So did you have one?

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
A friend who was of driving age when the Mini first appeared told me they were an absolute revelation handling wise compared to everything else available.
It's hard to appreciate, looking back, that the contemporary alternatives were things like the 100E & 105E Fords, Moggy Minor, etc. which were based in a different era so the Mini was an absolute revelation. The real sadness is that because BMC's costing system was so incompetent and they set the car's price based on the 100E Ford, they managed to make a loss on every one they sold for many years. Just one indication of why BMC / BL / et al failed.
Two cars that remind me of the original Mini - more than the BMW one:
Original Ford Ka. Torquey low down pull from the engine and with sweet steering and handling. And the original smart fortwo.
No knowledge of the Smart, but completely agree about the original Ka. Bought one for my then partner and it was a hoot to throw around, and very reminiscent of the original Mini. It even included an engine that was long in the tooth when it was launched: the euphemistically named "Endura-E" that was a derivative of the Kent engine first introduced in the 105E Anglia in the 1950's.
 
Shame -it seems to be a problem with low volume custom head production... iirc the early Coscast heads for the 190 2.3 Cosworth had porosity problems to the extent that engine production was moved to Germany in the later 2.5 engine models :(
I suspect that they exist now only as a cosmetic 'period' fitment. All's not lost though. The transplanting of a BMW K-series bike 16 valve heads gives the old A-Series the breathing it never quite had.
The original 5 port head was a good choice for road use with inlet flow and chamber shape being conducive to good combustion - even if what was combusted was frequently oil-laden given the woeful oil control rings (one more similarity with the smart I forgot). Had to laugh when Wartburg adopted the A-Series to replace its 2-stroke engines because they burned too much oil!
 
My second car was a 1071 'S'; a revelation after a shed of a Renault Dauphine. Dark metallic blue (sound familiar...) with a silver roof. The reg was 9100R; I wish I still had that, too.
 
LOL. I must admit that when I moved onto Alfasuds I was amazed at the quality of the castings and the oily bits compared to the best that BL could offer.

Not that the A Series was originally meant to go in it. They had ideas for something much more sophisticated but costs had already spiraled out of control.
There was also this the ALFASUD SPRINT----THE ORIGINAL FLAT 4 ENGINE WAS 1200cc IRRC BUT ENDED UP AT 1700cc IN SPRINT FORM !
Alfa-Romeo_Alfasud-Sprint.JPG
 
It's hard to appreciate, looking back, that the contemporary alternatives were things like the 100E & 105E Fords, Moggy Minor, etc. which were based in a different era so the Mini was an absolute revelation. The real sadness is that because BMC's costing system was so incompetent and they set the car's price based on the 100E Ford, they managed to make a loss on every one they sold for many years. Just one indication of why BMC / BL / et al failed.
Fantastic engineering - lousy marketing.
No knowledge of the Smart, but completely agree about the original Ka. Bought one for my then partner and it was a hoot to throw around, and very reminiscent of the original Mini. It even included an engine that was long in the tooth when it was launched: the euphemistically named "Endura-E" that was a derivative of the Kent engine first introduced in the 105E Anglia in the 1950's.
Good point re the Endura's ancestry. You might even wonder if Ford looked back to the Mini and thought.....
Going back to the fortwo for a moment, I'd love to know more of the design team behind it. There hadn't been a rear engined small car for decades but on the smart you can see so many features once used by European manufacturers. Transverse front leaf spring (Fiat), automated/clutchless transmission (DAF), de-Dion rear axle (DAF) - even the 3 stud wheel fittings could have been straight from Renault or Citroen's back catalogues. Did they coax designers from that period out of retirement? At the very least, they studied what had gone before.
 
Shame -it seems to be a problem with low volume custom head production... iirc the early Coscast heads for the 190 2.3 Cosworth had porosity problems to the extent that engine production was moved to Germany in the later 2.5 engine models :(

Please don't mention alloy head porosity in my presence. I am an Alfa Romeo survivor... still suffering from post-traumatic flashbacks.
 
There was also this the ALFASUD SPRINT----THE ORIGINAL FLAT 4 ENGINE WAS 1200cc IRRC BUT ENDED UP AT 1700cc IN SPRINT FORM !
Alfa-Romeo_Alfasud-Sprint.JPG
I had the 1.5 Sprint. Single carb. 85bhp. My mate had the twin card 95. One of the sweetest engines ever.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom