Austin TimesApril/May2004Volume 2Issue 1

A NEWSLETTER FOR ENTHUSIASTS OF AUSTIN PRE-1955

IN THIS ISSUE

We complete ourassessment of the Austin coach andinclude some impressions of what it was like to ownand operate.

Ask Arnold gets offto a flying start witha corker of a question from atroubled owner.

And we take a lookround the events to see what’s beengoing on and what’scoming up.

NEXT TIME

Revelations of thewater babes andbelles or...moreon marines.

Much more fromArnold

And something todelight any ex-Austinapprentices amongour readers

PLUS MUCH,MUCH MORE FOR

AUSTIN FANSEVERYWHERE

Why an Ascot avantthe attraction?

Editor, Martyn Nutland,is a lifelong devotee ofthe Austin Light TwelveFour and has owned themodel, but he could notresist the temptation, 70years on from thelaunch of Citroën`siconic `Traction`, tocompare the two genres

Back-to-back classic carroad tests have becomethe vogue among motor-

ing journalists in recent yearsand some of us may havebeen subjected to such spuri-ous contortions as a compari-son between the Austin Sevenand Morris Eight.

Never a publication to follow fash-ion, Austin Times would like toattempt something a little differentand wonders whether you have everconsidered the pre-war Citroën

heart of why the dearold Twelve was such aprim, prissy, shrinkingviolet of a countrytown cousin when theCitroëns were soextrovert, elegant andeclectic.

Chalk and cheese - 1935Ascot to the left, in thiscase sprightly 12/6 version,in company with 1938 7C

Traction Avant alongside the con-temporary Austin Light TwelveFour Ascot.

Not a so called back-to-backanalysis; the Austin is so hope-lessly outclassed mechanically forthat to be valid. But to go to the

The birth dates of our two sub-jects are roughly the same.The cowled radiator Ascot waslaunched in August 1934although Austin had beenoffering the same engine in anumber of Light Twelves sinceautumn 1932. The major deal-ers saw the wraps come offthe Citroën 7A on March 24,1934, the press show came amonth later and the very firstsale followed on May 3.

On the surface the two carsare similar. Both used in line,vertical, four cylinder, watercooled engines. FromLongbridge, a 1,535 cc (69.35x 101.6 mm) unit, and from thenew Javel works, sprawling inthe shadow of the Eifel Tower,one of 1,303 cc (72 x 80mm).

OLD FASHIONED

However, this was found to beinadequate, and just a monthinto its life the 7A’s engine wasbored out to 78mm (1,529 cc)making it the 7B. (A 1,628 cc7C and a 1,911 cc 7S in thenext French taxation categoryof 11CV were also available.)

To continue the comparison,both cars had manual gear-boxes, drum brakes, and couldcarry four people in comfort, orfive in thigh-squeezing intimacy.

But there the similarity mostdefinitely ends. The Citroën’sfour cylinder engine hadpushrod operated overheadvalves whereas the Austinrelied on an old-fashioned,performance restricting, sidevalve layout. Much moreimportant in this respect, the7B’s almost ‘square’ cylinderdimensions (78 x 80mm) wereat the forefront of efficientengine design. Whereas theLight Twelve’s long stroke

characteristic, tailored to thestultifying RAC formula for cal-culating horsepower tax, debil-itated this and many otherBritish engines. Even so theAustin managed about 33 bhpat 3,600 rpm as opposed tothe Citroën’s 35 at about thesame revolutions.

Both engines were rubbermounted, but the French caremployed a sophisticated sys-tem of synthetic cones andblocks devised jointly by twoFrench engineers namedPierre Lemaire and Pauld’Aubarède. This concept ofthe ‘floating motor ’ absorbedboth the torque reactions ofthe engine and shocks trans-mitted from the road. There isno evidence that the Ascot’ssystem lacked effectiveness itjust looks less scientific.

The engine room was onlythe beginning of the Citroën’sclaim to ‘cutting edge’ technol-ogy. The gearbox was to havebeen an automatic devicewhich reflected AndréCitroën’s personal dislike ofdriving and approval of any-thing which made control of avehicle easier.

Rather oddly, the companyturned to Dimitri Sensaud deLevaud for a design. Sensaudde Levaud was a Brazilian cof-fee magnate who, quite sim-ply, liked inventing things. Thisidea relied on oil driven tur-bines in the transmission linewhereby resistance from theroad wheels on one side wasovercome by the engine onthe other.

The result should have beenan ‘infinitely variable’ andcompletely smooth transmission.

PROVED DISASTROUS

The prestige French makeVoisin had used such a sys-tem in the mid-20s and itworked well in experiments onconventional Citroëns in theearly 30s. However, it proveddisastrous coupled to frontwheel drive. As a result the 7Breceived a three speed manu-al gearbox housed in the cas-ing intended for the automatic,and hung in front of the enginein the mannner of AmericanCords and the British FWDAlvis. This location resulted in

Elegance personified - the timeless loveliness of Bertoni’s linesfor the Traction, here on a 1934 7A. This was the very first rendition at 1300 cc.

the classic traction avant fea-ture of a gear lever protrudingfrom the instrument panel.

The drive shafts were unitedto wheels and gearbox byTracta constant velocity joints,as used by early Land Rovers,where they also proved trou-blesome.

The Austin, of course, couldrival none of this. However, itcould boast a four speed gear-box and by 1934 had synchro-mesh on second gear as wellas third and top, althoughAndré Citroën may still havefound the manipulation a littletricky.

Drive was at the rear wheels,conveyed by conventionaltransmission shaft and needleroller bearings to a spiralbevel, threequarter floating,rear axle.

The Citroën had independentsuspension to all four wheelsprovided by torsion bars.Initially it used large trans-verse friction shock absorbers,but by April 1935 sported a tel-escopic hydraulic type.Originally the cars steeredfrom a worm and sector gear-box but by 1936 they had amuch more appropriate rackand pinion. Braking was on

drums all round operated byLockheed hydraulics suppliedfrom a resevoir mounted onthe left-side bulkhead.

The Ascot is in the stone ageby comparison, with semi-ellip-tic ‘cart’ springs at each cornerand, in 1934, friction shockabsorbers, although pistontype hydraulics arrived beforethe War. Brakes were a rodand cable operated drum system.

‘TALENT SPOTTED’

This became an all-rod Girlingwedge and roller layout onlater models, which althoughabout as good as mechanicalsystems get, is not a patch onhydraulic operation.

Both the exterior and interiorstyling of the 7 Series washandled by the Italian sculptorFlaminio Bertoni. Bertoni’s tal-ent for bridging the dividebeen art and science has beenlikened to that ofMichelangelo. Born in Varesein 1903 he spent part of hisearly life working for theMacchi firm of vehicle bodymakers. By the time he was‘talent spotted’ by a delegationof French visitors, Bertoni haddeveloped a life long passionfor cars.

PLASTICINE

He subsequently moved toFrance and was hired as adraughtsman by Citroën in1932.

When he was asked to craftthe 7A he had never designeda car in his life but reputedlyformed its classic shape froma block of plasticine in a singleevening. He went on to styleboth the 2CV and DS19 andas a consequence now stands

among the immortals.The interpretation of Bertoni’s

design was a sturdy mono-coque. Construction beganwith a rigid platform integralwith the bulkhead and sub-stantial forward projecting‘pontoons’ to encase and sup-port the engine. It was basical-ly similar to the structure sub-sequently used for the chassi-less Austin Eight and Ten.

Onto the platform workersbeside the 10 kilometres ofJavel conveyors arc-weldedthe two sides of the car beforefinally cross-bracing the boxwith the front and rear lateralpanels.

The shells were sprayed inanother part of the 240 acreworks using a nitro-cellulosepaint. As a matter of interestthis finish had been developed

It was iconic. AsFrench as Maigretand the Can-Can,Camembert andVouvray. One of thegreat automotiveshapes. A car whichlooked, and was,years ahead ofits time.

Not Burzi’s best. The Italianwas capable of a softer linethan the ‘ Al Capone’ severityof the Lichfield.

Touch of class. The typicallook of quality embodied in thedetailing of all 30s Austins.

after the 1914-18 war to con-sume surplus stocks of chemicals!

As time passed, stretchingthe Traction Avant to make itaccommodate first six, thennine passengers, or everyingfrom two 250 kilogram barrelsof wine, through six full grownsheep to a prone adult on astretcher, plus increasing thefrontal overhang in 1937 to fita six cylinder engine andadding a humpy, barnacle of aboot in 1953, ruined Bertoni’soriginal lines. Yet at the outsetthe car was not sim-ply low, sleek, andsensuously propor-tioned, it was iconic.As French asMaigret and theCan-Can,Camembert andVouvray; one of thegreat automotiveshapes. A car whichlooked, and was,years ahead of itstime. The Ascot, by com-

parison, was yearsbehind the times.The body was bolted to a gird-er chassis frame. To be fair, bynow this was cruciformedbraced, which was the rightway to go, but hardly rocketscience.

The styling was by Austin’sown talented Italian, RicardoBurzi. Burzi had worked forLancia in the early 20s butthrough an act of incredibleimprudence, in that he usedhis drawing skills to caricatureMussolini for a newspaper,had to flee his homeland.

Recommended to Austin andinstalled at Longbridge hedesigned some lovely vehiclesfor the company. The 1934Lichfield (10 hp) series, which

included the Light Twelve FourAscot, with its vaguely AlCapone-Cadillac looks, wasnot among them.

But, and again to be fair,Burzi was very well aware ofHerbert Austin’s conservatismand he took the bold step in1936 of completely restylingthe 12 while Austin was onholiday. The New Ascot, as itbecame known, is a beautifullybalanced concept, with elegantflowing wings and tail whichlooks ‘right’ from any angle.

Intriguingly, there is a parallel

to the story of Bertoni havingstyled the 7A in a Parisienevening. Free from Austin’sover-the-shoulder gaze, it tookBurzi no more than a fortnightto create the New Ascot.When, the recently enobledLord Austin returned fromvacation and told his designerthe 12 should be revamped, afull scale colour drawing wasavailable within a few hours!Touché .

The Citroën suffered severebirth pangs. This was due inlarge measure to an unseemlyrush to get into productionmotivated by the company’sparlous financial state, AndréCitroën’s impetuosity and his

pride.The latter had been hurt by a

suggestion from arch-rivalLouis Renault that car manu-facture should be left to theBillancourt company whileAutomobiles Citroën devotedits time to marketing the output.

Stung into action, betweenthe late spring and early sum-

mer of 1933 Citroën had muchof his Javel works demolishedand a new factory created fora new world-beating project.

Round-the-clock workingcrammed a 36

month undertakinginto a sixth of thattime and provided

120,000 squaremetres of workshop

space to house15,000 machines -

as many asBillancourt - and

the 18,000 workersneeded to operate

them. On October 9, the

new facility wasopened with a ban-

quet in the 250-metre-longproduction hall for 6,500 ofCitroën’s friends,180 Frenchcelebrities, 3,600 agents and1,500 selected employees. Butif the money was there for thechampagne and special petiterosalie ice cream, it was notavailable to run the works.

As early as 1930 Citroën’sdebt stood at 125 milion francsand in this fall of ‘33 they weresoaring by the day. Just over amonth after the banquet theReceivers were in, and 13months later, in December1935, Michelin acquiredAutomobiles Citroën.

The scramble for productionmeant the prototype 7s were

Who said Austins couldn’t look as lovely as theirContinental cousins - haute couture by Salmons for aNew Ascot.

on the road with, lockingbrakes, torsion bars whichbroke on rebound, a moteurflottant which did so to suchan extent it fractured theexhaust and caused the radi-ator header tank to hit thebonnet, plus diverse electricalproblems. The automatic gear-box may have been, asdescribed at the works, ‘only fitfor frying chips’, but thereplacement manual ‘box suf-fered third gear jamming in theselector mechanism.

RESOLVED

And things were as bad onBertoni’s stylish body. Thedoors were difficult to openand close and flew open onthe move while the weldsbroke away.

To the credit of Javel’s tech-nicians most of these prob-lems were resolved in time fora company-organised con-cours d’elegance in Paris’sBois de Boulogne on June 81934.

The event illustrated AndréCitroën’s flair for publicity. Onthis occasion seven meticu-lously prepared TractionAvants - four saloons in red,white and blue, two cabriolets

and a faux cabriolet (fixedhead coupé) were handedover to a bevy of society beau-ties including Baroness deRothschild.

All went well until the carswere due to parade from theprize-giving whereupon thelocking brake malaisereturned. Mechanics scrabbledto release the shoes while, tosave the day, MonsieurCitroën performed the Frenchequivalent of an invitation to‘talk amongst yourselves’!

None of this would havedone at ‘The Austin’ , ofcourse. Boring, unsophisticat-ed and undistinguished thoughthe Ascot’s may have been,the middle class family who

invested around £200 of theirbank balance were guaranteeda reliable, quality car.

The phrase, ‘triumph of work-manship over design’ hasbeen unkindly applied to theRolls-Royce. It could moreappropriately be used for theAustin Light Twelve Four.

The materials Longbridgeused, the construction meth-ods they employed and thelevel of quality control were ofthe highest. The Ascots’ finish,detailing and appointmentswould all have reflected this -the clock, adjustable footrestsfor the rear seat passengers,roller blinds for the rear screenand quarter windows, and acomprehensive tool kit includ-ing a spare cylinder head gasket.

SKILFULLY DONE

Whereas the traction Avantcould be decidedly stark. Itcarried the same instrumentation as the Austinbut the layout was utilitarianand although the Ascot’s dash-board was also of steel, noattempt was made at ‘wood-graining’ as was so skilfullydone at Longbridge.

The Traction is one of the few popular cars that are genuinely usable today.The example on the right belongs to Walter and Noëlla Callens from Belgium

When Citroën stretched theTraction to create this1938 Famille they spoiled Bertoni’s original elegance. Austins always obtained more carryingcapacity while preserving their good looks.

The Traction Avant’s uphol-stery was unlikely to havebeen to English tastes. A vari-ety of materials such as wooland velours were used in dif-ferent styes - plain, pleated, acombination of both or but-toned. The frames were oftenworks-bus-tubular-steel; head-linings usually in the samefabric and colour as the seatswith rubber mats to the front ofthe car and woollen to therear. But there was little of thecraftsmanship you would enjoyin an Austin. In service, theAscot would have beenuntemperamental, easy todrive, safe, solid and comfort-able with a top speed around60 mph.

By contrast the 7B would havebeen sensational. No fasterbut incredibly safe, stable andwith exceptional cornering androad holding capabilities evenunder adverse conditions.

Despite all its early tribula-tions the Traction Avant isregarded as a masterpiecewhich set the trend in motorcar design for decades.

Clearly the Citroën is ‘lightyears’ ahead of the AustinTwelve with which we havesought to make comparison.Yet the question remains, whyshould this be so.

It is easy to respond with the argument that André Citroënwas a more innovative andaccomplished designer than

Lord Austin. And certainly theircharacters were very different.

The Frenchman was charis-matic, a bon viveur, an aes-thete, someone who, ratherthan automotive techicians,enjoyed the company ofartists, entertainers and itellec-tuals, numbering among hiscircle the young Menuhin, andCharlie Chaplin.

HAGIOGRAPHY

He was also a gambler andadored time spent in thesparkling casinos of Deauvilleand Le Touquet.

Yet to dismiss André Citroen,as some have, as a man moreconcerend with the fall of thedice and the turn of a prettyankle, than running a motorbusiness, is to do him thegravest injustice.

Citroën was a graduate ofParis’s Ecole Polytechnique,the most distinguished techni-cal academy in France. Asearly as 1902 he established abusiness manufacturingmechanically advanced doublehelical gears - the origins ofthe double chevron - and by1908 was involved in themotor industry through anassociation with the Frenchmanufacturer Mors.

POPULIST

Although Citroën had a regardfor Ford bordering on hagiog-raphy, by the early 1930s hehad come to resent beingregarded as the ‘French HenryFord’, seeing himself more inthe ilk of a populist EttoreBugatti. Partly for this reason,and also because of his finan-cial difficulties, he determinedto give his customers a car sodistinctive and technically

advanced that it would placehim years ahead of the competition.

It’s that time of year again.Many of us are rolling out ourcars after hibernation, somelight fettling or even a majorrestoration.

Time also to think furtherahead and further afield thanthe event on the village green.

This year sees the 13thSwiss Classic British CarMeeting which regular readersof Times will remember isstaged at Morges on theshores of Lake Geneva.

Date for the diary is SaturdayOctober 2 when 1500 carsare expected to turn out.Details of the event are stillbeing finalized but usual rulesapply – free entry and no priorbooking required by public orparticipants. There will also bespecial deals on accommodation.

We’ll keep you informed oryou can log on to the Meetingwebsite www.british-cars.ch

We conclude ourcomparison of the

Austin and Citroën inthe next issue

On guard forSwiss ‘Brit’By the early

1930s he had cometo resentbeing regarded asthe ‘FrenchHenry Ford’

But if you discount a VandenPlas 1300 as a draw prize,search the 20,000 squaremetres of hall space at thePorte de Versailles as youreditor might, he was hardpressed to find anything relat-ing directly to Austin, or indeedRosengart. But that’s hardly lepoint! The show is definitelyworth the trip across or underThe Channel.

Investment

However, don’t expect a re-runof a typically British classic carexhibition. While Retromobilehas got more polished andsophisticated as each of itsprevious 28 years passed, it issmaller, more informal andmore quirky than its UK counterparts.

Where else would you findnever-touch-the-tarmac,investment icons rubbing naveplates with a wax representa-tion of Cruchot ‘driving’ aMustang a la chase from LeGendarme de Saint-Tropez?

Autojumble

Maybe the French don’t taketheir classic cars that seriouslyand maybe that’s no bad thing.

However there’s some seri-ous ogling and/or divesting ofeuros to be done.

British enthusiasts will get achance to see legends they

would rarely encounter athome. I saw my first RenaultReinastella, Voisin Aérodyne,Panhard Dynamic, Pegaso,Excelsior and evenDuesenburg all atRetromobile. And the set piecedisplays – called ‘expos’ –from giants like Mercédès-Benz are superb.

Don’t expect too much eitherof the extensive autojumbleunless you are restoring aFrench marque. UpdraughtZeniths proliferate but they areusually XXL, and if you are nottoo much of a purist there are

table creaking excesses ofitems like side and headlights,clocks, mags and Pyrenes !

If miniatures turn you on thiscould definitely be the place.Scores of stands offer every-thing from the ground-under-foot dregs of some Marseillestoy box to a minutely detailedtableau of Bentley’s latest vic-tory at Le Mans. And I didmanage to find a couple ofscruffy Dinky A90 Atlantics andan Austin Healey 100/4 vyingfor cabinet space with a mintand boxed Rolls-Royce SilverWraith.

In the wonderful world ofAustin we try to unite manydifferent Longbridge disci -plines for a convivial exchangeof information and experi -ence. Such a happening tookplace recently when Ruby, BigSeven and Eight owners cametogether under intriguing cir -cumstances. Austin Timesreader and a man of broadAustin interests Vic Hind wasthere.

The British magazine Classicand Sports Car wanted to doa piece on the development ofthe Austin Seven from theRuby through the Big Seven tothe alligator bonneted Eightwrites Vic.

As a Big Seven Sixlite ownerand a member of the excellentand active Big Seven RegisterI was invited to bring along mycar for the ‘photo shoot’.Leading light of the Register,Robin Taylor, managed to findexamples of all three modelsplus a picturesque backdrop,all in the same geographicalregion.

Journalist Jon Pressnall andphotographer Tony Baker metthe team at Naphill, near HighWycombe, on an autumn day,so warm that even those asfollically challenged as I need-ed no headgear.

Not scores, but hundreds ofphotographs and

Better and better butAustin where were you?‘Adventure’ was the theme of this year’s Paris Retromobileheld during mid-February. Needless to say the emphasiswas on subjects like the half-track Citroëns of Georges-Marie Haardt, Darl’Mat Peugeots and, rather more obscure,the Delahaye of Courcel and Houard.

And babymadethree

by VIC HIND

It was a gent from the otherside of town we never sawmuch of. He ran a 1929 16/6,one of the nicest cars they

ever built, and usually as goodas gold. But a few years agohe’d had someone ‘recon’ themotor and had just had a newclutch put in to cure slippingand the ‘kangaroos’.

Ever since she’d had what hetold me was a deep grumblingsomewhere in the engine. Itcame in, under load, in allgears, in a particular revrange, but was particularly badin second or third when climb-ing steep hills. And there areplenty of those hereabouts, Ican tell you!

SMOOTHNESS

I went back to me tea andgave Tosh something of a his-tory lesson.

I told him how the engine inour gent’s car was a develop-ment of the 20/6 whichreplaced the legendary 20/4.Sir Herbert Austin had wantedto improve the smoothnessand power of this posh chassisand thought two more cylin-ders on the end would do the trick.

But by sod’s law, on test, thenew ‘six’ proved to be asrough as a badger’s wotsit andnowhere near as smooth asthe ‘four’ it was to replace. Theanswer was to fit a vibrationdamper to the front of the

transparencies of the carswent in the ‘can’ and Jondrove them at length and car-ried out in-depth interviewswith myself and Ruby andEight owners Bob Smith andJohn Cooper respectively.The day was rounded off withan excellent ‘Italian job’ at arestaurant in nearby PrincesRisborough, the ten English

establishments we had visited-having, true to tradition, proved incapable of providingan impromptu, late lunch !

The article appeared in theJanuary issue of Classic andSports Car and, as a point ofinterest, Austin Times carried amajor feature on the Big Sevenin the Spring 2003 edition.More on Big Sevens later thisyear.

Times readers frequently ask us to run atechnical section. So, to give you what youwant, we’ve persuaded ‘Arnold’ to come outretirement from the garage trade of long ago

No rumble but a grumble

I’d just put me mug down onthe old Harvey Frost and‘Tosh’, the apprentice, wasopening the bag of Welshcakes his mum makes us forour ‘elevenses’, when thephone in the office rang.

crankshaft. And bob’s youruncle, when the new ‘16’came out, they popped one onthat too and turned it into thesweetest running Austin of thelate ‘20s.

Tosh drove me out there inour old Seven van the follow-ing morning and we brought inthe ‘Sixteen’, a very nice tour-er as it happened. On the way,I noted the clutch was assweet as a nut and oil pres-sure spot on, but climbing inthird then second on theback way home she didn’thalf have a rumble in herguts.

Once we got her in and abrew going, the first thing Ithought of was that vibra-tion damper and the crankitself. If you don’t knowthese old girls it’s veryeasy to set it all up wrongand cause the customerproblems long term andbig time.

I warned Tosh that wewere going to have to stripto the bare essentials – abig job in itself - and notonly go over the damperbut look at the crank forbow and twist. And Ipulled him up short when hesaid such a stout piece ofengineering could never ballywell bow or twist. They canand do. And when they dothey cause the sort of symp-toms our gent was describing.

And, like to add insult toinjury, I told him, as we werestripping to that extent, I wasgoing to have him runningtests ‘til the cows came home;camshaft, timing chain andparticularly the connectingrods for cracks.

These ‘lads’ are as slenderas a ballerina’s pins; and areal worry. They go when

you’ve got about 40 on thespeedo and the conse-quences are not a pretty sight.I could have told him about theSixteen hearse of similar vin-tage we pulled in a few yearsback after a rod had gone, butit would have made him weeplike a widow!

When we got down to thereal business of solving thatgent’s rumble we stuck to ourChristian values of cleanlinessbeing next to Godliness and

began with one of the mostimportant jobs anyone can ever do. The bared crankcasewent into a drum of cellulosethinners. And stayed there for48 hours.

That melted years of gum, oiland varnish off the internalsurfaces but I still had Toshusing a stiff paint brush andseparate bowl of thinners toworry away at the stubborndeposits. Then I pulled myparty trick – the long, thin,copper-bristle bottle brushesthe builders of model steamengines buy to clean their boil-ers. These will get the oil

passages pretty clear but westill used a paraffin gun filledwith more thinners to blast outall the passages again andgive every surface a finalclean.

It didn’t apply to us but if the‘case had been oxidized,these days I would send it foraquablasting and vapourcleaning which leaves them‘as new’.

We then ran a tap through allthe threaded holes and had I

found any damage we

With my best steel rule andTosh squinting under the edgefor a show of light we checkedall the machined surfaces fortruth. And then it was time forsome technical stuff. I mount-ed the shaft in vee blocks andused the dial test indicator tocheck for bow and twist.

Had we been going toregrind the crank’ I would havehad it crack tested – properly;not dangly, dangly from therafters, then jingly-jangly whenhit it with a hammer stuff. Andso we came to those connecting rods.

would have replacedthem with a Helicoil

insert.Minor imperfections wetook out with a file, buthad there been largerdiscrepancies it wouldhave been an ‘outside’

job calling for light shadow grinding.

We could now moveonto the crank itself; a

nicely made item. We used exactly the same cleaning tech-

nique as for thecrankcase, but added ascrub with wire wool to

take off the gum andvarnish.

The 16’s crank’ and camshaft with fitments

I sat Tosh down on ourfavourite oil drums and gavethe poor lad another lecture.

The long and slender ‘rods’are one of the great weak-nesses of the 16/6 engine and the cause of many cata-strophic failures. Seventy-plusyears of metal fatigue on adesign which was not asstrong as it could have been,should cause great concern.

ROUGH RUNNING

I told him he should alwaysget new rods made, no matterhow good the originals looked.And if he was going to chanceit; always check for stretch,bow, twist and arrange a cracktest. And be sure who everdoes the regrinding of thecrank on these engines andre-metals the rods is deadaccurate in their work.

Errors on crankpins and jour-nals and out-of-true rodscause rough running at thehigher engine speeds.

Having bent his ear enoughfor one afternoon we startedback on the damper. However,it wasn’t long before I wassounding off again. In thesesix cylinder engines, Iexplained, the crankshaft‘winds-up’ as we call it; or, ifyou like, ‘springs’ slightlyahead of the flywheel at cer-

tain revs. This is more notice-able on engines like the 16which use heavy flywheelsand long stroke cranks.

What actually happens is asengine speed rises the ‘wind-ing up effect’ moves along thecrankshaft towards the fly-wheel becoming less notice-able. When the rpm fall thecrank unwinds all of which isfelt in the car as a band ofrough running . Which is whya vibration damper is needed.It doesn’t stop the effect butdamps it down like a shockdamper does on road springs.

Putting your foot down willmake it disappear until the carslows into critical revs again.

Tosh could see that on the16 the damper is a disc with atapered boss which fits on thefront of the crankshaft. In frontof the disc is a small ‘flywheel’which is able to rotate inde-pendently of the crank. The‘flywheel’ is clamped to thedisc by a set of small coilsprings and friction rings whichcontrol its movement in the rel-evant rev ranges.

I told Tosh it was easier tofollow the principle though ifyou look at our modern bond-ed rubber jobs. Here the discis within the little ‘flywheel’and ‘bonded’ radially to it by athick layer of rubber.

If a spot of paint is put on thedisc and a corresponding spoton the ‘flywheel’ and theassembly spun, the marksremain in unison until the criti-cal rpm. Then the outer paintspot moves momentarilyahead of the inner beforebeing ‘pulled back’ by the rub-ber element of the damper.This is how it stops them badvibes coming on.

On the old 16/6 the springsand friction rings take the

place of the rubber. What wehad to do after the cleaningprocess was use the dial testindicator to check the centredisc for truth. Then with finelapping compound lightly grindit onto the crank’.

The friction discs neededexamining for wear groovesand these to be ground out.But, very importantly, onlyafter the total amount to beground off has been measuredand noted. It must then beadded to the length of newsprings.

The springs themselvesmust have a uniform freelength and require roughlyeven poundage for a givencompression.

SHOWROOM

When we had the crank’ backin the ‘case, we checked eachend of the shaft for ‘run out’with the dial test indicator.Tosh turned the crank while Iwatched the needle. Happy itwas ‘bang on’, we mountedthe damper disc and checkedagain for run out ready for finalassembly.

Having got all this sortedand the job some ways backtogether, other things in theworkshop pressed and as thecustomer was running aroundin a rather natty Goodwoodwe’d had in the showroom fora few weeks and the gaffer’dloaned him, Tosh and I decid-ed to leave the 16/6 for a bit.

Austin Times nor the contributorsto this column, accept anyresponsibility whatsoever for theadvice contained therein. It’sadoption, and the consequencesthereof are entirely the responsi-bility of the reader and/or anythird parties working on his or herbehalf.

Even if the BedfordOB itself was virtu-ally an unknown

quantity, Longbridgeshould have been warythat its immediate pro-genitors had establisheda remarkable reputation.Bedford had been on the bus

and coach scene since 1931when they launched the WHBand WLB with 131 and 157inch wheelbases respectively.By 1935 the smaller vehiclehad already disappeared fromthe catalogue, and that yearthe WLB was replaced by theslightly longer (167 inch) WTB.

FAR-FLUNG

In 1938 the WTB got a biggerengine and it was this 28horsepower six cylinder whichwas to serve the famous OBso well in the post-war years.

By the mid 1930s - beforeAustin had even re-enteredthe commercial vehicle sector- 50 per cent of light or medi-um psvs sold in the UK were

Bedfords. In some regionsnine out of 10 coaches wereLuton built. And the companyalso had a presence in suchfar-flung corners of the globeas China and South America.

But the feature which con-tributed above all others to theOB’s unassailability wasdesign from the chassis up asa passenger carrying vehicle.Its two piece transmissionshaft was routed to the leftside of a double-drop frame,ladder braced like the Austin.The forward section of the shaft passed above the fourth

cross member, had the centraluniversal joint bracketed there,but then slipped under the fifthto reach a differential close tothe left wheel.

To make this simple arrange-ment possible, the Bedford’sengine was skewed slightly inthe chassis.

INGENIOUS

The explanation, for anyonewho ever wondered, as to whyan OB’s starting handle hole isoff-centre, unlike the compara-ble O Series lorry.The sum total was to provide

coachbuilders with the oppor-tunity for a low floor and easypassenger access.

If the arrangement of theOB’s chassis was particularlyingenious the overall mechan-ics were as straightforward asthose of the Austin, and possi-bly rather cruder.

The Bedford six cylinderoverhead valve engine of3,519 cc (85.72 x 101.6 mm)developed 72 bhp at 3000

Coaching for the premier division CONCLUDING OUR LOOK AT AUSTIN PSVs

All time classic; all time favourite, Bedford OB with Duple Vista body

Even industry stalwartsPlaxton find it difficult toachieve perfectly balancedlines on this CXB.

rpm. It drove through a straightcut, sliding pinion gearbox to,again, a spiral bevel fully float-ing rear axle.

Suspension was by semi-elliptic leaf springs all round,the rear ones on negativecamber at full load. As on theAustin there were no shockabsorbers as standard on theOBs until the very end.Steering was by a worm andwheel gearbox.

Like Austin, the Bedford usedLockheed hydraulic brakes butwith dual circuits worked froma tandem master cylinder andassisted by Clayton Dewandrevacuum servo. A further refine-ment was to place the rearslave cylinders outboard toavoid overheating when theassemblies were enveloped bycoachwork.

SYNONYMOUS

Mechanical niceties were anoptional tyre pump driven offthe gearbox (technologyknown to Longbridge who hademployed it on their wartimeambulance, but not nowadopted) and a spare tyre aswell as the wheel!

The early OB chassis costabout £500 and in the late 30sthe Duple coachwork withwhich Bedford became syn-onymous would have addedfrom £723 for a bus, to over£860 for a luxury ‘sunshinesaloon’ coach, body.

In January 1945 with WorldWar II not even over, Austinbecame the first manufacturerto rush into print with theannouncement of a post-warrange of commercial vehicles.These included what we knowas the CXB normal controlcoach, although it was still notdesignated as such.

The whole line-up was verysimilar to what had gonebefore, but as the three tonlorry chassis had gone infavour of a five introduced inthe war, the coach was nowbased on this, and like all theother commercials, benefitedfrom wartime experience.

The most striking visual alter-ation was to the radiator grillewhere the three, horizontallyribbed vertical panels hadbeen replaced by a more mod-ern design. This featured acentral section with its thickvertical bars relieved bychrome trim. It was flanked bypanels much like those of pre-war, but with thicker bars,three of whose equi-spacednumber were also chromeembellished.

The radiator itself had theprovisions for coolant expan-

sion adopted for the big carsand military ambulance, aswell as a revised pump. As in1939 the fan was cowled.

In the engine itself the valvestems were now shrouded byan extension of the guide andconsiderable attention hadbeen paid to the lubricationsystem. The mesh, ‘basin’-shaped, filter locatedover the head of the pumpbetween oil tray and sumpbase, favoured by Austin pre-war and which, on the com-mercials, was supplementedby an external by-pass filterbolted to the rear of the cylin-der block, had been modified.There was now a more sub-stantial, finer-guazed strainer,in the cooler depths of thesump but still supplementedby the external filter.

CONFUSING

The oil-ways and distributionchannels had been improvedand Austin’s patented synthet-ic rubber ring appeared on thecam gear to silence and ten-sion the timing chain.

Other post-war modificationsconcerned toughening up thetransmission with taper rollerinstead of ball bearings, tocarry the differential bevel pin-ion shaft. Another Austin favourite in

worm and wheel steering gearhad gone; replaced by Bishophigh efficiency roller-cam andlever. The linkage ball jointsgot harder contact surfacesand better lubrication, whilechassis spring hangers werestrengthened.

There is no record of servoassistance for the brakesbeing announced at that January launch to dealers, buta Clayton Dewandre system -

The most strikingvisual alteration wasto the radiator grillewhere the three,horizontally ribbed ,vertical panels hadbeen replaced by amore modern design

It would seem unlikely any busesand coaches actuallyappeared until 1947,particularly as coachproduction was noteven permitted until 1946

similar to the OB’s - was inplace by the time productionwas gathering momentum in1947.

Although Austin announcedits post-war commercial vehi-cle programme at the verybeginning of 1945 it wouldseem unlikely any buses andcoaches actually appeareduntil 1947, particularly ascoach production was noteven permitted until 1946. Butit has to be admitted the over-all picture is a little confusing.

VOCABULARY

Contemporary company litera-ture and the authoratitiveCommercial Motor magazineonly refer to both pre- andpost-war Austin psvs as ‘thecoach’, and the lorries byweight classification andwheelbase. Somewhere alongthe line CXB passed into ourvocabulary and alludes to the15 ft wheelbase (25 foot over-all) normal control OB-look-alike.

Not every authority agrees,but Keith Jenkinson inPreserved Buses (Ian Allan1978) gives the currency of the CXB as 1947-50. Around mid-way of course, in 1948, itacquired the four litre

(3,992 cc 87 x 111 mm)engine. This was a develop-ment, for the Austin Sheerlinecar launched in 1947, of theexisting overhead valve six.

As with Bedford the normalcontrol coach seems to havedisappeared from the Austinscene in 1950. But the 15 ftwheelbase chassis had exist-ed in forward control formsince 1948 and was to contin-ue until 1955 as what wewould call the CXD. Although itshoud be mentioned thatsome coachbuilders went for aforward control, or flat-fronted,appearence on the normalcontrol chassis.

This simply involved pan-elling the forward section on

each side of the standard grilleand must have made for arather strange driving positionbut would have providestowage, or even an additionalseat, alongside the engine.

In his erudite article on Austincoaches in a 1986 issue ofThe Vintage CommercialVehicle Chris Taylor quotesSalmesbury as exponents ofthis technique, and very nice itlooked.

It appears likely early ‘CXDs’were again simply called ‘thecoach’.

FAIR ASSUMPTION

By virtue of launch date, allwould have had the four litre,87 bhp engine. In 1950 a‘Series II’ was offered with theoption of a Perkins P6 4.7 litre(89 x 127 mm) diesel engine.

The latter developed a maxi-mum 83 bhp at 2,400 rpmwhen it was delivering 202lbs/ft of torque. It is a fairassumption CXD (D for diesel,perhaps) became commonparlance at this time.Production then continued until1955.

The most handsome of theforward control vehicles used

Another, but verytired, CXB benefits from anicely craftedearly Whitsonstyle.

In even worse condition is this similar model by an unknownbuilder, ousted from her garage to await ‘scrappy’ or the vandal.

a version of the earlier grillecontained within a gently con-toured horsehoe shape. Butwhen the body was moreungainly the squat grille of thenow-current, normal control,‘Loadstar’ truck was used withacres of sheet metal above.To add to our recognition

problems, the demand for psvvehicles in the immediate post-war years was such thatsome operators simply tookthe five ton lorry chassis andbodied it as a coach. Niftiest atthis ploy seem to have beenGuernsey Motors who resortedto treating about 29 lorry chas-sis this way between 1946 and‘51.

The giveaway should alwaysbe the wheelbase (13ft 1 1/2inches as opposed to 15 ft)and some of the psv refine-ments we have consideredwould also have been missingalthough, hopefully, theseshrewd innovators would haveremembered to re-route thetruck’s longitudinal exhaustsystem, finishing mid-wayalong the frame, to emerge atthe side!

The same comments applyto the contemporary two tonlorry chassis which, on awheelbase of 11ft 2ins could,and did, make a useful littlebus for about 20 passengers.

One final coach from this eraremains. The K8 was a 25 cwtvan current from 1946 until1953. It used the four cylinderoverhead valve 2,199 ccengine from the Austin Sixteencar, had Girling hydraulicbrakes all round and a wheel-base of 7ft 9 ins. The sellingpoint as a van was doors inthe sides of the cargo spaceas well as at the rear, leadingto the sobriquet ‘Three Way’.

‘WELFARER’

But the K8 also saw service asa smart ambulance called the‘Welfarer’ and, of course as a14/ 16 seater mini-coach. Firms like Kenex from Ashford,Kent, who concentrated theiractivities on Austin forwardcontrol chassis, left little doubttheir offerings were merelypassenger carrying K8s.However others, such asPlaxton, could squeeze theclassic Venturer style onto the15’ 7 ins long (9ft wheelbase)frame for a really eleganteffect.

SOLDIERED ON

Longbridge withdrew from thedomestic psv vehicle market in1955 to concentrate on theirother commercials. But theylaunched a Series III versionof the CXD in 1956 for over-seas customers and this sol-diered on for many years. Thefour litre petrol engine contin-ued to be an option alongsidea new 90 bhp five litre BMCdiesel.

Coachwork was often byMulliners of Birmingham - notto be confused with the firmlater commonly associatedwith Rolls-Royce - and therewere often as many as 44

seats on the old 15 ft wheel-base chassis. (Even in thedays of the CXB canny foreigncustomers managed to get 42aboard with an eight row, threeby two seat layout, plus doubleseat beside the driver!)

Any entrepreneurial operatorwho paid their £515 for theAustin ‘CXB‘ chassis in 1947got front wings, the bonnetand cowl, bumper, registrationplate, head and side lampsand a dashboard into the bar-gain. And there were numer-ous coachbuilders waiting totake more than half as muchcash again for the body.

Most famous of the firms whobuilt for Austin is probablyMann Egerton from Norwich.Apart from being Austin deal-ers the concern had a longcoachbuilding history. Not onlydid they construct limousines,but built the special Daimler‘invalid car’ which in February1929 carried King George V toa 13-week convalesence atBognor Regis. Less high pro-file were the hundreds ofAustin ‘Katy’ ambulances theyconstructed for the war effort.

By the mid-50s MannEgerton had at least one bodyspecifically for the Austin chassis.

Called the Norfolk it was ahandsome offering using

The demand for psvsin the immediatepost-war years wassuch that some operators simplytook the five-ton lorry chassis and bodied it as a coach

Why did Austin,who were sosuccessful inother categories,fail to makea significantimpact with their coaches

hardwood inserts panelled with aluminium over a light steelframe.

The overall finish was to theclassic formula of the periodwith interior lights on the pillarsof the openable window, lug-gage racks above the seatsand moquette and leatherupholstery.

Other ‘big names’ whoclothed the Longbridge prod-uct were Plaxtons, of course,and even Duple.

This London based company,however, will always be asso-ciated with the Bedford OB.Duple dated back to beforeWorld War I and had madetheir name - literally - with adual purpose body whichcould be used for trade pur-poses during the workingweek and as passenger trans-port at weekends.

Throughout the inter-waryears business boomed athome and broad as commer-cial vehicle bodies - and a fewfor luxury cars like Austin andVauxhall - were built, first atHornsey and then Hendon, to the north of the capital.

During World War II, Duplebecame very familiar with theBedford chassis, constructingmore than 2,000 ‘utility’ OWBs. And when peace returned andcoach manufacture was per-mitted the relationship

continued with the reintroduc-tion of the 1939 Vista body onthe OB frame.

There is no doubt the Vista(known within the works as theF Type) is one of the classicvehicle designs of all time.Lovely from any angle, it wasbuilt on a steel reinforced ashframe with bolted joints andpanelled almost entirely in alu-minium.

FABRIC COVERED

Early examples were embel-lished by generous quantitiesof varnished wood, but thiswas reduced when avant-garde Formica replaced fabriccovered steel for the interiorpanels.

Our entrepreneur would havepaid about the same for aBedford as an Austin, and itwould have been delivered to

the body builder with much thesame basic metalwork - frontwings, bonnet etc. And once inthe owner’s hands the twovehicles would have been sim-ilar to operate and run.

Although neither was aimedspecifically at the one-manoperator, for anyone of aver-age mechanical ability theywere no more complicated tomaintain than the average carand, size apart, supposedly nomore difficult to drive. Whilethis must have appealed to awhole section of customers inthe 40s it is one of the criti-cisms you sometimes hearfrom hobby classic bus ownerstoday!

So why did Austin, who wereso successful in other cate-gories - private cars, Londontaxis and for a short time, agri-cultural tractors - fail to makea significant impact with theircoaches. Arguably the Austin had a bet-ter engine than the Bedford.Not only was the four litre ver-sion more powerful it was eas-ier to work on.

For example, the prescribed,very tricky, method for under-taking the routine task of set-ting tappet clearances on theLuton product was with theengine running, whereas theAustin only required

More flamboy -ant than theCXBs we haveseen before,the builder ofthis examplewith its horns,lamps, spatsand fairings is,for the moment,a mystery. Theoperator thoughis J Beadle.

Mann Egertonof Norwichprobably builtmore coachbodies forAustins thananyone else.This is anexclusivedesign specifi -cally for thelater forwardcontrol models

conventional static adjustment. The Bedford though had supe-riot brakes. Although laterAustins were to get servoassistance the OB had thisfeature and other brakingrefinements from day onewhich must have made theresponsibility of having thelives of some 29 souls in yourhands somewhat less worrisome.

DICTATED

Whatever the fine trimmings, ithas to be said ‘Longbridge’had not sat down specificallyto design a coach whereas‘Luton’ had.

The standard commercialvehicle back axle dictated thefloor height and both waist androof line. This necessitated toodeep a windscreen and usual-ly excesses of panellingbeneath the back window.Therefore, compared with theOB with its elegant, beautifullyproportioned coachwork, theAustin had a more cumber-some look.

Even when the body was notby Duple, and there were atleast another 40 coachworkswhich built for the OB, theessential details of the chassisgave them the chance to pro-vide pleasingly balanced lines.

Stan Hickmott is a UK coachoperator from Ashford in Kentand runs a pristine example ofa 1950 CXBwith Plaxton29 seat

coachwork.The Hickmott vehicle was

new to Born’s of Okehampton,Devon, and straightaway givesus some indication of howhighly these Austins could beregarded as it was hired bythe prestigious Royal BlueCompany for relief work ontheir important Exeter toLondon Victoria route.

The fact Hickmott still usethe Austin commercially is atremendous tribute to the prac-ticality and durability of themodel and by also appearingat classic vehicle shows itdoes much to advertise thecomprehensive nature ofLongbridge’s product range. Talking to Austin Times about

the coach Mr Hickmott said: “Idecided to buy the CXBbecause I liked Austin cars,but to be perfectly honest I

don’t think there is a greatdeal to choose between Austinand Bedford.“When both vehicles were

competing in the market placecost would obviously havebeen an issue but I think wealso come back to the fact theBedford OB chassis was bet-ter suited to coach bodyworkand not simply a ‘lorry’ chassisas was the Austin.

MORE DIFFICULT

“In service I find the CXB isquite easy to drive - not quiteas starightforward as a big car,as the steering is pretty heavyand the gearbox more difficult.Knowing both the Bedford andthe Austin, I honestly couldn’tsay that one engine is betterthan the other but certainlyLuton’s brakes are superior.”

The black and white pic-tures which appear withboth parts of this featurewere given to Austin Timesby enthusiast Ian Graingerand we are extremely grate-ful to him. Sadly some ofthe coaches featured are atthe end of their lives andalmost certainly no longerwith us. It has not alwaysbeen possible to positivelyidentify the coachbuilderand sometimes not even tobe certain of exactly whichmodel is portrayed.

MYSTERY TAILPIECE

The articles appearing inAustin Times are copyrightand may not be reproducedin whole or part withoutprior consent. Howevermaterial is available to clubsfree of charge and to com-mercial publications byagreement. Enquiries to:Friends of the Austin, 10 Av.de la Porte de Ménilmontant, 75020 PARIS. E-mail Martyn.Nutland@wanadoo.frTel 00 33 (0)1 43 67 81 56

New to Born ofOkehamptomthis Plaxtonbodied CXBcontinuedservice withStan Hickmottof Ashford

.