(first posted 7/14/2017) The British motor industry started its long descent into oblivion in the ‘50s. These things take time: Britain was an automotive powerhouse immediately after the Second World War, exporting to all four corners of the globe. By the early ‘50s, things plateaued and then nosedived by the end of the decade. This Austin A40 Somerset is a good example of how Britain lost its mojo, never to regain it (with a few notable exceptions of course).
Above: Austin A40 Devon (1947-52); below: Austin A70 Hampshire (1950-55)
The A40 Somerset was launched in 1952 as a refreshed version of the 1947 A40 Devon, Austin’s first all-new post-war car. Essentially, Austin took the Devon’s chassis and B-series 1.2 litre engine, updated it to have hydraulic brakes on all four wheels and a column shifter, and bodied it with a reduced version of the 1950 A70 Hampshire, even going as far as using the A70’s doors and rear wings as were.
It may have made a lot of sense from an industrial and financial point of view, but the reduced dimensions make the A40’s styling look awkward, as well as passé, by 1952. Austin still managed to shift over 170,000 of these (including about 7000 two-door convertible “Coupé” versions made by Carbodies) in less than three years. Interestingly, Austin never bothered updating the styling of the estate version, the A40 Countryman, which just carried on with the Devon’s front end for a few extra innings.
So the A40 Somerset sold rather well. Did it conquer any new markets? No. Was it, for some people, the last British car they would buy? It certainly seems to have been the case in some quarters. The Somerset’s outdated styling was not the result of using a technically advanced monocoque, like say the Traction Avant or the “Step-Down” Hudson, but reflected its maker’s conservatism and penny-pinching. The Austin’s lousy handling meant the engine’s relative willingness to provide adequate power could not be taken advantage of in full. Export markets started to look towards the likes of Fiat, Simca, Peugeot, Borgward, Opel and Volkswagen for more competent compacts, especially in North America and Asia. In Europe, Australia and at home, competition was fierce too, but Austin kept more of a following, though this would soon vanish on the Continent.
High-silled, bottom-hinged trunk: how user-friendly Austin cars were…
Still, even if Austin’s head stylist, Dick Burzi, did a rather lousy job in my personal opinion, the car’s roly-poly and jovial nature, helped by the two-tone paint job, cannot help but bring a smile to one’s face. Compared to a contemporary Hillman Minx or Ford Anglia 100E, the Austin looks a good decade out of step. But those sleeker-looking rivals still made do with side-valve engines and, in the Ford’s case, a 3-speed gearbox. Pedestrian as it was, the A40 still held its own vis-à-vis its domestic rivals.
This Austin must have been imported new to Burma back in the day – at the time, Japanese cars were not yet the market’s darling that they became but a decade later. Datsun even built these under license in Japan at the time. Not many British cars of this vintage are to be found in Yangon these days. The only ‘50s metal still seen on rare occasions are the “pontoon” Mercedes-Benzes. This car has obviously had a complete engine / transmission transplant of unknown origin, which entailed moving the gearstick to the floor, as well as questionable updates to it interior. One does what one can in these far-flung places, and this is not the first time I’ve spotted a car in Myanmar that had major surgery done to it.
Semaphores are notoriously unreliable, but taking them out like that is a tad cruel…
Fit and finish was deemed acceptable by reviewers at the time, though it seems each one had some problem with the Austin they took for a spin. Never the same gremlin, either. With time, squeaks, rattles and misaligned trim were a common nuisance, as were issues with the column shifter. But in Britain at the time, this was hardly worthy of complaint. When Chrysler made their ’57-’58 lemons, folks noticed something wasn’t right in the kingdom of Highland Park, and said so. Austin A40s were probably just as shoddily built, but that was the norm. Except fewer and fewer clients were willing to put up with that by the mid-‘50s…
This was one of the last models Austin launched prior to the merger with the Nuffield Group, which created the twelve-headed hydra that was BMC and, after yet more mergers, British Leyland. Austin were masters at stretching a car’s obsolete body panels and mechanicals across their range, Morris were the badge-engineering geniuses that brought you five flavours of the same car. Together, they embodied the decline of Britain’s automotive industry. And this A40 Somerset is where it all began – on the Austin side of the story, anyway. Very few British cars were imported in Burma by the ‘60s – indeed, smaller cars like this generation of Austin were probably the last to come here in relatively significant numbers. For once, the Burmese were well ahead of the curve on this one.
Photos shot by my friend Luwi in Yangon, April 2017.
Related CC posts:
Curbside Classic: Austin A40 Somerset – Short, Chubby and Irresistible, by David Saunders
Curbside Classic: 1951 Austin A40 Devon – The Best-Selling Import Of Its Time, by PN
I think you will find that the picture which you say is a A70 Hampshire is actually a A70 Hereford (the later model).
This is a Hampshire
The A70 Hereford was much bigger and had an open port behind the Austin of England badge on the bonnet.
Yep, mistake on my part. Will amend the text…
The two tone really helps the odd body lines .
I thought the A40’s used the rev happy ‘A’ series engine….
-Nate
They used the B-series … sort of. It is pre-B series motor. The block is just a little bit shorter and of smaller displacement but certainly recognizable as the B-series.
Later 1622 and 1800 engine and gearboxes fit straight in, a common swap it gives these older cars agood power boost but makes the lousy suspension and brakes more obvious.
Looks like someone fitted an underdash AC unit. What kind of engine upgrade would fit under that bonnet to support such an accessory?
Nice pics.
You add a second hamster and wheel to provide the additional power required.
Almost certainly of Japanese origin.
As mentioned, Nissan built Austin A40 Somersets and Cambridges under license in the ’50s; there’s some parts interchangeability with ’60s/70s Datsuns.
The instrument cluster has been changed too. I don’t recognise it, but someone might.
Chances are it is a Nissan engine, given their heritage with Austin.
The instruments come from a locally-built Mazda Pathfinder.
These look so friendly and charming. What an unexpected place to find one.
What was it with British cars and bottom hinged trunk lids? Was/is Britain so overwhelmingly crowded that folks couldn’t possibly load a car’s trunk from the back of the car? Even that groundbreaking car, the Mini, was “stuck” with a bottom hinged trunk lid. You can’t help but think sticking with a “backwards” trunklid was why it took British car makers so long before FINALLY adopting the hatchback.
The bottom hinged bootlid makes more sense than you think no ducking down under the lid to load your groceries and oversized loads could be carried on the open lid especially with tiny little cars like the mini.
The bottom hinged lid made sense on cars like the Mini and the older Austin Devon whose lids were mostly vertical – the folded-open trunk lid made a platform on which extra stuff could be piled if necessary. It made no sense whatsoever on a three-box car with a mainly horizontal trunklid like the Somerset.
Issigonis hated boots so the idea was that the hinged boot on a Mini could act as a platform. The number plate was also hinged. I never saw anyone use it as such.
I assume that your erroneous use of ‘pontoon’ is a pun revolving around bridges and a well known WW2 film set in Burma…
It’s not erroneous. ‘Pontoon’ refers to the smooth, slab-sided styling that was influenced by the aerodynamic era of the 30s, and was used commonly to refer to the new slab-sided Mercedes models that appeared in the mid 50s.
Paul ;
Mercedes calls it ‘Ponton’ ~ I once made the mistake of saying
‘nice Pontoon’ and they nearly lynched me .
-Nate
I thought I was the only person to make that mistake, that is, assuming someone who used the word Ponton meant Pontoon.
I always associated pontoon styling with really bulbous fenders. Fenders so bulbous as to be almost separate from the (main) body of the car.
Yes ~ those 1940’s > American cars with the bulbous fenders were called ‘Pontoon’ design, Mercedes just calls it something eles .
Still damn fine cars .
-Nate
Update: Both “ponton” and “pontoon” are used interchangeably to describe these cars. The German and French word is “ponton”, but the English spelling is “pontoon”.
Definitely knew these as ‘pontoon’ in English and ‘ponton’ in French. But you understood what I was on about, so it’s a bit of a moot point…
This sidebar is talking about this generation of Merc?
I would have said the mid-50s W120
snap
hehehehehe
No, those are 300s
Ponton is this model…
Pretty ! .
? Is that Janis Joplin’s 356 photobombing ? .
-Nate
Keen eyes, Nate
? Is that Janis Joplin’s 356 photobombing ? .
The original Joplin car and a tribute 356 were both there. I’m not sure which was which as I was too busy ogling the Mercs. You can barely see the other one parked in front of this one.
This was at the Gilmore’s German show “Deutschemarques” a week ago.
The one in my pic of the Mercs must be the original, because that is the one Deutschemarques has on it’s Facebook page.
Thanx Steve .
-Nate
That’s Ponton, not pontoon. I’m fairly sure Ponton is French or French derived and first used for Hotchkiss and Salmson post war designs, then the new Benz models.
It’s “ponton” in French and German; “pontoon” in English. We write in English here.
Another ancient car with aftermarket seat belts.
Definitely a sad thing about the semaphores, but can’t fault the owner of this A40 making this sort of update.
I love British cars. Thanks Tatra.
Somersets were common when I was a lad, and I hated them as much as I hated the Devon. Contemporary Morris models were far better cars, and didn’t look quite so bad. Other makers managed to produce desirable cars. Austin didn’t produce anything notable after the “Seven”, unless you count the Austin-Healey.
The Mini, the 1100, and the Westminster had their moments.
Yes, the Morris Mini-Minor and the Morris 1100 were pretty good apart from the rust proofing. They were designed by a Greek gentleman who worked for Morris for many years.
The Mini is an undisputed hit. If nothing else, BMC gave us that. Apart from that, during the 60s, British automakers were not doing so well. Rootes, Vauxhall and most of BMC did pretty poorly.
The 1100 was not a big worldwide seller like the Minor or the A40 Devon had been. The Farina saloons were not huge sellers either, apart in Britain and a handful of countries.
Britain was still an important player in the small car (below 1 litre) and the luxury / hyperluxery /sports car field, but there was no British BMW or even a British Renault (i.e. a successfully-run nationalized carmaker). Therw was no world-class 2 litre car, apart perhaps from the Rover 2000 TC, by the late ’50s. Successful British non-sports cars were below 1 litre and above 2.3 for a couple of decades, then the bottom fell out. Now, Britain’s remaining industry is only surviving in the higher price field.
This Austin showed up at Greenfield Village this year. Sticks in my mind it was a 66. Seems like a perfectly pleasant car. I noticed the crank hole in the bumper, so asked the owner if he had a crank. He not only pulled the crank out of the toolkit in the back, but was a good sport and posed with it as if his Lucas starter had gone south.
That wagon was no slouch in the interior either.
The Triumph 2000 was not bad for its time too. The lack of really good 2-litre cars can probably be explained by them being above the volume-selling market sector. And then a general lack of profitability and investment from the early 60’s onwards…
Would have to agree though it is a shame Morris never received proper investment in the post-war period like Austin did, allowing it to become the stronger partner by the time it merged with Austin to form BMC instead of the weaker partner.
One could argue that William Morris sabotaged his own company due to his parsimonious investment in the post-war period as well as his severe dislike of the Morris Minor, which prevented the latter from unleashing its potential as a rival to the Volkswagen Beetle.
It is also a pity Austin never realized a true pre/post-war replacement for the Austin Seven prior to the A30, featuring an A-Series precursor engine in the same way the A40 Devon’s engine was a precursor to the B-Series (originally conceived as a 1000-1200cc unit).
The best thing Morris got from Austin was the engines. Both the Minor and Cowley/Oxford had well-planted, ‘wide track’ wheels and rack and pinion steering but out-dated engines, quickly replaced after BMC was formed.
There’s an A40 Somerset that I see quite regularly locally, well kept, all black and, I suspect, pretty original.
To be fair in the case of the Morris Minor, it’s engine was said to be a copy of the Ford Sidevalve unit.
Interestingly the Wolseley Eight featured an OHV version of the Morris Minor engine that was to be enlarged to around 950-980cc or just below 1-litre for use in the Morris Minor were it not for the BMC merger, also the Ford Taunus 15M (P1) model featured an enlarged 1500cc OHV version of the Ford Sidevalve engine.
On top of that the Morris designed BMC C-Series OHV 6-cylinder is said to be related to the post-war sidevalve Morris Six MS and OHC Wolseley 6/80 (that produced 4-cylinder sidevalve Morris Oxford MO and OHC Wolseley 4/50 variants), there were also plans to produce a related range of Morris and Wolseley vehicles featuring enlarged versions of the 6-cylinder with displacements of around 3.2-litres to 4-litres. Morris also looked at producing 4-cylinder versions of the C-Series engine that as a result of the BMC merger never reached production.
So had Morris invested in the pre-war Wolseley Eight OHV unit to produce 1500-1600cc versions, they would have had an engine family that could have lasted until the late-1950s to early-1960s before needing a new replacement and allowed the Morris Minor to more effectively challenge the Volkswagen Beetle for dominance during that period.
Additionally 1750-1950cc 4-cylinder versions of the 2.6-2.9-litre C-Series later equipped with OHC and Twin-Cams could have covered the upper end of Morris’s 4-cylinder cars, mention is made of a 1750cc OHV version of the sidevalve Morris Oxford MO unit being developed that allowed the latter to reach around 100 mph on autobahns with comparisons allegedly being made to the Volvo B18 engine.
It is also said that the 2.45-litre Riley Big Four engine was easily capable of being doubled to form a 200+ hp 4.9-litre V8 and could have powered cars which would be better received in markets such as the US during the post-war period.
Slight correction there; the Morris MS six wasn’t SV but OHC, just used a 65hp single carb version of the Wolseley motor with 6.6:1 instead of 7:1 compression. The MO Oxford was indeed SV.
“Shoddily made” – and that, more than anything, accounts for the demise of the indigenous British motor industry.
““Shoddily made” – and that, more than anything, accounts for the demise of the indigenous British motor industry.”
1,000 times this ~ I grew up in the glory dayze of LBC’s and I well remember folks cursing them roundly at every turn, all those kindly Mechanics who took me under their wings and trained me always said one thing : beware the British Automobile ! don’t ever get roped into working on nor buy one .
So I didn’t for decades even though I thought they sounded good and looked cute (I love tiny vehicles) , then I bought one and discovered they were designed to be run in the Colonies on poor fuel, bad roads and with iffy maintenance so how the hell did they plan this failure ? .
By using clever and mostly time tested engineering but sadly they never really got any handle on basic manufacturing quality ~ those of us idiots who still persevere with old British iron do so by basically rebuilding each one from bumper to bumper then they’re just fine, very reliable, amazingly economical and usually very fun to drive .
I run my 1959 BMC Sports Coupe very hard indeed (I broke six wheels in 2014) yet it takes it all and begs for more, I love it and it’s (in) famous for passing up all those high dollar restored LBC’s….
They dropped the ball and lost the game .
-Nate
I run Michelin steel wheels on my 1959 British sedan its set up to be driven hard and survives just fine, but theres a reason I dont buy BMC cars and these old Austins provide most of the reasons, unpredictable handling was a hallmark of lever arm shocks and these A40s handle poorly indeed,
The number of fairly rust free survivors that still run begs the question was the build quality really that bad or was it lack of proper maintenance that saw them off?
… those of us idiots who still persevere with old British iron do so by basically rebuilding each one from bumper to bumper then they’re just fine, very reliable, amazingly economical and usually very fun to drive .
One of the best attended shows at the Gilmore each year is the Brit show, and the Brit show is the only one where I have seen people giving their cars some stick.
Just so Steve :
My mighty Metropolitan is (in) famous for running the canyons at speed and often on three wheels .
All one needs do is fix the assembly mistakes and LBC’s are fun and reliable .
I had a nice time @ Golden Cove this morning, lots of old British tin plus some Yank Tanks (! pristine 1952 Ford !) and even two old Norton Motos .
-Nate
Yes, shoddily made was part of the problem; incidentally ‘shoddily’ is derived from ‘shoddy’ a cheap cloth made from discarded rags, then run up in sweat shops for the poor. The main issue with virtually everything in Britain is our lack of unity, because of our class system. Management and workers were in almost continual deadlock through the second half of the 20th century; thankfully that problem has been alleviated now that we either have no industry or it is foreign run like Nissan or Honda.
Thanx Jimmy ;
? Am I to assume you’re a British Subject then ? .
I always wanted to go as it looks very interesting and so much history everywhere .
I grew up during the postwar ‘export or die!’ situation and came to love LBC’s and Motocycles later on in my life .
-Nate
Thanks Tatra! Looks like this is turning into English week.. I love the styling on the Austins now, though they seemed really ancient by the 60’s, and not in a good way.
Wow, some memories being rekindled here. As a kid in short pants, I rode around in a secondhand A40 Somerset, in duck-egg blue, which my parents had for a couple of years.
Although the engine was OHV, it was only 1200 cc, and I remember it struggled to propel this car, despite low gearing, which limited cruising speeds to maybe 55-60 mph.
The ‘behind the times’ nature of cars like this, which Tatra87 rightly identifies, was also reflective of UK driving and social conditions in the 1950’s. Britain’s un-modernised roads, twisty and narrow, with mostly gentle hills, would to some extent have disguised its limitations. With the construction of a high speed road network (motorways) being barely addressed, until the 1960’s.
BMC therefore had the doubtful benefit of a home market in the early 1950’s which was more accepting of cars like this (and also, had been starved of cars of any kind, throughout WW2). Coupled with tariff (tax) barriers, which protected the motor industries of each country in Europe / UK at that time.
Interesting also that despite this analysis, during the same period, Austin did manage to design and introduce the smaller A30 model. Unlike the A40, this was a clean sheet of paper design, of unitary construction, and as related elsewhere in CC, the resulting bodyshell was of unusual torsional stiffness. Its new A series engine, although initially undersized and undergeared ( as per the A40 ), would go on to have many ( perhaps too many ) future forms and applications.
The A series was also carbon copied in the mid 50’s by the rival Standard Triumph firm, for their 8 and 10 models, and subsequently used in the Herald, Spitfire, etc. To make the copy slightly less obvious, ST re-handed ‘their’ engine, so that the camshaft, manifolds, etc are on the right, and the ignition and spark plugs on the left – all opposite to the A series !
Though it is often repeated similarities notwithstanding, the BMC A-Series and Standard-Triumph SC engines are in fact unrelated to each other as the latter used some elements of the Triumph Mayflower unit.
However Standard-Triumph’s engine was in fact copied by Reliant, the latter downscaling their version of the engine to 598cc and casting it in all-alloy in order to replace the old Austin 7-derived sidevalve unit.
Here’s a question that’s been bothering me, and someone out there might have an answer: was Austin build quality rubbish before the war, or did it take a dive in the 1940s and never recover? By “rubbish” I mean “significantly worse than its direct contemporary competitors”. By the 1970s only Fiat could give BLMC a run for their money, but how was it in the 1920s or 1930s, when they made their reputation?
Bottom-hinged trunks could be used as load platforms, see the Mini with flip-down number plate.
I wasn’t aware that the Mini’s license plate pivoted.
Still, I’m not sure I would trust the hinges on an English car to support any kind of load. I’ve seen TR3s with broken hood hinges and they were never used as loading platforms.
Well at least they were cute!
My father had one of these as his first car, in mid-1950s Vancouver (he was an English immigrant and English cars were very common there at the time). It was replaced with a new 1958 Morris Minor Tourer (convertible), which was the first car I can remember.
I’ve never seen one of these, but I understand that they were rather popular in New England and California in the 1950s and that briefly Austin was one of the most popular imported cars in the U.S. (Like number 3 or something, back when imports made up less than 5% of total sales in the U.S.).
You might google the limerick that beings, “There was a young man from South Boston…”
I came home from hospital in an A40 Somerset but not long thereafter dad finally managed to move into US iron – a 1953 Chev – so I have absolutely no memories of it. You could still see them here and there in the 60s but even in Israel of those days they were not very desirable.
An overly reduced example of the ‘English line’. For years during my childhood there were two of these curbside parked next to each other around the corner. A powdered green two door and a glossy black four door.
These were forced on buyers in Australia post war when the government implemented a buy-British policy in an effort to assist export income to Britain. My fathers family, who had cattle interests in Western Queensland, had Ford and Chev vehicles pre war but from 1946 new taxes forced them to buy British, including an A 40 bought for their house in Brisbane city. Tales of woe about these cars are family folk lore ! As soon as local versions of US cars, usually brought in as CKD kits from Canada to get around the taxes, guess what they bought….as quick as they could!
I do remember seeing only a few A40 Devons growing up here in Westchester County, NY back in the late 50’s – early 60’s. No recollection of other Austins. Although I do recall a VW with the semaphore signals and even a Skoda Octavia in my neighborhood. Morris Minors were much more plentiful. My family friend, Walter, was a semi-retired car dealer who often enlisted the neighborhood teen aged kids as helpers. I was one of the lucky ones who got to work on and sometimes even drive some really interesting and old automobiles. I’ll never forget the A40 Devon in Walter’s stock that needed a new clutch when one of the helpers managed to put the new disc in backwards. I think Walt’s had the larger sealed beam headlamps. Is that mascara on those headlamp rings of the Somerset? Looks like they may have been changed.
The story I’d heard of the styling is that they wanted something that would first and foremost be distinctly British, meaning mostly free of American and Italian influences. Unfortunately for them, the Detroit styling departments and Italian carrozzeria were the ones who had figured out how to effectively style an attractive pontoon-body car by then.
There is a story that the late Duke of Edinburgh (husband of the late Queen) told the Austin management “This won’t do chaps” on a factory visit in the 1950s. The outcome was using Pininfarina to style the next A40, Cambridge, 1100 and 1800. Dick Burzi was there to do the badge engineering – 5 brand names for the Cambridge, 6 for the 1100 in Britain alone (there were even more brand names where it was locally assembled such as Italy and Spain).
Unfortunately the Farina A40 and Oxbridge were Austin engineered and stodgy to drive.
As an Englishman I have to disagree with some of the comments about the build quality of British cars. European and Japanese cars prior to the 1980s didn’t resist rust any better in our climate. The six volt electrics of european cars weren’t any better than British cars, worse at starting from cold and Italian car electrics were appalling into the 1980s.
As to the Minor and Mini not being developed, they were both made well past their best before date, but so was the Beetle. Unlike the Beetle they were entry level cars for a model range, the manufacturer and the dealers wanted to sell the more profitable, larger cars. Unfortunately the larger cars didn’t very often appeal to buyers.
The 1100 was the best selling car in Britain for most of the 1960s and was quite popular in Europe and should have been developed, but the management of British Leyland came from Triumph and thought they knew better, hence the bad jokes of Morris Marina and Austin Allegro.
And finally Austin was actually an early adopter of the hatchback, there were hatchback versions of the A40 Farina from the early 1960s and the Austin Maxi of 1969 was a front wheel drive hatchback with an ohc transverse engine, a five speed manual or four speed automatic. It was also an orphan being the last Issigonis design and not supported by the Leyland management, and its styling didn’t appeal to many people.
The Issigonis book by Jonathan Wood notes the ADO16 prototype featured an end-on gearbox (an evolution of same layout on FWD Minor prototype), only for Suez, a shift in priorities and convenience in applying the Mini’s in-sump arrangement onto the other FWD projects on grounds of cost led to BMC being constrained by the gearbox layout until the Maestro and Montego with their brought-in VW Golf-sourced gearbox.
Meaning minus the suspension BMC could have easily beaten the FWD opposition had they retained the end-on gearbox for ADO16 and gave it a hatchback, followed by an updated end-on Mini hatchback and other FWD models.
The B&W pic of the A40 sedan reminded me of how popular the model was in Canada. They were everywhere until the early sixties it seemed. At least a couple in my neighbourhood when I was a kid.
Certainly built at a time when people were smaller in stature. Interior room is very snug.