the gearbox in the sump was probably novel, however?
>
> Also the adoption of front wheel drive was unusual at th time.

Done on the Citroen 2CV since 1948.

In message <t3oo9d$d8a$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:46:06 on Wed, 20 Apr
2022, ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> remarked:

>>>>>>>> I wonder if it's also affected by the proximity of main
>>>>>>>>dealers. None of the traditional big brands are represented
>>>>>>>>within a 40 minute drive from here, and even then they are
>>>>>>>>clustered so you'd not necessary drive past them very often.
>>>>>>>>But we have a quite large Kia dealership (and a very small Suzuki one).
....
>>>>>> But Kia still have long waiting times - mine took all but 6
>>>>>>months from order to delivery.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have a friend who ordered a Kia EV6 in January, expecting delivery by
>>>>> July. It's now expected in December.
>>>>
>>>> Humble Fords are on to 9 to 12 month lead times, and that’s just a best
>>>> guess by the dealer.
>>>
>>> I suppose it's a bad sign if any particular makes are available with
>>>fast deliveries these days!

>> That Kia garage has loads of them lined up outside, or perhaps they
>>are already sold? Or people are fussier about the exact specification.
>
>Unregistered cars? Suspect not, they are likely to be trade-ins etc as
>most, if not all, Kia's are on long waiting times.

There's a pool of assorted second hand vehicles to the side, and out the
front facing the road, two bays each for eight cars.

One set are presumably recent trade-ins (2020/21 plates), the other set
brand new vehicles, unregistered with prices on the windscreen (eg I saw
one for £28k). Just one of them also has a "sold" sticker on it.
--
Roland Perry

On Thu, 21 Apr 2022 00:40:09 +0000, Recliner wrote:

> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 12:45:05 +0100, Graeme Wall
>> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> On 20/04/2022 09:25, Marland wrote:
>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On 20/04/2022 00:12, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>>>>> On 19/04/2022 23:54, Marland wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Did MoD try to sell any suitable old vehicles to the civilian
>>>>>> market after the war or did they all wind up as ferrous scrap for
>>>>>> open-hearth furnaces?
>>>>>
>>>>> Many logistics companies started up with ex WD lorries bought cheap.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Though the wartime vehicles had almost all disappeared from public
>>>> roads by the 1970’s I still used to see quite a lot AEC crane
>>>> vehicles in use in scrapyards forestry work etc.
>>>> The introduction of the MOT had seen off many older vehicles from
>>>> the early 1960’s and also by that time British manufacturers had got
>>>> under way again with new designs like the Mini and Cortina.
>>>> Though most had introduced new models in 1950’s as shortages eased
>>>> they were largely new bodies still using mechanicals derived from
>>>> 1930’s production with performance rapidly being eclipsed.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> The mini was probably the first British car to completely break away
>>> from the traditional method of construction.
>>>
>> Morris Minor cars (but not the vans or pickups) were also monocoque
>> construction.
>
> That's interesting, and a surprise to me!
>
>> The main extra difference in a Mini was mounting the engine sideways
>> but apparently that had already been done in Germany in the 1930s with
>> a DKW (and later in the USSR with tanks).
>
> Putting the gearbox in the sump was probably novel, however?

The Minor Traveller was a strange mixture. The body was not all one
piece. The front was steel like the car. The back upper body used the
wood as structure with aluminium panels apart from the wheelarches / wings
which were steel. There was a rubber seal / insulator on the roof between
the steel part at the front and the aluminium part over the wooden rear.

And yet it wasn't quite the van / pick-up chassis as it had the longer
doors from the car and not the van doors. It did have two substantial U-
sections running front-to-back underneath.

And the brake master cylinder, _inside_ one of those U-sections under the
driver's feet, was a pig.

nib

In message <t3qbbd$6br$1@dont-email.me>, at 01:17:33 on Thu, 21 Apr
2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 21 Apr 2022 00:40:09 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 12:45:05 +0100, Graeme Wall
>>>> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 20/04/2022 09:25, Marland wrote:
>>>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 20/04/2022 00:12, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 19/04/2022 23:54, Marland wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Did MoD try to sell any suitable old vehicles to the civilian market
>>>>>>>> after the war or did they all wind up as ferrous scrap for open-hearth
>>>>>>>> furnaces?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Many logistics companies started up with ex WD lorries bought cheap.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Though the wartime vehicles had almost all disappeared from
>>>>>>public roads by
>>>>>> the 1970?s
>>>>>> I still used to see quite a lot AEC crane vehicles in use in scrapyards
>>>>>> forestry work etc.
>>>>>> The introduction of the MOT had seen off many older vehicles from the
>>>>>> early 1960?s and also by that
>>>>>> time British manufacturers had got under way again with new designs like
>>>>>> the Mini and Cortina.
>>>>>> Though most had introduced new models in 1950?s as shortages eased they
>>>>>> were largely new bodies
>>>>>> still using mechanicals derived from 1930?s production with performance
>>>>>> rapidly being eclipsed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The mini was probably the first British car to completely break away
>>>>> from the traditional method of construction.
>>>>>
>>>> Morris Minor cars (but not the vans or pickups) were also monocoque
>>>> construction.
>>>
>>> That's interesting, and a surprise to me!
>>>
>>>> The main extra difference in a Mini was mounting the
>>>> engine sideways but apparently that had already been done in Germany
>>>> in the 1930s with a DKW (and later in the USSR with tanks).
>>>
>>> Putting the gearbox in the sump was probably novel, however?
>>>
>> Even without that, the particular combination of features was maybe a
>> "first" ?
>
>Yes, I think monocoque construction and transverse engine,
>front-wheel-drive was probably a first at the time. It set the new standard
>for small cars that lasted till the end of the ICE era, 70 years later.
>Pretty amazing!

One has to wonder that having come up with a winning concept, what other
configuration might have superseded it (for family cars, anyway). A
longitudinal rear-engine, with the gearbox on the roof, probably
wouldn't have worked.

The mini is one of those things that *someone* would have got around to
inventing eventually; its claim to fame is being first.

>Plus you got tiny wheels, an amazingly compact four-seat body and very good
>handling. That's why it stayed in production for four decades with
>remarkably little change. The one thing it didn't achieve was
>profitability.

But it was also a catalyst enabling more people to become 'car owners',
and go on to buy more profitable models later.
--
Roland Perry

On 21/04/2022 09:01, Rolf Mantel wrote:
> Am 21.04.2022 um 09:18 schrieb Graeme Wall:
>> On 21/04/2022 01:40, Recliner wrote:
>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 12:45:05 +0100, Graeme Wall
>>>> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 20/04/2022 09:25, Marland wrote:
>>>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 20/04/2022 00:12, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 19/04/2022 23:54, Marland wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Did MoD try to sell any suitable old vehicles to the civilian
>>>>>>>> market
>>>>>>>> after the war or did they all wind up as ferrous scrap for
>>>>>>>> open-hearth
>>>>>>>> furnaces?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Many logistics companies started up with ex WD lorries bought cheap.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Though the wartime vehicles had almost all disappeared from public
>>>>>> roads by
>>>>>> the 1970’s
>>>>>> I still used to see quite a lot AEC crane vehicles in use in
>>>>>> scrapyards
>>>>>> forestry work etc.
>>>>>> The  introduction of the MOT had seen off many older vehicles from
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> early 1960’s and also by that
>>>>>> time British manufacturers had got under way again with new
>>>>>> designs like
>>>>>> the Mini and Cortina.
>>>>>> Though most had introduced new models in 1950’s as shortages eased
>>>>>> they
>>>>>> were largely new bodies
>>>>>> still using mechanicals derived from 1930’s production with
>>>>>> performance
>>>>>> rapidly being eclipsed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The mini was probably the first British car to completely break away
>>>>> from the traditional method of construction.
>>>>>
>>>> Morris Minor cars (but not the vans or pickups) were also monocoque
>>>> construction.
>>>
>>> That's interesting, and a surprise to me!
>>
>> Surprise to me too.
>>
>>>
>>>> The main extra difference in a Mini was mounting the
>>>> engine sideways but apparently that had already been done in Germany
>>>> in the 1930s with a DKW (and later in the USSR with tanks).
>>>
>>> Putting the gearbox in the sump was probably novel, however?
>>
>> Also the adoption of front wheel drive was unusual at th time.
>
> Done on the Citroen 2CV since 1948.
>

To be pedantic, that is not a British car.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Rolf Mantel <news@hartig-mantel.de> wrote:
> Am 21.04.2022 um 09:18 schrieb Graeme Wall:
>> On 21/04/2022 01:40, Recliner wrote:
>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 12:45:05 +0100, Graeme Wall
>>>> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 20/04/2022 09:25, Marland wrote:
>>>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 20/04/2022 00:12, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 19/04/2022 23:54, Marland wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Did MoD try to sell any suitable old vehicles to the civilian market
>>>>>>>> after the war or did they all wind up as ferrous scrap for
>>>>>>>> open-hearth
>>>>>>>> furnaces?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Many logistics companies started up with ex WD lorries bought cheap.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Though the wartime vehicles had almost all disappeared from public
>>>>>> roads by
>>>>>> the 1970’s
>>>>>> I still used to see quite a lot AEC crane vehicles in use in
>>>>>> scrapyards
>>>>>> forestry work etc.
>>>>>> The  introduction of the MOT had seen off many older vehicles from the
>>>>>> early 1960’s and also by that
>>>>>> time British manufacturers had got under way again with new designs
>>>>>> like
>>>>>> the Mini and Cortina.
>>>>>> Though most had introduced new models in 1950’s as shortages eased
>>>>>> they
>>>>>> were largely new bodies
>>>>>> still using mechanicals derived from 1930’s production with
>>>>>> performance
>>>>>> rapidly being eclipsed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The mini was probably the first British car to completely break away
>>>>> from the traditional method of construction.
>>>>>
>>>> Morris Minor cars (but not the vans or pickups) were also monocoque
>>>> construction.
>>>
>>> That's interesting, and a surprise to me!
>>
>> Surprise to me too.
>>
>>>
>>>> The main extra difference in a Mini was mounting the
>>>> engine sideways but apparently that had already been done in Germany
>>>> in the 1930s with a DKW (and later in the USSR with tanks).
>>>
>>> Putting the gearbox in the sump was probably novel, however?
>>
>> Also the adoption of front wheel drive was unusual at th time.
>
> Done on the Citroen 2CV since 1948.

… which was simply continuing the tradition started by the truly pioneering
Citroën Traction Avant in 1934.

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <t3qbbd$6br$1@dont-email.me>, at 01:17:33 on Thu, 21 Apr
> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 21 Apr 2022 00:40:09 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 12:45:05 +0100, Graeme Wall
>>>>> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 20/04/2022 09:25, Marland wrote:
>>>>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 20/04/2022 00:12, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 19/04/2022 23:54, Marland wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Did MoD try to sell any suitable old vehicles to the civilian market
>>>>>>>>> after the war or did they all wind up as ferrous scrap for open-hearth
>>>>>>>>> furnaces?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Many logistics companies started up with ex WD lorries bought cheap.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Though the wartime vehicles had almost all disappeared from
>>>>>>> public roads by
>>>>>>> the 1970?s
>>>>>>> I still used to see quite a lot AEC crane vehicles in use in scrapyards
>>>>>>> forestry work etc.
>>>>>>> The introduction of the MOT had seen off many older vehicles from the
>>>>>>> early 1960?s and also by that
>>>>>>> time British manufacturers had got under way again with new designs like
>>>>>>> the Mini and Cortina.
>>>>>>> Though most had introduced new models in 1950?s as shortages eased they
>>>>>>> were largely new bodies
>>>>>>> still using mechanicals derived from 1930?s production with performance
>>>>>>> rapidly being eclipsed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The mini was probably the first British car to completely break away
>>>>>> from the traditional method of construction.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Morris Minor cars (but not the vans or pickups) were also monocoque
>>>>> construction.
>>>>
>>>> That's interesting, and a surprise to me!
>>>>
>>>>> The main extra difference in a Mini was mounting the
>>>>> engine sideways but apparently that had already been done in Germany
>>>>> in the 1930s with a DKW (and later in the USSR with tanks).
>>>>
>>>> Putting the gearbox in the sump was probably novel, however?
>>>>
>>> Even without that, the particular combination of features was maybe a
>>> "first" ?
>>
>> Yes, I think monocoque construction and transverse engine,
>> front-wheel-drive was probably a first at the time. It set the new standard
>> for small cars that lasted till the end of the ICE era, 70 years later.
>> Pretty amazing!
>
> One has to wonder that having come up with a winning concept, what other
> configuration might have superseded it (for family cars, anyway). A
> longitudinal rear-engine, with the gearbox on the roof, probably
> wouldn't have worked.
>
> The mini is one of those things that *someone* would have got around to
> inventing eventually; its claim to fame is being first.
>
>> Plus you got tiny wheels, an amazingly compact four-seat body and very good
>> handling. That's why it stayed in production for four decades with
>> remarkably little change. The one thing it didn't achieve was
>> profitability.
>
> But it was also a catalyst enabling more people to become 'car owners',
> and go on to buy more profitable models later.

Though not from BMC.

Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On 21/04/2022 09:01, Rolf Mantel wrote:
>> Am 21.04.2022 um 09:18 schrieb Graeme Wall:
>>> On 21/04/2022 01:40, Recliner wrote:
>>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 12:45:05 +0100, Graeme Wall
>>>>> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 20/04/2022 09:25, Marland wrote:
>>>>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 20/04/2022 00:12, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 19/04/2022 23:54, Marland wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Did MoD try to sell any suitable old vehicles to the civilian
>>>>>>>>> market
>>>>>>>>> after the war or did they all wind up as ferrous scrap for
>>>>>>>>> open-hearth
>>>>>>>>> furnaces?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Many logistics companies started up with ex WD lorries bought cheap.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Though the wartime vehicles had almost all disappeared from public
>>>>>>> roads by
>>>>>>> the 1970’s
>>>>>>> I still used to see quite a lot AEC crane vehicles in use in
>>>>>>> scrapyards
>>>>>>> forestry work etc.
>>>>>>> The  introduction of the MOT had seen off many older vehicles from
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> early 1960’s and also by that
>>>>>>> time British manufacturers had got under way again with new
>>>>>>> designs like
>>>>>>> the Mini and Cortina.
>>>>>>> Though most had introduced new models in 1950’s as shortages eased
>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>> were largely new bodies
>>>>>>> still using mechanicals derived from 1930’s production with
>>>>>>> performance
>>>>>>> rapidly being eclipsed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The mini was probably the first British car to completely break away
>>>>>> from the traditional method of construction.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Morris Minor cars (but not the vans or pickups) were also monocoque
>>>>> construction.
>>>>
>>>> That's interesting, and a surprise to me!
>>>
>>> Surprise to me too.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> The main extra difference in a Mini was mounting the
>>>>> engine sideways but apparently that had already been done in Germany
>>>>> in the 1930s with a DKW (and later in the USSR with tanks).
>>>>
>>>> Putting the gearbox in the sump was probably novel, however?
>>>
>>> Also the adoption of front wheel drive was unusual at th time.
>>
>> Done on the Citroen 2CV since 1948.
>>
>
> To be pedantic, that is not a British car.

And to be even more pedantic, the 2CV dates from 1938, and it was the
successor to the moncoque, FWD Traction Avant of 1934.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote:
> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 12:45:05 +0100, Graeme Wall
>> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> On 20/04/2022 09:25, Marland wrote:
>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On 20/04/2022 00:12, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>>>>> On 19/04/2022 23:54, Marland wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Did MoD try to sell any suitable old vehicles to the civilian market
>>>>>> after the war or did they all wind up as ferrous scrap for open-hearth
>>>>>> furnaces?
>>>>>
>>>>> Many logistics companies started up with ex WD lorries bought cheap.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Though the wartime vehicles had almost all disappeared from public roads by
>>>> the 1970’s
>>>> I still used to see quite a lot AEC crane vehicles in use in scrapyards
>>>> forestry work etc.
>>>> The introduction of the MOT had seen off many older vehicles from the
>>>> early 1960’s and also by that
>>>> time British manufacturers had got under way again with new designs like
>>>> the Mini and Cortina.
>>>> Though most had introduced new models in 1950’s as shortages eased they
>>>> were largely new bodies
>>>> still using mechanicals derived from 1930’s production with performance
>>>> rapidly being eclipsed.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The mini was probably the first British car to completely break away
>>> from the traditional method of construction.
>>>
>> Morris Minor cars (but not the vans or pickups) were also monocoque
>> construction. The main extra difference in a Mini was mounting the
>> engine sideways but apparently that had already been done in Germany
>> in the 1930s with a DKW (and later in the USSR with tanks).
>>
>
> The Morris wasn’t alone , its Austin rival the A30 ,some Fords,and
> Vauxhalls of the 1950’s
> also had adopted monocoque construction so that was fairly old hat by the
> time the Minis
> first branded as an Austin 7 arrived. It was the other features that made
> it really different though
> most had been tried on other makes such as front wheel drive being used by
> Citroen, it was combining them together that made the Mini a mould
> breaker.

And the Citroen Traction Avant of 1934 was also monocoque.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
> Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote:
>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 12:45:05 +0100, Graeme Wall
>>> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 20/04/2022 09:25, Marland wrote:
>>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> On 20/04/2022 00:12, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>>>>>> On 19/04/2022 23:54, Marland wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Did MoD try to sell any suitable old vehicles to the civilian market
>>>>>>> after the war or did they all wind up as ferrous scrap for open-hearth
>>>>>>> furnaces?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Many logistics companies started up with ex WD lorries bought cheap.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Though the wartime vehicles had almost all disappeared from public roads by
>>>>> the 1970’s
>>>>> I still used to see quite a lot AEC crane vehicles in use in scrapyards
>>>>> forestry work etc.
>>>>> The introduction of the MOT had seen off many older vehicles from the
>>>>> early 1960’s and also by that
>>>>> time British manufacturers had got under way again with new designs like
>>>>> the Mini and Cortina.
>>>>> Though most had introduced new models in 1950’s as shortages eased they
>>>>> were largely new bodies
>>>>> still using mechanicals derived from 1930’s production with performance
>>>>> rapidly being eclipsed.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The mini was probably the first British car to completely break away
>>>> from the traditional method of construction.
>>>>
>>> Morris Minor cars (but not the vans or pickups) were also monocoque
>>> construction. The main extra difference in a Mini was mounting the
>>> engine sideways but apparently that had already been done in Germany
>>> in the 1930s with a DKW (and later in the USSR with tanks).
>>>
>>
>> The Morris wasn’t alone , its Austin rival the A30 ,some Fords,and
>> Vauxhalls of the 1950’s
>> also had adopted monocoque construction so that was fairly old hat by the
>> time the Minis
>> first branded as an Austin 7 arrived. It was the other features that made
>> it really different though
>> most had been tried on other makes such as front wheel drive being used by
>> Citroen, it was combining them together that made the Mini a mould
>> breaker.
>
> And the Citroen Traction Avant of 1934 was also monocoque.
>

From
<https://www.carmagazine.co.uk/car-reviews/citroen/traction-avant-1934-1957/>

The Traction Avant popularised front-wheel drive, monocoque body
construction (without a separate chassis) and all-round independent
suspension. Notice we said popularised – not invented. Front-wheel drive
experiments had been going on since the very early days of motoring. The
Lancia Lambda, launched in 1922, was the first monocoque production model,
while the Alfa Romeo 8C of 1931 was the first to have each wheel sprung
independently.

In message <t3r8uv$5qi$2@dont-email.me>, at 09:42:55 on Thu, 21 Apr
2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:

>> The mini is one of those things that *someone* would have got around to
>> inventing eventually; its claim to fame is being first.
>>
>>> Plus you got tiny wheels, an amazingly compact four-seat body and very good
>>> handling. That's why it stayed in production for four decades with
>>> remarkably little change. The one thing it didn't achieve was
>>> profitability.
>>
>> But it was also a catalyst enabling more people to become 'car owners',
>> and go on to buy more profitable models later.
>
>Though not from BMC.

Rationale for that:

a) By then the company was called something else
b) Or if called the same, wasn't making a profit on subsequent models,
or
c) Some drivers would look at completely different manufacturers

--
Roland Perry

On 21/04/2022 11:06, Recliner wrote:
> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>> Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote:
>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 12:45:05 +0100, Graeme Wall
>>>> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 20/04/2022 09:25, Marland wrote:
>>>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 20/04/2022 00:12, hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 19/04/2022 23:54, Marland wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Did MoD try to sell any suitable old vehicles to the civilian market
>>>>>>>> after the war or did they all wind up as ferrous scrap for open-hearth
>>>>>>>> furnaces?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Many logistics companies started up with ex WD lorries bought cheap.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Though the wartime vehicles had almost all disappeared from public roads by
>>>>>> the 1970’s
>>>>>> I still used to see quite a lot AEC crane vehicles in use in scrapyards
>>>>>> forestry work etc.
>>>>>> The introduction of the MOT had seen off many older vehicles from the
>>>>>> early 1960’s and also by that
>>>>>> time British manufacturers had got under way again with new designs like
>>>>>> the Mini and Cortina.
>>>>>> Though most had introduced new models in 1950’s as shortages eased they
>>>>>> were largely new bodies
>>>>>> still using mechanicals derived from 1930’s production with performance
>>>>>> rapidly being eclipsed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The mini was probably the first British car to completely break away
>>>>> from the traditional method of construction.
>>>>>
>>>> Morris Minor cars (but not the vans or pickups) were also monocoque
>>>> construction. The main extra difference in a Mini was mounting the
>>>> engine sideways but apparently that had already been done in Germany
>>>> in the 1930s with a DKW (and later in the USSR with tanks).
>>>>
>>>
>>> The Morris wasn’t alone , its Austin rival the A30 ,some Fords,and
>>> Vauxhalls of the 1950’s
>>> also had adopted monocoque construction so that was fairly old hat by the
>>> time the Minis
>>> first branded as an Austin 7 arrived. It was the other features that made
>>> it really different though
>>> most had been tried on other makes such as front wheel drive being used by
>>> Citroen, it was combining them together that made the Mini a mould
>>> breaker.
>>
>> And the Citroen Traction Avant of 1934 was also monocoque.
>>
>
> From
> <https://www.carmagazine.co.uk/car-reviews/citroen/traction-avant-1934-1957/>
>
> The Traction Avant popularised front-wheel drive, monocoque body
> construction (without a separate chassis) and all-round independent
> suspension. Notice we said popularised – not invented. Front-wheel drive
> experiments had been going on since the very early days of motoring. The
> Lancia Lambda, launched in 1922, was the first monocoque production model,
> while the Alfa Romeo 8C of 1931 was the first to have each wheel sprung
> independently.
>
>
>

I believe the Dinky Toy model of the mini was the first to have
independent suspension (sic)! I have two (Austin and Morris) on my
bookshelf.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.