Comments by "John Burns" (@johnburns4017) on "Number 27" channel.

  1.  @alantunbridge8919  Never put accountants in charge of companies. The first thing that happens is cuts. Marketing drops off, etc. Then slow decline.
    8
  2.  @andrewp4172  The original Mini was far too manpower intensive, so costs were high. They could have automated far more of the process. But would cost.
    8
  3.  @worldadventureman  There is a vid on the Triumph Stag, with interviews from a few of the designers. One said they looked at fitting a Rover V8 engine in, but the engine bay would need to be about 6 inches longer. Also that a third party supplier of cylinder heads changed the design without permission causing overheat problems. Revealing.
    4
  4.  @gingernutpreacher  The Morris Minor engine, A Series, was bored out to 1300cc. Easy to do, and was done, but not on the Minor. The anachronistic 1940s looking Minor was a car that was always 18 months away from being binned, so little was done to it. It amazingly lasted until 1971 - only because, like the awful anachronistic looking VW Beetle, it was reliable and never rusted as much as newer better designed cars. Still made in Sri Lanka. The whole industry was badly managed. Union activity was a manifestation of the very poor management. Well run organisations never suffer workforce unrest.
    4
  5. @Mark by far An exaggeration for sure.
    4
  6.  @tonywilson4713  Yes, a combination of these things. But some were minor, others major. Apportioning the blame is important. The blame was on management 90%.
    3
  7.  @johniksushibar165  Nothing wrong with Lucas. It was the makers who fitted the stuff. Lucas never designed their electrical system or fitted the appalling connectors. Or ran too much thru one rocker switch to avoid fitting a relay, etc. RR fitted Lucas without problems.
    2
  8.  @mrkim3257  Nothing wrong with the wiring. Well thought out and fitted by craftsmen who cared. No more problematic than any other supercar at the time.
    2
  9. BL was nationalised by the Tory government. It was just state capitalism. Run as a private company but state owned. Nationalised industries should have been cooperatives. Then they would have been huge successes. The biggest employer in the UK is the John Lewis Partnership. A co-op. Each person employed is a partner. They receive a bonus each year if it makes profits. They vote on its direction.
    2
  10.  @gingernutpreacher  What the customer wanted. Ask them? Henry Ford said if he asked the customers what they wanted, they would have said, faster horses.
    2
  11.  @sparky6086  For a clear example of bad management look at HS2 high speed rail in the UK. Firstly, it is not needed as upgrading the existing network gives the same results at a fraction of the cost. As a high speed network it's a very poor design as well. It is more like a West Coast Mainline relief line going to places where fast trains already go to. The cost overruns are through the roof.
    2
  12. Chrysler coming to the UK was the kiss of death.
    2
  13. The Morris 1100 was a pure rot box. How anyone bought one new is beyond me.
    1
  14.  @Schlipperschlopper  The 1100 was exceptionally prone to rot, yet was a best seller as it was well styled. The subframes also rotted away. If after 4 years there was no rot showing you were doing well. Total garbage. The successor the Allegro eliminated the silly rear subframe being much more resistant to rust. The improved 124 the Lada, was much superior in strength and rust resistance.
    1
  15. The first one I ever saw was bright lime green. A colour I had never seen before, and neither a car like it. Crowds stood around it.
    1
  16.  @mrkim3257  He needed an auto electrician who knew what he was doing
    1
  17. In 1959 they needed a quick front end re-design. Not a difficult job.
    1
  18. Similar to the 1963 Vauxhall Viva. A box on a box.
    1
  19. The government rationed steel as it was in great demand post war. More steel was issued to utility cars than luxury cars. So hence the Land Rover was born.
    1
  20. @SoWereDoingWhatNow  Read it again.
    1
  21. The USA now!
    1
  22. The K70 was an Audi. VW bought Audi.
    1
  23.  @smhorse  A slight mistake by me, either NSU or Audi, who VW bought at the same time. But it was not a VW design, something they acquired so went with it. I recall it had rust problems and expensive for what it was. All German cars tended to be more expensive even though they would be no better than other makes.
    1
  24. The British thought about that in the 1980s, then let others do low tech products. Look at high tech BA systems. World leaders.
    1
  25. The Jaguar XKE was not designed or made by Leyland.
    1
  26.  @torstenheling3830  The E-Type was pure Jaguar. BMC bought Jaguar starving it of investment. The XJ6 was already developed when they took over. BMC denied Jaguar investment, and subsequently British Leyland did when they got hold of Jaguar. In 1965 BMC (Austin, Morris, MG, etc) bought Pressed Steel, who made the bodies for Jaguar. In 1966 they bought Jaguar. In 1968 BMC Holdings was close to collapse, so they merged with Leyland, who built trucks and buses and also owned Triumph. Pressed steel also made bodies for Rolls Royce and Bentley. They made bodies for Volvo. About one third of Volvos was made in the UK, inc; body parts and rolling parts of the car. BL consisted of one hundred different companies, in seven divisions. BL was the world's fifth largest vehicle manufacturer. The problem was massive under-investment by BMC who they inherited. Their model range was appalling with no plans to replace the expensive to make outdated cars. BMC made twice as many cars as Leyland did, so this was a major problem. BMC had been run by men stuck in the early 1950s. British Leyland's companies duplicated models in marketing sectors. Leyland went into financial problems in the early 1970's as they tried to sort out the merged mess without massive borrowing. The UK Tory government stepped in partly nationalizing the company. Not much changed as the government would not spend for the necessary and needed investment. New designs came in, but too late with far too much committee influence in the models. Leyland should never have bought BMC. BMC should have been allowed to fail. The profit making sides, or parts with potential, would have been sold off, such as like Pressed Steel.
    1
  27.  @torstenheling3830  Vauxhall was part of GM, who made some awful cars, but now a part of Peugeot. Peugot's Ellesmere Port plant, near Liverpool, make only EV vans now. What the mechanic was saying was that old cars in the 60s/70s were easy to fix, even if they did brake down more than a new car. Same story all over the world.
    1
  28. Triumph's main buyer for sporty cars was the USA. V-8s engines in sports cars were selling in the USA - which are now out of fashion. Triumph could have fitted a tuned up straight six into the Stag, but V-8s sold in the USA. The Stag's engine was effectively two Triumph slant-4 45 degree engines bolted together. In the mid 1960s SAAB needed a new engine for their 99, being referred by Ricardo to Triumph and their new design. The 45 degree slant-4 gave lower hood lines giving better aerodynamics. The Triumph slant-4 was used by SAAB in their 99 and 900 cars from 1969. SAAB were the first to use the engine three years before Triumph had it in a car. Using British engineers SAAB started the turbo craze in 1978 fitting a turbo on the slant-4, achieving far more horsepower out of the engine, of which the well made and designed engine handled with ease. It was still being made in China a few years ago, may still be manufactured. The excellent slant-4 was the basis of the Triumph V-8. But bolting together two excellent slant-4 engines never went quite right. The high-mounted water pump was insisted upon by SAAB on the slant-4 for maintenance access. Because they had the engine backwards over the sealed gearbox, with the clutch at the front with the engine. So when the two slant-4 engines were made into a V-8 the water pump was also high. Not a problem if the top up water coolant bottle was located high, which in the Stag it foolishly was not - this is basic stuff a simple mechanic studies at tech' college. There is a U tube video by the Stag Owners Club that runs for about 25 mins. On it are some of the designers of the car and engine, who highlight the easily preventable faults. The prototype engines never had cooling problems after many miles of harsh testing as they got a German company to make special cylinder head gaskets for them. The buying dept penny pinched buying cheaper gaskets from other manufacturers which never had the compression of the German company - oops, potential head gasket failure. The head manufacturing was subbed out to two companies. One company changed the water gallery sizes without telling Triumph, starving the head of cooling water. So if you had an engine with two heads from the rogue company you had a disaster awaiting. Or a car from the company making the heads to specification with two good heads then you had a star. Some engines from 1970 inexplicably went like dreams, so now we know why. The Rover V-8 engine was considered with the designers saying they would have to lengthen the engine bay by four inches. Not a problem to do at the design stage. But Rover said they could not supply the V-8 engines as they never had enough manufacturing capacity, needing the capacity for the upcoming Rover SD-1. Inexplicably BL did not expand the Rover V-8 engine manufacturing plant to suit their own internal demand, but perversely spent on developing an unneeded new V-8 engine and the teething problems new developments brought. All the problems of the Stag engine were rectified by simple after market solutions. Mainly the many cooling system fixes available including electric cooling fans, superior head gaskets, higher quality timing chains, electronic ignition and high quality synthetic based oils. Simple fixes in themselves which should have been in the original early 1970s cars once the problems were known, no doubt making the car a well sold gem as the problems were primarily with only the engine, the rest of the car was superb. The simple after market fixes make the Stag one of the most reliable classic cars today. The body was trucked 100 miles to Coventry where the two suspension/engine sub-frames were bolted on underneath complete with components. The smaller sub-frames could have been shipped up to Liverpool having many in one truck instead of large car bodies taking up much truck space. But never mind, logical thinking did not apply. When the Stag's body manufacturing moved to inland Coventry, as space was needed in Liverpool to build the TR7, the quality lowered.
    1
  29.  @fairmont___d  Interesting. SAAB were the only manufacturer to use the engine for the first three years of its Coventry production.
    1
  30. An outdated 1950s looking car when introduced. Not good looking. I would never touch one. I cannot see the fuss about this lemon.
    1
  31. Before BMW bought Rover, Rover was the only European maker to be expanding. Their product range was wide from 4x4 to small hatches and most between. The quality was up amongst the main makers with good appealing designs at the time, with more to come. BMW had little experience outside rear wheel drive saloon cars. They wanted the Rover know-how. BMW did not want any Rover model competing with the German brands. If they did, the models were lacklustre and unappealing like the Rover 75. They wanted BMW engines in Rover cars. Rover engineers were not impressed with many BMW engines preparing their own V8, which was highly tunable for many applications. BMW welcomed the technology transfer with open arms. Then, when they had took all they could from Rover, boosting their own German brands in the process, they ran it down, then sold it. Apart from the Mini, what Rover models stood out under BMW? BMW kept the respected Mini brand and factory. They took the design of a small Rover being R&D'd calling it the BMW 1 Series. It was originally to be sold as the Rover 35 and was to be front wheel drive. Rover had a working driving concept car, wanting to keep the work they had done. BMW said the R&D is theirs, they own it, took it and converted it to RWD, what they were familiar with, when they split. Do not blame the British workforce. The right wing media did.
    1
  32.  @gregkillick4261  I did Aston Martin. The same!
    1
  33.  @tonywilson4713  Being privately owned does not make it efficient. Private enterprise should only be in an open and unrigged free-market. It has no place in monopolies. When monopolies are in private hands they go pear shaped. Look at the UK rail and energy industries. Sky high prices.
    1
  34.  @tonywilson4713  Public investment has an amazing private sector spin off at times. Look at a hospital built by the NHS in the UK. The private sector build and provide everything inside to the lowest tenders. Even ongoing maintenance replacement. All drugs as well.
    1
  35.  @tonywilson4713  Post WW2 the UK set up an electrical grid, and new electrical regulations which were, and still are, the best in the world. Power outs and brownouts were something we saw on TV that was happening in the USA. I recall being in France and Spain with people unable to switch on two appliances at the same time, as the supply could not handle it. This was all alien to us. This was done with public money and planning. Private construction companies would be used to build power stations, etc. But not in control. That only private companies had good managers is total tosh. Public bodies would also use management consultancies, as private companies do.
    1
  36. The Elan came out before the 124.
    1
  37. So did many US factories.
    1
  38. Lada in the USSR really improved this car. Thicker steel and the weak points and rust spots on the body eliminated - 124 bodies just fell apart. The Lada engine was a newer design Soviet NAMI with an overhead cam being better than the FIAT pushrod. They replaced the rear disks with aluminium drum brakes. FIAT would not allow Lada to sell in any country they exported the 124. In 1974 when the 124 was discontinued Lada was sold in other countries. In 1974 in the UK it was a hell of bargain for such a good robust and well proven car, being very cheap to buy.
    1
  39.  @andrewp4172  The car made until 2000.
    1
  40. The initial Alpha looked far better than the one at the end. So that is the best.
    1
  41. I detested working with older Britons, as I constantly heard from them "we have always done it this way".
    1
  42.  @snipperacoustics  But I have been with some creative older guys. Their creativity had dissolved, but they coached out of the box thinking.
    1
  43. I worked at a company that had a culture against university graduates. Those in charge were not graduates, thinking they were more savvy than graduates. The simple fact was that were not as intelligent and clearly not as well educated. Graduates in the UK system (that is higher education, not further education) are taught to think, and be objective. I left holding most in contempt, making that clear to them. The company failed about ten years after I left. I wonder why.
    1
  44. VW was started post WW2 by the British Army. What saved it was an order of many thousands by the British Army, painted army green.
    1
  45. What was the difference.
    1
  46.  @ianfrost3529  Later Ladas had more powerful and smoother engines. The Lada engine had an overhead cam but any extra power was to push the heavier Lada. But the Lada never rotted out before your eyes. And it was reliable.
    1
  47.  @ianfrost3529  🤣
    1
  48.  @ianfrost3529  If they fitted a/c and power steering I may have bought the up market version. I liked the simple FIAT style.
    1
  49. Oh No! He is defending Thatcher.
    1
  50. Look at the identical Austin 1100 and Morris 1100. Badge engineering.
    1
  51. Farina, at their own expense, in 1967 built a brilliant looking car using Austin 1800 front and rear sub frames and running gear. An easy design to get in production quickly as all the mechanicals and suspension were on bolt-on sub frames. They even put BMC on the front at motor shows. BMC said no it is not our thing. The design emerged as the Citroen CX. Look at the poor body engineering that rusted after two or three years. Look at the BMC designs! The Austin Allegro! Austin Maxi, and Austin 1800 - downright ugly even for the time. Then look at the outdated dumps they built the cars in. Ford and GM built new plant in the UK to great success. Then the right wing media blamed the unions. If I worked in one of those dismal dumps I would be on strike, to get better conditions and pay.
    1
  52. Many removed the Yankie V8 fitting the Rover V8 or straight 6 Ford to get better mpg. I considered buying a used Jensen, fitting a Ford 6. I rang them up it seemed like a guy from the shop floor answered. He said, "it will fit, but make sure you get the gearbox, cxn to prop, and engine mountings right, which will most certainly be modified adaptions, using specialists".
    1
  53.  @byteme9718  They did remove them for sure. It drank fuel it was so inefficient.
    1
  54. The Triumph Stag was being developed when the organisation had the Rover V8 and Daimler V8 under construction. So, Triumph made their own disastrous V8. Why? They could have used this proven engine. What planet were they on?
    1
  55. I knew a guy who worked for Dunlop in Liverpool. In the 1970s he operated a machine made in the 1930s. He said when they did strike, It was a relief not to be in the dump.
    1