Morris Minor Owners Club

Just to make sure I understand this, we're talking about when the rear 'bodyline' lost this little bit by the rear window...
I'm posting this a 2nd time because the forum is having a funny turn and giving me an error message....

1948-1951 Without
1951-1958 With
1958 on without

Or in the case of the last Minor built

Some Minors including mine which were produced in 1957 do not have the LRBM so the date(s) given above are inconsistent with the facts.

Can the loss of the LRBM be linked to any other changes such as introduction of larger rear window?
Is the intermittent appearance due to BMC using up existing pressings after the forms and dies had been changed in the presses?

philthehill wrote: ↑Sun Aug 15, 2021 7:50 am Some Minors including mine which were produced in 1957 do not have the LRBM so the date(s) given above are inconsistent with the facts.

Sorry Phil, didn't infer you were wrong - or my guess was factual - find it odd that a '57 doesn't have this feature, yet all other '57s I have do.

Would you please pm your cars' body number code & vin to amend my records.

How is this item fitted; can it be removed?

Mick Lynch wrote: ↑Sun Aug 15, 2021 4:40 pm Can the loss of the LRBM be linked to any other changes such as introduction of larger rear window?
Is the intermittent appearance due to BMC using up existing pressings after the forms and dies had been changed in the presses?

Primary question is WHY!?

Would those aftermarket Tourer "hardtops" fit both models, quite a difference.

Have read somewhere about Cowley being unable to supply enough 2drs for export, forcing them to convert tourers held in stock - several converted tourers survive in Australia - so whether conversion done at Sydney, who knows.

610xxx didn't

Never knew they converted extant tourers. Do the converted tourers have the other characteristics like the extra brackets at the A post to dash? Or any other clues?

Mick Lynch wrote: ↑Mon Aug 16, 2021 9:10 pm Never knew they converted extant tourers. Do the converted tourers have the other characteristics like the extra brackets at the A post to dash? Or any other clues?

Heritage Certificates come back as standard Tourer's - with strengthening panels & Tourer chassis/body nos - suggests conversions done AFTER production (in UK?) or indeed, Australia.

Another interesting point - if ANYTHING I say is classed as interesting(sic!) - on these,there is lead loading around the roof panel joint & the LRBM.

It’s all interesting. It appeals to the oft quoted ‘male autistic brain’ and the need to sort and quantify many males have.

The people who made these cars are mostly long gone. The machines are long gone. The decisions long lost and forgotten.

Finding the small inconsistencies in the process is akin to removing layers of dirt from an Iron Age hearth... it’s the throwaway items that give us the best way of how the ‘whole’ worked.

Mike, you're quite correct about the Autism, allbeit mildly so.

SO frustrating, the info IS out there, sadly, no-one keen on taking research further, assuming a book will provide ALL the answers.

It’s been said many times before but never accepted, this subject can be researched ‘till the cows come home but there will always be other revelations that follow, for example, the bottom of the B post on some lcvs end with a plain vertical area, whereas others follow the shape found on saloons. When did that happen? I’d say the past history is ongoing rather than being definitive.

les wrote: ↑Tue Aug 17, 2021 8:38 pm It’s been said many times before but never accepted, this subject can be researched ‘till the cows come home but there will always be other revelations that follow, for example, the bottom of the B post on some lcvs end with a plain vertical area, whereas others follow the shape found on saloons. When did that happen? I’d say the past history is ongoing rather than being definitive.

1968

POMMReg wrote: ↑Sat Aug 14, 2021 10:01 pm 1948-1951 Without
1951-1958 With
1958 on without

The most interesting part of this to me is the ‘without’ to ‘with’ portion. I’m wondering what instigated the design change ‘without’ to ‘with’. I prefer the cleaner lines of ‘without’, as ‘with’ looks like a half effort, or awkward at best.

Does ‘with’ serve to correct some underlying issue they had during the production run? Cracking or a hard point leading to fatigue? Seems it needed more effort viz. lead loading, so was a deliberate (engineered rather than focus group cosmetic) deviation from the original design. The length of time the change happened into the production run would correspond with owner issues feeding back to the design department.

Could it have been a problem NMP had with the part coming off the presses?

To me the ’without’ to ‘with’ was a stopgap solution to an as of yet unknown problem. Is there additional stiffening in that area after the reversion of ‘with’ back to ‘without’?

Decided to throw in the towel with saloons,Traveller's & Tourer's, not making enough headway to continue.

Undecided about AddPk Travellers - body numbers reasonably complete - but happy to offload them on a MMOC member who's happy to continue research.

After what I calculate to be your eleven plus years, the headway on any research becomes less prolific, simply because the main body of work has been done; there’s less to discover, what there is, is less easy to find so headway will be slower.

les wrote: ↑Thu Aug 19, 2021 4:57 pm After what I calculate to be your eleven plus years, the headway on any research becomes less prolific, simply because the main body of work has been done; there’s less to discover, what there is, is less easy to find so headway will be slower.

Started during 2013 for the passenger varient, and THAT was only intended to investigate body numbers.
I doubt the explaination for the LRBM will ever be solved, enthusiasts are seemingly content with "black & white" publications, any "grey" subject, without a straight forward answer, is overlooked, or simply not mentioned!

I don’t know about all that, my post was referring to lack of headway.

les wrote: ↑Thu Aug 19, 2021 6:39 pm I don’t know about all that, my post was referring to lack of headway.

With SO many Minor's surviving, the answer IS out there, by owners not supplying details we're never going to find out new information.