VOLUME 13, NUMBER 6 NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 2008

INSIDE THIS ISSUE

Austin J4 Update ..........................10 Autojumble (more ads online) ......10 Cena di Natale ................................1 Defeating the Triumph ...................3 Green Sports Car Set to Launch ....9 Meeting Places & Events 2009.......8 Mini Turns 50 in the Smokies......10 Moving on Up ..................................2 Thanks Contributors! .....................8

UPCOMING EVENTS

Tue., Jan. 6: 7 pm, Rainbow Station, 120 N Willingdon Ave, Burnaby; 1930s Austin Factory Video

Tue., Feb. 3: 7 pm, Old Spaghetti Factory, 50 Eighth St, New West-minster; Program TBA

Sat., Feb. 14: Valentine Tour, Location of start TBA

Tue., Mar. 3: 7 pm, Location TBA; VCB AGM and elec-tion; Social time and nib-bles! Please join us!

EDITOR’S BIT

CAUGHT UP! Roundabouts got off schedule after I fell in January but I’m finally caught up! 2009 promises to be busy with several tours, other activities, and car shows. Start getting your old English car ready now!

December 2nd saw about 40 members of the OECC’s Van-couver Coast Branch gather at the Roma Hall in Queensbor-ough for our annual Christmas Dinner and Awards Night.

“Grazie!” to Italo Cirillo for arranging another wonderful feast for us at the hall. This time we were seated upstairs in a smaller room which had a much more intimate feel for our size of group. A bar was provided and was well-utilized as we chat-ted before sitting down for dinner.

Served by an attentive and professional staff, the food was delizioso! We had antipasto of cold meats and pickled veggies followed at a discreet interval by pasta (wonderful penne with meat sauce) which nearly filled up some of our members. The main course was baron of beef piled high on our plates (too high for a few members who were forced to offer some of it to their tablemates, a fortuitous circumstance of which I took full advantage!) plus vegetables and roast potatoes. On the table was salad, a platter of roast chicken and baskets of buns. Des-sert was a large plate of assorted Italian pastries which thank-fully did not come with labels listing their caloric value. Add a splash of vino and the company of friends and it was a wonder-ful meal.

The evening did not end there, however. It’s the Christ-mas Dinner and Awards Night, remember. A number of de-serving staffers received Certificates of Appreciation to ac-knowledge their efforts. These included our Events Coordina-tor and Spanner Editor Steve Diggins, Roundabout Editor and

Brits ‘Round B.C. sparkplug Steve Hutchens, Treasurer Elaine Lafontaine, Secretary-Registrar Dennis Nelson, and London-Brighton Com-memorative Run architect Walter Reynolds. Mike Smith, our Phone Committee Chief was not present to accept his certifi-cate. The Iron Manwith the Wooden Car, Chair-man Ken Miles, was presented with a shirt emblazoned “Will Talk Car With Anyone” (which he then proceeded to do).

The grande pre-mio, our Bovril Award, is essen-tially the “member of the year” and recognizes club spirit and participation. This year it was shared - “community property” if you will. The Vancouver Coast Branch’s own “Road Angels,” Patrick Jones and Elaine Lafontaine, get to park the coveted Bovril Award on their mantle this year. Having been personally rescued by said Road Angels, I know they deserve it!

Pat and Ken Miles regaled us with tales of their epic trip Down Under for the annual Morgan Owners of Australia gath-ering. They also pre-sented a slide show of tour photos on their laptop which made us green with envy. What an experience for them and what a great chance for us to share it with them!

There was something for everyone at the Cena di Natale.

Buon Natale e Felice Anno Nuovo! Grazie mille, Italo!

HAPPY NEW YEAR! IT IS DUES RENEWAL TIME

$20 BY 12/31, $25 AFTER

Cena di Natale Les Foster

Elaine and Pat receive the 2008 Bovril Award from Ken

Ken displays his new shirt!

Ken during his presentation after

a great dinner

PAGE 2 T H E R OUN DABOUT VO LUM E 13, NUMBER 6

Moving On Up Bence McIntyre

Our last kid just left home! Several years ago, with the future promising life without kids, I discussed the thought of purchasing another MG with SWMBO (“she who must be obeyed,” used by Horace Rum-pole in “Rumpole of the Bailey” to refer to his wife, is from the novel "She" by Henry Rider Haggard which first appeared in serial form in 1886 and was pub-lished as a novel in 1887).

SWMBO naturally thought of something similar to the 1971 MGB we owned early in our marriage; I thought more exotic, like a MGTF.

I looked into several cars, but being of Scottish heritage I did not want to pay the big bucks of a finished car and, not being much of gambler, did not want to buy sight unseen over the Internet. After just missing out on good deal on a local MGTF, I re-evaluated my plan and started to look for another MGB.

I wanted an earlier car, 1968 or prior, as I’ve always preferred the earlier dash and interior. While looking for an MGB, I came across an ad for a 1964 Midget. My first MG was a 1968 Midget with the steel dash and piping on the seats. At first I was not keen as I thought all 1964 Midgets had side curtains and if I was not buying a MGTF I wanted roll up windows. When I realized the car had roll-up windows, I de-cided to check it out as I had fond memories of my 1968 Midget.

As it turned out this car was in good original condition. The prior owner in his 80s was selling it as he could no longer get in and out of the car. (He had bought a 49cc scooter to get around town in). The car was rust-free and garage-kept. The prior owner, a BMC mechanic from Lethbridge, AB, was the sec-ond owner. Due to the condition, my memories, and not knowing what type of driving we would be doing, I bought the car. No regrets.

First came the car, next came some car shows. We met Walter and Linda at the Highland Games and joined OECC. We started doing road trips, drove to Penticton, Olympia, Belleview, Victoria, Lady-smith, the Kootenays with Brits ‘Round BC, Cour-tenay and toured southern Vancouver Island.

About three years ago we realized we were traveling much more than we ever imagined. Think-ing of post retirement and wanting to do longer trips, we would need a car with longer legs and a bit more luggage space. I considered an MGC for a while. I

soon realized, however, that another MGB would give us what we needed with economical running cost and easy spares.

So, for last couple of years, I have been lightly looking for the right car. I had my list of require-ments, one of which was that I was not going to restore a car. At Fort Rodd, Gerry Parkinson told me about an early MGB for sale in Victoria. The body and paint was done, the interior had new carpets and good seats. The current owner was the second owner. I viewed photos and talked to the mechanic who serviced the car. The car was complete with the original hardtop, soft top and tonneau. The car fit most of my requirements but did not have the over-drive I wanted or a five bearing engine (the five bear-ing engine entered production a few days after this car was built). But you can’t always get every thing you want and an overdrive can be installed. Also after talking to several people, I decided the three bearing engine is not a negative. Plus, as an added bonus, it is a pull handle car and black, which is the colour we painted our ‘71 MGB. I called my friend Wayne Watkins on the island and asked his assis-tance in viewing the car. Wayne owns an older MGB and is quite knowledgeable, plus he would not be swayed by the colour. The following is an article by Wayne published in the Victoria MG Club Octagon newsletter.

Pull Handle MGB Goes to New Home

Wayne Watkins (SIB)

Club member Peter Durrant has a 1964 MGB and it is for sale, or rather, it was for sale. Peter has been thinking about some touring and all of a sudden he got "healey-itis." So with only a single car garage, he had to give some thought to this. Hmmm, garage

cannot be doubled and it isn't tall enough for a hoist to store two cars so, reluctantly the 'B' was for sale. It is an early car-1964. Until Peter bought it, it was pretty much a one owner Victoria car and well looked after. Black paint, black interior and a dark grey fac-tory convertible top. The early MGBs had pull han-dles on the doors that were replaced in 1965 with the push-button fixed handles which remained in place through to the end of production in 1980. A friend of mine in Vancouver heard about it and found that it is rebuilt, repainted, interior pieces replaced as re-quired and that it has been looked after by "The Wizard" Mike Owen. That was good enough for my friend.

I picked him up at the ferry a few weeks ago and we went for a test ride. It was a beautiful Octo-ber day, the top was down and we went for a run around the airport and up to Dunsmuir Lodge. It passed the test in spades. Hmm, friend already has a LBC so home to chat with SWMBO about buying this MGB. SWMBO says that retirement is just around the corner so what the heck. She is a car enthusiast which is a big bonus in these situations.

Then I got another Friday evening call - "I am coming over tomorrow to see if I can do the deal. Can you pick me up?" Of course I can - this is car guy stuff. Poking around a garage, looking under the hood and under the car and in the box of spare bits - what a better way to spend a Saturday morning!

Just for fun, we look up the production numbers and other information in the "Original MGB" book by Anders Ditlev Clausager. Total production of 1964 models in left hand drive for North America was 16,753. This car has the original three main bearing engine, which is preferred by many MGB aficiona-dos. There is quite a following of the "pull handle" MGBs, so much so the North American MGB Regis-ter (NAMGBR) has a separate registry and registrar for these early "pull handle" cars.

So, did they do the deal? Yes. Soon my friend will be catching another 7:00 AM ferry from Tsawas-sen and meeting Peter in the Swartz Bay terminal passenger parking lot to make this happen. As a matter of fact, Peter had acquired an extra metal dash, which goes with the car. Realizing there might not be enough room for it later when my friend picks up the car with all the spares in it, he decided to carry it with him as he walked on board. We wrapped it in a garbage bag, but then we realized it might look a little bit like a rifle! So we added an orange gar-bage bag and some duct tape and by carrying it by the opening in the dash, it no longer looked like a rifle. I didn't hear back from my friend on this so I guess it worked.

When my friend comes back again, the factory hardtop will be in place, the convertible top and ton-neau cover will be in the trunk and the original driver's manual (yes, the original one) will be in the glove box. Peter will catch a ride back home and my friend will head down the highway to Beacon Ave-nue, do a U-turn and drive back on to the ferry for the trip home, trying all the time to hide his ear to ear grin. "Now," my friend says thinking about retirement coming up and the summer runs to California and the Okanagan, "where can I get an MGB overdrive?" I am sure that will be another part of this story.

PAGE 3 T H E R OUN DABOUT VO LUM E 13, NUMBER 6

You’ve seen the advertisements. The car is a trim little two-seater, perhaps British racing green, with its convertible top lowered to reveal an interior that is at once Spartan and cozy. Its jaunty styl-ing evokes wind-blown freedom and quick adventure, and the manufacturer’s promise of high performance and a mod-est price seem almost irresistible. The car has all the characteristics of a classic British sports car except for one: It’s not British. It’s a Mazda, not an MG or a Tri-umph. This is, after all, 1993, not 1963.

A dozen years have passed since the British stopped almost all manufacturing of sports cars -- one of the great niche products of industrial history. Today only up market British-built cars such as Jag-uar (now owned by Ford) and Range Rover - which is, in fact, a different sort of creature—can be found on U.S. roads. Once-familiar names such as Sunbeam, Triumph, and Austin-Healey have passed even from British showrooms. What hap-pened?

A better question might be, What went right? The British sports car indus-try was chronically plagued by exorbitant design costs, poorly skilled managers and, eventually, engineers, unsophisti-cated corporate structures, disruptive

labor relations, poor production tech-niques, poor distribution structures, fre-quent shortages of parts, and horrendous quality control. Yet Austin-Healey, MG, and Triumph achieved great success in unit profitability and export sales. The firms almost stumbled into their success, and they failed to recognize what their real strengths were. As those strengths wore away, the industry’s institutions proved impossibly rigid and the compa-nies couldn’t meet the challenges of changing market conditions and emerg-ing competition. The story contained les-sons that Detroit appears to be slowly learning. The British mass-market sports car is dead and buried, but its passing can still teach the Americans something.

The name MG Car Company was registered by its proprietor, William R. Morris, in 1930, but the company’s opera-tions began in 1911, when Morris opened a car sales and repair shop in Oxford known as Morris Garages (hence MG). Morris was an entrepreneur and a tink-erer, not an engineer, but he realized that mass production using common com-ponents was fundamental to expanding output and lowering costs.

Morris increasingly focused on vol-

ume car production, and in 1922 he ap-pointed Cecil Kimber. a versatile motor man, to manage Morris Garages. The following year Kimber began modifying the engines and bodies of standard Mor-ris models. Initially indifferent to Kim-ber’s MG sports cars and sedans, Morris soon came to regard them as an impor-tant part of his arsenal in a battle with Austin and Ford. Demand for MG cus-tomized cars increased throughout the decade, and in 1929 production was moved from Morris Garages to a disused tannery in the nearby market town of Abingdon.

Morris believed, as did most British car makers, that the key to healthy do-mestic sales lay in offering a model in every market segment. His marketing strategy was similar to that of Alfred Sloan at GM: As a British buyer’s income and family increased, he could move from a mass-market Morris to a higher-priced Riley, just as an American would trade in his or her Chevrolet for a Buick. By offer-ing its own upgrade, MG could sell a car that had “a 20 percent improvement in performance and a 50 percent increase in price,” according to John Thornley, the general manager of Abingdon from 1952 until 1969.

The cars were seldom seen in the United States before 1946. After the Sec-ond World War, as Abingdon moved from assembling tank and airplane compo-nents back to cars, the restora-tion of the wider British economy was impeded by shortages of raw materials and hard currency, especially dol-lars needed to buy food and other essential commodities. The Labour gov-ernment decided that British in-dustry must earn those scarce dollars through a cam-paign known as “Export or Die.”

DEFEATING THE TRIUMPH The Decline of the British Sports Car Empire

by Timothy R. Whisler Fall 1993, Audacity Magazine (a division of Forbes)

William R. Morris, Lord Nuffield, founder of Morris Garages. On the strength of MG’s

profits, he also founded Nuffield

College at Oxford. Photo circa 1930s.

How the English automotive industry lucked into a lucrative U.S. franchise

without knowing why; and then threw it away.

Editor’s Note: Over the years I have collected several articles on the demise of the British automobile industry. I would occasionally use them to illus-trate concepts in marketing strategy and international marketing classes. Recently, I have added a few articles that I found on the Internet to my col-lection. Always looking for interesting Roundabout content, I decided to use these articles in a series of reprints. This article was used as a case in an MBA marketing strategy course I taught. Most of the articles are based on serious business history research. A few are by former British Leyland employees. At least one, as in the case of this article, was written by a scholar who happened to be an Eng-lish car enthusiast. Others are focused solely on attempting to explain the demise of this once great auto empire. I hope you will find this series inter-esting and welcome your comments.

PAGE 4 T H E R OUN DABOUT VO LUM E 13, NUMBER 6

The govern-ment pressured the industry to export 70 per-cent of its output to hard-currency markets and then placed re-strictions on do-mestic car sales to secure compli-ance. Despite the wartime destruc-tion of European competition and Detroit’s inabil-ity to meet U.S. demand, the British motor firms, including the Morris and, later, the Nuffield, Organisation (Morris had become Lord Nuffield in 1934 and, in 1938, the Riley, MG, Morris, and Wolseley companies fused), were unenthusiastic about selling abroad. Some firms had exported within the em-pire before the war, but now they had to establish distribution structures and product image in unfamiliar markets like the United States. Today comprehensive market research projects and massive advertising campaigns would precede entry into such markets, but in 1947 Nuf-field simply shipped a number of cars to the United States and waited to see what happened.

The Nuffield board anticipated that its small sedan, the American-styled Morris Minor, would gain a large market share as a substitute for scarce Detroit models. The car was a huge success in England, but its appeal didn’t hold up overseas. British sedans might have looked like U.S.-built cars to Englishmen, but to American buyers they were small, cramped, noisy, underpowered, poorly sprung, and prone to break down. More-over, they were expensive compared with their American rivals and had few deal-ers selling them.

The “export or die” campaign did work, however. From 1947 until the early 1960s England was the world’s leading exporter of automobiles and stood second only to the United States in total produc-tion. And the MG TC sports car, not the Minor, became Nuffield’s best seller in the United States. The car was intro-duced by American GIs who had brought their MGs home after the war; although the model was familiar to British con-sumers, Americans had never seen any-thing like it. It was an accidental sensa-tion: the MG offered unique driving char-

acteristics and classic styling. The com-pact design, with convertible top, was a sexy, indulgent alternative to more prac-tical sedans. While the car’s engine might have been unimpressive compared with Detroit’s units, the MG TC offered much higher levels of steering, road holding, and braking, combined with a stiff sus-pension system. It all made for an excep-tional driving experience. The MG was a differentiated product that created a market niche and distinctive image. As such, MG sales were not hindered by a price that was higher than a U.S.-built mass-market sedan’s. In 1949 an MG TC cost $1,875; a base-model Chevrolet was priced at $1,329.

In the absence of competition MG had the luxury of developing its T series sports cars through incremental innova-tions. The TD (1949-53) and TF (1953-5) offered slightly reworked cockpits, in-cluding the essential left-hand drive, and reworked body panels. All the models utilized virtually the same chassis, body style, and engine that could be found in prewar designs. While MG essentially held a monopoly in the moderate price segment and Jaguar offered upmarket sports cars, the middle price segment was left vacant, a position filled in 1953 by the Triumph TR2.

Once again circumstances, rather than strategy, played a large role in this development. Triumph, based in Coven-try, had been a successful producer of upmarket sedans and sports ears before

the war. The company went into receiver-ship in 1939 and lost its plant to the Nazi blitz, and the Standard Motor Company optimistically purchased the name in 1944. But a succession of Standard-Triumph (ST) models achieved few sales in any overseas market during the late 1940s, and the company’s failure in the United States was especially doleful. The situation became critical in 1950, when the government announced that the Ko-rean War rearmament forced it to ration steel and that quotas would be based on higher export sales.

In 1952 the Ministry of Supply sug-gested that ST concentrate upon its re-cently developed and largely exported farm tractors. The ST chairman, Sir John Black, replied that the firm was develop-ing a new range of car models for export. In fact, Black had ordered the construc-tion of a sports car prototype only one day earlier.

The Triumph sports car was con-ceived in a period of severe material scar-city, a condition that generally prohibits new model development. At the time of the model’s unveiling, a decidedly cool reception from the press suggested that the model might be stillborn. After six months of further development, the com-pany launched the TR2 sports car. This sleek body rested upon a chassis and sus-pension borrowed from existing Triumph volume cars, and the high-performance engine was actually a modified version of the unit developed for the previous Van-guard model; it also fitted in the firm’s tractors. While no advertisement would reveal the mundane nature of these com-ponents, the use of common parts, even if slightly altered, was the key to producing these semi-specialist sports cars at mod-erate cost.

This lesson of common components was then forced upon MG. The Nuffield Organisation’s traditional policy of offer-ing a wide variety of models had been accompanied by a strategy of using an

Cecil Kimber, MG’s brilliant man-ager and inventor. Photo circa 1930s.

A 195Os pamphlet lauds the MG TD Midget. The ad copy is accurate: Postwar British sports cars had

triumphed everywhere.

The MG TC, as seen in a 1950s hobbyist’s guide. The TC started

the U.S. sports car craze when GIs fell in love with it World War II.

PAGE 5 T H E R OUN DABOUT VO LUM E 13, NUMBER 6

equally wide range of engines, and the company’s cost structure combined with the low export profit margins and mate-rial scarcities to reduce the firm’s profits. By the early 1950s it had become increas-ingly clear to Lord Nuffield, now in semi-retirement, that his once-imposing em-pire was too small to achieve increasingly important economies of scale in manufac-turing. In 1952 he reluctantly agreed to a merger with his hated rival, Austin Mo-tor Company. MG and the other Nuffield badges became part of the British Motor Corporation (BMC), a holding company that fell under the dictates of the Austin managing director, Leonard Lord.

Lord refused to integrate the two companies, insisting that only the three Austin-built engines be used in BMC’s wide model range, including sports cars. As a result, through the early 1960s BMC regularly achieved an efficient scale in engine production. The strategy low-ered sports car component costs, in-creased annual output, and facilitated the development of a wider range of mod-els.

Throughout the 1950s and 1960s BMC and Triumph enjoyed an effective duopoly that was almost too good to be true, allowing them to compete on the basis of design and image instead of price. (The Japanese Datsun and the Ital-ian Fiat posed little threat.) Periodically

the British manufacturers launched new models to maintain a competitive edge, creating a design spiral. MG and Austin-Healey (introduced in 1952, when Lord agreed to produce the designs of the Healey) were generally the first movers, specializing in bold, almost revolutionary designs. Triumph responded with an evo-lutionary program, developing its robust designs gradually. Their contest for North American market share (where about 80 percent of output was sold) spawned models priced from entry to up-market, as they matched levels of engine performance, cargo space, and interior comfort.

Consistently the annual leader in sports car sales, MG remained in the tra-ditional moderate price segment. Its T series was replaced in 1955 by the sleek MGA and MGA coupe (1956-62). The MGB (1962-80) proved to be the best-selling British sports car with more than 520,000 units built during its eighteen-year production run. Austin-Healey com-pleted the BMC range by offering the upmarket Austin-Healey 3000 (1952-67) and the introductory Sprite (1958-71), which shared an engine with the Mini to lower costs. The “bug-eye” Sprite was

restyled in 1961 and launched together with an MG clone using the resurrected Midget name.

The Triumph company’s development strategy reflected a chronic shortage of

capital. Incremental innovation - slight modification of the body, better engine performance, improved braking- trans-formed the TR2 into the TR3 (1955-57), TR3A (1957-61), and TR3B (1961). But the changes weren’t substantial enough; Triumph never achieved the popularity of MG. The company continued its tradition of relatively minor modifications with the restyled TR4 (1961-65), the more power-ful and comfortable TR4A (1965) and TR250 (1966-67), and the TR6 (1968-74), which retained the six-cylinder engine and most of the body panels fitted to pre-vious models.

If the TR6 could be traced to the original Triumph sports car, the Spitfire (1963 - 80) emerged from the Triumph Herald sedan, one of the most versatile designs in British motor history. The Herald’s floor pan and engine, the two most costly components, formed the foun-dation for the sports cars. The sedan and sports cars even shared many major body panels, and the Spitfire and GT6 (1966-77) were identical except for the latter’s hardtop, minor trim, and six-cylinder engine shared with the Vitesse, a high-performance version of the Herald.

ST bet everything on the Herald,

gambling that the new sedan would cap-ture a significant share of the mass mar-ket. Severe quality problems, however, led ST to the brink of bankruptcy in 1960. The following year the Leyland

Two American enthusiasts pore over maps spread out on the

nose of their new MG in the early 1950s.

An interior view of MG’s famous and very imperfectly mechanized Abingdon factory in the early 1960s.

PAGE 6 T H E R OUN DABOUT VO LUM E 13, NUMBER 6

Motor Corporation, Britain’s largest pro-ducer of trucks and buses, purchased the firm and immediately abandoned the mass-market strategy, stressing in-creased utilization of existing capacity and balanced labor and capital inputs. Equally important, Leyland committed capital to develop ST’s designs for the Spitfire, GT6, TR4, and an up market sedan range.

In 1963 Leyland-Triumph reported a profit and acknowledged the importance of sports cars in the company’s continu-ing turnaround during the mid-1960s. At the time Triumph sports cars had the highest unit profits of the firm’s range even though export sales tend to have low margins as a result of higher distri-bution and financing costs. MG and Aus-tin-Healey also returned large unit prof-its from North American sales, yet BMC annual profits declined steadily. As early as the mid-1960s it was clear that Brit-ish-built sports and volume cars were on divergent paths.

Many economic historians have ar-gued that the rigid social and economic institutions developed in the nineteenth century impeded the implementation of mass-production techniques in Britain. Whether this is true or not, those same institutions were well suited to the pro-duction of sports cars and other niche

motor products. The sports car makers’ success had stemmed from differentiated model design and characteristics, little interference in operations by the corpo-rate staff, the use of common components - especially engines - to keep manufactur-ing costs down, and traditional British labor-intensive production methods. But by the 1960s, when these production methods had become a burden, the firms were terribly slow to abandon them.

Abingdon, which was BMC’s sports car assembly plant, lacked even rudimen-tary machinery. The car body, produced in BMC factories, was pushed by two workers to each work station, where en-gines and other components were fitted with hand (and eventually air powered) tools. This method provided the flexibility needed to assemble six different low-volume models with output controlled by a piecework payment system that was used in all BMC and Leyland plants until the early 1970s. Measured day work pay-ment required careful management of variable costs, but Abingdon could adjust labor inputs and work speeds to meet changes in demand with little cost pen-alty. The obvious disadvantage of this assembly method was limited annual output.

Compared with the Dickensian as-sembly at Abingdon, production at Tri-umph looked positively modern. It was similar to that used for volume cars, and roughly balanced mechanical and labor inputs allowed Triumph to earn unit profits even though the annual output of a particular model was about twenty to twenty-five thousand units. The Spitfire and GT6 were so similar to the Herald and Vitesse that the cars were assembled on the same track, and this sharing of production costs enabled the Spitfire to be priced between the Midget and MGB. The higher price of the TR series permit-ted assembly on a dedicated mechanized line.

However, by the latter half of the 1960s many of the production difficulties that bedeviled the British mass produc-ers were evident at Triumph as well. Pro-ductivity was reduced by overstaffing, old machinery, poor build method and super-vision, and increasing labor unrest as the unions muscled their way in. The prob-lems resulted in and were exacerbated by frequent component shortages at Tri-umph and MG.

Other weaknesses were becoming apparent: Neither BMC nor Triumph had been able to construct viable distribution structures in overseas markets despite

their early entry into the U.S. market. Sales and service facilities were espe-cially weak. A reluctance to invest in di-rect distribution meant the firms relied on their independent distributors and dealers, who frequently pursued their own interests rather than those of the manufacturers. Low sales of British vol-ume cars, recurrent shortages of sports cars and spare parts, and inadequate marketing and servicing assistance from Britain compounded the problem. Sea-sonal sports car turnover forced many dealers to acquire an additional non-British franchise to survive.

Until 1963 the British monopoly in the moderately priced semi-specialist sports car segment camouflaged its in-herent weaknesses. While a cross-elasticity of demand with other imports (such as the Volkswagen “Beetle”) had always existed, the tremendous success of the Ford Mustang (1964) made it clear that the British had not fully exploited the sales potential of this niche. How-ever, bad American management deci-sions gave the British a second chance. The sales threat from the Mustang and its “muscle car” imitators - most signifi-cantly, the Corvette - receded as Detroit attempted to increase sales by developing the size and comfort of the models.

Nissan’s Datsun Z series presented a more serious danger. The 1969 Datsun 240-Z offered a greater level of innovative mechanical and design characteristics, including high product reliability - which had perpetually eluded the British - at a price slightly higher than that of the es-tablished competition (1970 prices: Dat-sun $3.647, TR6 $3,375, MGB $2,875, Spitfire $2,395, Midget $2,279). Two years after its debut Datsun became the best-selling sports car in the United States and a year after that it was out-selling MG and Triumph combined.

Over the next decade Nissan main-tained its market share through rapid development and efficient distribution of the Z series. The Japanese, however, weren’t ready to drive the British from the market altogether. Instead, by offer-ing more power, amenities, and passen-ger comfort in successive Z models, Dat-sun moved its sports car up market in price and image (1975 prices: Datsun 280-Z $6,284, MGB $4,350). Coinciden-tally, Datsun’s misguided provision for and the Europeans’ slow reaction to U.S. legislation banning convertible cars (which was never actually enacted) re-sulted in a British and Italian duopoly in a shrinking open-car market segment.

The British twins Susan and Jennifer Baker atop the hood of an MG sedan at

the 1963 International Automobile Show in New York City. Ford’s Mustang was

then about to challenge MG.

PAGE 7 T H E R OUN DABOUT VO LUM E 13, NUMBER 6

The merger of Leyland-Triumph and BMC in 1968 to form the British Leyland Motor Corporation (BL) appeared to strengthen the British position. BL, how-ever, faced enormous problems: aging and overlapping models, declining mar-ket share, outdated and scattered produc-tion facilities, a discontented and overmanned work force, inadequate dis-tribution structures, and limited invest-ment capital.

Furthermore, that same year the United States introduced rigid standards for car exhaust emissions and car safety. The legislation had a profound effect on British sports car manufacturers, who had to either suspend U.S. sales or abruptly modify their cars. That caused the market share to droop even further. BL’s CEO, Donald Stokes, believed that the firm’s weaknesses could be overcome by establishing a multi-divisional struc-ture. The sports car line companies and their parent firms had a tradition of en-trepreneurial and personal management and were used to working with a large degree of operational freedom. That leg-acy, however, had prevented the develop-ment of the middle management skills necessary to supervise and coordinate the activities of a multidivisional firm. Partly in response to this deficiency and partly because of his nature, Stokes often inter-vened in trivial operational matters.

There was plenty of opportunity for confusion. In BL’s sports car division, seven models were assembled in two plants supplied by dozens of manufactur-ing facilities. MG and Triumph were placed in two different divisions, while the component producers and sales staffs were situated in yet two others. As day-to-day minutiae overtook strategic con-cerns, inertia and confusion overwhelmed the firm.

In a desperate, misguided move Stokes initiated an ambiguous and naive rationalization plan. New sports models built in brand-new plants with modern capital-intensive methods would gradu-ally replace the existing models manufac-tured with labor-intensive techniques. Employment would not have to be re-duced despite increased mechanization and decreased model offerings, since the new models would be produced in high volume, and the successful sales of each model would finance the next, overcom-ing the capital constraints.

The plan quickly collapsed. The new mass-market cars, hastily designed and poorly built, did not sell, and BL was forced to return to old models to preserve

domestic and export market share. Sports cars became even more vital as steady U.S. sales provided badly needed income.

British Leyland’s next misstep, the introduction of the Triumph TR7 (1975-81), vividly revealed the problems that

eventually ruined the company. Amaz-ingly, the model was intended to replace the entire sports car range. The project inevitably ignited a rivalry between MG and Triumph divisions since the firm refused to merge the two design teams. Perhaps more serious, BL failed to re-cruit and retrain engineers. In the past, sports cars had been designed by “practical men” who had learned their trade through experience. But these prac-tical men did not have the expertise to meet the challenge of making cars that were safer, more fuel-efficient, more reli-able, and less polluting than the stan-dard models. The scarcity of engineers in Britain, combined with a historic suspi-cion of university graduates, left BL with few engineering resources at a critical time.

As a result, BL abandoned its inno-vative design when it was most needed. The TR7 was a poor attempt at imitating Datsun’s Z series. The controversial styl-ing and the undistinguished attributes, along with horrendous product quality, provoked tremendous sales resistance despite a price that was considerably lower than the Datsun’s ($5,100 against $6,359). After producing 32,743 units during the first full year of TR7 produc-tion, only 22,939 units were built in 1976, compared with 28,681 MGB units.

Only the company’s projected high annual sales of the TR7 (more than any British model had ever achieved) justi-fied the use of dedicated capital-intensive production techniques and unique compo-nents. Failure to meet sales targets caused low capacity utilization and pro-ductivity rates and, consequently, the disastrous combination of high variable and fixed costs. Moreover, the poor build method and haphazard supervision that resulted from the firm’s engineering cri-sis further raised the cost structure. Management’s attempt in late 1976 to reduce variable costs by bringing the la-bor force in line with output resulted in a strike. It lasted a full year, but in effect the dispute simply reduced the output of a virtually unsalable car. The car’s poor image condemned the more innovative convertible and high-performance ver-sions, which were launched in 1979.

At that point the design, production, and degree of market competition of the TR7 and BL’S struggling volume cars were virtually the same. It follows that the sales, output, and unit profit results were also similar. Clearly BL could not adapt to capital-intensive manufacturing methods and a sophisticated corporate

Top to bottom: The sleek MGB, Shown in 1962, was the most popular British sports car. By the second half of 1974 the MG’s silhouette had been cluttered with

cumbersome bumpers, hastily attached in compliance with the new

American safety requirements. The successful 1970 Triumph TR6

had a chassis similar to Triumph’s original sports car.

The hapless Triumph Stag was a misguided attempt to update the look.

PAGE 8 T H E R OUN DABOUT VO LUM E 13, NUMBER 6

structure. In fact, there was an increase in productivity and capacity utilization rates when TR7 production was moved to smaller, more flexible, less mechanized plants in 1977 and again in 1979.

Such rigidities affected the fate of Austin-Healey, MG, and the Triumph Spitfire as well. The Sprite was one of the few models eliminated in BL’s rationali-zation plan. The planned phase-out of the other models and the acute shortage of capital led to expedient modifications, such as the MGB’s massive and singu-larly unattractive bumpers, to meet the 1975 U.S. collision and exhaust regula-

tions. The Spitfire and the MG range were already outdated compared with the new Mazda RX-7 and several volume cars, but desperate alterations further reduced their appeal.

Only low sales of the TR7 and con-vertible tops kept the older models in production. Although MG sold a postwar record of 34,794 units in the United States in 1977, time and circumstance were catching up. Reduced sales - caused by the U.S. recession of 1979-80, the ap-preciating value of sterling against the dollar, and BL’s mysterious decision to retain unique engines after the cancella-tion of its sedan counterparts—raised costs considerably.

Closed out of Europe by its underde-veloped distribution structure and un-willing to raise prices to the level of the fledgling TR7, BL canceled the older models in the midst of the 1979 corporate consolidation plan, and production dwin-dled to a halt the next year. Depressingly low sales in the wake of the MGB and Spitfire withdrawal left the TR7 expend-able. In 1981, during yet another corpo-rate rescue plan, the sports car of the future became history. The British finally surrendered the niche they had created.

Austin-Healey, MG, and Triumph achieved their great successes when they were part of small, simply structured firms that permitted a large degree of operational freedom. It’s true that by

1968 the world motor industry had long bypassed the Victorian methods of Abing-don and the semi-mechanized techniques of Triumph, but BL’s greatest failure was not its attempts to implement new proc-esses but the rapidity with which it aban-doned everything it had been doing right. Big is not always better, especially when a firm lacks adequate expansion re-sources and concentrates upon its weak-nesses to the detriment of its strengths. Detroit might take note—and indeed, may already have begun to.

British Leyland’s disastrous TR7. The car’s weird geometric design is

emphasized in an advertisement by a head-on shot inscribed within a

diamond. The TR7, built to replace all other British sports cars,

Timothy R. Whisler earned his Ph.D. in economic history from the London

School of Economics and Political Science and is a professor

of history at St. Francis College in Loretto, Pennsylvania. When this

article was written, his 1971 MG Midget was in the shop for repair.

Meeting Places and Events For 2009 Steve Diggins, Events Coordinator

Our Vancouver Coast Branch is well known for interesting meeting places and good driving events. This past year was very good with two new meeting locations and two new events. The new meeting locations, the Buck and Ear Pub in Steveston and the Billy Bishop Pub in Kitsalano, proved to be popular and I suspect that we will use them again. New events included the July picnic at the HMCS Discovery and the London to Brighton Commemorative Run in No-vember. Our Christmas dinner was at the Roma Hall and, although the numbers were down a bit, those who were there had a nice evening. One would have had to pay twice what we did for the same quality and quantity in a restaurant.

Finding new meeting locations for a group our size remains a challenge, so if anyone has a suggestion I assure you it would be welcome! Below is a VERY TENTATIVE OUTLINE of what the first half of 2009 might look like: January 6 Meeting: Rainbow Station, Burnaby (1930s Austin factory video) January Event: Nothing planned February 3 Meeting: Old Spaghetti Factory, New Westminster; Program TBA February Event: Valentine Run March 3 Meeting: Location TBA (VCB AGM and Election) March Event: Garage Tour (Date & Locations TBA) April 7 Meeting: Location and program TBA April Event: Fort Langley Run (the 12th or the 26th) May 5 Meeting: Billy Bishop Pub (Program TBA) May Event, Saturday the 16th: VanDusen ABFM (post-ABFM event TBA) June 2 Meeting: Tucker Tin Farm (TBA) June Event: TBA

I want to thank contributors who provided Round-about content in

2008. We are fortu-nate to have sev-eral authors and a photographer who

contribute regu-larly and many who do so from time to time. With-

out these members there would be no newsletter! David Ballantine Fred Bennett John Chapman Ian Cox

Steve Diggins Les Foster Adele Hedges Carl Knorr Brian Lees Bence McIntyre Ken Miles Pat Miles

Dennis Nelson Celia Obrecht Walter Reynolds Elliot Sclater Malcolm Tait Irene Thompson Chris Walker Wayne Watkins

THANKS CONTRIBUTORS! Steve Hutchens, Editor

PAGE 9 T H E R OUN DABOUT VO LUM E 13, NUMBER 6

Green sports car set for launch By Jonathan Fildes Science and technology reporter, BBC News news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7265267.stm Published: 2008/03/03 08:38:13 GMT © BBC MMVIII Submitted by David Ballantine

The hydrogen-powered Lifecar, based on the design of the Morgan Aero-8 road-ster, produces little noise and only water vapour from its exhaust. The lightweight model packs advanced fuel cells and an energy storage system that gives the car a range of 250 miles (400km) per tank of hydrogen. It has been developed by a con-sortium of UK companies and universities.

"Figures suggest the car should be capable of doing 0-60 [miles per hour] in about seven seconds," Matthew Parkin of classic sports car manufacturer Morgan told BBC News. However, the exact acceleration will not be known until the complete car is taken for its first test drive. "It's nearly there and the plan is to drive it when the show is over," said Mr Parkin. Clever power

The £1.9m project to build the Lifecar, part funded by the UK government, has taken nearly three years. "The basic concept was to build an entertaining and fun sports car that would act as a showcase for the tech-nology and would deliver 150 miles to the gallon," said Mr Parkin. "Everything else has tumbled out from that."

The car is powered by a bank of light-weight hydrogen fuel-cells developed by UK defence firm Qinetiq. "If you took a typical internal combustion engine and replaced it with a fuel cell, the fuel cell would be very large," explained Ian Whit-ing of Qinetiq. "That's not an efficient way to do things." The fuel cells in the Lifecar produce about 22 kilowatts - roughly one fifth of the amount of power of a typical combustion engine. "With that we can provide all of the cruise capability we need to," he said.

When the car needs to accelerate or climb a hill it draws extra power from a bank of ultra-capacitors aligned down the centre of the car. "They are like a battery

but they do not store quite as much en-ergy and they allow the energy in and out much quicker," explained Mr Whiting. These are primarily charged by a regen-erative braking system which slows the

car by converting the vehicle's kinetic energy into useful electrical energy using a motor. "Hybrid cars already use regen-erative braking - normally it restores about 10% of the energy," said Mr Parkin.

"Lifecar is aiming for 50%." Quiet runner

The car has a range of about 250 miles (400km) and has a top speed of around 90mph (145km/h). "The whole thing has to be built around efficiency which comes down to weight at the end of the day," explained Mr Parkin. As a result, the car has an aluminium chassis and a light-weight wooden interior, including seats. It also doesn't have any of the "luxuries" such as a stereo, central locking or even airbags, found on many modern cars. "The objective is to get the weight down to 700kg."

There are also other notable omissions such as a gearbox and - as the fuels cells produce little noise - the roar of an en-

gine. "We may have to supply headphones with the sounds of a five litre V8 linked to the throttle pedal," said Mr Parkin.

Other car manufacturers have shown off hydrogen-powered sports cars, al-though many have been conversions of existing models or hybrid cars that can also run on petrol. For example, Japanese manufacturer Mazda has unveiled a modified version of its RX-8, known as the Hydrogen RE, which uses a dual-fuel system. Honda has also announced that its petrol hybrid CR-Z sports car concept would launch in 2009. Bumpy road

However, the road to a hydrogen-fuelled future has a number of obstacles.

Critics point out that to pro-duce hydrogen by splitting water uses a large amount of electricity. At present, the majority of this electricity comes power stations burn-ing fossil fuels and therefore brings no environmental benefit. In addition, there is little infrastructure for refuelling the vehicles. "There's a whole range of questions about how you [could roll out a hydro-gen infrastructure] and when you could do that," said Mr Whiting. "For vehicles which have a central base you can readily install a system to refuel those." For example, hydrogen buses that return to a central depot already operate in many cities. An infrastructure to refuel per-sonal hydrogen vehicles would take longer, he said. However, interim solutions do exist, such as so-called

"reformer technology". "It allows you to take the existing fuel infrastructure - diesel for instance - and convert it into hydrogen on the vehicle," said Mr Whit-ing.

The car is a concept at this stage but Morgan does not rule out going into pro-duction at some point in the future. We will gauge reaction when we show it," said Mr Parkin. "If there is an enormous response we will have to look at the pro-ject, the pricing and how it will function."

The car will be on display at the Ge-neva Motor Show in Switzerland between 6 and 16 March. Other collaborators on the project were Oscar Automotive, Cran-field University, Oxford University and Linde AG.

We may have to supply headphones with the sounds of a five litre V8 linked to the throttle pedal.

—Matthew Parkin

AT THE WHEEL Chairperson: Ken Miles

kengmiles@shaw.ca - 604-576-8036 Vice-Chairperson: Steve Hutchens

sphutchens@yahoo.com - 360-733-3568 Treasurer: Elaine Lafontaine

Wolseley@lightspeed.ca - 604-591-3332 Membership renewals: #73-8190 King George Highway, Surrey, BC V3W 5B7

Secretary: Dennis Nelson dnelson@dccnet.com - 604-599-9032 New memberships and correspondence: 10932 Scarborough Drive, Delta, BC V4C 7X1

Good & Welfare: David Ballantine dballantine@shaw.ca - 604-980-4120

ICBC/AirCare Liaison: Fred Bennett 604-939-1773 / Fax 604-939-1753

Meetings & Events Coordinator: Steve Diggins - 604-294-6031

Phone Committee Chief: Michael Smith mlsnbarbara@shaw.ca - 604-936-8674

Roundabout Editor: Steve Hutchens sphutchens@yahoo.com - 360-733-3568 Newsletter articles, photos, and other content: 2090 N Shore Road, Bellingham, WA 98226-7864

Roundabout Printing & Distribution: Richard Taylor mikmaq@telus.net - 604-298-9346

PAGE 10 T H E R OUN DABOUT VO LUM E 13, NUMBER 6

AUTOJUMBLE English Cars & Parts For Sale and Wanted

See more ads at oecc.ca/vcb

under the Autojumble menu

1970 Triumph Stag. RHD. Manual trans-mission with overdrive (rare in North America). Original V8 in pieces. Trans-mission and drive train out of car. Soft and hard tops. Great 2+2 dark blue body. Stored dry. Manuals. $4,500. All offers considered, or trade for what have you. Jurgen, 604-737-8065 or jpeterat@hotmail.com.

1978 Rolls Royce Silver Shadow. New paint, brakes and tires. Some interior work done. 108,528 miles. Runs well. $25,000 OBO. Contact Ken at 250 549 1524 or k-buchana@shaw.ca to view. 1987 Jaguar XJ-12 Vanden Plas. New brakes (parking left to do), tires (4 new plus a good spare), gas tank and spare air conditioning unit. $5,000 OBO. Contact Ken at 250 549 1524 or k-buchana@shaw.ca to view.

Minis turn 50 with a party in the Smokies David LaChance, Hemmings eWeekly, December 25, 2008 This coming year marks the 50th anniversary of the classic Mini, and Classic Minis United will be celebrating with a three-day gathering in Townsend, Tennessee, in the Great Smoky Mountains. “Classic Mini 50: Party in the Smokies” takes place from April 22-25, 2009.

In Britain, there’s a tradition of camping at Mini meets, so that’s how CMU will be doing it, too. The epicenter will be the Townsend Great Smokies KOA camp site, which offers lodges, cabins and sites for tents and RVs. For those whose idea of roughing it is basic cable, a nearby hotel, the Tally Ho Inn, is offering discounted rates for participants. “We chose what is consid-ered the most beautiful time of year there, still cool temps with plants blooming,” the organizers say. “For the three-day gathering we’re planning a cruise into the mountains each day, a nighttime scavenger hunt, and a big birth-day party. We hope that the start of Saturday’s cruise becomes the new North American record for the most classic Minis cruising in one long

line. The car show will be a three-day moving car show, judged by their peers. Oh, and we will be able to take over the entire campground (except for the large amounts of RV sites); it’ll be our own Mini Town USA! If you haven't been to a CMU gathering before, we do it differently; we drive/cruise a lot, with plenty of stops and things to see.” You have to be a CMU member to take part, but guess what? Membership is free. All of the driving events are for 1959-2000 classic Minis and their variants, without exception. No Mini? Another participant might be able to give you a seat in theirs. To learn more about the gathering and to find out how to join the CMU, visit www.classicminis.org.

Editor’s Note: I include this bit of filler with a purpose, having no illusion that any of us are likely to venture to the Great Smoky Mountains (however great an adventure that might be!). My purpose is to suggest that we might con-sider finding an appropriate way to commemo-rate the significant anniversaries that will occur in 2009 (Mini’s 50th, Morgan’s 100th, and perhaps others). Certainly this would be in the spirit of the Old English Car Club!

12/26: A “stay of execution” has been arranged! To help save this very rare Austin J4, please contact Ian

Cox, SIB (ian@britishcarshop.com or 250-384-2910) British Light Utility Vehicles (bcluv.austingipsy.net)