Tell me about British Leyland

Author
Discussion

CDP

7,454 posts

253 months

Monday 16th November 2020
quotequote all
Yertis said:
I must admit I don’t understand the derision heaped on Lucas electrics. It’s all piss-easy to fix and maintain. If you want to see real pain look at a Quattro wiring diagram - twenty-plus pages of current-track mayhem, all in German, with hundreds of sometimes almost impossible to locate components. (ie dashboard lamps).
The difference is quality of the parts and their connectors. A lot of BL faults come down to a loose connector or failed switch. Apparently a lot of it is down to BL beating the price down to the point where quality wasn't an option.

LuS1fer

41,086 posts

244 months

Monday 16th November 2020
quotequote all
CDP said:
The difference is quality of the parts and their connectors. A lot of BL faults come down to a loose connector or failed switch. Apparently a lot of it is down to BL beating the price down to the point where quality wasn't an option.
Like the electric fuel pump on the A40. It had a thin black earth wire from the body of the pump to the steel floor. This was always the cause of the fuel pump not working and a replacement small braided earth strap cured it, for good.

CDP

7,454 posts

253 months

Monday 16th November 2020
quotequote all
LuS1fer said:
CDP said:
The difference is quality of the parts and their connectors. A lot of BL faults come down to a loose connector or failed switch. Apparently a lot of it is down to BL beating the price down to the point where quality wasn't an option.
Like the electric fuel pump on the A40. It had a thin black earth wire from the body of the pump to the steel floor. This was always the cause of the fuel pump not working and a replacement small braided earth strap cured it, for good.
That kind of thing exactly. They saved a few pennies at the expense of a marginal design. The car industry has to price everything down to a penny or less but some makers are better at reducing costs without consequences. The examples of the original Mini and Daewoo Matiz being sold at a loss are legendary.

2xChevrons

3,159 posts

79 months

Monday 16th November 2020
quotequote all
CDP said:
The difference is quality of the parts and their connectors. A lot of BL faults come down to a loose connector or failed switch. Apparently a lot of it is down to BL beating the price down to the point where quality wasn't an option.
Take for instance the much-maligned Lucas Petrol Injection system in the Triumph TR5, TR6 and 2.5 PI. A system that was originally developed for military and aviation use and was successfully used on the air and on the racetrack but is generally considered a dog's dinner of a fuelling system because most of us are familiar only with its use on Triumphs.

Triumph specified the cheapest, smallest, lowest-capacity main feed pump that they could get away with and have the system still work - it ended up being a pump with the same motor as one of Lucas' industry-standard windscreen wiper assemblies. Lucas could have supplied any number of higher-capacity pumps for the system but Triumph chose the cheapest one and Lucas supplied what the customer chose. Triumph also botched the installation slightly as, in the TR especially, the main pump was close to the exhaust. So the system was prone to getting vapour locks due to high fuel temperatures, exacerbated by the marginal volume and rate at which the fuel circulated around the system (the point was that the main pump continually moved a volume of fuel around the circuit to drive out vapour and keep both the fuel and the fuel distributor at a stable and moderate temperature) so the system was very prone to conking out in traffic, in hot weather or when the tank level was low (less of a heat sink), hence the old trick of putting a bag of frozen peas on the fuel pump, and why the 'solve' these days is to fit a Bosch pump. That has nothing to do with the superiority of 'Lucas stuff' versus 'Bosch stuff', just that the Bosch pump chosen in the conversion kit has a higher capacity than the one Triumph chose from Lucas. Lucas could have supplied such a pump in 1967 but Triumph didn't want to pay for it.

Edited by 2xChevrons on Monday 16th November 19:05

Mikebentley

6,037 posts

139 months

Monday 16th November 2020
quotequote all
And this cost cutting went on. I have friends who worked at Longbridge when Honda were involved. Hondas relentless attention to detail meant that many delivered components were rejected by them only to be used by Rover hence why Honda Concertos outlasted 213/216s. I accept many Honda variants were much more costly to buy and their ownership demographic was different too.

To be fair though most cars of this period were a bit crap if you scratched too deeply. Look at the period classic picture thread they all look buggered at 3/4 yrs old.

Frankthered

1,619 posts

179 months

Monday 16th November 2020
quotequote all
2xChevrons said:
CDP said:
The difference is quality of the parts and their connectors. A lot of BL faults come down to a loose connector or failed switch. Apparently a lot of it is down to BL beating the price down to the point where quality wasn't an option.
Take for instance the much-maligned Lucas Petrol Injection system in the Triumph TR5, TR6 and 2.5 PI. A system that was originally developed for military and aviation use and was successfully used on the air and on the racetrack but is generally considered a dog's dinner of a fuelling system because most of us are familiar only with its use on Triumphs.

Triumph specified the cheapest, smallest, lowest-capacity main feed pump that they could get away with and have the system still work - it ended up being a pump with the same motor as one of Lucas' industry-standard windscreen wiper assemblies. Lucas could have supplied any number of higher-capacity pumps for the system but Triumph chose the cheapest one and Lucas supplied what the customer chose. Triumph also botched the installation slightly as, in the TR especially, the main pump was close to the exhaust. So the system was prone to getting vapour locks due to high fuel temperatures, exacerbated by the marginal volume and rate at which the fuel circulated around the system (the point was that the main pump continually moved a volume of fuel around the circuit to drive out vapour and keep both the fuel and the fuel distributor at a stable and moderate temperature) so the system was very prone to conking out in traffic, in hot weather or when the tank level was low (less of a heat sink), hence the old trick of putting a bag of frozen peas on the fuel pump, and why the 'solve' these days is to fit a Bosch pump. That has nothing to do with the superiority of 'Lucas stuff' versus 'Bosch stuff', just that the Bosch pump chosen in the conversion kit has a higher capacity than the one Triumph chose from Lucas. Lucas could have supplied such a pump in 1967 but Triumph didn't want to pay for it.

Edited by 2xChevrons on Monday 16th November 19:05
That's the thing about "Quality" isn't it? It's very easy to point the finger at the people on the shop floor, but 80% or so of issues are common faults which, rather than being the fault of the assembler, they indicate a flaw in the design which could be many things - something specified incorrectly, or costs being cut to the point where the component only just works, or it could be something that just wasn't thought through, like putting the fuel pump close to the exhaust.

Another classic was the Dolomite Sprint getting the same radiator as the 1850 and, well, surprise, surprise, it wasn't quite big enough if you were giving it the beans and/or when the weather was really hot. Meaning that the Sprint has a tendency to overheat and the consequent reputation for HGF.

So if you ever hear, "They all do that, sir." don't blame those on the factory floor, it's much more likely to be a design issue.

a8hex

5,829 posts

222 months

Monday 16th November 2020
quotequote all
Frankthered said:
That's the thing about "Quality" isn't it? It's very easy to point the finger at the people on the shop floor, but 80% or so of issues are common faults which, rather than being the fault of the assembler, they indicate a flaw in the design which could be many things - something specified incorrectly, or costs being cut to the point where the component only just works, or it could be something that just wasn't thought through, like putting the fuel pump close to the exhaust.

Another classic was the Dolomite Sprint getting the same radiator as the 1850 and, well, surprise, surprise, it wasn't quite big enough if you were giving it the beans and/or when the weather was really hot. Meaning that the Sprint has a tendency to overheat and the consequent reputation for HGF.

So if you ever hear, "They all do that, sir." don't blame those on the factory floor, it's much more likely to be a design issue.
Or some bean counter who's rejected what the design said.
The 80/20 rule, I don't care if it's only 80% as good so long as it only costs 20% as much.

heebeegeetee

28,591 posts

247 months

Monday 16th November 2020
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Excellent. thumbup

2xChevrons

3,159 posts

79 months

Monday 16th November 2020
quotequote all
Frankthered said:
That's the thing about "Quality" isn't it? It's very easy to point the finger at the people on the shop floor, but 80% or so of issues are common faults which, rather than being the fault of the assembler, they indicate a flaw in the design which could be many things - something specified incorrectly, or costs being cut to the point where the component only just works, or it could be something that just wasn't thought through, like putting the fuel pump close to the exhaust.
Exactly.

This was one of the insights that Toyota and Honda had and that it took the rest of the world so long to catch up to.

As shown in the infamous 'The Quality Connection' film, in a British car factory in the 1970s 'quality' was entirely the responsibility of those on the production line. A high quality car was entirely dependent on everyone doing their job exactly as it was intended, absolutely perfectly, absolutely every time. If the engineers produced an assembly with an awkward mish-mash of fixings that all required different torque settings, or that needed tolerances to be checked manually as the line moved on, or that had to be fitted around previously-installed parts, that was the workers' problem. All the effort went into cajoling the line workers into being perfect, unfailing drones who never got tired, distracted, hungry, bores or frustrated.

The Japanese realised that quality was the responsibility of everyone at every stage - the car was designed for easy, reliable, consistent, assembly. So was the production line and it's equipment. The fitters were given special tools. And if quality problems occured the line workers were empowered to stop the line to resolve it, instead of having to watch the car roll on to the next station, and the companies had processes to investigate and resolve the problems.

The workforce at BL were not all blameless in the matter of the company's issues, but in many ways they were an easy scapegoat and many of the products' problems were much deeper-rooted than 'lazy workers'.

saaby93

32,038 posts

177 months

Monday 16th November 2020
quotequote all
a8hex said:
Frankthered said:
That's the thing about "Quality" isn't it? It's very easy to point the finger at the people on the shop floor, but 80% or so of issues are common faults which, rather than being the fault of the assembler, they indicate a flaw in the design which could be many things - something specified incorrectly, or costs being cut to the point where the component only just works, or it could be something that just wasn't thought through, like putting the fuel pump close to the exhaust.

Another classic was the Dolomite Sprint getting the same radiator as the 1850 and, well, surprise, surprise, it wasn't quite big enough if you were giving it the beans and/or when the weather was really hot. Meaning that the Sprint has a tendency to overheat and the consequent reputation for HGF.

So if you ever hear, "They all do that, sir." don't blame those on the factory floor, it's much more likely to be a design issue.
Or some bean counter who's rejected what the design said.
The 80/20 rule, I don't care if it's only 80% as good so long as it only costs 20% as much.
Isnt there a similar company in turnip county where the aerial centre lead was cost reduced to a single thin filament

Zener

18,928 posts

220 months

Tuesday 17th November 2020
quotequote all
Mikebentley said:
And this cost cutting went on. I have friends who worked at Longbridge when Honda were involved. Hondas relentless attention to detail meant that many delivered components were rejected by them only to be used by Rover hence why Honda Concertos outlasted 213/216s. I accept many Honda variants were much more costly to buy and their ownership demographic was different too.

To be fair though most cars of this period were a bit crap if you scratched too deeply. Look at the period classic picture thread they all look buggered at 3/4 yrs old.
Not really a fair comparison the Concerto had a different floor plan and suspension to the 213/216 these had more in common with the 3rd gen 3 dr Civic

anonymous-user

53 months

Tuesday 17th November 2020
quotequote all
Zener said:
Not really a fair comparison the Concerto had a different floor plan and suspension to the 213/216 these had more in common with the 3rd gen 3 dr Civic
Eh? The Ballade was rebadged as the 213/216 (Hyacinth Bucket shape)

The Concerto was rebadged as the R8 - 214/216/220.

2xChevrons

3,159 posts

79 months

Tuesday 17th November 2020
quotequote all
Landcrab_Six said:
Zener said:
Not really a fair comparison the Concerto had a different floor plan and suspension to the 213/216 these had more in common with the 3rd gen 3 dr Civic
Eh? The Ballade was rebadged as the 213/216 (Hyacinth Bucket shape)

The Concerto was rebadged as the R8 - 214/216/220.
As far as the UK is concerned, it's more accurate to say that the Concerto is a rebadged R8. Not only were they developed in genuine collaboration (unlike the very literally rebadged Acclaim and SD3) but the UK-market Concerto, like the R8, had strut front suspension while the Japanese-market Concerto had Honda-style wishbones.

The platform is derived from the 4th-gen Civic's, but it's significantly different away from the floorpan and scuttle. The body design and styling was led by Rover.

a8hex

5,829 posts

222 months

Tuesday 17th November 2020
quotequote all
2xChevrons said:
Exactly.

This was one of the insights that Toyota and Honda had and that it took the rest of the world so long to catch up to.
The silly thing is this wasn't Toyota and Honda's idea, they just recognised it as being the right way to do things when it was presented to them. The ideas were introduced to Japanese industry after the war by W. Edwards Deming. The Japanese seized on the notions of this more scientific approach to quality control whereas traditional "western" car manufactures just carried on doing their own sweet way. There were western companies that follow the ideas but not in this field.

Fastchas

2,640 posts

120 months

Tuesday 17th November 2020
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
I live not far, by the Empire Cinema. I’m not a Brummie, having moved there two years ago from Wolves but I like to watch old Top Gear videos showing Longbridge as it was then.
Seems funny watching Clarkson standing on the road pointing down towards Northfield pointing out the reason why they rusted as bare metal was carted down the road in all weathers.

Zener

18,928 posts

220 months

Tuesday 17th November 2020
quotequote all
Landcrab_Six said:
Zener said:
Not really a fair comparison the Concerto had a different floor plan and suspension to the 213/216 these had more in common with the 3rd gen 3 dr Civic
Eh? The Ballade was rebadged as the 213/216 (Hyacinth Bucket shape)

The Concerto was rebadged as the R8 - 214/216/220.
I was referring to the 213/216 torsion bar front suspension that the Concerto never inherited however the Ballade did

LuS1fer

41,086 posts

244 months

Tuesday 17th November 2020
quotequote all
a8hex said:
The silly thing is this wasn't Toyota and Honda's idea, they just recognised it as being the right way to do things when it was presented to them. The ideas were introduced to Japanese industry after the war by W. Edwards Deming. The Japanese seized on the notions of this more scientific approach to quality control whereas traditional "western" car manufactures just carried on doing their own sweet way. There were western companies that follow the ideas but not in this field.
It didn't stop the Japanese cars rusting away though. I was taking bits off a 1986 Toyota Corolla on which the cam belt had snapped and was very impressed by the detail. Screws screwed into plastic insets, not straight into metal. The digital clock was always right....

Zener

18,928 posts

220 months

Tuesday 17th November 2020
quotequote all
We was assured the Concerto and Ballade models were going to be of comparable quality to Honda Japan built models when I was an Honda tech in the 80's scratchchin sadly this wasnt the case..... water leaks, premature corrosion around windscreens & door skins to door shells, wind noise from poorly fitted doors/door frames against body, water leaks, poor paint, failing relays well the Lucas branded ones, poor trim quality and often on PDI inspections random clips and screws almost like when they was assembling the cars they dropped into the interior or in the spare wheel well and they just picked another eek these problems were consistent across both models , I seem to remember Ballade most affected on the corrosion issue sometimes within 1/2 years we got handed various Dintrol products to apply around panel joins on service's to combat rust as Honda received feedback from dealers nationwide , 99% of these issues we never witnessed with Japan built models Civic,Accord,Integra,Prelude, sadly , the 2.5 4dr (brit built) Legend was far better but far from ideal , bizarrely the 92 > American assembled Accord Aerodeck (an estate really unlike earlier generation aerodeck) was really well assembled with no build issues or contaminated non Jap hardware as I remember scratchchin





Edited by Zener on Tuesday 17th November 13:13

2xChevrons

3,159 posts

79 months

Tuesday 17th November 2020
quotequote all
a8hex said:
The silly thing is this wasn't Toyota and Honda's idea, they just recognised it as being the right way to do things when it was presented to them. The ideas were introduced to Japanese industry after the war by W. Edwards Deming. The Japanese seized on the notions of this more scientific approach to quality control whereas traditional "western" car manufactures just carried on doing their own sweet way. There were western companies that follow the ideas but not in this field.
Indeed. As I mentioned (either way back in this thread or the 'what might have been' one), the basics of Lean Processes and Just In Time manufacturing in the car industry were developed at Morris Engines in the 1920s by Frank Woollard. Nuffield even built an entire new factory in Australia based on Woollard's ideas - the first car plant in the world to be purpose-built to use JIT and what would now be called 'agile' production.

Taiichi Ohno and Kiichiro Toyoda visited the Nuffield Australia plant in 1950 when they discovered Woollard's work and added it to that of Frederick Winslow Taylor and W.E. Deming, plus their own ideas and experiences to create the Toyota Production System.

A lot of the principles in TPS, the Honda Method and other holistic processes that apparently caught the Western manufacturers so unawares are actually pretty simple and obvious. It just requires a level of insight, dedication, bravery and long-term thinking on the part of management to get it to work.

I remember reading about Honda's working practices and it quoted an executive from Honda's in-house management academy saying that they provide training and consultancy for firms in all sorts of industries and around the world, but something like 80% of all their clients try to pick and choose which elements of the system they can implement, not understanding that it's a total thing that has to be done in full at every level and that it has to be committed to for the long term. And a similar proportion of companies that do try to implement such systems abandon them in five years or less either because they're failing to do it right or it's not paying off quickly enough for the shareholders.

Ironically Honda suffered from similar problems in the 2010s when a new cohort of executives decided to maximise shareholder value and started pruning the R&D budget and removing Honda hallmarks like technical directors having complete control over allocating their budgets. Now they're rapidly undoing all those 'reforms'.

Fastchas

2,640 posts

120 months

Tuesday 17th November 2020
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Opposite the Ambiwlans station, me. Small world...