newmercman:
BL weren’t alone in producing lemons, take the Transit as a good example, it hit the scene and changed the way we thought about vans, then came the diesel version and it was a horrid thing, I’m sure Ford had shares in Easy Start at the time! That York engine would’ve finished any other range of vehicles and yet the Transit went on to become the most successful range of vehicles ever produced and they never backtracked and did anything about the York engines until the mid 80s and the introduction of the direct injection engine.
How were Ford able to produce such a lemon and get away with it for so many years?
The V4 petrol motor wasn’t exactly the state of the art in engine design in the day either or the early attempts at 4 cylinder OHC.I’d guess that’s what I meant about resources.Given a big successful US parent covering all the angles Ford UK could live with any weaknesses in the product.On that note as I said given the right products at the right time Leyland might have stood a chance.Which in this case meant a Jaguar sorted wishbone all round SD1 and a Triumph sorted McPherson front and semi trailing IRS Marina and a cynical knock off of the Transit in production for the early 1970’s.
Ironically,at that point,Leyland was probably in a better position regarding engines,with the BMC B series both petrol and diesel and Rover V8 than Ford was with the V4,York and to a lesser extent the V6.Leyland.Unfortunately being let down by too little and/or too late chassis engineering in the form of the Marina,SD1 and Sherpa not to mention the boat anchor of carrying on with Issigonis’ follies after the 1968 merger with BMH.
If British Leyland had got the Maxi right, as in reliability and build quality, it would have wiped the floor with everything in its class. It was the first mass produced five door family car and would have topped the market, had it been right.
rastone:
Many vans I think are front wheel drive but perhaps being an old codger do they have any problem with the weight being on the back
Tony
In the real world weight transfer under acceleration,or load distribution such as in the case of commercials and towing and the fact that rwd remains steerable on and above the limits of traction and generally a nicer drive,all helps to bust the myth of fwd being of any benefit.Again in addition to the maintenance cost angle.
Dave the Renegade:
If British Leyland had got the Maxi right, as in reliability and build quality, it would have wiped the floor with everything in its class. It was the first mass produced five door family car and would have topped the market, had it been right.
Dave the Renegade:
If British Leyland had got the Maxi right, as in reliability and build quality, it would have wiped the floor with everything in its class. It was the first mass produced five door family car and would have topped the market, had it been right.
What could it do that a Cortina Estate couldn’t.
I owned Cortina’s, good vehicles, but the Maxi when it was launched was a more modern attractive vehicle, if the reliability had been right.
Dave the Renegade:
I owned Cortina’s, good vehicles, but the Maxi when it was launched was a more modern attractive vehicle, if the reliability had been right.
If it’s all about ‘reliability’ ( maintenance costs ) then the last thing you’d want is an already discredited in that regard fwd chassis configuration and an OHC engine and all the aggro of a 5 speed box.When you’ve already got everything needed in a proven bulletproof push rod motor that puts out the same power and torque and an over drive box,in the form of the MGB driveline.All of which just needs to be put in a decent well sorted all independent suspension chassis.IE the car the Marina ‘should’ have been.
As for all those who often use Stokes as a scapegoat for all of that,this article might finally help to bust that myth.IE Stokes was arguing for exactly what I’m arguing about.IE a credible rwd competitor to the rwd US competition that was slaughtering Leyland Group.To which the answer from his opponents within the group was there’s not enough cash,we’ll compromise customer confidence in Issigonis’ fwd heaps even more and we’ll upset the US opposition.At which point if it had been me I’d have walked away and said shove the job and resigned.
While ironically even the under funded predictably flawed eventual result still managed to do that anyway.
Which ‘might’ at least partly explain why Ford took the nuclear option in the form of the Granada in retaliation against Rover and Triumph.
On that note the move towards the coupe/saloon styling of the SD1 and away from the three box styling of the Triumph 2.5 just added to the problems in a world that still ( rightly ) preferred the latter as shown by the Granada Mk2 and BMW 5 and 7 series among others.While personally I’ve never taken to that styling change and never will.
FWD V’s RWD or even AWD, it all comes down to skill.
90% of drivers probably couldn’t tell the difference either way. Once a vehicle is really pushed, most of us would fail.
My old RWD car has computer controlled front wheel assist. Once “G” sensors and wheel speed sensors detect the rears are spinning, the hydraulic clutch packs in the transfer case give the front diff some torque which immediately takes power from the rears, hopefully removing the oversteer.
Works like a dream with the factory 200kw engine, but it’s effortless to double that power and with some more $$, 3X is a piece of cake.
Then everything gets unstuck. I doff my hat to blokes like Ben Collins or Ken Block.
As for vehicle manufacturing costs there’s no comparison, FWD wins by a mile.
Maintenance, on today’s car it’s called “engine out”. Took me a long while to twig but it takes but a few hours to have engine/box out of almost anything.
Last struggle I had was trying to remove the turbos from a 2JZ. Half a day gone and some buried brackets stumped me. Bit the bullet, engine and box out in under 2-hours. Everything is accessible, all those tiny hoses and pipes can be sorted easily.
And a rubber block brick, if you took longer than 20 minutes to lift body off subframe you weren’t trying.
The less said about hydrolastic the better.
newmercman:
BL weren’t alone in producing lemons, take the Transit as a good example, it hit the scene and changed the way we thought about vans, then came the diesel version and it was a horrid thing, I’m sure Ford had shares in Easy Start at the time! That York engine would’ve finished any other range of vehicles and yet the Transit went on to become the most successful range of vehicles ever produced and they never backtracked and did anything about the York engines until the mid 80s and the introduction of the direct injection engine.
How were Ford able to produce such a lemon and get away with it for so many years?
I think it was probably just that an unreliable transit was still a better bet than the unremarkable rivals,my brother worked for a butchers they swapped their fleet of unreliable transits for new sherpas but with hanging meat they had a tendency to fall over so they were back with ford a year later. I don’t think the opel diesel in the cf Bedford was much better
Dave the Renegade:
I owned Cortina’s, good vehicles, but the Maxi when it was launched was a more modern attractive vehicle, if the reliability had been right.
If it’s all about ‘reliability’ ( maintenance costs ) then the last thing you’d want is an already discredited in that regard fwd chassis configuration and an OHC engine and all the aggro of a 5 speed box.When you’ve already got everything needed in a proven bulletproof push rod motor that puts out the same power and torque and an over drive box,in the form of the MGB driveline.All of which just needs to be put in a decent well sorted all independent suspension chassis.IE the car the Marina ‘should’ have been.
As for all those who often use Stokes as a scapegoat for all of that,this article might finally help to bust that myth.IE Stokes was arguing for exactly what I’m arguing about.IE a credible rwd competitor to the rwd US competition that was slaughtering Leyland Group.To which the answer from his opponents within the group was there’s not enough cash,we’ll compromise customer confidence in Issigonis’ fwd heaps even more and we’ll upset the US opposition.At which point if it had been me I’d have walked away and said shove the job and resigned.
While ironically even the under funded predictably flawed eventual result still managed to do that anyway.
Which ‘might’ at least partly explain why Ford took the nuclear option in the form of the Granada in retaliation against Rover and Triumph.
On that note the move towards the coupe/saloon styling of the SD1 and away from the three box styling of the Triumph 2.5 just added to the problems in a world that still ( rightly ) preferred the latter as shown by the Granada Mk2 and BMW 5 and 7 series among others.While personally I’ve never taken to that styling change and never will.
If you actually read your own link you’ll see it was stokes who wanted the marina to be designed to run alongside his bestselling fwd products. As for putting a rover engine in a Triumph it was never gonna happen the suits at triumph thought of rover as rivals why do you think they didn’t put it in the stag and ruined what could have been a good car with a bodged up rush job of an engine that was never reliable
Austin and morris cars were designed to appeal to different types of customer so that’s why you got an Allegro and a Marina for sale in the same dealership.
As for you never taking to the hatchback styling it’s a personal thing I suppose but even you can’t deny that the bestselling cars of today are mostly fwd and hatchback. Also if we’re talking about the Cortina rivaling the maxi then you need to get your facts right the OHC engine you slag off so much in the maxi was in competition with the mk3 Cortina,the majority of which had OHC pinto engines. The mk3 coming on sale in 1970 the maxi in 69.
dazcapri:
If you actually read your own link you’ll see it was stokes who wanted the marina to be designed to run alongside his bestselling fwd products. As for putting a rover engine in a Triumph it was never gonna happen the suits at triumph thought of rover as rivals why do you think they didn’t put it in the stag and ruined what could have been a good car with a bodged up rush job of an engine that was never reliable
Austin and morris cars were designed to appeal to different types of customer so that’s why you got an Allegro and a Marina for sale in the same dealership.
As for you never taking to the hatchback styling it’s a personal thing I suppose but even you can’t deny that the bestselling cars of today are mostly fwd and hatchback. Also if we’re talking about the Cortina rivaling the maxi then you need to get your facts right the OHC engine you slag off so much in the maxi was in competition with the mk3 Cortina,the majority of which had OHC pinto engines. The mk3 coming on sale in 1970 the maxi in 69.
If you read between the lines of that article it’s obvious that Stokes was in no way supportive of the Issigonis jobs it was more a case of ‘tolerate’ and try to make the place work ‘despite’ them.His agenda was all about getting away from them and producing something which the customers actually wanted.Hence the rwd Marina.Bearing in mind if the things were really so called ‘best sellers’ there was obviously no need for the Marina. It also makes it clear that he faced massive resistance within the Group to his plans by the Issigonis fwd fan boys.To the point where they even complained about the limited funding which Leyland was prepared to divert from their pet fwd heaps to the Marina.Or damaging their customer credibility even more ( as if that was possible ) .Let alone funding the project properly by ditching the Maxi and the Allegro etc and making the Marina the clean sheet Mc Pherson front and semi trailing IRS,with MGB driveline Cortina killer they needed.Together with the ( correct ) comments that the idea was going to upset the big US competition.In which case his reply should have been that’s what we’re here for.But if we aren’t going to do the job properly I’m walking away with immediate effect.
As for OHC the point was at that point in time it was a liability they didn’t need just as it was for Ford and yet another drain on funds which they needed to put into producing a decent rwd chassis.While the OHC v pushrod argument actually rumbles on to this day with me being firmly in favour of the latter when it comes to maintenance costs and convenience with no real advantages for the OHC configuration in terms of output.While also being one of the main drawbacks with Jaguar v its US competition whether in the old 6 cylinder,V12 or even later V8 form compared to Ford’s and greater extent GM’s V8’s.It only really being character and preference for a big 12 over a big V8 that ( very ) narrowly won out over me dropping an LS into the XJ for example.Although I’m still not ruling that out at some point in the future even now.
dazcapri:
If you actually read your own link you’ll see it was stokes who wanted the marina to be designed to run alongside his bestselling fwd products. As for putting a rover engine in a Triumph it was never gonna happen the suits at triumph thought of rover as rivals why do you think they didn’t put it in the stag and ruined what could have been a good car with a bodged up rush job of an engine that was never reliable
Austin and morris cars were designed to appeal to different types of customer so that’s why you got an Allegro and a Marina for sale in the same dealership.
As for you never taking to the hatchback styling it’s a personal thing I suppose but even you can’t deny that the bestselling cars of today are mostly fwd and hatchback. Also if we’re talking about the Cortina rivaling the maxi then you need to get your facts right the OHC engine you slag off so much in the maxi was in competition with the mk3 Cortina,the majority of which had OHC pinto engines. The mk3 coming on sale in 1970 the maxi in 69.
If you read between the lines of that article it’s obvious that Stokes was in no way supportive of the Issigonis jobs it was more a case of ‘tolerate’ and try to make the place work ‘despite’ them.His agenda was all about getting away from them and producing something which the customers actually wanted.Hence the rwd Marina bearing in mind if the things were really the so called ‘best sellers’ there was obviously no need for it…It also makes it clear that he faced massive resistance within the Group to his plans by the Issigonis fwd fan boys.To the point where they even complained about the limited funding which Leyland was prepared to divert from their pet heaps to the Marina.Let alone funding the project properly by ditching the Maxi and the Allegro etc and making the Marina the clean sheet Mc Pherson front and semi trailing IRS,with MGB driveline Cortina killer they needed.Together with the ( correct ) comments that the idea was going to upset the big US competition.In which case his reply should have been that’s what we’re here for.But if we aren’t going to do the job properly I’m walking away with immediate effect.
As for OHC the point was at that point in time it was a liability they didn’t need just as it was for Ford and yet another drain on funds which they needed to put into producing a decent rwd chassis.While the OHC v pushrod argument actually rumbles on to this day with me being firmly in favour of the latter when it comes to maintenance costs and convenience with no real advantages for the OHC configuration in terms of output.While also being one of the main drawbacks with Jaguar v its US competition whether in the old 6 cylinder,V12 or even later V8 form compared to Ford’s and GM’s V8’s.It only really being character and preference for a big 12 over a big V8 that ( very ) narrowly won out over me dropping an LS into the XJ for example.Although I’m still not ruling that out at some point in the future even now.
My Uncle bought a new 1.8 Marina, which he regretted and soon got rid of it. Poor brakes plus a load of other issues. He bought a Volkswagen Polo estate which proved to be so reliable, he ended up changing it for another new one after 3 years.
Dave the Renegade:
My Uncle bought a new 1.8 Marina, which he regretted and soon got rid of it. Poor brakes plus a load of other issues. He bought a Volkswagen Polo estate which proved to be so reliable, he ended up changing it for another new one after 3 years.
To be fair the 2.8i Granada’s brakes weren’t exactly its strongest point while most standard cars benefit from a good braking upgrade.As for the Marina as I said an under funded Morris Minor based heap but which still managed to outsell the ■■■■■■. But I’m guessing that none of those ‘issues’ included anything wrong with the motor and if it did was a lot easier to work on than the E series in the Maxi.While unfortunately as I’ve said it didn’t have the MGB’s over drive box in this case because it obviously wouldn’t fit in what was effectively a re styled Morris Minor.
I can’t do a link cos I’m on my phone but if you look on that site you’ve got your link from and search for allegro you’ll see it was actually stokes who wanted the austin to be technologically advanced compared to the usual morris product. The truth is not only did he want fwd,they were his bestseller after all,he actually worked closely with his designers to get them. Issigonis,harris Mann etc didn’t sign off the designs that was down to stokes so he knew exactly what he was letting himself in for. Stokes main problem was the huge over staffing that he chose to ignore.
As for the fwd versus big engine rwd why is it in the USA that most of the top ten bestselling cars are,mostly Japanese, fwd the bestselling car for a long time over there was the honda accord and last year it was the Toyota camry
dazcapri:
I can’t do a link cos I’m on my phone but if you look on that site you’ve got your link from and search for allegro you’ll see it was actually stokes who wanted the austin to be technologically advanced compared to the usual morris product. The truth is not only did he want fwd,they were his bestseller after all,he actually worked closely with his designers to get them. Issigonis,harris Mann etc didn’t sign off the designs that was down to stokes so he knew exactly what he was letting himself in for. Stokes main problem was the huge over staffing that he chose to ignore.
As for the fwd versus big engine rwd why is it in the USA that most of the top ten bestselling cars are,mostly Japanese, fwd the bestselling car for a long time over there was the honda accord and last year it was the Toyota camry
Firstly either Stokes ordered the Marina into production because BMC’s fwd heaps were getting slaughtered by the rwd US opposition or he didn’t ?. Assuming that we accept the former as unarguable fact,then anything which then also says he was supportive of the fwd products he was trying to replace in the market with the rwd Marina.Or that those fwd products were supposedly ‘best sellers’,can only be media contradictory hyperbole and bs as usual there to save face for those who regard Issigonis as a genius.
As for the US or European market.Technology and driving conditions and stricter speed limit enforcement combined with fuel costs and the fact that the big volume producers don’t compete with rwd v fwd in that market sector now anyway obviously makes it a different world now than it was in 1968-1980.On that note even I use a fwd Zafira as a general runabout now rather than a 2.8i Granada Estate for example.Having said that it’s leased so I’m not responsible for maintaining it either.If I was maybe I would still prefer something like an older BMW 3 series estate instead.
As for the performance/‘premium’ saloon market sector I don’t see any change now in that regard than the 1970’s.IE BMW,Jaguar,Mercedes.Or big V8,preferably pushrod GM LS engined,rwd products like the previous generation Cadillac CTSV.
Which just leaves the question of someone at GM for example saying what if we go back to offering something affordable in the 1.8- 2.0 litre 4 cylinder volume class maybe with a pushrod motor with rwd.
dazcapri:
I can’t do a link cos I’m on my phone but if you look on that site you’ve got your link from and search for allegro you’ll see it was actually stokes who wanted the austin to be technologically advanced compared to the usual morris product. The truth is not only did he want fwd,they were his bestseller after all,he actually worked closely with his designers to get them. Issigonis,harris Mann etc didn’t sign off the designs that was down to stokes so he knew exactly what he was letting himself in for. Stokes main problem was the huge over staffing that he chose to ignore.
As for the fwd versus big engine rwd why is it in the USA that most of the top ten bestselling cars are,mostly Japanese, fwd the bestselling car for a long time over there was the honda accord and last year it was the Toyota camry
Firstly either Stokes ordered the Marina into production because BMC’s fwd heaps were getting slaughtered by the rwd US opposition or he didn’t ?. Assuming that we accept the former as unarguable fact,then anything which then also says he was supportive of the fwd products he was trying to replace in the market with the rwd Marina.Or that those fwd products were supposedly ‘best sellers’,can only be media contradictory hyperbole and bs as usual there to save face for those who regard Issigonis as a genius.
As for the US or European market.Technology and driving conditions and stricter speed limit enforcement combined with fuel costs and the fact that the big volume producers don’t compete with rwd v fwd in that market sector now anyway obviously makes it a different world now than it was in 1968-1980.On that note even I use a fwd Zafira as a general runabout now rather than a 2.8i Granada Estate for example.Having said that it’s leased so I’m not responsible for maintaining it either.If I was maybe I would still prefer something like an older BMW 3 series estate instead.
As for the performance/‘premium’ saloon market sector I don’t see any change now in that regard than the 1970’s.IE BMW,Jaguar,Mercedes.Or big V8,preferably pushrod GM LS engined,rwd products like the previous generation Cadillac CTSV.
Which just leaves the question of someone at GM for example saying what if we go back to offering something affordable in the 1.8- 2.0 litre 4 cylinder volume class maybe with a pushrod motor with rwd.
Stokes ordered the marina to compete against the ford in the fleet car class he ordered the Allegro to replace the 1100 in the small family runabout class they were two different markets I don’t get what part of that you don’t understand. There was no money in the kitty to replace the minor so the marina was,supposed to be,a stop gap parts bin special that they were going to replace but never did get the money.
Your the one who saying bl would have survived if they made a V8 triumph so what’s the difference between comparing the USA now to what would’ve happened had they took your advice.
Every other post you make is saying we’d all be better offer with big rwd V8, s when even in the land of the big car they’ve gone over to fwd so I could ask you what your argument is against fwd
dazcapri:
I can’t do a link cos I’m on my phone but if you look on that site you’ve got your link from and search for allegro you’ll see it was actually stokes who wanted the austin to be technologically advanced compared to the usual morris product. The truth is not only did he want fwd,they were his bestseller after all,he actually worked closely with his designers to get them. Issigonis,harris Mann etc didn’t sign off the designs that was down to stokes so he knew exactly what he was letting himself in for. Stokes main problem was the huge over staffing that he chose to ignore.
As for the fwd versus big engine rwd why is it in the USA that most of the top ten bestselling cars are,mostly Japanese, fwd the bestselling car for a long time over there was the honda accord and last year it was the Toyota camry
Firstly either Stokes ordered the Marina into production because BMC’s fwd heaps were getting slaughtered by the rwd US opposition or he didn’t ?. Assuming that we accept the former as unarguable fact,then anything which then also says he was supportive of the fwd products he was trying to replace in the market with the rwd Marina.Or that those fwd products were supposedly ‘best sellers’,can only be media contradictory hyperbole and bs as usual there to save face for those who regard Issigonis as a genius.
As for the US or European market.Technology and driving conditions and stricter speed limit enforcement combined with fuel costs and the fact that the big volume producers don’t compete with rwd v fwd in that market sector now anyway obviously makes it a different world now than it was in 1968-1980.On that note even I use a fwd Zafira as a general runabout now rather than a 2.8i Granada Estate for example.Having said that it’s leased so I’m not responsible for maintaining it either.If I was maybe I would still prefer something like an older BMW 3 series estate instead.
As for the performance/‘premium’ saloon market sector I don’t see any change now in that regard than the 1970’s.IE BMW,Jaguar,Mercedes.Or big V8,preferably pushrod GM LS engined,rwd products like the previous generation Cadillac CTSV.
Which just leaves the question of someone at GM for example saying what if we go back to offering something affordable in the 1.8- 2.0 litre 4 cylinder volume class maybe with a pushrod motor with rwd.
Stokes ordered the marina to compete against the ford in the fleet car class he ordered the Allegro to replace the 1100 in the small family runabout class they were two different markets I don’t get what part of that you don’t understand. There was no money in the kitty to replace the minor so the marina was,supposed to be,a stop gap parts bin special that they were going to replace but never did get the money.
Your the one who saying bl would have survived if they made a V8 triumph so what’s the difference between comparing the USA now to what would’ve happened had they took your advice.
Every other post you make is saying we’d all be better offer with big rwd V8, s when even in the land of the big car they’ve gone over to fwd so I could ask you what your argument is against fwd
There was no difference between what the ‘fleets’ wanted and the reasons they wanted it v what the public wanted in the same small to medium volume class. Anything which says different is bollox.The fleets wanted the rwd competition because it was generally a better drive and a lot easier and cheaper to maintain and/or flog when they got rid of it.
While it’s clear from the article that all the pressures to keep on with Issigonis’ failed design was from those who believed in it ‘not’ Stokes.To the point where his opponents were ( rightly ) worried that the Marina would put even more doubt in customer’s minds in that regard with his answer obviously going along the lines of tough.The problem in this case being that those opponents got their way not Stokes in spending more of Leyland’s limited funds on yet more fwd zb that no one wanted.
The result being no cash to put into the Marina to take on the Cortina and ■■■■■■ or for Rover and Triumph to take on the Granada On that note yes continuing with the 3 box saloon and seperate Eastate styling,in the form of an upraded 2.5 Triumph,with Jaguar designed wishbone all round suspension and the new 6 cylinder and Rover V8 engines had more chance of doing that than the ugly retrograde McPherson front and live rear axle SD1.
As for the US market they might often buy Japanese ricers for a shopping car but it’s still the big V8 rwd that they use if they want a ‘proper’ motor.
The idea of a ‘proper’ motor like a V8 Rover/Triumph v a V6 Granada obviously having a lot more relevance in the 1970’s than now.
You’ve answered it yourself the fleets didn’t want fwd because of the perceived higher servicing costs and again if you actually read your own link properly you’ll see that the marina was designed as a bigger car than the mk2 cortina unfortunately ford brought out the larger mk3 which ruined stokes plans. The austin range was built to be a small car with an uninterrupted interior,hence the invention of hydragas so no suspension turrets intruding. Why change from the tried and tested formula of the bestselling fwd austin to go backwards with rwd.
Your saying the yanks buy rice burners as shopping cars but get rwd barges when they want a real car,they actually buy pick ups the f150 being the best selling us vehicle by far. Several people on here have said that’s why people bought minis/1100’s etc but you argued against thar so your now agreeing with them? You also say the yanks use fwd cos of high fuel prices stricter speed limits etc we got that here as well so if that’s the case why would putting a V8 in a Triumph saved BL. By your own arguments Issigonis far from inventing rubbish was in fact a very forward thinking genius who was years ahead of his time
dazcapri:
You’ve answered it yourself the fleets didn’t want fwd because of the perceived higher servicing costs and again if you actually read your own link properly you’ll see that the marina was designed as a bigger car than the mk2 cortina unfortunately ford brought out the larger mk3 which ruined stokes plans. The austin range was built to be a small car with an uninterrupted interior,hence the invention of hydragas so no suspension turrets intruding. Why change from the tried and tested formula of the bestselling fwd austin to go backwards with rwd.
Your saying the yanks buy rice burners as shopping cars but get rwd barges when they want a real car,they actually buy pick ups the f150 being the best selling us vehicle by far. Several people on here have said that’s why people bought minis/1100’s etc but you argued against thar so your now agreeing with them? You also say the yanks use fwd cos of high fuel prices stricter speed limits etc we got that here as well so if that’s the case why would putting a V8 in a Triumph saved BL. By your own arguments Issigonis far from inventing rubbish was in fact a very forward thinking genius who was years ahead of his time
Stokes’ ‘plans’ for the Marina were doomed from the start because his Issigonis fan boy opponents wouldn’t give him the funds needed to make the Marina the clean sheet design that it needed to be.So instead of a Mc Pherson front semi trailing IRS MGB overdrive driveline Marina able to take on the Cortina.Leyland got a re styled Morris Minor with the B series engine compromised transmission and zb suspension to fund the zb Austin Maxi and Allegro to keep those Isssigonis fan boys happy. Not to mention that and all the following fwd zb instead of the clean sheet V8 all wishbone 3 box design successor to the Triumph 2.5 and Rover P6 needed to take on the Granada. You couldn’t make this zb up.
On that note,as I said,we are talking about the roads of the 1970’s not the supermarket car parks of the 21st century.
while most standard cars benefit from a good braking upgrade.As for the Marina as I said an under funded Morris Minor based heap but which still managed to outsell the ■■■■■■.