gingerfold:
So there we have it, as I said pages, weeks, months, and years ago there countless reasons why British Leyland failed.
There will be a few more pages yet Graham, I reckon at least half a dozen off CF alone
Hereâs an idea. Letâs start a thread on 'Why Did Bedford Fail?", then when that is exhausted for Bedford substitute, Seddon-Atkinson, or Foden, or ERF, or Dodge, or Commer. We should be able to keep going for a good few years to come.
Or why was British Leyland Formed ? ⌠That should do the trick
Dave the Renegade:
All vehicle manufacturers fail or pack up eventually, to be superseded by newer better vehicles from new kids on the block.
Spot on Dave! We Brits invented things and then convinced ourselves that they were the âBees Kneesâ because we were âGreat Britainsâ while other countries bought them and then set about improving things when they went wrong! Take motorcycles, riding a British 'bike you always had a coin in your pocket to enable you to get the bus back home again when the thing expired somewhere, the Japs came along (after buying leaky unreliable British machines to evaluate) and perfected them. Cars just the same, but by the time we realised that we were rapidly being overtaken by other countries it was too far gone to claw it all back. Just sitting here looking around our living room I canât see a single thing electrical wise that was built in Britain, Japanese TV, computer, laptop, stereo, dvd player, shredder, headphones and even the blooming filter in the fish tank is German!
gingerfold:
So there we have it, as I said pages, weeks, months, and years ago there are countless reasons why British Leyland failed.
Thereâs no doubt that there were plenty of reasons.But poor engineering design decisions and dodgy political interference to the point of arguable possible industrial espionage being of a higher level than many others in this case.Not surprising considering the threat that a well funded British rival to Mercedes would have had regarding the US plans for post war European recovery.
Dave the Renegade:
All vehicle manufacturers fail or pack up eventually, to be superseded by newer better vehicles from new kids on the block.
Spot on Dave! We Brits invented things and then convinced ourselves that they were the âBees Kneesâ because we were âGreat Britainsâ while other countries bought them and then set about improving things when they went wrong! Take motorcycles, riding a British 'bike you always had a coin in your pocket to enable you to get the bus back home again when the thing expired somewhere, the Japs came along (after buying leaky unreliable British machines to evaluate) and perfected them. Cars just the same, but by the time we realised that we were rapidly being overtaken by other countries it was too far gone to claw it all back. Just sitting here looking around our living room I canât see a single thing electrical wise that was built in Britain, Japanese TV, computer, laptop, stereo, dvd player, shredder, headphones and even the blooming filter in the fish tank is German!
Pete.
I think thatâs a good point, we werenât as good as we thought we were. A prime example being the following fact. Ford, always regarded as cheap and cheerful in this country took over a shadow factory in Trafford Park in WW2 to build RR Merlin aero engines. When Ford engineers got the blueprints for the Merlin they were aghast at the wide assembly tolerances stated by RR and all the blueprints had to be re-drawn to Ford tolerances. Ford at Trafford Park actually built over 30,000 Merlins in WW2 and had the best record for reliability of all the manufacturers, including Packard. Even earlier in steam locomotive building days after grouping in 1923 the Midland Railway at Derby built locomotives to tolerances of fractions of an inch; Crewe and Horwich worked in thous and Midland engineers hadnât a clue what the Crewe and Horwich men were talking about!
Dave the Renegade:
All vehicle manufacturers fail or pack up eventually, to be superseded by newer better vehicles from new kids on the block.
Spot on Dave! We Brits invented things and then convinced ourselves that they were the âBees Kneesâ because we were âGreat Britainsâ while other countries bought them and then set about improving things when they went wrong! Take motorcycles, riding a British 'bike you always had a coin in your pocket to enable you to get the bus back home again when the thing expired somewhere, the Japs came along (after buying leaky unreliable British machines to evaluate) and perfected them. Cars just the same, but by the time we realised that we were rapidly being overtaken by other countries it was too far gone to claw it all back. Just sitting here looking around our living room I canât see a single thing electrical wise that was built in Britain, Japanese TV, computer, laptop, stereo, dvd player, shredder, headphones and even the blooming filter in the fish tank is German!
Pete.
I think thatâs a good point, we werenât as good as we thought we were. A prime example being the following fact. Ford, always regarded as cheap and cheerful in this country took over a shadow factory in Trafford Park in WW2 to build RR Merlin aero engines. When Ford engineers got the blueprints for the Merlin they were aghast at the wide assembly tolerances stated by RR and all the blueprints had to be re-drawn to Ford tolerances. Ford at Trafford Park actually built over 30,000 Merlins in WW2 and had the best record for reliability of all the manufacturers, including Packard. Even earlier in steam locomotive building days after grouping in 1923 the Midland Railway at Derby built locomotives to tolerances of fractions of an inch; Crewe and Horwich worked in thous and Midland engineers hadnât a clue what the Crewe and Horwich men were talking about!
You are approaching the crux of the reasons for GBâs industrial decline. It does not matter how âcheapâ the product is, it still takes an army of top brains to design the methods to make it reliably and profitably. If the product is extraordinary in any way- like the AEC V8, the Leyland 500 and the Leyland Gas Turbine- you may double the number of clever people on the job. The notion that that work- engineering- can be done by people who have been moved from other work, for whatever reason- is the central fallacy, and it persists to this day in GB. The result is what we have today- for every fully-educated engineer working at Leyland, Paccar will employ another ten at its plants in the Netherlands and America. The value is added overseas, in the main. A better example, possibly, is the Nissan factory in the North East. The manager of that plant was on the radio not so long ago, saying that the place earned 30-something percent of the factory gate price of the car, 40-something percent going to suppliers of parts. One only needs to guess where the remaining 20-odd percent goes- to head office in Japan, where the important decisions, and the profits, are made.
gingerfold:
I think thatâs a good point, we werenât as good as we thought we were. A prime example being the following fact. Ford, always regarded as cheap and cheerful in this country took over a shadow factory in Trafford Park in WW2 to build RR Merlin aero engines. When Ford engineers got the blueprints for the Merlin they were aghast at the wide assembly tolerances stated by RR and all the blueprints had to be re-drawn to Ford tolerances. Ford at Trafford Park actually built over 30,000 Merlins in WW2 and had the best record for reliability of all the manufacturers, including Packard. Even earlier in steam locomotive building days after grouping in 1923 the Midland Railway at Derby built locomotives to tolerances of fractions of an inch; Crewe and Horwich worked in thous and Midland engineers hadnât a clue what the Crewe and Horwich men were talking about!
Blimey gingerfold that has to be a bigger myth than the idea that AEC engineers designed the Rolls Eagle.
Feel free to explain how an engine will run if designed and manufactured to + or - hundredths or tenths of an inch. Itâs my guess that someone heard someone else say that they knew someone whoâd heard someone else say that Rolls were machining stuff holding tolerances of + or - tenths.When what they actually meant was tenths of thous.Bearing in mind that would also be âfractions of an inchâ.
The idea that Britain wasnât/isnât second to none in its engineering skills is bs.
cav551:
The reference is to an external combustion engine.
Thanks cav I mixed up the rail engine comment with the Ford v Rolls Merlin one.Although the general theme was similar.
On that note if the Americans were that good they would have designed and made the Merlin and Rolls would have made the Allison and ze Germans would have been marching down the Mall in September 1940.Without us even getting the chance to show the Americans how to make the Merlin and put it in the Mustang.
While if there was a manufacturing problem with the Merlin it was supposedly skew gear failure of some say supercharger drive but more likely magneto drive which seems to be a unclear of the cause.But there are some âinterestingâ comments around suggesting that outsourcing was actually the problem and return to in house manufacture the solution in that case.Including criminal prosecution related to sabotage ( not Ford ).
Yes, sadly the âBritish Leylandâ logo is possibly the most negatively regarded logo world-wide. If only BL had kept âLeylandâ for solely the truck side and chosen another name for those dreadful cars eg Austin-Morris; all under a non-descript holding company name eg âConsolidated Motorsâ so that there was minimal cross-contamination.
Overseas where I was, we removed all reference to âBritish Leylandâ on badges and letterheads, just using the name âLeylandâ and the rondel itself. Leyland was well respected there from the days of the original Comet and Super Hippo. We had the badges made up locally.
But, more importantly there was no dealer importing the BL car range to sulley the Leyland brand. Boy, were we lucky!
What is the situation with Leyland now , don`t they still exist in their home town, obviously DAF are producing there but are Leyland still active in a small way ?
Tomdhu:
But, more importantly there was no dealer importing the BL car range to sulley the Leyland brand. Boy, were we lucky!
Brand perspective and loyalty can be a subjective thing especially in this case.
Ironically it would be fair to say that to some of us Leyland cars means those with their origins within the Leyland Group and instigated by Leyland Group management.Which would obviously count in the Triumph 2.5,Rover V8 and Jaguar v12 E type, XJ6/12 XJS.
While obviously counting out the Issigonis designed fwd junk which in most respects can be blamed on the BMC Group thinking not Leyland.
On that note not much sulleying of the name here.More like thanks Leyland for some great products including those which might/should have been like the Rover V8 Triumph 3.5/4.0.
ramone:
What is the situation with Leyland now , don`t they still exist in their home town, obviously DAF are producing there but are Leyland still active in a small way ?
Leyland Trucks Ltd is owned by Paccar of the USA and operates out of what was previously the Leyland Assembly Plant (LAP) which was built before by Leyland before DAF took over Leyland.
When DAF went bust in 1993, the management of LAP bought the LAP operation from the receivers.
In 1996 Paccar (producers of Kenworth and Peterbuilt) took over DAF.
Then in 1998 Paccar bought out the management team at LAP, Leyland.
Leyland Trucks now build ALL DAF right hand drive trucks plus all the left hand drive light weight (LF range) trucks. It recently built its 400,000th truck.
The engines for the larger trucks come from DAF in Holland/Belgium and the smaller ones for the LF are made for Paccar by â â â â â â â and badged Paccar.
Leyland town as a one company town lives on as the home of " tâ Motors".
Tomdhu:
While obviously counting out the Issigonis designed fwd junk which in most respects can be blamed on the BMC Group thinking not Leyland. I
Would that include the six million Miniâs built around the WorldâŚ
The reality of the Mini and 1100 etc was that they not only created loads of disillusioned customers who either believed Issigonisâ bs.Until they realised what zb boxes the things were after living with them for a while.Let alone having to work on the them or the results of examples like using engine oil to lubricate the gearbox etc etc.They also cost more to produce v the superior rwd opposition from Ford.To the point where sales actually just added to BMCâs losses together with the need to discount an already un profitable heap in an effort to try to shift them to yet more mugs.The result being even less income,more warranty claims and more disillusioned customers.
Steady on Carryfast, the brick was OK .âŚâŚâŚfor that era .
Completely outclassed by the Japs and just about everyone else by the later 60âs, but when first released with its only competition VW or Fiat, 2CV etc, it was a breath of fresh air.
Sure they were horrible to work on, boiled like a kettle, wore our CVâs and rubber universals as fast as you could fit them but they were a car for those times.
Iâd love to own a similar car with sliding windows and storage in the doors/dash, but todayâs safety standards means thatâs impossible. The front seats werenât even bolted solid to the floor.
By the time one builds a suitable crash tested chassis and adds at least 7-airbags, the cost has gone through the roof, just ask Mr Tata.
But back to the thread, I wouldnât blame the brick on BLâs failure.
cargo:
Steady on Carryfast, the brick was OK .âŚâŚâŚfor that era .
Completely outclassed by the Japs and just about everyone else by the later 60âs, but when first released with its only competition VW or Fiat, 2CV etc, it was a breath of fresh air.
Sure they were horrible to work on, boiled like a kettle, wore our CVâs and rubber universals as fast as you could fit them but they were a car for those times.
Trust me there were two main types of buyer in that market sector.Those who bought a 105E Anglia or Mk1 Cortina v those who bought a Mini or 1100 instead but wished theyâd bought the Ford. Or even a Triumph Herald if it had to be Mini type poverty spec. Thatâs assuming they didnât decide that a used Zodiac,or Westminster,or Cresta PB etc wasnât an even better bet in those days of give away petrol prices.
Let alone the fact that BMC seem to have forgot to cost the things before starting to produce them.
