invacar LightBulbFun's Invacar & general ramble thread, index on page 1, survivors lists on Pages 24/134 & AdgeCutler's Invacar Mk12 Restoration from Page 186 onwards, still harping on...

[Eyersey1234]

@LightBulbFun this cropped up on my faceache feed, thought it might interest you 

[wuvvum]

That top one looks like a back to front Invacar.

[Eyersey1234]

1 hour ago, wuvvum said:

That top one looks like a back to front Invacar.

That's why I thought it would interest @LightBulbFun

[LightBulbFun]

1 hour ago, wuvvum said:

That top one looks like a back to front Invacar.

 

12 minutes ago, Eyersey1234 said:

That's why I thought it would interest @LightBulbFun

to be fair Frisky kind of Ripped off the Stanley Harper Mk6! (which predates the Frisky)

On 11/11/2019 at 19:52, LightBulbFun said:

On 11/11/2019 at 10:11, Three Speed said:

Stanley (Harper) called, said it wants its rear end back!

 

 

[somewhatfoolish]

Is that a Model 67 I see before me? Here.

[LightBulbFun]

5 minutes ago, somewhatfoolish said:

Is that a Model 67 I see before me? Here.

indeed it is, nice spot not one i have seen before  

[Mrcento]

On 1/17/2021 at 12:53 PM, LightBulbFun said:

I've nothing of value to add to this thread bar saying this is pretty much 5 minutes walk  from my house 😂

[Eyersey1234]

3 hours ago, LightBulbFun said:

indeed it is, nice spot not one i have seen before  

Bloody hell  @somewhatfoolish you have found an Invacar picture that @LightBulbFunhasn't seen, I'm in shock now 🤣

[somewhatfoolish]

Looking at the pic again further along the street toward the photographer there's this, which is mildly amusing given your other hobby.  

 

[Eyersey1234]

2 hours ago, somewhatfoolish said:

Looking at the pic again further along the street toward the photographer there's this, which is mildly amusing given your other hobby.  

 

I'm surprised @LightBulbFundidn't pick up on it lol

[LightBulbFun]

for @barrett a pitch-side Vernon invalid car

(which is clearly a colourised Black and white photo because Vernon's are not blue!)

and for @quicksilver 

On 01/08/2020 at 21:04, quicksilver said:

XDU 995 was issued in the first half of 1959 according to https://www.oldclassiccar.co.uk/registrations/reg-letters.htm so your dating is pretty good. A battleship grey Delta sounds awful, an ugly car in a horrible colour that looks like primer, but I wonder what a BRG one would be like. The standard model must have been really basic given the 'luxuries' you got for your extra tenner on the Deluxe.

a Battleship grey Tippen Delta!

 

also someone needs to check the alignment of the printer at the DVLA LOL

[Jon]

In order to make up for the major faux-pas of late, which saw me nary a side glance from locating the chassis number of the NZ-based red Tippen Delta, serendipity took place today, as I leafed through an old mag, whilst transferring them from my house to my garage (I now have a very full, very immovable wardrobe, stacked 2 layers deep over 5 shelves of the buggers!). 

Here is the only magazine which caused me to drop my productivity streak - I've no idea why I chose to flick through it:

 

And here's one of those light hearted 'in world news' car stories that magazines liked to do back in the day:

Apologies for the terrible photo quality, which is both a result of my ill-performing phone camera and 47 year old print. However, I make out the plate to be MPL x29L, which may or may not be helpful. Seems it was a relatively new car at the time, with the publishing date being late '74. 

Anyway, hopefully this is one you haven't seen before but regardless, it might be of interest to see how far the news event travelled back in the day!

 

[LightBulbFun]

57 minutes ago, Jon said:

In order to make up for the major faux-pas of late, which saw me nary a side glance from locating the chassis number of the NZ-based red Tippen Delta, serendipity took place today, as I leafed through an old mag, whilst transferring them from my house to my garage (I now have a very full, very immovable wardrobe, stacked 2 layers deep over 5 shelves of the buggers!). 

Here is the only magazine which caused me to drop my productivity streak - I've no idea why I chose to flick through it:

 

And here's one of those light hearted 'in world news' car stories that magazines liked to do back in the day:

Apologies for the terrible photo quality, which is both a result of my ill-performing phone camera and 47 year old print. However, I make out the plate to be MPL x29L, which may or may not be helpful. Seems it was a relatively new car at the time, with the publishing date being late '74. 

Anyway, hopefully this is one you haven't seen before but regardless, it might be of interest to see how far the news event travelled back in the day!

 

neat find! poor Model 70 tho! its what happens when you dont feed them well enough they start chewing on random street furniture *om nom nom nom*

indeed its either MPL329L or MPL429L (part of the MPL251L-MPL450L block of Model 70's) 

its a block I have know about for a while, but that photo is not one iv seen before so thats new  and its another good example of how Model 70's stuck with white on black plates until they where forced onto retroreflective plates by the law

also some old traffic light porn for @Tadhg Tiogar

 

its interesting to see how the fibreglass is damaged if you look at the head lamp missing a trim ring it looks like an outer layer has flaked off, guessing that was the gel coat?

 

thanks for sharing it  always happy and very thankful to know people are still on the look out for me 

[somewhatfoolish]

11 hours ago, LightBulbFun said:

its interesting to see how the fibreglass is damaged if you look at the head lamp missing a trim ring it looks like an outer layer has flaked off, guessing that was the gel coat?

 

It's exactly where you'd expect the GRP to fail in a collision; at a discontinuity with difficult to mould features resulting in poor wet-up or air gaps and/or holes(a corner populated with holes for lights and a moulded in 'bumper').

[quicksilver]

On 2/6/2021 at 6:22 PM, LightBulbFun said:

 

and for @quicksilver 

a Battleship grey Tippen Delta!

 

 

OK the quality isn't great but that actually isn't as unpleasant as I thought it would be. It kind of looks like one of those miniature one-man submarines but fitted with wheels.

[LightBulbFun]

1 minute ago, quicksilver said:

OK the quality isn't great but that actually isn't as unpleasant as I thought it would be. It kind of looks like one of those miniature one-man submarines but fitted with wheels.

haha  I found it amusing because not only is it Battleship grey, but its Tippen Delta 1 so you only got 1 headlamp which does it no favours LOL

(the Tippen Delta 2 was also a single headlamp machine but gained steel wheels, the Delta 1 being on wire wheels still, then finally with the Delta 3 you got 2 head lamps, the luxury!) 

[Mrs6C]

Changed a bit since then... Princess Way is now pedestrianised behind the camera and the TSB is now a tattoo parlour... no Model 70 now but still some traffic lights!

[Eyersey1234]

15 hours ago, LightBulbFun said:

haha  I found it amusing because not only is it Battleship grey, but its Tippen Delta 1 so you only got 1 headlamp which does it no favours LOL

(the Tippen Delta 2 was also a single headlamp machine but gained steel wheels, the Delta 1 being on wire wheels still, then finally with the Delta 3 you got 2 head lamps, the luxury!) 

Bloody hell they have pushed the boat out with 2 headlamps 😂

[Mr Pastry]

On 2/9/2021 at 1:19 AM, Jon said:

In order to make up for the major faux-pas of late, which saw me nary a side glance from locating the chassis number of the NZ-based red Tippen Delta, serendipity took place today, as I leafed through an old mag, whilst transferring them from my house to my garage (I now have a very full, very immovable wardrobe, stacked 2 layers deep over 5 shelves of the buggers!). 

Here is the only magazine which caused me to drop my productivity streak - I've no idea why I chose to flick through it:

 

And here's one of those light hearted 'in world news' car stories that magazines liked to do back in the day:

Apologies for the terrible photo quality, which is both a result of my ill-performing phone camera and 47 year old print. However, I make out the plate to be MPL x29L, which may or may not be helpful. Seems it was a relatively new car at the time, with the publishing date being late '74. 

Anyway, hopefully this is one you haven't seen before but regardless, it might be of interest to see how far the news event travelled back in the day!

 

It seems to me that the fuel tank and everything else in the front compartment is very vulnerable.  How difficult would it be to add a crossmember inside the front body to give a bit more protection?   There is probably not much space but a piece of, say, 2" tube or 2 x 2 channel, bent to the inside profile of the body moulding with brackets back to the chassis would make a lot of difference, and it would not need to be heavy gauge.  It would be nice to be able to drive away after such a relatively minor bump.

[quicksilver]

14 minutes ago, Mr Pastry said:

It seems to me that the fuel tank and everything else in the front compartment is very vulnerable.  How difficult would it be to add a crossmember immediately behind the bumper to give a bit more protection?   There is probably not much space but a piece of, say, 2" tube or 2 x 2 channel, bent to the inside profile of the body moulding with brackets back to the chassis would make a lot of difference, and it would not need to be heavy gauge.  It would be nice to be able to drive away after such a relatively minor bump.

The lack of any impact protection is one of the things that surprised me about the Model 70. It doesn't even have bumpers, just moulded sections of the fibreglass panels that crack very easily so the repairers must have spent an awful lot of time patching up cracked GRP after minor shunts. Was it a callous line of thinking ("the drivers are already disabled so what's the worst that can happen?") or simply an unintentionally bad design? Why wasn't there a recall program to fit bumpers as someone must surely have realised that would be cheaper than constantly patching up every little bump?

[Mr Pastry]

1 hour ago, quicksilver said:

The lack of any impact protection is one of the things that surprised me about the Model 70. It doesn't even have bumpers, just moulded sections of the fibreglass panels that crack very easily so the repairers must have spent an awful lot of time patching up cracked GRP after minor shunts. Was it a callous line of thinking ("the drivers are already disabled so what's the worst that can happen?") or simply an unintentionally bad design? Why wasn't there a recall program to fit bumpers as someone must surely have realised that would be cheaper than constantly patching up every little bump?

A lot of unanswered questions about these machines.

 I'm inclined to think an unintentionally bad design - basically evolved from a powered wheelchair, AC would have been told what to do by the Ministry, who may not have got it quite right,  crashworthiness wasn't such a big thing in the 1960s as it is now, and fibreglass was sometimes seen as a miracle material which would absorb impacts, and so on.  So a combination of factors.  Of course a thicker layup would have helped, but there would be a weight penalty.

I was trying to think what could be done to improve matters for modern conditions.

[plasticvandan]

Reliant were no different,it's all down to keeping them under the weight limit

[LightBulbFun]

3 hours ago, quicksilver said:

he lack of any impact protection is one of the things that surprised me about the Model 70. It doesn't even have bumpers,

The Model 70 does have 2 big chassis out riggers that I know do provide some impact protection in the event of a frontal crash

3 hours ago, Mr Pastry said:

How difficult would it be to add a crossmember inside the front body to give a bit more protection?   There is probably not much space but a piece of, say, 2" tube or 2 x 2 channel, bent to the inside profile of the body moulding with brackets back to the chassis would make a lot of difference,

Yeah im surprised a horizontal member behind the front bumper linking the 2 front chassis out riggers together was never installed, seems like a fairly obvious one, so I do have their reasons for not including one

although im not sure the lack of an actual separate bumper was such a problem you make out, for example most reliant dont have any either, and I dont see those with chunks missing out the front!

1 hour ago, Mr Pastry said:

Of course a thicker layup would have helped, but there would be a weight penalty.

I do believe Model 70's indeed had a much thicker layup compared to the Model 67, although I have sadly not been able to make a direct comparison myself so on that im just going by the world given to me by people who have dealt with both types

(keep in mind the Model 70 was a heavy bastard for what it was, so I doubt a bit of extra fibreglass etc would have mattered much)

 

it is worth mentioning tho that the Model 70 was tested and crash tested quite a lot for a 1970's car, due to the scrutiny the whole invalid vehicle scheme was going under at the time

and a number of improvements where made by studying the crash results, for example improved fuel tank mounting to prevent the fuel tank from being ripped apart in a front end collision was made

which was also retrofitted to existing Model 70s, and further crash safety measures was built into to Model 70's going forward with the Model 70 Mark B (and then improvements again with Post March 1976 Model 70's)

for example improvements where made to prevent the engine from entering the cabin in the event of an accident and I also believe improvements where made with regards to how far the controls entered the cabin in the event of an an accident

and in later Model 70's even a rollover bar to protect the occupants in a rollover crash was added

which is better then what most other 1970's cars had!

 

by no means am I saying the Model 70 is a safe vehicle by modern standards but it was a darn sight better then what most people think and indeed better then a lot of other cars of the same time in some aspects!

(you could say you even got a permeative front crumple zone in the form of the collapsable front mud guard LOL)

[dollywobbler]

5 hours ago, plasticvandan said:

Reliant were no different,it's all down to keeping them under the weight limit

Though the Reliant chassis does at least have that big crossbar ahead of the engine. The Invacar has a fuel tank and a brake master cylinder! There is no metal going across the front of the car until you get behind the front wheel. I try not to think about it...

[plasticvandan]

The reliant also has steel reinforcement tubes around the screen and door posts,and access and along the roof.certainly when I double rolled my last one there was no obvious omg he must be dead to look at it,even all the doors still opened and shut.And as you say the footwells and cabin are within the chassis frame. The model 70 was crash tested by Mira following the Graham hill lobby period,but the dhss refused to publish the results.rosetinted viewing aside,I would not want a head-on in one. But then I wouldn't in any car really!

[dollywobbler]

12 minutes ago, plasticvandan said:

The model 70 was crash tested by Mira 

That cannot have been pretty! There are times when I'm bombing around a 60mph where I do question my sanity. But then I've been driving 2CVs since I was 18, so I guess I feel like I'm on first name terms with death already.

[LightBulbFun]

49 minutes ago, plasticvandan said:

The model 70 was crash tested by Mira following the Graham hill lobby period,but the dhss refused to publish the results.

as I mentioned before you can find bits and pieces of the report in old parliamentary reports, it makes for a really interesting read

for example this one https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/written-answers/1975/oct/20/invalid-vehicles#column_49w

mentions how they experimented with adding additional padding, but it just made things worse for Bicycle steering wheel machines apparently

 

and the reason it was never published, was nothing to do with the DHSS or such, but because it included comparisons and tests with other contemporary cars and the MIRA was not allowed to publish the report because of those other cars and the confidentiality agreement MIRA had with the manufacturers of those cars

 

I guess whoever did not want their car to be compared to or shown performing worse then a Model 70!

and as I have also mentioned before when this topic last came up

 

as a side note, I have wondered what vehicle Graham Hill was given, we all Assume it was a Model 70 but since he was a temporary user. I do wonder if he ended up with a loaner Villiers machine or such

which is obviously a different kettle of fish from the Model 70!

[plasticvandan]

Indeed,this adds a bit more detail:

https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/lords/1974/feb/05/disabled-drivers-vehicles

Suspect Mr hill had his in 73 or so.

Do not delude yourself into thinking you would be anything less than severely injured in anything more than a low speed bump.Like them as much as I do from a historical and sentimental standpoint,there was a reason why they were campaigned against so strongly.

[Out Run]

Model 70 equals tank.

All other vehicles of the era facing one would be akin to the Fifth Gear Modus Vs 940.

[LightBulbFun]

2 hours ago, plasticvandan said:

Do not delude yourself into thinking you would be anything less than severely injured in anything more than a low speed bump.Like them as much as I do from a historical and sentimental standpoint,there was a reason why they were campaigned against so strongly.

I feel like people miss the point somewhat

im not trying to say that they are as safe as a tank as @Out Run says

 

im just trying to fight the unfair image that Model 70's have that they are somehow the worst road going vehicles out there

like you dont get this sort of talk about other cars from the period, yeah you get the odd death trap comment, but noting like the crap the Model 70 and Invacars generally get

im trying to show that no, they are not some how way worse then any other 1970's car of the same class

and that they did actually try and improve the safety of the Model 70 over time

so when @quicksilver mentioned the surprising lack of impact protection I just figured id mention they did actually test it and made incorporate improvements from the results

thats all!

 

and it really does not help that the Model 70 gets bundled in with all the Villiers machines and tarred with the same brush

for example in @plasticvandan's linked report its clear in a few places the vehicle being talked about is NOT a Model 70, for example they mention the tricycles as only having a single door which obviously is not a Model 70 then since they have 2

for example in the interview with the user its quite clear that she has a Villers machine and not a Model 70