On Sun, 08 Jan 2017 13:27:15 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:
In article ,
wrote:
On Sun, 08 Jan 2017 11:29:00 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:
The Nash Metropolitan was hideous then as now. A UK designer's attempt
at a scaled down US car incorporating all the worst aspects of them.
********, I suppose because it was assembled by Austin you assume it
was designed here as since the days it all went pear shaped in the
late 60's it has become fashionable to knock anything done by BMC
You suppose wrong. BMC lost the plot in several different directions - and
before the late '60s.
Whatever , Still doesn't make your statement
A UK designer's attempt a scaled down US car correct.
It was US designed.
The Nash Metropolitan was designed in the US by Americans
with some influences from some larger Nash cars that had an input from
Pininfarina.
And Farina refused to have that 'influence' made public. Not surprising
given the hideous result.
Not going to dispute that but it doesn't
make your statement.
A UK designer's attempt a scaled down US car correct.
It was US designed.
Fisher& Ludlow who made the body pressings and Austin who provided
mechanicals and assembly did so purely as contractors , Fisher were
still independent when negotiations started but became part of BMC by
the time of production in1953.
Austin only sold a version for non competing markets from 1956.
If you look at the original Nash concept drawings and what it ended up
looking like in production, you'll see what I mean. I assumed that was by
the design being modified to make it possible to actually make it. US
designers had little experience of monocoque construction so had to leave
it to one who had - ie Austin and Pressed Steel. Just how and where it
went so badly wrong looks wise I dunno.
I wonder if it looked so bad from American eyes for whom its US
designer styled it , tastes across the Atlantic can be quite
different.
Pressed steel had an interesting genesis, they had started as a joint
venture between Morris and the Budd corporation of the US but due to
differences became an independent company before WW2 with Morris
having to relinquish its shareholding after a court ruling. Budd
later sold their controlling interest in 1935 and it became a British
company rather than a joint UK US one.
Budd had developed monocoque construction in the 30's and one of the
first mass produced vehicles to use it over there was the Nash 600 in
1941,by the time of the Metropolitan a couple of other models had
followed so I don't think they had as little experience as your post
is trying to make out.
Talking about design tastes varying much of Budds business was
building Railroad cars and for a brief period after WW2 the Railroads
of the US and Canada purchased many Budd railroad Cars in their trade
mark stainless steel and corrugate finish and incorporating a lot of
their welding techniques that made the body far more of a load
bearing unit those previously, some are still in use now in Canada.
Budd wanted to break into the post WW2 British market and had this
built as a demonstrater which toured the UK and Ireland.
http://irishrailwaymodeller.com/atta...8&d=1448817913
http://irishrailwaymodeller.com/show...ilver-Princess
Like the Nash Met it just looks strange and not quite right but it is
interesting to see who they wanted to build it .
Pressed Steel , the companies may have had a divorce but it looks like
they kept close relations .
G.Harman