Top Gear to do 'BL' special in new Series

[planetdave]

I think it's a great looker. Compared to the Cortinas and Avengers and other mainstream saloons of that period it was a breath of fresh air.

Even an Allegro (which has to be the worst car I ever had the mispleasure of driving) deserves to be kept at this sort of miles. Junk the terminal and retain the rest as 3D lessons in how we suffered in days of yore.

[Pat H]

planetdave said:

I think it's a great looker. Compared to the Cortinas and Avengers and other mainstream saloons of that period it was a breath of fresh air.

Yep.

I saw one on the road about three months ago and it looked pretty good.

I love seeing well preserved autoshite on the roads.

I get fed up of going to classic car shows and seeing endless rows of MGs, Triumphs and Alfas.

They are all very worthy, but it makes a change to see the runt of the litter, if only because it makes you realise how far things have progressed since the 1970s.

It is all about nostalgia.

There is no more logical reason to preserve a Capri than a Princess, they are both shite by any objective modern standard.

But we should applaud those eccentric or mad enough to preserve unwanted examples of our motoring heritage.

If Top Gear treats this old Princess with the same casual disdain as their £10,000 supercars, then I will dispair of the wretched programme.

Clarkson and Hammond may be a pair of baffoons, but May is a thoughtful chap with fine taste who appreciates obscure old cars and bikes. He would do well to distance himself from the daft antics of the other two.

[Paul Dishman]

Wollcage said:

Graham said:

Wollcage said:

they're also doing the britcar 25hr in a bmw 330d

wow their going to take an extra hour over every one else

tucker will probably change the rules last minute so that they come top three

I might just give him a ring and pass your suggestion on

[speedtwelve]

Pat H said:

There is no more logical reason to preserve a Capri than a Princess, they are both shite by any objective modern standard.

Other than the Capri's circuit-racing competition history, the fact that it was available with (for the '70s) proper engines and proper performance, and a little 'cultural' significance, even if it is for for being power-slid through a disused gasworks by Bonehead and Foyle.

[Colvette]

Balmoral Green said:

Yes you could, because it would be opinion.

Just like the load of old cobblers spouted about the Princess, from someone who I would bet has got absolutely no idea, real knowledge or experience of the car at all, let alone be able to judge it in a contemporary setting. Probably never even sat in one, let alone driven one back to back with its mainstream competitors.

Well, that's not me, mate - trained in design, art and mathematical engineering, and my job is all about staying on top of contemporary trends and in some cases being able to actually predict future trends, so I do know what I'm on about. The Princess is a turd, and if education counts for anything, then I guess my opinion means something.

Most cars do have some value, but my description of "Rare" says it all - this car was neither a marvel of engineering or design, and was awful to be in. My next door neighbour had an orange one with a "primer coloured" wing when I was a nippa.

I could start talking about the fact that, design wise, the car is too heavy at the back, is too narrow at the front, and the wheels are too small to actually be aesthetically pleasing, but hey, perhaps I'd be going too far there...

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder (obviously as people keep telling me not to buy a 300c), but at the end of the day, if we were going for a nationwide vote, "Keep it or Kill it", I'm confident my opinion would be validated with regard to the Princess.

[bent8rover]

Pat H said:

I saw one on the road about three months ago and it looked pretty good.....I love seeing well preserved autoshite on the roads......etc

Well all the points I was going to post are in yours

Colvette said:

Well, that's not me, mate - trained in design, art and mathematical engineering, and my job is all about staying on top of contemporary trends and in some cases being able to actually predict future trends, so I do know what I'm on about. The Princess is a turd, and if education counts for anything, then I guess my opinion means something

arrogance of the highest order???

[Pat H]

speedtwelve said:

Pat H said:

There is no more logical reason to preserve a Capri than a Princess, they are both shite by any objective modern standard.

Other than the Capri's circuit-racing competition history, the fact that it was available with (for the '70s) proper engines and proper performance, and a little 'cultural' significance, even if it is for for being power-slid through a disused gasworks by Bonehead and Foyle.

As I said, it's all about nostalgia.

And the points you make are all reasons why I have a V6 Capri tucked away in the garage. But even with upgraded brakes and suspension kits, the Capri is a pretty woeful performer by today's standards.

Ironically, the first thing to disappear from Austin Princesses in the scrap yards were the brake calipers, snapped up by the owners of fast Fords who were desparate to do something about the fact that their cars went quickly, but couldn't stop.

So maybe we should be thankful for the old Princess after all?

[75_Steve]

Well, I don't know if Colvette is being arrogant or just plain clueless.

For it's time, the Princess *was* innovative. Proper, independent, fluid suspension, transverse 6-pot engines, 'wedgy' styling (which still looks good today, IMHO)..... the Ambassador went on to become a very early example of the large family hatch.

A colleague had one when I was about 16 (1991-ish), they were considered cheap bangers at the time, but he was constantly raving on about how comfortable it was. Having ridden in it, I tend to agree.

I'd love one with some suitable, period tweaks and a T16 engine.

[bent8rover]

see this http://forum.bmw5.co.uk/rss.php?t=14724

"It is apparently possible to fit the Turbocharged Rover T16 (800 Vitesse) engine on top of the 1700-2000 Princess/Ambastardor gearbox using the Princess 2000 crank. The T16 uses the O Series* block you see"

So it been done? Maybe TG can be encouraged, maybe in the same vein as the Lotus-Lada Twink

[andymadmak]

Colvette said:

Well, that's not me, mate -and in some cases being able to actually predict future trends, so I do know what I'm on about.

Oh my - are you related to David Icke?

At a time when contemporary car stying brought you the Ford Cortuna Mk 4 the Princess was rather novel. It was the Princess that predicted the future trend by leading the wedge period and extending the trend from sports cars dwon into the mass market. Still, I suppose Lotus, Ferrari, Aston Martin Lagonda, Lambo, not to mention TVR et al were all wrong too.
The princess further extended the use of fluid independant suspension systems with interlinked units, at a time when leaf springs and solid axles were still common on many new cars. If you had EVER ridden in a Princess you would know that in terms of ride comfort there was little that could touch it back then, and precious little that could touch it today. The handling was a bit understeery, but then again it was in line with that of its contemporaries.
Transverse six cylinder engine - Oh yes, Volvo do that these days too....., Later models with massive hatchbacks (renamed Ambassador) ? - oh yes Ford ended up copying that with the Sierra
So, actually, all in all, the Princess predicted quite a few trends, and set new standards of excellence in others. - Oh yes, and it was structurally very rigid (not tin can like at all in that respect) something that BL had a history of, dating back to the Landcrab.
So you had a neighbor with a Princess with primered wing! Big deal! Sounds like one that wasn't particularly well cared for. How many miles did you drive this vehicle? Did you ever actually SIT in it?

You see, the trouble with people like you Colvete is that you just love to follow the herd. Far from having powers of clairvoyance you actually just parrot the common line.
A better analysis might have been to say that in the Princess, Allegro (and its predecessor the 1100/1300) Maxi et al BL built cars that were too sophisticated to be profitable, with a workforce too unskilled to build the cars properly, led by a management bereft of vision and leadership ability, dictated to by successive Governments who knew about as much about the car industry as you appear to do. Moreover, BLs cars which were too sensible to be seen as glamorous. Ford identified the whole aspirational ladder thing - L, GL, GLX Ghia etc. Its cars might have been achingly basic, but they were good enough, and the common man could make them go better. Stiffer springs are easy to fit, recalibrating hydragas spheres is not easy to do. The Princess may have had several more acres of room inside it than the cortina (with similar external dimensions) but since when did sensible and roomy sell when up against glam and aspirational? Even when BL did basic cars, like the Marina they were still sold on the basis of the huge boot, rather than any sense of style or performance (despite the Marina TC having an MGB engine in it that was at least as powerful as the 2.0litre Pinto engined cortina)
Do you see what I'm getting at, oh mystic one? The actually underlying engineering of the cars like the Princess was far in advance of its contemporaries. The styling predated a whole 20 years of cars that eshewed trad 3 box stying. What BL got wrong, horribly, dratically wrong was the execution of the build of the cars, the marketing of its products and the total failure to recognise the value of aspirational branding.

So, Colvette, with your all seeing eye and your crystal ball, tell me what the future holds for trends in car design?

[stephen300o]

Your joking yes?, the Princess led the way in nothing, it was just another nail in Austin Rovers coffin.

[Colvette]

Wasn't saying that I know everything about future design - I actually said that I need to be able to predict future trends. It's part of my job. Sometimes we get it wrong, but usually we don't - predicting trends isn't predicting future events, it's looking at the past and making educated guesses at what will happen in the short-term future.

As for the "arrogance" - it was nothing of the sort. It was explaining that my opinion comes with a background in aesthetic design, and and understanding of design principles as such, in response to what appeared to be an unprovoked and unjustified personal attack on a valid opinion.

Anyway - again, based on trends, the Princess was never praised in the public eye. You didn't see famous people travelling around in it, you didn't see massive sales due to it's cleverness, and it isn't something which helped BL pave their way to a brighter future. If you're talking about successful design which actually moved the industry on, then cars like the VW Beetle, Porsche 911, Lamborghini Countach and more recently the Ford Sierra are the cars to look at.

True irony is the fact that anyone can know the stuff about the princess you're talking about just by checking out it's Wikipedia page, so whoop-die-fookin-do. Not knowing the exact specifics of the car's underpinnings doesn't mean I don't understand design, it means I'm not a car historian or some kind of freako BL fan!

Icons survive. Quality design survives. Innovation survives. Shit, generally, dies.

Above all, trends and public perception rule. It's sad that you all get so personal about this.

Edited by Colvette on Saturday 25th August 23:10

[agent006]

andymadmak said:

A better analysis might have been to say that in the Princess, Allegro (and its predecessor the 1100/1300) Maxi et al BL built cars that were too sophisticated to be profitable, with a workforce too unskilled to build the cars properly, led by a management bereft of vision and leadership ability, dictated to by successive Governments who knew about as much about the car industry as you appear to do.

STOP PRESS: Man in "Hits nail on head" shocker.

[Seymour Vadge]

Anybody bored with this thread got to www.allegromotorsport.com and put some meaning back into your life.

[Justayellowbadge]

Seymour Vadge said:

Anybody bored with this thread got to www.allegromotorsport.com and put some meaning back into your life.

A Gulf liviried, scissor doored, Allegro? You, Sir, are our kind of nutter.

[toppstuff]

I am compelled to defend the Princess and indeed some of the BL generation cars in general.


There was some decent , intelligent design applied to some of the cars even though some of the execution and general construction was poor in the dark days of union-addled BL in the 70's.


My father had a Princess. It had many redeeming features, including lots of room ( far more than many modern cars) and a pretty decent ride. Build quality was not great but the designers behind the car were not idiots. The car is not s stinker. To think so is to reveal profound ignorance.

Top Gear should be careful. Destroying the car is wrong.

[215cu]

Colvette said:

Wasn't saying that I know everything about future design - I actually said that I need to be able to predict future trends. It's part of my job. Sometimes we get it wrong, but usually we don't - predicting trends isn't predicting future events, it's looking at the past and making educated guesses at what will happen in the short-term future.

As for the "arrogance" - it was nothing of the sort. It was explaining that my opinion comes with a background in aesthetic design, and and understanding of design principles as such, in response to what appeared to be an unprovoked and unjustified personal attack on a valid opinion.

Anyway - again, based on trends, the Princess was never praised in the public eye. You didn't see famous people travelling around in it, you didn't see massive sales due to it's cleverness, and it isn't something which helped BL pave their way to a brighter future. If you're talking about successful design which actually moved the industry on, then cars like the VW Beetle, Porsche 911, Lamborghini Countach and more recently the Ford Sierra are the cars to look at.

True irony is the fact that anyone can know the stuff about the princess you're talking about just by checking out it's Wikipedia page, so whoop-die-fookin-do. Not knowing the exact specifics of the car's underpinnings doesn't mean I don't understand design, it means I'm not a car historian or some kind of freako BL fan!

Icons survive. Quality design survives. Innovation survives. Shit, generally, dies.

Above all, trends and public perception rule. It's sad that you all get so personal about this.

Edited by Colvette on Saturday 25th August 23:10

Well Colvette, put away your crystal ball and pin your ears back.

For a start, you cite the VW Beetle. A design stolen from Tatra so that's out, also are modern cars air cooled? I'd say the Morris Minor had more to say about the future of compact cars than a Beetle.

There is very, very little modern design can teach bearing in mind the modern addiction derivation of previous car designs. Neither does popularity in the public perception lead to the success of a design.

Take the MINI. Derivative. New Mondeo, looks like a BMW 6-series to me, has hints of a Lambo in it too. And that's nothing new, the Rover SD1 had hints of Ferrari Daytona in it.

What Iggy, Harris Mann, Roy Axe and to a degree David Bache did was original work, sure it didn't appeal to all but it certainly appeals to plenty of customers that bought their work. What is completely missed that Andy eludes to is whilst the design on paper looked certainly appealing, the design for manufacture had to make too many compromises. A case of giving the bean counters too much power. Certainly this is true for the Allegro and to an extent the Princess.

And that original work is now sorely missing in car design, it's all been done before. I admire Bangle's attempt to inject some originality back into car design. I admire the originality but the final execution, in my opinion, if f-ing ugly.

You talk about trends, that is about following a herd, taking a moving average, making incremental changes so not to rock the boat. That is really quite sad in terms of design, it is progress but mere tentatively evolution, not revolution.

Mann and Axe's wedges were revolutionary, perhaps too much so. Sadly some the execution was lacking but it really was no worse than many other European manufacturers at the time. If the Princess was shit, there were plenty of its contemporaries that were shit for different reasons but shit all the same. Where the Princess had innovation was in its ride, being a passenger in one was a very pleasant experience to a child prone to car sickness like me.

Also, you cite some pretty enough looking cars but that is all they are. A Countach looks great but you can't see out of the back and it's difficult to get into it. I'm lost on the innovation part. As for a 911, until recently, siting the engine so far back over the rear wheel has been a perennial problem to the car's handling, so much so, they used to put concrete up front. Agricultural at best. We've covered the Beetle, as for the Sierra, the later models were a pastiche of bastardised Bauhaus principles, if that's the zenith of original thinking modern car design, you can shove it where the sun doesn't shine. You'll be citing the Audi TT next.

You've missed one car that captures all the elements you cite and that points to definite arrogance in your opinion and also a lack of judgement on the very criteria you give.

I'd argue a Citroen DS set the car design benchmark that's never been beaten. Beautiful, practical, incredibly innovative and certainly well build and very popular from the day it was first launched until this very day.

Even a Rover P6 has many of those elements too, sadly it was built on a desire to emulate the DS so can't really be included.

As for modern cars, I'd argue a Chrysler 300C would trump your modern Sierra/Mondeo on your criteria too. Then that's still a derivative, the principal designer citing the Rover P5B as it's main influence.

There is not one modern cars that doesn't have its roots in a previous car, a previous school of thought. You would do well to learn from that so that something original might happen in the future.

And that's the crux of the matter really, modern designers are constrained by history, safety regulations, design for manufacture capabilities and cost. Even three decades ago, they were only just getting to grips with those but at least they still had the originality of mind to do something a little bit revolutionary.

[toppstuff]

215cu said:

Colvette said:

Wasn't saying that I know everything about future design - I actually said that I need to be able to predict future trends. It's part of my job. Sometimes we get it wrong, but usually we don't - predicting trends isn't predicting future events, it's looking at the past and making educated guesses at what will happen in the short-term future.

As for the "arrogance" - it was nothing of the sort. It was explaining that my opinion comes with a background in aesthetic design, and and understanding of design principles as such, in response to what appeared to be an unprovoked and unjustified personal attack on a valid opinion.

Anyway - again, based on trends, the Princess was never praised in the public eye. You didn't see famous people travelling around in it, you didn't see massive sales due to it's cleverness, and it isn't something which helped BL pave their way to a brighter future. If you're talking about successful design which actually moved the industry on, then cars like the VW Beetle, Porsche 911, Lamborghini Countach and more recently the Ford Sierra are the cars to look at.

True irony is the fact that anyone can know the stuff about the princess you're talking about just by checking out it's Wikipedia page, so whoop-die-fookin-do. Not knowing the exact specifics of the car's underpinnings doesn't mean I don't understand design, it means I'm not a car historian or some kind of freako BL fan!

Icons survive. Quality design survives. Innovation survives. Shit, generally, dies.

Above all, trends and public perception rule. It's sad that you all get so personal about this.

Edited by Colvette on Saturday 25th August 23:10

Well Colvette, put away your crystal ball and pin your ears back.

For a start, you cite the VW Beetle. A design stolen from Tatra so that's out, also are modern cars air cooled? I'd say the Morris Minor had more to say about the future of compact cars than a Beetle.

There is very, very little modern design can teach bearing in mind the modern addiction derivation of previous car designs. Neither does popularity in the public perception lead to the success of a design.

Take the MINI. Derivative. New Mondeo, looks like a BMW 6-series to me, has hints of a Lambo in it too. And that's nothing new, the Rover SD1 had hints of Ferrari Daytona in it.

What Iggy, Harris Mann, Roy Axe and to a degree David Bache did was original work, sure it didn't appeal to all but it certainly appeals to plenty of customers that bought their work. What is completely missed that Andy eludes to is whilst the design on paper looked certainly appealing, the design for manufacture had to make too many compromises. A case of giving the bean counters too much power. Certainly this is true for the Allegro and to an extent the Princess.

And that original work is now sorely missing in car design, it's all been done before. I admire Bangle's attempt to inject some originality back into car design. I admire the originality but the final execution, in my opinion, if f-ing ugly.

You talk about trends, that is about following a herd, taking a moving average, making incremental changes so not to rock the boat. That is really quite sad in terms of design, it is progress but mere tentatively evolution, not revolution.

Mann and Axe's wedges were revolutionary, perhaps too much so. Sadly some the execution was lacking but it really was no worse than many other European manufacturers at the time. If the Princess was shit, there were plenty of its contemporaries that were shit for different reasons but shit all the same. Where the Princess had innovation was in its ride, being a passenger in one was a very pleasant experience to a child prone to car sickness like me.

Also, you cite some pretty enough looking cars but that is all they are. A Countach looks great but you can't see out of the back and it's difficult to get into it. I'm lost on the innovation part. As for a 911, until recently, siting the engine so far back over the rear wheel has been a perennial problem to the car's handling, so much so, they used to put concrete up front. Agricultural at best. We've covered the Beetle, as for the Sierra, the later models were a pastiche of bastardised Bauhaus principles, if that's the zenith of original thinking modern car design, you can shove it where the sun doesn't shine. You'll be citing the Audi TT next.

You've missed one car that captures all the elements you cite and that points to definite arrogance in your opinion and also a lack of judgement on the very criteria you give.

I'd argue a Citroen DS set the car design benchmark that's never been beaten. Beautiful, practical, incredibly innovative and certainly well build and very popular from the day it was first launched until this very day.

Even a Rover P6 has many of those elements too, sadly it was built on a desire to emulate the DS so can't really be included.

As for modern cars, I'd argue a Chrysler 300C would trump your modern Sierra/Mondeo on your criteria too. Then that's still a derivative, the principal designer citing the Rover P5B as it's main influence.

There is not one modern cars that doesn't have its roots in a previous car, a previous school of thought. You would do well to learn from that so that something original might happen in the future.

And that's the crux of the matter really, modern designers are constrained by history, safety regulations, design for manufacture capabilities and cost. Even three decades ago, they were only just getting to grips with those but at least they still had the originality of mind to do something a little bit revolutionary.

What an excellent post 215cu !

Colvette - I hope you are not planning on earning a living in this way because you don't appear to know what you are talking about, no offence and all that, but really...

The engineering integrity and the philosophy behind design are what informs car designers - speak to any of them and they are a walking encyclopedia of car history and knowledge ( or at least the best ones are ).

[Twincam16]

stephen300o said:

Your joking yes?, the Princess led the way in nothing, it was just another nail in Austin Rovers coffin.

Just about there but not quite.

The Princess was BL's attempt to do a Citroen CX. Most of the technology used was comparable (if nowhere near as reliable), and the styling was futuristic - at leaast it was on Harris Mann's drawing board. By the time they'd added the market-dictated vinyl roof, raided the parts bin for the light clusters and buggered up te proportions fitting the engine in, it was a badly compromised mess.

Sad thing was, they were offered a Citroen-esque Pininfarina design but turned it down as they wanted a 100% British-designed car.

[IforB]

Justayellowbadge said:

Seymour Vadge said:

Anybody bored with this thread got to www.allegromotorsport.com and put some meaning back into your life.

A Gulf liviried, scissor doored, Allegro? You, Sir, are our kind of nutter.

I Love it! That is pointlessness personified. Good Work Allegro Building Fella's!