MOT station trying it on?

Ian gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

They _really_ think it's going to go 20k miles without even needing the oil topping up? That's gonna bite.

The actual basic design of the engine doesn't seem to make that much difference to its life. The A series being a prime example. The first version (803) was lucky to do 40,000 miles before requiring a complete overhaul. Each later incarnation upped this mileage by a considerable amount - the '1000' unit mainly because it changed to full flow oil filtration. And then better production tolerances and bearing materials etc on later units. My brother ran an Ital to well over 150,000 miles - and it wasn't the engine which killed it.

The gearbox on my HA van was the best I've ever used on any vehicle - ever. Like operating a well engineered switch.

OTOH, if nothing is user servicable surely they haven't a leg to stand on when it blows up (assuming he sticks to the presumably extortionate servicing schedule)?

This account of a non-stop 10,000 miles in a Morris Minor is less impressive, but the methods for servicing the car on the move make an interesting read:

Dave Plowman (News) wrote: [...]

I think it must be a matter of personal preference then.

I always thought that the feel of the Viva gearchange was of the linkage; I like to feel the gearbox more.

I certainly didn't feel I could make as quick a change on the Viva as in its Ford contemporaries.

BTW, the best gearchange I've ever experienced is in my present car - a Focus. It's still perfect, with no linkage or cable slop, at 93K.

Chris

Quite the reverse of mine - it could be flicked between gears faster than anything.

Cable changes at one time had a bad reputation - in my opinion unjustified. Far fewer pivots etc to develop wear.

A BMW 1 I had for a while had an oil top-up but no dipstick- the electronics would tell you when to chuck 0.5 litres in. I'd imagine this is the next step.

Nah, people didn't grease them - if you shoved grease up them every few thousand miles (same set up as the Moggy Minor) they lasted well. I remember looking after a small fleet of Itals for BOCM Pauls, (IIRC) never a problem - let them dry up and it's a different story.

Was it as heck ''lethal.'' I do wish people would stop using such extreme exaggeration, it had a bit more power than the 1.3 and the rear end could be lost if you were a buffoon with the throttle - same as any other RWD car from that era.

Julian.

Apart from that though, they were OK ! ;-)

Actually, I used to enjoy greasing the old Popular and seeing the grease emerge from the far end but I'm easily pleased.

Andy C

Andy Cap wrote: [...]

...and possibly in need of counselling?

:-)

Chris

I have just greased front and rear suspension on my runabout, a 1995 Metro, possibly the last large production vehicle with grease points? or would that be Transits (king pins on the front always needed greasing before the MoT) or what about taxis , I'll bet they still have grease points.

Mrcheerful

Yebutt would you admit to *enjoying* it ;-)

Chris

Yup. And mine being older had already suffered that way, so the vertical link threads would have been corroded meaning the new trunnions just wore out faster. ISTR you could buy modified ones with a sleeve that screwed over the old thread that improved things a lot.

Yes. When the aforementioned 1.3 estate died, I changed to a 1.8 saloon bought from a colleague. It was an earlier model without the roll bar (or with a much weedier one, I don't remember). The 1.3 hadn't been the best handling car in the world, with its knackered dampers, but the contrast between the two was huge. I very nearly came a serious cropper when trying to take a familiar corner at the same speed in the 1.8. Had anything been coming the other way, I'd have hit them for sure. Dunno what it was, the heavier engine up front; the shorter body; the even more antiquated suspension; the fact that it seemed to ride a little higher for some reason; but it was one of the scariest cars I've driven.

It wasn't just the power, the weight of that engine made a hell of a difference too. The front suspension had been fine in the Minor and borderline in the 1.3 Marina, but the 1.8 literally tipped the balance the wrong way. I can't think of any other RWD car from that era that was nearly as bad.

Small BMW's? ISTR the Germans wouldn't take them out in the wet - oversteer was so bad. Not quite a fair comparison to an Ital though.

Actually, at the same time as I was working on Itals and Cortinas etc I had a BMW 323 in for a head job - the cam belt had snapped. (many of the valves = toast and they cost ££££'s each) That was my first ever experience with the new fangled rubber drive belts, now 30 years later it still accounts for a good proportion of garage work.

Julian.

Actually it was enjoyable in a way, you don't even have to lift the car to do it, so it isn't a chore at all.

My 04 Disco 2 has some nipples on the rear prop shaft. Sadly there's none on the front prop (like my old Disco 1) so I expect that to be knackered one day - IIRC it's a double carden joint thingy so will be expensive :-(

I remember the day when the grease nipple was deleted from water pumps, another retrograde step IMHO.

PS. Sorry, I first hit 'reply to you' rather than 'group.'

Julian.

Why? They often failed in half the time or less than today's waterpumps, which often last the life of the vehicle. (Certain Vauxhalls are excluded from this comment. Obviously.)

It's the same with suspension components. I made a lot of pocket money in the sixties and seventies replacing worn out suspension joints on things like Minis and 1100's. They had grease nipples; they were full of grease, yet were often knackered to the point of MOT failure before 50K miles.

Chris

Not on BMWs, though - they learnt their lesson 15 years ago.