The November edition of the Automobile magazine is on the newsagent's shelves now and includes an excellent six page write up on the Austin Seven versus Morris Minor debate. Both cars have also been afforded front cover status so go out all of you and buy a copy!!

Location: Melton Mowbray

Surely we all know the answer without having to spend more money Chris.

Location: Bristol

Cheap-skate!!!

Location: Melton Mowbray

I had opportunity to compare a '30 coachbuilt Minor saloon to my RL recently.

Suffice to say its a good job the overhead cam engine had issues with the dynamo drive back in the day. It was a superb motor and runs rings around the Austin in all areas. No doubt cost and the dynamo issue is what stopped them selling like Austins.

Didnt they revert to a sv engine.

They did. My assumptions are on cost and reliability issues.

I have always been surprised at the success of the Seven vs Morris rivals.The sv Minor appears a robust car. Sadly those close to the cars in their day are now gone. It has been suggested that here in NZ Morris after market service was poor.
I wonder what the typical crankshaft life was. Although the 3 bearing were notorious, the 1 5/16 2 bearing Sevens were not a well known problem until late in vehicle life.
Decarbonising and valve grinding were regular Seven rituals. Assuming also necessary on a Minor would be a disincentive, although a greater margin of reserve power.
Any recollected views passed down from contemporary mechanics etc would be of interest.

Bob Culver

Location: Auckland

I have subscribed to 'The Automobile' since it's inception in 1982. I still have every copy. Until recently, the magazine has restricted it's coverage to that of genuine historic vehicles and taken a serious approach to the preservation of our motoring heritage. Unfortunately, it has started promoting 'hot rods' - presumably in an attempt to widen its market appeal.

After 32 years they have lost my support and I will not be renewing my subscription.
I may not be alone.

Location: Derby

Ray,
I believe that in the September edition of the Automobile you put your argument against the inclusion of hot rods and they in turn responded with a cogent reply in their defence.
I have no desire to either comment on their reply or counter your argument but I think it is a shame to condemn a magazine the contents of which is 95% at least devoted to our types of cars. Where else in the UK motoring press do you go to?
Usual disclaimer

Location: Melton Mowbray

Chris,
yes I did write to object to the inclusion of hot rods in 'The Automobile' magazine. Unfortunately, my comments were edited in a way which made me look stupid, which was a bit unfair. You can't believe everything you read.

At least I know the difference between an Austin Seven special and an American style hot rod which the Asst. Editor apparently does not. Hot rods have their place but not in a magazine that purports to stand for the preservation (rather than destruction)of original cars.

I may cancel my subscription and only buy a copy if and when it appeals.
There are no hot rods in the edition you have drawn to our attention and the Austin 7 v Morris Minor show down seems to be a fair report - although the debate as to which is best will no doubt continue....

The real importance to my mind of the early mm is that it formed the basis for the M type MG which is a whole other story. My father was a Morris and MG man and used to own an M type in the 1950s. When I told him I had bought an Austin Seven he carried on as if I had committed treason!

Location: Derby

What precisely is wrong with Hot Rods? They've been around as long as there's been cars, pretty well. I'd have thought they are a valid part of motoring history, deserving their place in Automobile magazine.
I've never understood the feeling among the old car movement that special builders are somehow second class.

Alan with all due respect, I think the onus is on you to explain why you think hot rods should suddenly start appearing in a journal which for the past 32 years has been dedicated to historical accuracy. What I think about hot rods, street rods, rat rods or any other hybrid vehicles is irrelevant. The point is that they are at odds with the reason why this magazine exists. 'The Automobile' took over from 'Veteran and Vintage' magazine as the only serious journal for those interested in the preservation of veteran and vintage cars. The remit has since been widened to encompass pre 1960 cars but essentially the magazine is there and always has been there to further the preservation of historic vehicles rather than support their destruction and reconstruction into what it's readership considers to be dubious hybrids.

For those interested in hot rods etc. 'The Automobile' is an entirely inappropriate journal. You would not appreciate space being given over to an authentic restoration of an Austin Seven for example or a report on the Brighton run if you were subscribing to 'Hot Wheels' or whatever and you were only interested in hot rods.

Tell me I am wrong and why.

Location: Derby

I have just written a long reply to this, which took 1/2 an hour. it has been lost due to it apparently being spam! its no wonder there is a lot less activity than there used to be!!!!!!!!

Location: Devon

Ray,

Yes- I am so glad they don't allow hot rods such as the Napier Railton, Napier Bentley or the Monster- that Mercedes Crossley horror to sully the pristine pages - rather lowers the tone what!

I believe all the local pre war MG's - K and P types especially, had cut down bodies- a truly colonial b*st*rdisation in the hot rod style

Disgusted of Malvern

Puts on solar topee and strides off twirling moustaches

Location: Malvern, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

The thing which bugs me when magazines embrace modern cars, modern souped cars, modern hotrods is the associated trend to use the racy language and standard "in" expressions of the young followers, something the likes of Bill Boddy always avoided.
I am not familiar with the Automobile, but a case could perhaps be made for classic hotrods of the 1940s/50s.

Bob Culver

Location: Auckland

I am not sure what sparked the outburst but August had a page and a half on the VHRA Pendine Sands running which included a number of pre war and just post war 'hot rods', September had 1/2 page on 'Hot Rod Hayride' for pre 1965 cars. September also included an article on the 1954 Crossley Mercedes hot rod.

Tony.

Location: Malvern, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

I think Ray may possibly have a point.
I would like to make it clear I am a huge special fan, having built a couple recently.
I have built kit cars using 1970s saloon cars as well and currently am modifying my modern classic for motor sport use.
However the Automobiles remit I thought was more as Ray suggests the preservation of historically accurate vehicles of a certain age.
Perhaps as a compromise historically important specials and hot rods could be considered if they were built in period and form an important contribution to motoring history.
Tony hints at this with his suggestions, Brooklands was full of specials all of its life as was Shelsley with its ubiquitous Shelsley specials.
Were I think the issue lies is with the more modern specials or recreations which spring up these days either as a pastiche in VSCC events or FIA sanctioned at prestigious international events. I am guilty as charged myself having built specials in recent years so I'm not throwing criticism from hallowed ground!
Its certainly a valid debate as long as we can do it without falling out with each other and respecting various points of view.
Regards Steve.

Location: South East Cornwall

Steve,

With most of the brief mention of 'hot rods' being about vehicles up to 1965 I think that cancelling a long standing subscription hardly agrees with your suggestion -

"Its certainly a valid debate as long as we can do it without falling out with each other and respecting various points of view"

I understand the Napier Bentley was built in 1968. I think I might agree if 'The Automobile' featured the Packard Bentley though.

Tony.

Location: Malvern, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

This is a subject which always divides opinion. There is nothing anyone can do about 'The Automobile' taking a change of direction apart from stop buying it if they no longer enjoy the content.

If anything, I regret having hi-jacked a thread about Austin Sevens versus early Morris Minors. At least we can debate the pros and cons on the understanding that the vehicles in question are standard fare - or can we? Unless the cars being used have their BHP independently verified how can we be sure?
There are lots of little things that can be done to improve performance without being obvious to the casual observer and other things which if neglected can have the opposite effect so I am never sure quite how much can be taken from such comparisons. That said it still makes for an interesting read - and not a v8 hemi in sight!

Location: Derby

Keeping to the 'speak nicely' requirement I don't think that we should denigrate the American V8 - most successful UK V8 engines have been based on US designs. One of the more interesting UK designed V8 engines was the Stag but what a disaster that was.
Sorry - back to 'The Automobile' hopefully recovering its remit by featuring an Austin Seven and a Morris Minor. If this is the OHV version it owes a lot to Herbert Austin's old Wolseley company and I think a better comparison would be with the later side valve Morris Minor with its two bearing crank.

Tony.

Location: Malvern, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

As has been stated it is the side valve minor not the overhead camshaft model which preceded it. The comparison is therefore logical.

As I have said, the 'cammy' minor with it's notorious vertical dynamo was instrumental in the development of the 'M' type MG. I have a photo on my bedside table of the modified one which my Dad used to own competing in a VSCC event in 1950. I hope this dispels the myth that I am against intelligently modified cars. American style hot rods do not and never have fallen into this category. To my mind they are an abomination and are the single biggest threat to the motoring heritage of the U.S.A. A distinction should be drawn between these ridiculous monstrosities and 'specials' this side of the pond. They are not the same thing.

Incidentally, the rare Ford V8 coupe featured in the September issue of 'The Automobile' would be unlikely to survive the attentions of the 'rodders' in the states. It would be quite normal for such a car to be treated as a 'project' by insensitive individuals who haven't a clue what they are chopping up and care even less.

Location: Derby

Well, Ray says the onus is on me to explain, so here goes.

Hot rodding has been around for decades. It's origins are unclear, but during Prohibition it was a good idea to have a car faster than the Police had. Or, maybe, it was just local youth enjoying building cars faster than anyone else. However, they weren't called Hot Rods, that dates from the 1940s. They were Hopped Up or Gow Jobs. Be that as it may, and call it what you will, the practice has been around since the 1920s.
Now, if the offending article had been about destroying viable cars to build modern hot rods, I think Ray might well have had a point, but that's not the way I understand it. If The Automobile was reporting on genuine old hot rods, which I think was the case, then surely that is very much a part of history, and one I'd like to know more about. So, I think it's entirely appropriate they the magazine should give them space.

Thank you Alan for that considered response and it follows a similar line to that which 'The Automobile' is making. I remain resolute however and will not be getting misty eyed over some old hot rods any time soon....

If the magazine had taken the trouble to provide a more balanced approach, an investigation into the impact this practise has had, especially in the U.S.A., they will have found a depressingly familiar picture at every 'antique' car show where highly modified cars far outnumber the unmolested ones. I see it as vandalism and ignorance of historical worth on a vast scale. That is the legacy and it's not one I wish to be associated with.

If, despite everything, you still wish to immerse yourself in the subject of American hot rods, I am sure there are other magazines dedicated to the subject.

'The Automobile' is of course a commercial enterprise and I would not be surprised if the new sub editor thinks that this venture into the dark side is a way to increase sales. They may end up killing the goose that laid the golden egg!

Location: Derby

I'm not going to disagree with you on that point Ray. The modern hot rod has little in common with its ancestors. But I find the overdone restoration seen in many USA car shows (eg pebble beach) equally offensive.

I'm so glad we are singing from the same hymn sheet Alan. I sometimes feel like a lone voice crying in the wilderness. I recently saw a collection of very rare Dodge DC8 cars from @ 1930. The quality of restoration was superb in terms of workmanship. Sadly, the over restoration with every surface chrome plated and overly fancy paintwork spoiled the intrinsic beauty of these art deco masterpieces.

There's no accounting for taste (or lack of it). It makes me realise how much we take for granted in this dear old country of ours.

Location: Derby

Ray,

"As has been stated it is the side valve minor not the overhead camshaft model which preceded it. The comparison is therefore logical."

Sorry- but not having received my subscription copy Automobile I was not aware and most earlier discussion here seemed to be about the OHV Morris.

I still have my cherished collection of 'Vintage and Veteran' and a goodly selection of The Automobile from the 80's before I took out a subscription a few years back.

I rarely read about American 'restorations' and still shudder at Ken Purdy's desecration of a very original Mercer Raceabout, proudly described in Kings of the Road.

I believe that even in Australia we have a good tradition of 'proper' restoration and I think back to 1955 when I was carefully restoring or maintaining original Austin Sevens when many others were building them into specials of varying quality.

I don't believe that two and a half pages dealing with cars well outside my interest is enough to make me want to cancel my subscription to The Automobile and I look forward to the early arrival of the next issue with the Austin Seven/Morris comparison.

Many years ago I also briefly owned and rebuilt a P Type MG with that very complicated OHC engine.

Tony,

Location: Malvern, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Tony, I tend to go off like a rocket when something winds me up but eventually common sense will win out and I calm down again.

I expect when it comes to renewing my subscription, so long as 'The Automobile' has kept the faith, I will probably get my credit card out again.

Location: Derby

Ray,

I appreciate your feelings- a few other subscribers here said they just didn't read the 'of topic' articles.

I do hope you re-join - the Vintage car movement needs strong minded followers to keep up the interest in my kind of car.

Tony.

Location: Malvern, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Thanks Tony for your supportive comments. Sometimes we get frustrated about things that we have no control over; like when they built a housing estate on the Brooklands track. Sometimes there is nothing you can do.

No point in "cutting off my nose to spite my face" as the saying goes.

Incidentally, I have an Australian bodied Dodge Brothers car. It's a 1926 tourer in pretty good condition. The bodywork was by Holden we think. I was given it as a non runner about 3 years ago and restored it. It's how I came to find out exactly what has been going on in the States. I understand Australia has similar problems but hopefully not quite as bad.

Location: Derby

I cancelled my Automobile subscription a couple of years ago having found it a bit boring,reading through it ,for me in about 20-30 mins.

I now buy Classic bike,just because I find it a more interesting read.
Years ago I used to buy Street Rodder and the "Resto rods",Cars modified with period components were beautiful.

Ray,I think you will find most Ford V8's in the uk were finished off in Oval circuit races or Bangers.There were 2 still at Long Eaton speedway about 20 years ago.

The Austin v Morris article may have been fairer if comparing SV to SV,I haven't bought the Automobile Yet!

The comparison I made was direct.

Nov 1930 Austin 7 RL

October 1930 Minor Saloon (OHV)

The Minor was streets ahead as a direct car/car comparison.

What seems a lifetime ago when I lived in Woking I used to work for a garage owner called David Cobb. In his younger days he was a stock car racer and by all accounts was pretty successful with many wins to his name. He used Ford Pilots as his choice of car because that V8 could be tuned to produce a lot more power and the cars were also stronger than almost anything else.

I remember my Dad complaining that they were pretty thirsty beasts and I suppose that would also partly account for their comparative rarity today. Apparently they were often deemed beyond economic repair when the ten year test was introduced and that's when many were condemned to the scrap yard. Hence their cheap availability for stock car racing.

To my way of thinking what happened in those days was part of life then. Those days have gone.

It seems a shame to carry on decimating what few survivors there are when they do occasionally come to light especially when there are modern alternatives.

I remember the famous American hot rodder, Boyd Coddington, realising that the supply of original cars was drying up, decided that the way to go was with off the shelf glass fibre bodies. What was happening was unsustainable and towards the end of his life, he urged his followers to move away from original cars. Of course, the trouble is that 'glass is not cheap and so the destruction carries on. Many rodders will argue that they take a rusted out wreck and give it new life - and in many cases that is true but I have seen fine unrestored old cars and even fully restored ones get cut up and there seems to be no end to it.

Location: Derby

I have just had a look at an M Type MG (which uses the first Morris Minor OHV engine) As I thought, the two bearing crankshaft has plain bearings mounted in very complicated split 'cheese' housings, a very delicate camshaft drive via tiny bevels through the extremely vulnerable vertical dynamo, a very involved camshaft support and valve clearance setting method and the whole assembly is over 1 1/2 times the height of the Austin Seven engine.
The build cost and maintenance problems quickly caused it to be replaced by the two bearing crank side valve unit, with a roller bearing rear main and plain bearing front. The top end is similar to the Seven.
Transmission is through a three speed gearbox to the rear axle via a rigid tailshaft with two fabric universals
The braking system with uncompensated cables is not much different to the Seven and the chassis doesn't appear to be any more rigid.

The later Morris 8 and Series E were big improvements but I don't think the first two Morris Minors were a great threat to the Austin Seven.

I will be interested to read the comparison, but I believe that over time the Seven would give far better service.

Tony

Location: Malvern, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

The later P type MG was more robust but just as complex and difficult to maintain for an amateur so it was often replaced with a Ford side valve engine.

Location: Sheffield, the home of Hendersons Relish.

I saw this over the weekend at a model railway show....
- My other hobby.

Location: Very edge of Europe, west of just about everybody.

With the known propensity of the rear bearing in Sevens to rumble and grumble it is surprising the sv Minor followed. It is a pity there are few or none about with recollections of the comparability of the cars in their day.
A colleagues brother owned a 4 door sv 8 about 1957. About the most non macho car ever made...and he had side curtains in it!

Bob Culver

Location: Auckland

Bob, the main rear bearing, if I remember my Dad's M type, was babbit and didn't complain like a 7's . The flywheel, however, was known to come loose so perhaps there are similarities! This happened to us on holiday one year when climbing Porlock Hill. There used to be a garage in the village and the owner allowed Dad to use his tools etc on a Sunday to fix the job!
Imagine that happening these days!

I have been trying to locate the car for many years. UW 5990. Chassis No. 2M 0715 was attributed to a MMM register member John Butt in 1980 and represented the M type model in the Golden Jubilee celebrations at Abingdon in the previous year but seems to have disappeared. Several attempts to contact Mr Butt have met with no response.

I have a nice photo of the M type ascending a VSCC hill climb in 1950 but despite posting it on the MMM forum no one recognised the location.

Location: Derby

Ray - according to the records I have, 2M 0715 was first registered OU 7189 and UW 5990 was 2M 0964

OU 7189/2M 0715 is on the Triple M Register as entry No.1265 and a mail to the Registrar - grahamarrondelle at supanet dot com my help you further..

Hope that helps..

Location: Cambridge

Thank you very much, Hugh. Any new information is a breakthrough and a great help.
I guess I must have been given incorrect information? I will check with the MMM again.

The registration number was definitely UW 5990. So according to your records, the chassis No. is 2M 0964. I have the first owner as J.R. Andrews and a build date of 17 September 1929.
There is a picture of the car at the Golden Jubilee in 'Thoroughbred and classic car' magazine, Feb.1980. By then the car had been returned to it's original body shape, including replacing the one piece folding windscreen with an original split screen. I'm not sure where to go from here. Any suggestions?

When my Dad bought the car he discovered that the block was cracked and he was proud of having metal "stitched" the crack with brass. Being an engineer and having access to a machine shop he was also able to stop the oil leaking down into the vertical dynamo. His father, a cabinet maker, worked on the body and gave it a slab tank which made it look more up to date.

Sorry for the hi jack.

Location: Derby

I beg your pardon Ray, you are quite right, I made an error in sorting in Excel. UW 5990 is indeed chassis No. 2M 0715, built on 12/9/1929 and was shown as being owned by John Butt in 1980. It is Triple M Register No. 1265.

As I say, the Triple M Registrar might be your next best port of call, particularly if you have already posted a request on the Triple M Forum. More apologies for thread hijack - Ray, happy to help where I can, so probably best to continue this off line. Drop me a mail if I can help further.

Edit: I've just seen your post on the Triple M forum for last year - I remember it now. Looks like you may have exhausted research there. Oddly enough, it doesn't come up on a DVLA search either Further enquiries there may prove fruitful perhaps?

Location: Cambridge

Thanks for confirming that, Hugh. It's so frustrating that the car appeared in seemingly good order in 1980 then nothing. There are a few questions I need to ask you away from this forum (before we get thrown off!) For technical reasons I am unable to access your email from the link here. My email address is raywhite750@fsmail.net if you could contact me direct please.

Many thanks to everyone here for your patience.

Ray.

Location: Derby

Ray,

As Hugh confirms, the registration number doesn't show up on mycarcheck, which means it's not on the DVLA database. I suppose the good news is that neither has the registration been transferred to a more modern vehicle. I wonder if it's been exported since the 1980's and no longer carries its original registration. Finding someone who remembers John Butt would be a great help for you. Best of luck with your search.

Jeff.

Location: Almost but not quite, the far North East of England

Thank you Jeff. I am so grateful for the help from you chaps.

The M type MG was the first car I remember despite being very young at the time. The Austin 7 and minor both had one big advantage. The hood; it was a silly affair having more in common with a two man tent than a roof. My mother lost patience with it. At the time the 'cammy' minors were worthless and I remember my dad towing one home that had been abandoned. The lasting impression I have is of the minor, a battered red car, being tipped on it's side in the garden to get at the underside. It's funny what sticks in the mind from one's childhood days.

The arrival of my Brother into the world meant my Dad's beloved MG was replaced with a series 1 Morris 8 tourer which was like a boat in comparison. Dad never really got over the MG "magic" and would often describe all the M type's little details. Only his CS1 racing Norton held more memories but his Brooklands days are not for here.

Location: Derby

Ray,

"Bob, the main rear bearing, if I remember my Dad's M type, was babbit and didn't complain like a 7's ."

As I mentioned - only the OHV engine had plain bearings on the two bearing crankshaft, the side valve had a roller rear- I don't know if people complained of rumbling but if Morris used it then it must have been acceptable to customers after 9 years in the Austin Seven.

The M Type MG was not much different to the Ulster in mechanical design and I would think the Austin engine was much more reliable even if not as powerful.

The P Type MG I owned back in the 60's was a much heavier design but still had a very complicated engine to work on.

As you might note I am an Austin Seven fan

Tony.

Location: Malvern, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

I think the MG M Types is fundamentally different to the Austin Ulster in most design elements, chassis, springing, engine and body

http://www.austinharris.co.uk/article/the-british-double-twelve-may-1931-brooklands

I would be a bit careful about comparing supercharged Austin 7's with un supercharged M Type midgets! MGs were aspirational in their day. They swept the board in the 1931 Brooklands Double Twelve.

Sorry, I cant even post a link properly.

Location: Derby

Here you are Ray,

http://www.austinharris.co.uk/article/the-british-double-twelve-may-1931-brooklands

Thanks Ruairidh. I have no idea how you do that!

P.S. Please don't forget my pinterest photos. I am hoping others here will share a little of the affection I have for my Swallow "Trundles".

Location: Derby

Sorry Ray, that had totally slipped my mind, I was away when you emailed me. I will try and remember to set it up, need to do James Anderson's R Saloon one as well. Please nudge me, lots happening up here and I forget much!!!

Alan,

"I think the MG M Types is fundamentally different to the Austin Ulster in most design elements, chassis, springing, engine and body"

I meant they were both light chassis with beam front and rear axles. I would think the very light M type ladder chassis would have been less rigid than the Austin Seven A frame with its triangulated front axle location. The M Type had small semi elliptic springs front and rear which were shackle mounted- possibly even more flexible than the sevens transverse front, 1/4 elliptic rear.
I did notice the engine was different, but it was also two bearing and with a very problematic overhead camshaft drive. It was also larger and I suspect heavier with slightly greater capacity.

Tony.

Location: Malvern, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Incidentally, the Double Twelve M types had their capacity reduced to 750cc to comply with the class H regulations which makes their results over the supercharged Ulsters even more impressive.

None of this can alter the fact however, that as a standard road car, the OHV minor failed to topple the ubiquitous Austin Seven and even in more reliable side valve guise did not capture the public imagination for a large car in miniature which our Austins do so well even to this day.

Location: Derby