The Austin America (ADO16/Austin/Morris 1100/1300) has become one American journalists/blogger’s favorite whipping boy, along with the more recent Yugo. In both cases, they were not actually as bad as one might think, even from CC’s own post on the America. Of course it failed in the very competitive US market, arriving just when the Japanese ascendancy was getting seriously under way.
The ADO16 cars were ahead of their times in a number of ways, as we’ve covered here a number of times, but one of the most outstanding was its unique four-speed automatic, offering significantly better performance than the two and three-speed automatics available in the competition. R&T tested one, and the were impressed with it. Of course, the test car also exhibited evidence of the lackadaisical quality that had come to define BMC products.
R&T was so impressed they went as far as calling it “the biggest bargain in today’s imported car market”. The America was of course just an updated Austin 1100, now with the larger 1275 cc engine. It had been previously sold in the US as the MG 1100/1300, but in quite modest numbers. Americans just weren’t biting Issigonis’ highly advanced FWD products.
The Power Products four speed automatic was quite different than most, as it used bevel gears along with a torque converter; so a bit like an automated manual. And it could be shifted manually too. The resulting performance was still slower than a true manual version, but its 0-60 time of 18 seconds was quite decent for a small car at the time, and faster than a stick-shift VW.
The engine is a detuned version of the 1275 cc unit first used in the Mini Cooper S, now sporting one carb and rated at 58 hp, but more significantly, 13% more torque than the 100, which allowed a higher (lower numerical) final drive ratio, which was very helpful in reducing engine revs at American highway speeds.
Of course R&T loved the many other qualities of the ADO16; it’s superb space utilization, stiff body structure, excellent ride from its Hydrolastic suspension, superb visibility and its fun-to-drive nature. The fact that last quality was not diminished by its automatic is a real tribute.
R&T also noted a number of issues with their short-term tester: poor ventilation, rattles, paint flaws, left side mirror head missing (?), and some other niggles. They were expecting to get another with which to do a 24,000 mile extended test.
Related reading:
Turkey Day Classic: 1968-1972 Austin America – Yankee Doodle Disaster
Curbside Classic: 1965 MG1100 (ADO16) – BMC’s Greatest Hit
IIRC the 24,000 mile extended test never happened, which is too bad. It would have been interesting.
I also would had loved to have read how well this icon of British workmanship had held up (or not?) during a 2 year, 24,000 mile extended road test.
Stay tuned. In the same issue there was a detailed report of an MG1100 that its owner had driven for 107k miles. It was not quite as bad as you might think.
IIRC that was one of their “after the new wears off” articles. I remember that piece pretty well but had forgotten that it was in the same issue.
I believe the guy had had some major engine problem at some point, but a shop that catered to racing Sprites was able to save the day by pressing in a stock-bore dry sleeve. Presumably most owners would have thrown up their hands at that point.
Regular oil changes would have kept one going I imagine but who did that after a few years FWD BMC cars were shockers for oil leaks so everyone just topped these self oilchanging devices up untill they stopped entirely or got sold on.
Zero to sixty in 18 seconds, in the late 1960’s?
That’s not really “acceleration”; just gathering momentum going down the street.
“acceleration” and “gathering momentum” are the same thing, actually. 🙂
That 18 seconds would have been competitive to other stick shift import economy cars at the time (R10, Corolla, etc.) at the time, but for an automatic, it was in a class of its own.
“…it was in a class of it’s own”.
Once again, Paul and I agree on a car.
🙂
I worked as a lot boy at Bill Young’s Sports Cars (MG, Austin, Lotus), summer 1969. The America Automatic was painfully, painfully slow, even for in-town driving from the storage lot to the dealership.
The one detail that stands out, for me, is the foot pump-operated windshield washer; there was so much pressure that, at a stop or low speed, fluid would shoot over the car and hit the backlight.
Our 78 Toyo Corolla did that; particularly the one on the passenger side.
A “stick shift challenged” relative of mine was looking for an automatic transmission small car in early 1974.
She drove this Austin America, offered by a used car lot in the suburbs, and though it “wasn’t too awful”.
I persuaded her to test drive a 2 speed “ToyoGlide” automatic transmission Toyota Carona coupe. With a working POE added air conditioner. (The below dash “slim line” add on A/C on the Austin had long since died.)
She decided that the extra money for the Toyota was well worth it…esp after she heard some Austin/MG/BL horror stories from disgruntled owners. Preventive maintenance was not her strong suit. The Carona served her well for many years.
I remember the Toyota Corona tag line, “Zero to sixty in sixteen seconds”. I’m sure that was the manual shift version, still impressive for imported economy cars back then.
Ive driven a Mini panel van with the 4 speed Wilson automatic it did go ok but I’d never buy one rare back then unobtanium now.
I was getting into cars as a little kid in the early and mid 70s. I really sought out fresh styling, and considered these one of the uglier, and most dated-looking cars on the road. A fresh, advanced small car, with so many dated styling details was inexcusable, if they wanted to succeed in the North American market. I was a little kid, and noticed all the very dated styling details then. It looked like a small car from the early 60s IMO. Or older.
The thick and very clunky rubber weather stripping with rounded corners surrounding the windshield glass, looked ancient compared to how American cars handled this detail. I was very young, and noticed this. Though it was still very common on English cars it seemed. Almost all domestic cars ditched this ugly styling detail in the 50s. All the rounded corners on windows didn’t look fresh or crisp. It said 1960. The raised rocker panel looked ancient. Gave it a ‘running board’ quality. The nose looked from 1961 or earlier. As did the wheel covers. Applying Mini styling details from the late 50s, didn’t cut it almost a decade later. Sure, it is a small car with advanced engineering. But the styling says early 60s Nash, generally speaking. All it needs are small tail fins to look like a late 50s design.
This was my POV around 1973-1974. Wonderful, it was a small FWD car, but the exterior styling details collectively looked ancient then. No wonder, the VW Rabbit/Golf styling looked so crisp and brilliant at the time. When their general shapes are similar. The Rabbit had a similar windshield installation. But the overall design came off so much more modern.
You’re right. The styling is really just an update and stretch of the 1958 A40 Farina with some late ’60s tweaks to make it more like the 1964 1800(!). Still they did make a newer looking one in 1973, though that didn’t go too well…
“..though that didn’t go too well…”
I like your sense of understatement!
+1 🙂
“Right then… carry on.”
Totally agree on the styling looking dated. As a kid (think I might be a bit older) I noticed the same things. British cars did look a bit old hat back in this era, but when the engineering is so futuristic, it’s a shame the body was backward-looking. Not so bad for the early sixties when the ADO16 design first came out but by 1965 the hood/fender line looked dated as did the little fins; pleasant enough, but dated. It needed the Austin Apache front end (not invented yet), and smooth sill panels rather than those curious mini-running-board types, and a rear end like the (also later) Morris Nomad. I would often look at my aunt’s car in the drive and mentally restyle it.
BTW, I’m curious about the R&T wear index they refer to – I’m assuming this is related to piston speed? Those early 1100s had horrific gearing…..
Remarkable, how we as little children (4-7 years old), could so easily identify dated designs.
It extended to observing people’s fashion sense, architecture, things in our everyday lives. I don’t think everyone had/has that skill. lol
When this came out Americans were buying the slightly updated VW Beetle though. And the new VW rear engine models had similar styling details. French cars of that period like the Renault 16 had similarly mounted windshields. The design of the original 1960 Valiant was too complicated already but to make matters worse the windshield was similar, adding a discordant element to the design it didn’t need. The Metro successor to the Mini repeated the same kind of windshield design.
For the time I didn’t think the Austin America was all that bad in terms of style. The fashionably wide C pillar helped a lot.
But things could and would get worse at BMC (or whatever it was at that point).
Some people saw its design was clearly dated. And by dated, I mean a generation. Many didn’t. Your focused on the windshield, comparing it to other cars, when it was much more than that.
It could have been introduced in 1958, with its styling.
It was introduced in 58 slightly taller in two estate style with RWD. ADO 16 was merely an update with the powertrain sideways at the front
I’m guessing you bought one?
Obviously, the Beetle wasn’t competing on its modern style. It was already an icon. And best represented economy and value to many.
It looks much like the 1958 A40 Farina, Bernard stated, it was derived from.
It’s a shame that around this time in ’68 BMC/BL didn’t put the design Pininfarina proposed for the next generation in production for them;
https://i0.wp.com/www.aronline.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/leyland_blmc_1100_1-650×488.jpeg?resize=678%2C509
It looks very French. Might have been a problem.
I remember the few stick shift versions of these, they were well hated by owners, Mechanics and the dealers that sold them .
Too bad, I’d like to try one just for the experience .
-Nate
Fun to drive too fast on a twisty road if you can cope with the noise and general discomfort horrid driving position etc. A Mini is better and being lighter put less stress on the drivetrain which was quite fragile
Our family had one as a second car – stick shift version. It had a reputation for being somewhat trouble prone but I don’t remember the details. It wasn’t, however, a disaster. It was remarkably roomy and comfortable for a small car. I was too young to drive so don’t have direct experience but it was also viewed as quite sporty. Handled and rode well. We had it for at least 6 years.
I worked for a while doing D checks and cleanups at the GM dealership my father was company secretary of,, An Austin 1300 GT was traded in on a new Vauxhall Chevette it was a very tidy car no rust or dents but it was never put on the used car lot gawd no, lots of non GM cars were foe sale used but not any small BMC stuff such was the reputation they had, it became a workshop runabout untill the guy who bought unwanted trade at wholesale prices turned up and took it away, I drove it several times going to get parts or doing the freight bus run it went ok and there wasnt anything wrong with lus it had basically a Cooper S engine so if you got up it the little car went really well.