Issigonis, you git.................

[saabhappy]

Good call - but I was really saying that a Ka should perform adequately by the standards of its time, which is all it did and no more, and with precious little fun attached. The Mini performed equally well by the standards of its time up until the 80s, 20+ years after its launch. Comparing the Ka to the Mini is an irrelevance, like comparing a Bentley T2 to an 8 Litre car of the 1920s. I'll love the Mini and ADO 16 for life, and no amount of comparison with modern jellymoulds with ropey old engines will alter that.

[muff1380]

Suppose I'd better hold my hands up - I've been a fan of Minis since I was about 3 (I'm 30 now) when I was given a corgi Mini as a present and at the moment I am currently blighted by 4 of the bloody things ( two off road in storage, one 1380 weekend toy and my daily driver tat box 998 auto ), fortunatly I have never owned a pair of rose tinted glasses and unlike a lot of Mini "enthusiasts" can see their shortcomings. Yes they are akward to work on but on the flipside the parts availability is great and when I can get my fat hands and sausage fingers into the confines of the engine bay things seem pretty simple - I managed to build and install the 1380 with minimal dramas despite never attempting stuff like that before. Despite being the best part of 18 stone and 5'11" tall I can still fit in reasonably confortably - I once drove a 60's Fiat 500 and felt like I was wearing it.But I can see why people don't like them, I don't think the "scene" helps - most of the Mini forums seem full of young lads who are obsessed with massive (for a Mini) 13" wheels, self styled Mini experts who actually seem to know very little and folk who honestly believe that no progress has been made in car handling and packaging in the last 50 years. As for the Ka - I think they're great just like a small cheap car should be, no excess electric stuff, bare metal inside, minimal trim and a simple easy to work on engine. Shame they like rusting, but I see a lot with cover sills on them with a nice bit of underseal up to the weld line just like the old days, makes me feel nostalgic for the days when my cousin bought his first Mk2 Escort - that stunk of tetroseal and the entire passenger side floor was made from a sheet of fibreglass.

[Mr Lobster]

As for the Ka - I think they're great just like a small cheap car should be, no excess electric stuff, bare metal inside, minimal trim and a simple easy to work on engine. Shame they like rusting, but I see a lot with cover sills on them with a nice bit of underseal up to the weld line just like the old days, makes me feel nostalgic for the days when my cousin bought his first Mk2 Escort - that stunk of tetroseal and the entire passenger side floor was made from a sheet of fibreglass.

I like the Ka, shame they didn't put the 1.25 Zetec engine in though as it would have been superb then. Pleasingly basic in a sensible, practical way, cheap to run and pretty good to drive. Do like to rust though and the higher spec versions seemed a bit pointless to me.

[dollywobbler]

Minis are pleasure AND pain. They are truly hateful things to work on, especially when I'm used to the 2CV, where all the panels come off in minutes. Welded-on front wings? No thanks!!The suspension on my wife's Mini is dreadful, but having driven an ERA with Smootharide recently, and a Cooper S spec with hi-los and Spax dampers, the almost-certainly original suspension components are highly likely to be completely knackered. So I'll reserve some judgement.It does hurl more oil on the floor than any of my other cars, by a long way. But the front subframe is not even slightly rusty.The points seem to close up every few hundred miles. This is a pain. Some bits are stupidly cheap. This is good.For short blats, it's truly superb as long as the road is smooth. I'm still amazed at how quickly the thing will go around bends.You can't blame Issy too much - he's certainly not an un-tainted genius as some may claim (all of his designs were compromised by his inability to accept anyone else's input) but he was also hamstrung by BMC/BLs cost-cutting measures. The Mini wasn't meant to have a huge lump of an A series engine and if time had allowed, it would have had Hydrolastic suspension from the start. As for the engine turn-around - I'm not sure that's been decided yet. Was it to prevent carb icing, by moving the carb to a bulkhead location, or was it because the gearing just wasn't working with the engine the other way around?

[Ratdat]

It was down to carb icing IIRC.

[Conrad D. Conelrad]

From the impeccably researched AROnline Mini Development Story:

At this time, the engine was rotated through 180 degrees to face the bulkhead, so that the carburettor was now to the rear of the engine, instead of at the front, where it tended to ice up in cold conditions. According to John Cooper, the real reason why the engine was reversed, however, was that Mini prototypes kept destroying their synchromeshes after about 100 miles. Issigonis was reportedly very upset that this change was required because the car was faster in its original form. Why the engine was rotated, rather than Austin designing a more durable synchomesh can be put down to two factors: time and money - or more correctly, the lack of it. So, carburettor icing was cited as the reason for this reversal of the position of the engine, but the response of John Cooper to this suggestion was that it, 'was a load of bull!'

[Pete-M]

I have had three minis, my first was my first car I terrorised the highways in after passing my test*, a red 850 RWM248K that needed welding on a weekly basis, but it was fun and had the insane 3 mile long gearlever. Used to be able to drop the clutch in 3rd gear and gravity would drop it into 4th..Second was a blue 1275GT POV50R fitted with a bored and stroked lump, powermax pistons, DCOE Weber (with hole cut in bulkhead..). That was fun, bloody quick for a Mini back then. Used to go 'off the clock', although that might have just been because I was 18 and mental enough to try it.Third was a rough as anything 1275 GT HPB115N that used to heat seize regularly with the thrashing it got. The radiator was more than a bit gunked up... The Peco back box fell off when I drove it over a raised manhole cover, so I replaced the system with an aerial mast I had lying about. Fitted into the LCB manifold and made possibly the least pleasant sound I've ever heard a car make.It always got me home though.*More often than not I ended up using my mum's yellow W reg Polo.

[Richard]

It's a long time since I've attempted to work on a Mini but I suspect they are a breeze compared to most cars from the 1990s on.

[Ratdat]

From the impeccably researched AROnline Mini Development Story:

At this time, the engine was rotated through 180 degrees to face the bulkhead, so that the carburettor was now to the rear of the engine, instead of at the front, where it tended to ice up in cold conditions. According to John Cooper, the real reason why the engine was reversed, however, was that Mini prototypes kept destroying their synchromeshes after about 100 miles. Issigonis was reportedly very upset that this change was required because the car was faster in its original form. Why the engine was rotated, rather than Austin designing a more durable synchomesh can be put down to two factors: time and money - or more correctly, the lack of it. So, carburettor icing was cited as the reason for this reversal of the position of the engine, but the response of John Cooper to this suggestion was that it, 'was a load of bull!'

Bizarre. I can't for the life of me think of one reason why engine orientation would affect sycromesh durability in the gearbox.

[Mr_Bo11ox]

Me neither, nor why the car is slowed down by having the engine rotated through 180, or how it could possibly be easier/quicker/cheaper to turn the engine round than to fix a syncromesh problem.

[AnthonyG]

I wouldn't mind a Mini as a second car, just to see what the fuss was about - like Seth, I'd have a simple 60s/70s one.I had a Austin 1100, the Mini's big brother, which was good fun, with great handling and a good, albeit bouncy ride - due to the hydrolastic suspension.I've have another 11/1300 tomorrow, if I had a nice dry garage to keep it in!They rusted even worse than the Mini though, which is why there are so few left, despite them outselling the Mini in the 1960s.For something to use every day though, it would have to be a Ka though - I think they are great, although the vulnerability to rust is pathetic in this day and age. I would never own a Beetle, and don't see the appeal in them at all. But each to their own.

[scruff]

I don't think the "scene" helps - most of the Mini forums seem full of young lads who are obsessed with massive (for a Mini) 13" wheels, self styled Mini experts who actually seem to know very little and folk who honestly believe that no progress has been made in car handling and packaging in the last 50 years.

Autoshite aside (most of the time), that's the same with any 'old' car forum I'm afraid.

[saabhappy]

I don't think the "scene" helps - most of the Mini forums seem full of young lads who are obsessed with massive (for a Mini) 13" wheels, self styled Mini experts who actually seem to know very little and folk who honestly believe that no progress has been made in car handling and packaging in the last 50 years.

Autoshite aside (most of the time), that's the same with any 'old' car forum I'm afraid.

I think most forums, including this one, tend to get dominated by people who talk in broad terms because the detailed knowledge is limited. There are loads of sweeping generalisations, but the different levels of knowledge reflect the wide range of folks who just like cars. You'd hardly expect posters on a VW forum to spend their time bigging up Minis. The ones who make me smile when I read their posts are those who've built themselves up into pale copies of Clarkson and go on and on about how different cars perform at ten tenths, when aside from track days most of us never get anywhere near that. It's the Pub Bore Syndrome: there are MG Bores, Jaguar Bores, Handling Bores, 0-60 Bores, Pre-War Car Bores...me, I'm just boring anyway.

[Rocket88]

I cannot understand this obsession with "packaging". Trying to squeeze four people in a car the size of a Mini was a brilliant, but pointless, achievement. Issigonis was obsessed with "packaging", to the detriment of driver comfort, ease of manufacture, ease of maintenance, cost of buliding, and just about evrything else. He hated anything that would make the driving experience anything less than a "hair shirt" experience. It was his "I know better" attitude that hacks me off..

[saabhappy]

I agree - I bet he was a pain to work with, because he was one of those folks who have a "vision" and they can be infuriating.

[garethj]

Bizarre. I can't for the life of me think of one reason why engine orientation would affect sycromesh durability in the gearbox.

Weren’t there a set of transfer gears put in at the same time? This could reduce the torque put through the synchromesh**Only a guess because it’s years since I’ve done geartrains….

[Ratdat]

Weren’t there a set of transfer gears put in at the same time? This could reduce the torque put through the synchromesh**Only a guess because it’s years since I’ve done geartrains….

This is what it says on the AR website but presumably the torque would only be reduced if the ratio from crank to gearbox input changed (taller) and surely that could be achieved anyway without swapping the engine round. Also, synchro rings don't ever take the full torque loading themselves. It all sounds iffy as it's surely would have been far cheaper and simpler to design better synchros, if indeed that was the issue, than to design an entirely new greabox casing and end casing, along with drop gears etc to turn the engine round! It all seem a bit bizarre although I'm sure there's a solid engineering explanation there somewhere.Purely from a packaging point of view it made more sense to have the carb on the bulkhead side, especially with the use of an SU. It would have been a bugger to do the points if they hadn't have turned the motor round!

[AnthonyG]

I agree - I bet he was a pain to work with, because he was one of those folks who have a "vision" and they can be infuriating.

He wasn't called Arragonis by other BMC people for nothing!

[M'coli]

I believe the synchromesh problem was due to the excessive inertia of the transfer gears in their original form; having the engine spin in the opposite direction reduced the diameter of the transfer gears because they needed 3 instead of 2, and hence the inertia was reduced too.