1968 Austin 1100 Mk1 (Take 2)

Talk about your cars etc here. Keep it sort of sensible and on topic please.
User avatar
Hooli
Self Appointed Internet God
Posts: 33181
Joined: Mon Apr 08, 2019 9:25 pm
Has thanked: 14100 times
Been thanked: 10988 times

Re: 1968 Austin 1100 Mk1 (Take 2)

Post by Hooli »

Riveting is almost too easy to do, you think it'd be more difficult & wonder if you've done it right.
Private signature, do not read
User avatar
Eddie Honda
Rainman The Google Fu Master
Posts: 21168
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2019 10:45 pm
Location: 寄居町
Has thanked: 13144 times
Been thanked: 12816 times

Re: 1968 Austin 1100 Mk1 (Take 2)

Post by Eddie Honda »

SiC wrote: Mon Jun 22, 2020 9:39 pm
fried onions wrote: Mon Jun 22, 2020 9:34 pm I think that will be the least of your worries with this car.
What are my chief worries going to be on this?
Rubber spiders knocking?

Forever trying to get fanimold to downpipe seal?
SiC
It's S small i C
Posts: 9246
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2019 8:59 am
Has thanked: 1805 times
Been thanked: 5251 times

Re: 1968 Austin 1100 Mk1 (Take 2)

Post by SiC »

Eddie Honda wrote:
SiC wrote: Mon Jun 22, 2020 9:39 pm
fried onions wrote: Mon Jun 22, 2020 9:34 pm I think that will be the least of your worries with this car.
What are my chief worries going to be on this?
Rubber spiders knocking?

Forever trying to get fanimold to downpipe seal?
You'll have to enlighten me on what rubber spiders are. Displacers?
User avatar
Eddie Honda
Rainman The Google Fu Master
Posts: 21168
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2019 10:45 pm
Location: 寄居町
Has thanked: 13144 times
Been thanked: 12816 times

Re: 1968 Austin 1100 Mk1 (Take 2)

Post by Eddie Honda »

Nah, the inboard driveshaft joints. Y'know, the rubber crosses used before they moved onto pot joints.

Oil would invariably leak onto them and they'd swell up. Aftermarket alternative was made of Delrin.
SiC
It's S small i C
Posts: 9246
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2019 8:59 am
Has thanked: 1805 times
Been thanked: 5251 times

Re: 1968 Austin 1100 Mk1 (Take 2)

Post by SiC »

Eddie Honda wrote:Nah, the inboard driveshaft joints. Y'know, the rubber crosses used before they moved onto pot joints.

Oil would invariably leak onto them and they'd swell up. Aftermarket alternative was made of Delrin.
Ah yeah I know exactly the ones you mean. When they go apparently they're pretty efficient at eating through the gearbox casing.

One side has replaced with new ( :( ) and the other looks original. I'm not sure how easy the bearing ones are to get nowadays.
User avatar
Eddie Honda
Rainman The Google Fu Master
Posts: 21168
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2019 10:45 pm
Location: 寄居町
Has thanked: 13144 times
Been thanked: 12816 times

Re: 1968 Austin 1100 Mk1 (Take 2)

Post by Eddie Honda »

Yes, these bastards :lol:
s-l800.jpg
s-l800.jpg (47.3 KiB) Viewed 3539 times
Only surpassed in shitness by piss-poor rubber doughnuts on Hillman Imps and Triumph GT6s.
User avatar
fried onions
Posts: 3316
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:29 pm
Location: In my safe space (the garage).
Has thanked: 1449 times
Been thanked: 2372 times

Re: 1968 Austin 1100 Mk1 (Take 2)

Post by fried onions »

Yep, 1100's were shit. Fair to say that it was corrosion which finished most of them off more than anything mechanical, hence the Magenta.
Squire Dawson


HUMBER - built stronger to last longer.
User avatar
Eddie Honda
Rainman The Google Fu Master
Posts: 21168
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2019 10:45 pm
Location: 寄居町
Has thanked: 13144 times
Been thanked: 12816 times

Re: 1968 Austin 1100 Mk1 (Take 2)

Post by Eddie Honda »

Not that shit. Could be flung round corners swift enough and still hold their own (once up to speed) many years later. Looks good in its Italian suit and not the automotive potato that the 'leggy was.
User avatar
mercrocker
Numb3rP14t3Fun
Posts: 16794
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 2:53 pm
Has thanked: 12084 times
Been thanked: 8521 times

Re: 1968 Austin 1100 Mk1 (Take 2)

Post by mercrocker »

They've never been a favourite of mine but I do like to see them about and being fettled like this one is. They were big-selling cars, no mistake, even well into their production life and represented a brief period when BMC were as good as anything Europe could do in the volume market. I wouldn't have thought equivalent Renault, Simca or Fiat offerings would have fared any better in the rust stakes had they been as numerous over here. ADO16s were notoriously neglected by the kind of buyers who hardly bothered with minimal 100E, Minor or A35 servicing at sufficiently regular intervals and I recall many of them that were polished to death but completely and utterly ignored underneath. Foreign stuff tended to be bought by more enthusiastic types when there was a healthy chunk of import duty involved.
There's a great long bar in Rock & Roll heaven.......
SiC
It's S small i C
Posts: 9246
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2019 8:59 am
Has thanked: 1805 times
Been thanked: 5251 times

Re: 1968 Austin 1100 Mk1 (Take 2)

Post by SiC »

I can't say they're shit or not as, despite being under two of them for a fair old bit, I've yet to drive one... :lol:

Yes they did like to rust but if BMC really wanted (or afforded) to, those rust traps easily could have been designed out on the MK2. But then it's not as if other cars of the era were that much better. Just their rust traps were easier to repair and also with so many ado16 about, made little sense to repair.

Exactly the same problem as of now currently with late 90s/early 00s cars. The Focus MK1/306/etc are very good cars (practicality, reliability, efficiency, etc), but when they rot there isn't enough value of emotional attachment in them (because "a car") to justify saving them. Hence their numbers are thinning out really rapidly now. Journeyman cars that were built in the millions.

I'd still had preferred a Mini but I'd of course had to spend twice what I did for this for a 60s one and it'd be delivered as boxes of bits!

Given this is a Scottish car, it's quite a miracle it's still here over 50 years later!
Post Reply