Can any one settle argument re early minis

I started an argument because I said that part of the fun driving 1970 minis was because I thought the bum was closer to the ground which was
disputed so if any one has a mini and a bit of time to waste could they measure seat to ground to settle argument or prove me wrong? :)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

They did have pretty slim seats and of course smaller wheels than very much later Minis (not the BMW one)
--
*What do you call a dinosaur with an extensive vocabulary? A thesaurus.*

Dave Plowman snipped-for-privacy@davenoise.co.uk London SW
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 18/10/2018 13:47, FMurtz wrote:

Undoubtedly closer to the ground than most saloons. Perhaps comparable to Sprite / Midget etc of that generation?
But the fun comes as much from the FWD, short bonnet, and wheels right at the corners IMHO. The steering just felt much more direct than, say, an Anglia even though the ratio is probably much the same.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 18/10/18 13:47, FMurtz wrote:

Equal to the fun of driving a Skeleton (Bobsleigh), or maybe a Sinclair C5?
--
Adrian C

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 18 Oct 2018 19:50:48 +0100, Adrian Caspersz

Yup. ;-)
"Sinclair claimed that the C5 had the ‘same seat height’ as a family car. That was true if that car was originally from 1959 and was called a Mini."
https://www.motoringresearch.com/car-reviews/sinclair-c5-retro-road-test/
http://www.snookerbacker.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/sinclair-c5-.jpg
Or even other cars ...
https://not2grand.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/traffic-136395389851902601.jpg
I wonder if the OP could work out the answer from this:
https://preview.tinyurl.com/yaq8juff
Cheers, T i m
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
T i m wrote:

That seat is much more luxurious and thick than my minis were.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 18/10/2018 13:47, FMurtz wrote:

1970 isn't particularly early - the Mini was introduced in 1959!
It's not clear what you're comparing it with - closer to the ground than *what*?
--
Cheers,
Roger
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Roger Mills wrote:

I mean the early ones not the current crop. Once I have the measurement I can compare, someone already has suggested it is no lower than a vw of the time but without the measurement all the discussion is guesswork and academic.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 19/10/2018 10:22, Robin wrote:

and dents in the floor from raising and lowering the driving seat to allow access to the back.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I could measure mine but mine hasn't got the original seats nor is the suspension factory original, the tyres have been removed 'for winter' and it's up on axle stands.
The Haynes manual would probably state the ride height to a common reference point. I have one somewhere and even an original factory workshop manual which might have every dimension but neither are immediately to hand.
Your best bet would be an original UK road test such as those done by Autocar or Motor back when they measured everything and the road tests were full of facts and not pointless fluff
But you can work out a ballpark figure from just the vehicle height
Wikipedia has the external dimensions of a shedload of cars, the Mini being 1346mm / 53"
Allow maybe an inch for the headlining
Then make a big assumption that the top of the head just touches the headlining
On the basis of ISO 3411 50th percentile male 'chest height' (sat, dimension from base of bum to top of head) being 880mm/34.65" you could work out that the base of the seat would be somewhere around 17" above the road (but the head of someone that height would probably be clear of the headlining)
On the basis of a 95% percentile male the chest height dimension is 960mm/37.80" giving a base of the seat dimension as 14 inches above the road, a reasonable assumption for the mini is that the head of a 9th percentile male is in permanent contact with the headlining.
A 50th percentile male is 1715mm/67.52"/5ft 7.5" high (in shoes) whilst a 95th percentile male is 1880mm/74.02"/6ft 2" high
The Mini is certainly low compared to the cars of today, low compared to most four seat cars in the 1960's but not particularly low compared to the likes of say the Lotus Elan, a Jag E Type (series 1) or even an MGB.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 19 Oct 2018 13:57:13 +0100, The Other Mike

Make that 95th percentile
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 19/10/2018 13:57, The Other Mike wrote:

14" looks about right judging from the photo Tim posted.
Not sure about your assumptions though - a 6'11" mate could fit in and drive my old Mini with headroom to spare - from dim/distant memory.
--
Cheers, Rob

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yes, the only measurable being a 10" rim plus 145mm x 80% profile tyre height 14.5 inches

Long legs, bent back, bent knees, and almost certainly some degree of built in seat recline with the head located well behind the hip pivot point could account for someone taller 'fitting' There are lots of variables and the figures in the standard assume a sitting position with a vertical back which isn't exactly the case.
At somewhere around the 95th percentile myself in terms of height albeit with shorter legs and a longer back I wasn't even remotely comfortable in a mini without the forward seat mounts being extended a couple of inches rearward, the steering column being dropped by an inch and a smaller diameter (13") steering wheel being fitted. Fit a roll cage and a competition seat and it gets way too cosy. Add in a few decades worth of belly growth and it's beyond cosy and into painful :)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 19/10/2018 16:01, The Other Mike wrote:

IIRC there used to be someone round here who removed both front seats and drove from the back seat. He also had a Great Dane as a passenger.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 23 Oct 2018 22:24:43 +0100, newshound

Shades of hightower in Police Academy with a Honda Civic

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phHZ2HOkn8s

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 18/10/2018 13:47, FMurtz wrote:

Back in 2005 the Renault Clio "shaking your ass" ad claimed a low seat height 55cm gave "good feel". As they claim a low seat height gives good feel, I have to assume that Clio felt like a wallowing barge that will result in much shaking of your ass when compared to my Nissan 200SX with 35cm seat height from ground.
I've since got one with 3cm drop so that's 32cm. I think that rivals Porsche 911 but not Lotus Elise.
When you get down below 50" roof height the seat doesn't get any closer to the ground but the seat back reclines more.
Anyone up for measuring the seat height from ground of a living room on 4 pogo sticks, aka SUV?
The 1970 Mini
https://www.autopaper.com/images/28484/photo/img5272_111894.jpg
Roof height 1.35m Seat to roof 0.95m at an angle. Seat to roof vertical 0.9m (did some trig). I think there must be at least 1cm between headlining and roof (unless they did the measurement with the stick pushing the headlining on to the roof).
Estimated seat to ground = 44cm (17.3in in old money)
I think that's probably as exciting as an Audi TT (also ~1.34m high).
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.