Zel's Motoring Adventures...Volvo, Renault, Rover, Trabant, Invacar & A Sinclair C5 - Updated 13/11.

[LightBulbFun]

3 minutes ago, Slowsilver said:

Yes, IIRC they are all four different. The front of the front ones slope to match the angle of the front of the front side window glass and the back ones are vertical to match the vertical front edge of the rear glass. Then each side is a mirror image of the other. I don't know if Invacars ever had them but Minis also had a "fuzzy strip" seal which pushed onto the rear edge of the front glass to stop the draughts.
 

yeah I think so   if your referring to this felt? strip going through the middle of the photo here?

[Slowsilver]

That's the thing. Actually fits on to the front of the rear glass or they can get nicked even if the car is locked. Doesn't look like TPA has them. Would help the weatherproofing and certainly reduce the cabin noise if it had some. They used to go missing from a lot of Minis because they normally only push on, but I suppose they could be glued. In the above picture the front and rear catches look the same so I wonder why they had different part numbers.
Incidentally, the early mark 1 Minis from their launch in 1959 had all-metal push-button catches on the sliding windows, which were much more robust and stylish than the later cheapo plastic ones, which were introduced in about 1963, presumably for cost reasons. They are interchangeable but I guess the metal ones are probably NLA now.
 

[LightBulbFun]

5 minutes ago, Slowsilver said:

That's the thing. Actually fits on to the front of the rear glass or they can get nicked even if the car is locked. Doesn't look like TPA has them. Would help the weatherproofing and certainly reduce the cabin noise if it had some. They used to go missing from a lot of Minis because they normally only push on, but I suppose they could be glued. In the above picture the front and rear catches look the same so I wonder why they had different part numbers.
Incidentally, the early mark 1 Minis from their launch in 1959 had all-metal push-button catches on the sliding windows, which were much more robust and stylish than the later cheapo plastic ones, which were introduced in about 1963, presumably for cost reasons. They are interchangeable but I guess the metal ones are probably NLA now.
 

ah interesting  

yeah, I THINK theres some of these strips in the spares stash which if that is the case @Zelandeth is more then welcome to it as as im concerned  

[LightBulbFun]

15 minutes ago, Slowsilver said:

In the above picture the front and rear catches look the same so I wonder why they had different part numbers.

thought just occurred to me, is it because the 2 window panes are at different depths, but both catches have to line up with the same holes in the window trim

so the catches would have to be different thicknesses if that makes sense?

[Zelandeth]

Yeah, those Mini ones look to be the job.  Though I have to ask HOW MUCH?!?

I've got the vertical weatherstrip on the nearside window but the offside one is missing (well, not missing but so utterly rotten as to be useless).

[LightBulbFun]

17 minutes ago, Zelandeth said:

Yeah, those Mini ones look to be the job.  Though I have to ask HOW MUCH?!?

yeah I said the same! I was quite confused as to how can it be so expensive especially as it looks like you can buy the 4 catches on their own at "only" £24 for the 4, but it looks like the kit also includes a bunch of ancillaries which seem to drive the price up

maybe you can get away with getting just the catches since I assume you already have most of the needed ancillaries already?

perhaps they also might be cheaper elsewhere I have not really looked (just pulled up that page to confirm if they are indeed Mini items etc)

[Zelandeth]

29 minutes ago, LightBulbFun said:

yeah I said the same! I was quite confused as to how can it be so expensive especially as it looks like you can buy the 4 catches on their own at "only" £24 for the 4, but it looks like the kit also includes a bunch of ancillaries which seem to drive the price up

maybe you can get away with getting just the catches since I assume you already have most of the needed ancillaries already?

perhaps they also might be cheaper elsewhere I have not really looked (just pulled up that page to confirm if they are indeed Mini items etc)

Yeah, I'm going to have a rummage around, find out what the original BMC part number was and then do a search for that.  I'm fully expecting that they will be available for a sane price with a bit of digging if you're not buying from a Mini specialist therefore paying three times more than you need to.  See also headlights...The ones I bought to replace the horrible clear lensed things on there currently are absolutely identical to the ones advertised as for Minis and Land Rovers - but not having those words in the title seems to reduce the price by at least 50%.

I'd be willing to stand for £20 or so, but at £50+ they're having a laugh!

[bobdisk]

6 hours ago, Zelandeth said:

  See also headlights...The ones I bought to replace the horrible clear lensed things on there currently are absolutely identical to the ones advertised as for Minis and Land Rovers - but not having those words in the title seems to reduce the price by at least 50%.

I'd be willing to stand for £20 or so, but at £50+ they're having a laugh!

If the headlights are the same as Minis and Land Rovers, they are also the same as Morris 1000, and any other British classic of the era, (Rover P4, P5, MG Midget, MG B, Triumph Herald, Hillman Minx. BMC Farinas and many more)  that has them, They are Lucas 7 inch Sealed Beam. Not sure, but I think the bowl is also the same. so there is a variation to choose from.

https://www.morrisminor.org.uk/parts/54-headlights

https://rimmerbros.com/Item--i-GRID005448

I would put H4 Halogens in, better than tungsten, which is what the sealed beams are. Not original perhaps, but I have a thing about lights must be good. What exactly are those you have?

[Zelandeth]

The ones currently in TPA are modern "upgrades" for Minis etc (different slightly to MG, Minor and Land Rover as they also include the sidelights).  They were bought in error for another car years ago.  They actually work well, just look awful on the car.  As the headlights I had were shot they made sense for recommissioning purposes though.

The ones I've bought are standard looking H4 units intended for Minis etc. Just for £25 rather than the £60 odd that exactly the same thing simply labelled as what it was rather than specifically naming the Mini.  So visually they will look identical to the sealed beam or equivalent units that would originally have been fitted.

[Slowsilver]

11 hours ago, LightBulbFun said:

thought just occurred to me, is it because the 2 window panes are at different depths, but both catches have to line up with the same holes in the window trim

so the catches would have to be different thicknesses if that makes sense?

Of course, you are correct. It can clearly be seen in Zel's picture in the next post to yours that the front catch is much wider than the back one so that it reaches from the outer glass to the same set of holes in the runner.
 

[Zelandeth]

Well after nearly three hours of swearing and nearly passing out from heat exhaustion the offside window runner is sorted.

Look, no daylight!

Here's a "before" image for comparison.

(From the opposite side, but they were pretty similar).

The channel rubber is pretty knackered but will do for now.  It does at least hold the glass properly now.

Really don't want to have to do that again!

[egg]

Well done. My motivation for anything car related dwindles to zero anything above 23-24 degrees.

[LightBulbFun]

9 minutes ago, egg said:

Well done. My motivation for anything dwindles to zero anything above 23-24 degrees.

FTFY

[Zelandeth]

That is very true for me, just anywhere above 18-20C these days I start falling to bits.

I'm trying to maintain momentum with this though.  I've really been enjoying buzzing around in this little car the last couple of days now I think I'm starting to get a better feel for it.  I don't want to end up putting off sorting things and ending up another year down the line with it barely getting used.

Having got the door back together it was time to reattach the gear selector to the gearbox. 

This job is most easily done from underneath, though jacking the car up would have meant taking the car out of the garage and working beneath the deadly ball of death that is the sun today.  Not happening.

I wanted to inspect the pulleys, CVT belt and check the oil levels in the gearbox and diff - all of these things want the rear service hatch in the cabin out, so figured I'd just work from above like last time.

Pulleys look perfect.  There was quite a bit of surface oxidisation on the primary pulley when it was fitted, as I hoped though it's cleaned itself up through use.  Lovely satin smooth finish on both of them now.

Belt also seems happy enough.  The manual states very clearly that cracking between the teeth on the belt will happen early during its life and shouldn't be considered a sign of impending failure, so I'm not worried about that.

It's really noticeable that before the pulleys were replaced that this whole area used to get covered in finely atomised belt material during any run.  No noticeable deposits anywhere since last time I was in here though so that behaviour seems to have been purely down to surface corrosion on the old secondary pulley.

The gear selector was originally attached to the selector arm on the box by a roughly 1/4" diameter roll pin, held in place by a split pin.  I was missing this because the replacement selector I fitted (the original one in TPA was totally siezed) didn't have it, and no amount of effort was able to shift the original one from the linkage.  Originally I fitted a bolt in this location and used a locknut arrangement to try to stop it loosening itself over time.  Apparently this didn't work as since then I've lost two bolts.

Annoyingly the replacements I have, presumably because they're a metric size, don't fit.  The smallest size I've got that fits drops straight through, the next size up won't fit.  Adding an extra washer to the smaller one adds enough length that I can't then get the split pin in.  So we will need to use a bolt then for the time being.

It was at this point I had a bit of a brainwave.  There are two pivot joints on the gear linkage of this type.  The lower one (the source of my problem), then an identical one where the rod actually pushes/pulls on the actual gear selector on the box.  The lower one is an absolute swine to get to other than from underneath because there is a load of pulley and belt in the way.  The top one however is near enough level with the top of the gearbox pretty much and is readily accessible.

So I took the standard coupler out of the top pivot and installed that in the hard to get to bottom location.  I then fitted a bolt and lock nut to the top one.

The fact that I can actually get to it makes it possible to easily do the locknut up *way* more tightly than I probably managed last time.  I also put a blob of thead lock on it. 

At least if it does drop off again in future replacing the thing will be a five minute job as it's dead easy to get at.

I do get the impression that I may need to look at replacing the gearbox seals at some point though...

Still out of gloves. 

I'd been literally dripping with sweat since about two minutes after leaving the house so called time at this point before I wound up passing out from heat exhaustion (showing 36C in the garage by the time I called it).  I'll check the gearbox and diff oil levels tomorrow before I button the service hatch back up.

Edit: Keep forgetting to post this.

One real bonus of having a wide angle mode on my camera now is that it's way easier to get group fleet photos.

Obviously I'll need to take another one once the Xantia returns from the garage, but I've been meaning to do this for months so wasn't going to miss the opportunity.

I enjoy how many extremes of the automotive spectrum we have covered in that one photo.

[LightBulbFun]

Love the wide angle shot  (I also quite like the general short of the CVT setup/gearbox/rear of engine, its much better then my photos!)

 

BTW I noticed in a post on another forum ya mentioned wanting to track down some more CVT belts for good measure

sadly I believe they are NLA but I recall someone did call up the people that made em at one point and they said the closest modern equivalent is the Dayco HP2020 (Sadly im not sure how well it works @dollywobbler tried one, but this was during his pulley issues so its hard to say what was the belt and what was just knackered pulleys in general)

but I recall @st185cs mentioning in a post on this forum that he has a few hundred Model 70 belts kicking around, as you do! so perhaps you could work something out with him for a few?  

[bobdisk]

21 hours ago, Zelandeth said:

Belt also seems happy enough.  The manual states very clearly that cracking between the teeth on the belt will happen early during its life and shouldn't be considered a sign of impending failure, so I'm not worried about that.

It's really noticeable that before the pulleys were replaced that this whole area used to get covered in finely atomised belt material during any run.  No noticeable deposits anywhere since last time I was in here though so that behaviour seems to have been purely down to surface corrosion on the old secondary pulley.

Looks like my new Daf belts. They have never been used, but I suspected the cracking was due to age. Will post a pic after a few miles to see if they have changed (When its back on the road in a few weeks)

[Zelandeth]

The important things for the belts are the taper angle and width. The taper is the most critical as while it might require a bit of trial and error, it should be possible to mitigate slight width differences by tweaking the distance between the pulleys (a bit of math could probably figure out how much change would be needed).

I've got two or three spare belts here so it's not something of immediate concern, just would be nice to know that it's possible to switch to a modern one in the future if supply of the original ones becomes an issue. 

The impression I'm getting is that they're actually pretty resilient to the passage of time so it hopefully won't be too massive a headache.

[somewhatfoolish]

In extremis, it should be possible to create a trimming tool/jig that could create the right taper and width if a belt of the right length but too wide is available; ultimately that's how the maker gets the belt profile in the first instance.

[Zelandeth]

Finally got around to getting something done today which had been bugging me since the day that TPA first started rolling again.

They're pretty cheap and nasty but will do the job just fine.  It's not as though I'm going to be commuting daily in the dark.  Hopefully somewhere down the line I'll come across a better quality more in-period set of 7" H4 headlights.  They certainly look better than the clear ones which I've had in here until now though!

Halfway there...

Done.  Doesn't that look better?

Before I called it done on the offside door I wanted to get one last issue ticked off while I still had the drill and such out - that the upper runner channel (normally held on by several tiny self tapping screws) had pulled out of the door at the front.

I drilled a couple of new holes and secured it with proper bolts with large penny washers behind the panel to better spread the load.  Hopefully that won't cause is any issues in the future.

Then once I'd resecured the seal in a few places I called it good.

That door is still a pig to get closed sometimes and doesn't run properly on the lower runner so I will need to pull the whole lot apart at some point.  I think that the rollers are knackered or seized to the axle they sit on.

While I was fiddling with door seals I resecured the one on the nearside door which had started to peel off yet again.  I've given up on gluing these in now after the third or fourth time and have just screwed it to the frame.  Yes, I know that's not how the did it at the factory...but I'm sick of having to clean everything off and try a different type of adhesive every two months...and Sikaflex seems like overkill which is about the only thing I can think of I've not tried yet!

I do have a full set of new door seals for this car which I'll probably get fitted soon as these are a bit dog eared in places.  It's a pretty low priority though.

I checked the oil level in both the diff and the gearbox and despite the visible leak they were both still showing as spot on.  Before I went to put the service hatch back in through I wanted to make an improvement to the fittings for that.

Originally this was secured by moderately large self tapping screws which screwed into spring clips behind the panel - all but two of these had dissolved in my case and required me to drill them out to get the panel off.  Trying to get the screws into the bottom two holes is also nigh on impossible given that I can't just pull the back of the seat off with two bolts because I'm not using the original seat.  Even having replaced the spring clips in there I've found that the screws tend to loosen themselves off over time as well.

My solution was to stick a bolt through from the back side, sandwiching the bulkhead panel between two big washers, essentially giving me studs attached to the bulkhead which I can then bolt the cover down onto.

This is the first time that I've ever actually had this really solidly secured in place I think.  It made getting the thing in way, way easier as it just slotted onto the bolts rather than having to spend forever trying to wriggle it around until all the holes line up and I can get the screws in.  I'll be curious to see if this has had any impact on the noise level in the cabin.

Just need to finish tidying up tomorrow and then we should be able to get her out and about again.

[LightBulbFun]

very cool stuff

it will be interesting to see how the more period looking H4 halogen head lamps compare to the not correct looking but work very well set  

do agree tho the Ring set do Look much better  hopefully they still work satisfactorily!  

25 minutes ago, Zelandeth said:

That door is still a pig to get closed sometimes and doesn't run properly on the lower runner so I will need to pull the whole lot apart at some point.  I think that the rollers are knackered or seized to the axle they sit on.

yeah sadly if the whole lot aint greased from time to time, the bobbin rollers can jam which exacerbates the issue as a groove gets worn into them because they aint rolling freely

so thats the first thing id check if it helps  

[dollywobbler]

Can confirm that the slightest gap around that cover makes a massive difference to noise levels. I once went for a drive without it at all. That was a mistake! 

[Zelandeth]

7 hours ago, dollywobbler said:

Can confirm that the slightest gap around that cover makes a massive difference to noise levels. I once went for a drive without it at all. That was a mistake! 

Having it securely bolted in place all the way round with a thick foam gasket seems to have reduced the number of squeaks and rattles from behind me by about 90%...just the doors now that make a racket on poor surfaces really.

[Zelandeth]

Really wishing I'd set the camera up today...TPA has been very much confusing other road users.  Not least the bus full of people we just overtook going up a hill.

Wanted to do a test to see how she would hold speed on a gradient. Lowest recorded speed on the A421 on the hill heading out of MK towards Bedford was 56mph from hitting it at 60, which I'm absolutely happy with.

She's done 40 or so miles all over MK today under all types of driving conditions and I can't fault her at all. 

Being absolutely honest I'm really surprised how capable a car she seems to be given the reputation these vehicles have. 

Here are a couple of updated "profile" shots with the new lights and engine cover fasteners on, and after I gave the interior a clean today.

 

The one thing I really wanted to check after a period of really hard high speed work was to see what the oil temperature was doing.  I'd made a point of painting the bottom of the oil pickup strainer Matt black so I could get a good reading with an IR thermometer.

That's absolutely perfectly reasonable I think.  Looking at the gauge I'd fitted that's about 1/3 on the scale.  I'd deliberately been working the car hard before jumping out to get this reading.  I'm not massively surprised by this given the ample size of the oil cooler but it's nice to have confirmed.

[LightBulbFun]

1 hour ago, Zelandeth said:

Really wishing I'd set the camera up today...TPA has been very much confusing other road users.  Not least the bus full of people we just overtook going up a hill.

Wanted to do a test to see how she would hold speed on a gradient. Lowest recorded speed on the A421 on the hill heading out of MK towards Bedford was 56mph from hitting it at 60, which I'm absolutely happy with.

She's done 40 or so miles all over MK today under all types of driving conditions and I can't fault her at all. 

very happy to hear TPA is continuing to run well and break peoples minds  

 

1 hour ago, Zelandeth said:

I Love shots of Model 70's from these sort of angles the way they are good at hiding the front wheel it makes it look like the front end is hovering/floating off the ground

1 hour ago, Zelandeth said:

Being absolutely honest I'm really surprised how capable a car she seems to be given the reputation these vehicles have. 

I think the biggest issue, is people are "colour blind" when it comes to these vehicles, they see all the different types, as one singular vehicle, just an "invacar"

so the Model 70 unfairly gets tarred with the same brush from all the other types

just recently for example I noticed in your Retro rides thread someone talked about cleaning up after one involved in a RTA, where he clearly said "because it only had 1 door" well thats clearly not a Model 70 then is it!

and its not helped by the fact a lot of people have never actually driven or experienced a Model 70 first hand, and people just slag them off with no real basis to it,

and finally also not helped with how people where jut brought up and in general where sadly not very nice to disabled people in general, see all the not very nice names these vehicles where called by kids and grownups alike back in the 70s and 80s etc

so a lot of people just cant/refuse to look these objectively as "an car" sadly

 

 

it is really interesting to see how much better TPA performs compared to TWC, I do have to wonder if TPA (and by extension her engine now fitted to TWC) has actually gone round the clock, especially given the oil leaks TWC (ex TPA)'s engine is now experiencing as well as clearly being down on power

(I have seen a couple Model 70's showing 90K on the clock! ) 

[Zelandeth]

I don't think so.  There's no real serious wear apparent on any of the braking or suspension components which would have suggested high miles (obviously no idea if the brake drums are original to the car or not!), and the windscreen is crystal clear - a frosted windscreen is usually a tell of a high mileage car unless it's been replaced too.

The difference between before and after the most recent carb service is huge - performance seemed much more similar to what I kind of associate with TWC before that.  She'd do 60 if asked, but it felt like you were definitely having to try, and were starting to run out of steam by then.  Whereas now she'll quite happily cruise at 60 on the level at what feels like 30-40% throttle with plenty of reserve to allow speed to be maintained on mild gradients.  She still takes a while to wind up to it, but you expect that.  Heck...most normal family cars in 1973 took a while to wind up to 60.  Still reckon she gets there well quicker than the van!  I should time it one day just for giggles.

The other thing I've noticed since the carb work - she doesn't sneeze anywhere near as often.  She seems to do it almost without fail the first time I go to apply throttle better backing out the drive for the first trip of the day (so I'm probably just being a bit premature opening the choke back up), but I don't think I've been aware of it happening while actually driving on a single occasion since I last looked at the carb.

I know the jets were all spotlessly clean when it was originally cleaned, but there must still have been a restriction somewhere, purely based on the difference in behaviour now.

It wouldn't surprise me based on this if TWC's carb isn't in tip top shape.  Plus she has *always* sounded like she's idling on one cylinder so I reckon she's got deeper mechanical issues in the engine.  Mileage aside you never know what's in the history of an engine.  These don't hold much oil, and we all know how critical oil quality and quantity is for cooling on air cooled engines.  Wouldn't be at all a stretch to imagine a non mechanically oriented user running her out of oil - especially if there's a leak!

In fairness to a lot of folks, to the untrained eye the various models of invalid carriage do look very similar.  Plus they were pretty much just part of the on street scenery rather than something they'd ever really think about.  Adding to that the fact that with the exception of a tiny number of people, nobody's going to have seen one in any form in the wild in at least 17 years.

A lot of the criticisms do still hold true though.  While the Model 70 is an incredibly capable vehicle when looked at compared to the scope it was designed for especially given WHEN it was designed, and is great fun as a car enthusiast to buzz around in, it does still have several glaring issues, totally discounting the social aspect.  Safety is an obvious one, compared to even a basic car from the 80s it's laughable.  If someone hits you at speed it's in the hands of the gods as to whether you get out of it.  Fibreglass is fantastically good at absorbing energy, but if someone hits you especially from the side you're in trouble.  The directional stability on an even vaguely breezy day is "interesting" to say the least.  While they corner well for a three wheeler in this layout it's still entirely possible to get yourself into trouble if you don't use a bit of common sense, the very, very direct link between the handlebars and the steering make that far more possible as it's essentially possible to turn the steering from lock to lock instantly...you can't do that with a steering wheel.  Security is basically non existent.  The heating and ventilation is basically a joke and seems to exist purely so they could tick a box on the spec sheet to say it has a heater.  The weatherproofing isn't much better.  The lack of a proper luggage compartment is irritating even for how I'm using the car now (thank goodness my driver's seat has a map pocket!).  Rear visibility is poor at best, reversing I invariably find requires me to remove the seatbelt and swivel my entire body through about 90 degrees to have any hope of actually being able to see where I'm going.  Then there's the noise levels anywhere above walking pace. 

Don't get me wrong, I love the little buzz box and especially now having seen how well she can drive when running properly can't see me ever selling her.  However if I was relying on this as my sole means of transportation in the mid 80s if I had serious enough mobility issues to be getting DLA, and I had to choose between a Model 70 or something like a Metro, Mini, Nova, Fiesta or even a 2CV (yes I know, no full automatic version there)...In all honesty the Model 70 wouldn't have got a second glance. 

I've had a healthy early Metro.  The weather all stays outside, the windows demist when I tell them to, it came with halogen headlights, it had a radio, four seats, a decent heater (seriously, I never struggled with warmth even in the depths of an Aberdeenshire Winter), inertia reel seatbelts, a proper boot, glove compartment etc...

The Model 70 compares *very* favourably to pretty much any microcar I've been in or driven (so Trojan, Mechersmitt (I've probably horribly misspelled that), Isetta and a variant on the Bond one with the swivelling engine...I was five though) from the period around when it was designed.  A lot of that probably is down to it being built to a standard rather than a cost like pretty much all microcars were (that's kinda their point!), but it still compares poorly to even the most basic small hatchback from even ten years later in most quantifiable ways if you're looking at things from a purely commonsense approach.

Yes it's a lot quicker than it looks, yes it handles well for a three wheeler, yes it's fun, and yes they were infinitely adaptable to different disabilities.  As a main car though they still struggle to tick many boxes.

Are they as bad as even half the rumours suggest though?  Absolutely not...if they were it would have been like the day I had a shot of the Isetta.  I'd enjoy my trundle around the country lanes and getting to drive something different, but be very glad to hand the keys back to the owner after an hour, with no desire to actually use the vehicle beyond trundling to the odd car show and maybe the odd bumble a few miles down to my local shop on a quiet sunny Sunday afternoon.  I definitely wouldn't have been rubbing shoulders with rush hour traffic in Milton Keynes without a second thought in it.

I still think more people need to experience actually driving one though to realise how well they can actually drive and how much fun can honestly be had driving one *if* it's the sort of car you can enjoy.  Especially once you start to get used to the slightly surreal driving experience.

[LightBulbFun]

3 hours ago, Zelandeth said:

I don't think so.  There's no real serious wear apparent on any of the braking or suspension components which would have suggested high miles (obviously no idea if the brake drums are original to the car or not!), and the windscreen is crystal clear - a frosted windscreen is usually a tell of a high mileage car unless it's been replaced too.

if its Triplex screen (which I think it is, I know all the other windows on a Model 70 are) then there should be some dots/dashes around the Triplex name, exactly like the date code on on a fluorescent tube  

I cant recall how to decode Triplex codes but I know a couple other members might  

3 hours ago, Zelandeth said:

It wouldn't surprise me based on this if TWC's carb isn't in tip top shape. 

yeah I have often wondered how TWC's carb would respond to a good ultrasonic cleaning as I dont @dollywobbler has done one yet, would make for a very interesting video  

(tis something I want to do/have done on REV's carb at some point  )

 

3 hours ago, Zelandeth said:

A lot of the criticisms do still hold true though.  While the Model 70 is an incredibly capable vehicle when looked at compared to the scope it was designed for especially given WHEN it was designed, and is great fun as a car enthusiast to buzz around in, it does still have several glaring issues, totally discounting the social aspect.  Safety is an obvious one, compared to even a basic car from the 80s it's laughable.  If someone hits you at speed it's in the hands of the gods as to whether you get out of it.  Fibreglass is fantastically good at absorbing energy, but if someone hits you especially from the side you're in trouble.  The directional stability on an even vaguely breezy day is "interesting" to say the least.  While they corner well for a three wheeler in this layout it's still entirely possible to get yourself into trouble if you don't use a bit of common sense, the very, very direct link between the handlebars and the steering make that far more possible as it's essentially possible to turn the steering from lock to lock instantly...you can't do that with a steering wheel.  Security is basically non existent.  The heating and ventilation is basically a joke and seems to exist purely so they could tick a box on the spec sheet to say it has a heater.  The weatherproofing isn't much better.  The lack of a proper luggage compartment is irritating even for how I'm using the car now (thank goodness my driver's seat has a map pocket!).  Rear visibility is poor at best, reversing I invariably find requires me to remove the seatbelt and swivel my entire body through about 90 degrees to have any hope of actually being able to see where I'm going.  Then there's the noise levels anywhere above walking pace. 

Don't get me wrong, I love the little buzz box and especially now having seen how well she can drive when running properly can't see me ever selling her.  However if I was relying on this as my sole means of transportation in the mid 80s if I had serious enough mobility issues to be getting DLA, and I had to choose between a Model 70 or something like a Metro, Mini, Nova, Fiesta or even a 2CV (yes I know, no full automatic version there)...In all honesty the Model 70 wouldn't have got a second glance. 

I've had a healthy early Metro.  The weather all stays outside, the windows demist when I tell them to, it came with halogen headlights, it had a radio, four seats, a decent heater (seriously, I never struggled with warmth even in the depths of an Aberdeenshire Winter), inertia reel seatbelts, a proper boot, glove compartment etc...

The Model 70 compares *very* favourably to pretty much any microcar I've been in or driven (so Trojan, Mechersmitt (I've probably horribly misspelled that), Isetta and a variant on the Bond one with the swivelling engine...I was five though) from the period around when it was designed.  A lot of that probably is down to it being built to a standard rather than a cost like pretty much all microcars were (that's kinda their point!), but it still compares poorly to even the most basic small hatchback from even ten years later in most quantifiable ways if you're looking at things from a purely commonsense approach.

 

Ill agree with most of the criticisms to varying degrees, 

 

but I will make a counter argument (and waring this turns into a bit of a general Ramble!)

 

"compared to later cars it does not hold up as well" is true of any car, a Metro is going to have better amenities then a Mini for example and its worth noting that by the Mid 80's the IVS had long since closed to new applicants, the last New Model 70's being issued to "regular" folk in 1978*, so by the mid 80s you couldn't get a Model 70 even if you wanted one*

(* the Model 70 did remain an option to war pensioners up until 1983, although it was not thought anyone went for one that late, until I discovered the Last Model 70 issued, CXI936 in Northern ireland  ) 

*unless your Dennis webb the 2nd Owner of REV,  (remember one of the few Model 70's sold privately when new so not under government control)  who bought REV from her first owner to replace his fiat mirafiori in 1985!  (as the Model 70 was easier for him to get in and out of than the Fiat)

 

and the government originally wanted to get rid of all Invalid vehicles by 1981 (and presumably punt everyone to the recently introduced mobility allowance and  motability scheme) but the silent majority suddenly let out a cry and existing users where allowed to continue using their machines if they so wanted to and many willingly chose to do so, with the government only finally putting their foot down in the late 1990s and announcing they would withdraw all remaining machines by the 31st of March 2003 (although in actual fact it was only until the 14th of October 2004 was the Last government Model 70 withdrawn TJN352R "belonging" to Marion Webb) 

 

anyone still using an Invacar in 1985 was mostly doing so out of their own free will, despite there being other options available to them

(it is also worth mentioning that even in the 1960s and 1970's the DHSS did also issue specially adapted Morris Minors and later Minis, especially to married couples and the such like)

 

and I do wonder especially on stuff like weather proofing, how much of that is a problem because poor TPA was left to rot in a field for 16 years (her tax running out in November 2001)

and in general a lack of/poor maintenance, I remember you mentioning a worrying lack of fuel hose clips (on KPL), but the workshop manual clearly states they should be there, so the fact they are missing if the fault or whichever person last worked on it, and not a fault of the car

and poor maintenance/abandonment will adversely effect any car, you leave a Metro in a damp field for 16 years and I doubt it would do any better (there would be a lot more rust for a start!)

it would be very interesting to know how a new Model 70 performed, without 40 to 50 years! worth of wear and tear but sadly I dont have TARDIS

 

on the Model 70 handling front, although as you say they do have very direct steering, from what I have been told, you have to really try to upturn a Model 70, because the parallelogram front suspension will force the handle bars/steering back into a neutral forward/straight position, and also a Model 70 would break traction before it grip rolled, but ill let someone else verify those claims!

(unless you hit a bump and dig into soft grass as I found out the hard way *ahem* )

 

 

so I do think the criticisms should be looked in context (like how did the Model 70 compare to other 1970's cars) so to speak but sadly they rarely are,

 

3 hours ago, Zelandeth said:

Are they as bad as even half the rumours suggest though?  Absolutely not...i

and therein lies my gripe, no one seems to get this!

 

im not saying the Model 70 is perfect, far from it

but the big problem is people will read and spread the criticism, but for whatever reason will just refuse to listen to any sort of positive argument you try to make for them and you just get laughed at if you try to

and you also have to keep in mind, the Model 70 was built to a specific set of specifications to a specific job it was designed as an appliance like a wheel chair or artificial limb, to help the disabled get mobile to help get them from point A to point B, it wasn't designed to be a regular car 

and it feels a bit like if someone criticised an MX5/MGB at being a crap estate car, it was never built to be/as an estate car in the first place LOL while completely ignoring the amazing little sports car it is, if that makes sense!

the fact the Model 70 is as usable as a regular car  as it is in todays world  , is pretty amazing, but people dont see it like that sadly

 

as an interesting side note there is still somewhat of a void left by the Model 70, in that todays vehicles are regular cars adapted to someones disabilities, I dont think there are any cars these days (apart from Mobility scooters?) that where built from the ground up and designed specifically for the disabled and to be as accessible to them as possible 

if you only had 1 arm and no legs, the Model 70 could easily cater to that limitation, but I dont know if theres any  other car from after the Model 70 you could drive with just 1 arm and no other limbs like that for example?

 

 

the TL;DR is

no I dont think the Model 70 is perfect far from it

but I do feel like its positives are brushed aside/ignored far too much be people

and that makes me sad

[Slowsilver]

8 minutes ago, LightBulbFun said:

if its Triplex screen (which I think it is, I know all the other windows on a Model 70 are) then there should be some dots/dashes around the Triplex name, exactly like the data code on on a fluorescent tube  
I cant recall how to decode Triplex codes but I know a couple other members might  

Don't know about laminated screens but the Triplex toughened glass windscreens were date coded with a dot under one of the letters of the word "TOUGHENED". Only 9 letters so no dot = 19x0, dot under the 'T' = 19x1, dot under the 'O' = 19x2, ... , dot under the 'D' = 19x9.
 

[Zelandeth]

I think the biggest thing to keep in mind regarding the handling is that it behaves quite differently to a "normal" car, especially if you're braking hard mid corner - like when that fox decided to leg it across the road in front of me last week halfway around a roundabout.  A bit like the rear engined Skodas.  Are they inherently dangerous?  No.  Do you need to keep your wits about you and keep in mind that they behave a bit differently to most cars, especially on a wet road?  Yes.  Especially if you realise you've got in a bit over your head...If you lift off the throttle which is the thing you instinctively will want to do, you're going to be heading backwards through the nearest hedge quicker than you can say "Oh Sh..."

The weatherproofing issues I'm mostly referring to are inherent to the design rather than the ravages of time.  I'm not counting things like shrunk windscreen seals, decomposed window runner felts.  There was never any seal between the door tops and the window runner, so you'll have been able to see daylight through there from day one.

My comparisons to small cars of the day were very much intended for comparisons when all the vehicles in question were new...A Metro that had been sitting in that field TWC and TPA came out of would have dissolved beyond all redemption after a quarter of the time these cars were there!  Likewise pretty much any car I can think of to be honest!  Of course I'd got the dates totally around my neck, it had totally escaped my brain that the scheme had closed to new applicants essentially in 1978.  This is exactly the sort of thing that I need to get straight in my head before I start getting TPA's page on my website written.

Given the fact that they were a vehicle made to a spec primarily centred around catering for people with disabilities, and really aimed at bumbling a couple of miles across town to a shop and back it's absolutely astonishing that they drive even half as well as they do.  It really does show how much work AC put into the design...

[Zelandeth]

Nothing much to report today, other than noting that  trying to pull away using anything more than about 3% throttle on the Jag while the roads are wet and greasy like they were today pretty much inevitably results in it trying to slide around.  I'm really looking forward to getting new tyres on it.

I had reason to look back at some of my historic photos of TPA earlier today...and realised that it's easy to forget how far she has come.

June 2018:

Aug 2020:

 

 

There are definitely bits of the bodywork I want to revisit in the future, but she's definitely come a long way...

[Zelandeth]

Continuing the theme of me turning up with the most unusual thing in the car park...

Had the smug satisfaction this afternoon of making use of how narrow the Invacar is when I found two cars both encroaching on the space between them - yet still had plenty of space to be able to slot into the gap.  I'd forgotten how satisfying doing that is.  It used to be a favourite pastime when I had the Cappuccino.

About 30 seconds after that photo was taken I learned something that Dollywobbler already knows: Hail in an Invacar is LOUD.

We had one of the most biblical downpours I've seen down here descend on Newport Pagnell just as I was leaving that carpark.

As the spray bouncing off the road was enough to render viability basically zero I pulled over and just waited for the worst to pass.

Once things died down to a sensible level and the surface water had receeded to the point where I could see the road again we continued.

Despite a few folks having cautioned me on how poor these tyres are I didn't notice any issues today even when dealing with quite heavy surface water.  Definitely was using caution though as I knew with so little weight on the front it wouldn't take much at all to cause aquaplaning.

The novelty of looking in the rear view mirror and seeing three rather than two clear bands of road behind you on a wet surface will take a while to wear off.

The weatherproofing is definitely massively improved over when I got the car but still needs work.  Some water is still finding a way in around the nearside of the windscreen (though at least far enough over to clear my knees now) and I will obviously need to put some rubber washers under the bolts holding the window runner channel down as it drips into the door cavity along the bolts themselves.  Overall though given the absolutely torrential level of the downpour it wasn't bad at all.  The windscreen leak is the one which needs the most urgently sorting though as it has the potential to drip into my shoes.