Correct, I can’t remember any brand new car purchases in our street in the '60s. The only new car purchaser in my immediate family was my Uncle Bill who bought a Riley 1.5 in 1964. He had a “good job”, - despatch foreman at Exide Batteries and his wife, my Aunt Amy worked full time as a secretary at Greaves & Thomas. They never had children. Incidentally Uncle Bill was one of those drivers who had a full licence but he had never taken a driving test, a quirk of legislation from the 1930s. Before the Riley his first car was a second-hand Triumph Herald (one of which I passed my driving test in)
gingerfold:
Correct, I can’t remember any brand new car purchases in our street in the '60s. The only new car purchaser in my immediate family was my Uncle Bill who bought a Riley 1.5 in 1964. He had a “good job”, - despatch foreman at Exide Batteries and his wife, my Aunt Amy worked full time as a secretary at Greaves & Thomas. They never had children. Incidentally Uncle Bill was one of those drivers who had a full licence but he had never taken a driving test, a quirk of legislation from the 1930s. Before the Riley his first car was a second-hand Triumph Herald (one of which I passed my driving test in)
My Dad had never passed a driving test either! I’m a 60’s child and i can remember the cars we had, Austin A40 Farina type reg no 433 JOJ, Morris Traveller TUK 141F, Austin Allegro estate never was one bit of trouble in the 6 years my Mum had it only had to replace it because it got nicked and smashed up and this was replaced by a Nissan a white four door thing, that got nicked as well!
robert1952:
gingerfold:
Going back to Carryfast’s comment about my Bolton street not being typical of the '60s and '70s, well it had changed lots in the 10 years after we moved there in 1958 (when there were only 3 car owners). It reflected the doubling of car ownership borne out by the statistics. I cannot remember how many cars were in the street in 1968 but by then there were more front doors with cars parked outside than not. For example, at 18 years old I bought my first car in 1966 (a second hand Ford 110E that cost £125). The motorcycle riders had moved up to cars and my immediate neighbours (up to next door but one on both sides all had cars). Our street comprised mainly blue collar workers ranging from labourers to dustbin lorry driver to skilled engineering workers, and wages clerk, with a smattering of retirees. No one was unemployed and most wage earners who hadn’t already bought a car were saving up for one. Hire Purchase, about the only sort of credit available then, (the “Never-Never”) was frowned upon by most families.You’re 4 years older than me Graham, but I remember vividly the car-scape street scenes of the '50s and '60s; and one thing that strikes me now, looking back, is the absence of new cars of the day - those were a rarity. Even well into the '60s there was still a large number of pre-war cars whose lives had been extended by spending the war years on bricks because of fuel rationing. The advent of the ten-year test, later to be called the MOT, culled a lot of these in the late '50s, but cars from the '30s & '40s were still abundant by the time I had my driving licence. Many of my age-group bought them as their first ‘old banger’. So the purchase of contemporary new cars was actually blurred by the abundance of old vehicles that were cheap to buy, as yet unrestricted by regulations and needed using up! Robert
The relevant clue in this case being the customer choice between the rwd alternatives,as opposed to the Mini/1100 in the used and new market when Leyland were lumbered with the problem in 1968.It was no secret in the motor trade even then that the latter were difficult to shift and unprofitable when they were eventually moved on at an inevitably poor price.On that note for the purposes of BMC’s effects on Leyland Group it’s what predictably happened then after that.As for me my first car was a 6 year old Triumph 2.5,admittedly bought at a good price,through the trade,but certainly not an unusual choice among my peers in the mid/late 1970’s.With those who were older often able to buy even later examples of that or any of the other numerous alternatives.In all cases the fwd BMC offerings were usually avoided for the same reasons in the used market as in the new market.With the lose lose situation of that also adding poor residual values to the issues at the point of new sale or nearly new.With the 1.8 Marina arguably being the best bet among a bad BMC bunch at that point.
In which case Leyland Group paid a heavy,ultimately commercially suicidal,price to predictably just end up with an obsolete,cheap,marketing panic driven rwd project.Because of the poor choices made by BMC’s engineering design before the merger. 
Does anyone else remember the horrendous knocking on the early BMC front wheel drive models when they were on full lock? 
gingerfold:
Does anyone else remember the horrendous knocking on the early BMC front wheel drive models when they were on full lock?
Sounds like the old CV joints issues ?.When it wasn’t that it was often engine mountings giving up the struggle of trying to handle fore and aft torque loadings and transmissions worn out by being lubricated with engine oil instead of a seperate EP oil supply.
In the 1950s we lived in a ground floor flat a stone’s throw from Streatham bus garage. Being in London if it was too far to walk, we went virtually everywhere either by bus or by train. Try as I might I can’t recall the name of the milkman’s horse - it was a different world then. One side of Barrow rd did have a fair number of cars parked, but who they belonged to I never knew. I think some were short term stays while the owners used the local shops or the common. The vicar had a Morris Oxford, the Chemist a new Sunbeam Talbot 90, a friend’s father a one year old sit up and beg Ford Pop. Towards the end of the decade my grandfather died and we inherited his rather tired Austin Devon, this sat for a long time in the street opposite waiting for our irregular use. Usually we would take my blind great aunt out for few hours in it, my lasting memory being of Daisy, swathed in towels, trying to avoid the rain coming in through a hole in the roof.
My father worked for what was then the Westminster Bank, he kept being moved around spending time either at Head office in the City, at Guildford or at various other branches as work dictated. The Austin staying where it was all the time. At the beginning of the 1960s, Dad now in his 50s, had saved enough money for the deposit on a house and a staff mortgage. We now lived just off the Kingston Bypass fairly near Raynes Park. The Austin Devon staggered its way through one MOT and then succumbed to terminal rust. Other families in the street by now did have cars, but I don’t recall any new ones. My father by now was a Branch Inspector travelling the South of England (by train) checking the books and ensuring that the Towns’ Bank Managers were only lending money to those who could afford to repay it. When we needed a car for some special trip we hired one: a Morris Minor, a couple of Mini Countrymen, an Austin Cambridge and then a succession of Austin 1100s. Finally towards the end of the '60s my father was promoted back to head office, much to his disappointment since for the fourth time a promotion had come weeks before he would have been entitled to a company car if staying in the old job.
At the age of 55 he approached my late Grandfather’s best mate, who was partner in the Austin dealership in Huntingdon (Maddox and Kirby), and a specially favourable deal was struck on a new Austin 1100. He was very pleased with it, I don’t recall any problems with it nor any financial disappointment when it was traded in for a 1300 a few years later. Certainly I would agree that to some extent we were tied to the brand, but I am sure Bill Kirby would never have allowed dad to be saddled with what he regarded as a lemon - and twice at that too.
My mate had 1100’s, 1300’s, Maxi’s and three of the big ‘Landcrabs’ and never had any real problems with them. The Maxi was very popular with caravanner’s as they pulled well and you could get plenty of stuff in them, good engine’s as well with very few reliability issues. A local chap still use one daily. Even the much maligned Allegro wasn’t a bad motor in mark 2 form, all the BMC group FWD models handled well if driven correctly. The early rubber CV joint issue was sorted and even today on most FWD vehicle those joints wear if the boots split and lubricant is lost but otherwise give no problems.
Pete.
Wasn’t the Maxi the first model in its pricing class to have a 5 (forward)-speed gearbox?
gingerfold:
Wasn’t the Maxi the first model in its pricing class to have a 5 (forward)-speed gearbox?
Yes- according to my half-arsed attempts to research it! BL beat Citroen, Renault and Lancia to market, with a 5-speed, FWD hatchback. In addition, the Maxi’s seats folded into a bed. Unfortunately, the gear linkage was barely functional, and had to be completely redesigned, while the car was still in production.
Everywhere you look, BL was the technological leader, but it lacked in the execution. Frustrated swarf-sweepers, like a certain TNUK contributor, will say that their imagined knife-and-fork, trial-and-error methods would beat the “boffins”, but the missing ingredient at BL was enough brains in the design office. Reading about the work of those other three firms confirms it- BL’s demise was founded on typical British inverted intellectual snobbery. BL’s quite laudable attempts to cure the ill, by founding their Student Apprenticeship scheme (described by Tomdhu earlier in the thread), were undermined by their filling most of the places on it with the offspring of their best customers, rather than the best brains the world’s best education system (British Grammar Schools) could produce.
[zb]
anorak:
Yes- according to my half-arsed attempts to research it! BL beat Citroen, Renault and Lancia to market, with a 5-speed, FWD hatchback. In addition, the Maxi’s seats folded into a bed. Unfortunately, the gear linkage was barely functional, and had to be completely redesigned, while the car was still in production.Everywhere you look, BL was the technological leader, but it lacked in the execution. Frustrated swarf-sweepers, like a certain TNUK contributor, will say that their imagined knife-and-fork, trial-and-error methods would beat the “boffins”, but the missing ingredient at BL was enough brains in the design office. Reading about the work of those other three firms confirms it- BL’s demise was founded on typical British inverted intellectual snobbery. BL’s quite laudable attempts to cure the ill, by founding their Student Apprenticeship scheme (described by Tomdhu earlier in the thread), were undermined by their filling most of the places on it with the offspring of their best customers, rather than the best brains the world’s best education system (British Grammar Schools) could produce.
Great so with all those brains and a knighthood you’d think that BMC’s fwd products were a sure winner.In which case why bother to rush an under funded rwd panic measure into production,in the form of the Marina.When according to your version of history the customers were all supposedly looking for a home made version the stuff which the Frogs were turning out.Let alone the thing’s unbelievable sales success v Ford when they’d done it. 
As for the 5 speed box.Great another gear in an already compromised fwd transmission package.When they could have put a bit more effort into the Marina and put the MG’s overdrive box in it to go with ( what should have been ) the McPherson front end and IRS instead of wasting all that cash on a French knock off. 
Carryfast:
for me my first car was a 6 year old Triumph 2.5,admittedly bought at a good price,through the trade,but certainly not an unusual choice among my peers in the mid/late 1970’s.With those who were older often able to buy even later examples of that or any of the other numerous alternatives.In all cases the fwd BMC offerings were usually avoided for the same reasons in the used market as in the new market.With the lose lose situation of that also adding poor residual values to the issues at the point of new sale or nearly new.With the 1.8 Marina arguably being the best bet among a bad BMC bunch at that point.
We have different memories of the mid 70’s, all my peers wanted Mini’s or MK1 Cortina’s, the better off ones went for Coopers or MK2 Cortinas.
I owned both Marinas and Maxis. The Marina was quite a nice middle-of-the-road British car: comfortable, quick enough and functional. The Maxi was a breath of fresh air! That 5-speed 'box made driving easier and more fun. It was just a pity that it had linkage problems and another problem: there was a pointy thing at the bottom of the stick that traced out an indented H-I pattern in a little plate bolted to the bottom of the container that held it in place. The indentations were too shallow and the stick was apt to come adrift - it was a bugger to relocate it. That said, the gear ratios were very good and the old Maxi was really comfortable to drive. I had four 2nd-hand ones - one after another! (Then I bought a Rover 95. Ah!). Robert
The early Maxi’s had a cable gearchange, as did the 250 JU commercial, but the Mk 2’s had a more conventional rod system.
Pete.
cav551:
At the age of 55 he approached my late Grandfather’s best mate, who was partner in the Austin dealership in Huntingdon (Maddox and Kirby), and a specially favourable deal was struck on a new Austin 1100. He was very pleased with it, I don’t recall any problems with it nor any financial disappointment when it was traded in for a 1300 a few years later. Certainly I would agree that to some extent we were tied to the brand, but I am sure Bill Kirby would never have allowed dad to be saddled with what he regarded as a lemon - and twice at that too.
‘Lemon’ in this case meaning from the point of view of the manufacturer/dealer.IE a description of ‘favourable deal’ obviously isn’t good from the manufacturer’s/dealer’s point of view.When they needed a product which could be sold at full list price no ifs no buts and no favours.While from the buyer’s point of view which could be sold for more privately than as a p/ex at trade in time and in which the dealer wasn’t lumbered with a used one that would have probably ended up losing money on the overall deal at auction.Bearing in mind it’s the used buyer not new who generally takes on all the potential aggro.
dave docwra:
Carryfast:
for me my first car was a 6 year old Triumph 2.5,admittedly bought at a good price,through the trade,but certainly not an unusual choice among my peers in the mid/late 1970’s.With those who were older often able to buy even later examples of that or any of the other numerous alternatives.In all cases the fwd BMC offerings were usually avoided for the same reasons in the used market as in the new market.With the lose lose situation of that also adding poor residual values to the issues at the point of new sale or nearly new.With the 1.8 Marina arguably being the best bet among a bad BMC bunch at that point.We have different memories of the mid 70’s, all my peers wanted Mini’s or MK1 Cortina’s, the better off ones went for Coopers or MK2 Cortinas.
A bit like today.The insurance companies didn’t like 17 year olds driving the same stuff that the law were using on the motorways in the day. The key was finding a good broker.On that note I really wanted a 420 S type Jag and at that the broker said I was taking the pish so the Triumph it had to be.Although looking back I often think I should have put a Rover V8 in the Triumph instead of moving on to a 2.8i Granada and 3.0 Litre BMW as I got older. 
Although I’d guess similar types of discussions between the Cortina buyers and Mini buyers as here in that case ?.
Carryfast:
Bearing in mind it’s the used buyer not new who generally takes on all the potential aggro.
Very true, but not of paramount importance to the manufacturer, or the dealer either when both will be making a profit from the sale of spare parts. A vehicle sold generates more revenue than just the sales receipt. Cars of that era would generally have had exchange units fitted at a significantly lower mileage than an equivalent vehicle today. For example engines in the 1000cc - 2000cc bracket would have been requiring attention at 70.000 - 90,000 miles. Quite possibly the vehicle would have had another gearbox some time before that as well. Nor was corrosion protection a particular concern for the manufacturer - the shorter time the car lasted the sooner a new vehicle would be sold, even if it wasn’t to the owner whose vehicle had just expired.
Carryfast:
dave docwra:
Carryfast:
for me my first car was a 6 year old Triumph 2.5,admittedly bought at a good price,through the trade,but certainly not an unusual choice among my peers in the mid/late 1970’s.With those who were older often able to buy even later examples of that or any of the other numerous alternatives.In all cases the fwd BMC offerings were usually avoided for the same reasons in the used market as in the new market.With the lose lose situation of that also adding poor residual values to the issues at the point of new sale or nearly new.With the 1.8 Marina arguably being the best bet among a bad BMC bunch at that point.We have different memories of the mid 70’s, all my peers wanted Mini’s or MK1 Cortina’s, the better off ones went for Coopers or MK2 Cortinas.
A bit like today.The insurance companies didn’t like 17 year olds driving the same stuff that the law were using on the motorways in the day.
Although I’d guess similar types of discussions between the Cortina buyers and Mini buyers as here in that case ?.
Nothing to do with insurance, they were the cars of choice for youngsters back then, Triumph 2.5 was something my Dad or Grandfather would have been driving around in…
dave docwra:
Carryfast:
dave docwra:
Carryfast:
for me my first car was a 6 year old Triumph 2.5,admittedly bought at a good price,through the trade,but certainly not an unusual choice among my peers in the mid/late 1970’s.With those who were older often able to buy even later examples of that or any of the other numerous alternatives.In all cases the fwd BMC offerings were usually avoided for the same reasons in the used market as in the new market.With the lose lose situation of that also adding poor residual values to the issues at the point of new sale or nearly new.With the 1.8 Marina arguably being the best bet among a bad BMC bunch at that point.We have different memories of the mid 70’s, all my peers wanted Mini’s or MK1 Cortina’s, the better off ones went for Coopers or MK2 Cortinas.
A bit like today.The insurance companies didn’t like 17 year olds driving the same stuff that the law were using on the motorways in the day.
Although I’d guess similar types of discussions between the Cortina buyers and Mini buyers as here in that case ?.
Nothing to do with insurance, they were the cars of choice for youngsters back then, Triumph 2.5 was something my Dad or Grandfather would have been driving around in…
The Triumph Dolomite I had was typical of the majority of the 70s BL motors it had a decent engine but a complete rot box
It’s a good job I was a good welder
As I remember the 70s car choice was very different to what it is now, there was no badge snobbery, you bought what you could afford and when it fell apart, you bought another one. If you wanted something a bit fancy a vinyl roof and a set of Wolfrace wheels did the job on whatever car you had.
dave docwra:
Carryfast:
dave docwra:
Carryfast:
for me my first car was a 6 year old Triumph 2.5,admittedly bought at a good price,through the trade,but certainly not an unusual choice among my peers in the mid/late 1970’s.With those who were older often able to buy even later examples of that or any of the other numerous alternatives.In all cases the fwd BMC offerings were usually avoided for the same reasons in the used market as in the new market.With the lose lose situation of that also adding poor residual values to the issues at the point of new sale or nearly new.With the 1.8 Marina arguably being the best bet among a bad BMC bunch at that point.We have different memories of the mid 70’s, all my peers wanted Mini’s or MK1 Cortina’s, the better off ones went for Coopers or MK2 Cortinas.
A bit like today.The insurance companies didn’t like 17 year olds driving the same stuff that the law were using on the motorways in the day.
Although I’d guess similar types of discussions between the Cortina buyers and Mini buyers as here in that case ?.
Nothing to do with insurance, they were the cars of choice for youngsters back then, Triumph 2.5 was something my Dad or Grandfather would have been driving around in…
Ha ha Dave ,i was just thinking that , my dad had a Triumph 2000 the mk 1 i think ,ugly thing rotted away on the back end like most cars of that era .and now i`ve turned into my dad Volvo S80