Morris Minor Owners Club

60 mph impact of Morris Trav Vs 7 tonne Merc truck. I was off work for 18 months and the Mog was totalled but I walked away from it. Decent Newton Commercial seats and inertia reel seatbelts saved me. The front shock arm was bent through 90 degrees but the front crossmember was still intact. All 4 tyres ripped off the rims. Wish I had taken pics (but was slightly 'out of it' at the time)

If it isn't rusted in the wrong places it is a fairly RIGID car that absorbs the impact like a brick but will still crumple if hit TOO hard. Had it been a eurobox then it would have crumpled in the way it was intended to and then I would have lost my legs.

Bit late chipping in on this one, but it would probably be a safer world if all teenagers had to start off with Minors. Limited available speed, and a ride that keeps you acquainted with the road and doesn't make you think that you're driving a racing car. (most boring eurobox hatchbacks leave MGs standing)
So yes, if you're going to have a collison at speed, you'll be much safer in a crumple-zone protected NCAP starred box.
If you're driving something that won't effortlessly do 30 or more over the national limit, you're much less likely to ever have that problem. (Oh yes, my first car as a teenager was a Nova like the one in the pic below - I'd have been MUCH safer with a Mog!!)

My 2penneth from working in A&E:

Modern cars better in large collisions. The crumple zone / safety cage nature of them means that you'll be safe but the car will be totalled. Small shunts, safety wise little to choose between them but the Minor will probably survive whereas the modern car will be written off much more easily.

In a well maintained minor you're reliant on the other car crumpling, and that's something you need to be aware of when making the decision about what you're driving - but you will be much more aware of speed in the Minor. I forget how fast I'm travelling in modern euroboxen, whereas I'm much more aware in the Minor, the DAF (or indeed on the bike).

My view:
Young drivers have greatly elevated risk of crashing--the statistics are very clear on this.
We as drivers all make mistakes when driving. Young drivers make more of them and they tend to be serious mistakes both because they are inexperienced in managing a vehicle and 'reading' traffic and because of many other factors associated with being young (impulsiveness, yielding to peer pressure to drive in a risky manner, etc).
The risks are not only for the driver--other road users that might be hit have to be considered too.
So, as a general principle, it is safest to put young, new drivers in vehicles that have a high occupant safety rating and a low aggressivity rating (safer for people that they hit). That way, they are likely to live long enough and gain enough relevant experience without maiming themselves or others so that later on they will be reasonably safe in a vehicle with lower safety ratings. It is worth noting that larger vehicles with a given occupant safety rating are safer than smaller vehicles with the same safety rating (mass will typically win in a crash).
So, IMHO, the parents are right. The Morris Minor might be cheap to run and have many other endearing qualities (fun to drive, etc), but but when safety is taken into account it, is is far from the ideal daily driver for young, novice drivers. Motoring is one of the main ways that young people come to serious harm. I don't think it is over-protective for a parent to take proven steps to keep their young one safe on the road.

Its just not true that you can' get into trouble with a Morris Minor because they are relatively slow. Many drivers--especially young ones--will at times flog their vehicles beyond their safe limits. I remember spinning my Series 2 (lowered and on wide wheels and tyres but otherwise standard) and rolling my 1000 (with two mates on board) in my younger days. And where are all the drivers/riders who advocate powerful vehicles because they provide rapid acceleration to get you out of trouble in hazardous situations.

For the record, I learned to drive on a Morris Minor and my first four vehicles were Morris Minors. I own two now (one is an Austin Minor).
FWIW, I am a road safety specialist with more than 30 years experience.

Safe and happy motoring Captain!

Cheers

Pyoor Kate is right about crumple zones. They protect the occupants by using up energy and softening the impact for the occupants.

Morris Minors were not designed with crumple zones. So when they are involved in a crash with modern cars, they rely on the safety engineered into the modern cars to provide some protection the Morris occupants. But what happens when a Morris hits a power-pole or a brick fence or a truck or a 4x4 or something else that doesn't have crumple zones? A very different outcome for the Morris occupant(s)!

Cheers

We could be totally mising the point here. Many young drivers buying their first car do not have the money to spend on a eurobox jelly mould with a good encap rating. They end up in a 10 year old rust bucket. Is that better or worse in an accident than a Minor? In my opinion - worse - as the impact speeds will be considerably higher. Of course they will drive them to the limit the're young and want to push the envelope, didnt you. There is no doubt that car safety (passive) has come on leaps and bounds in recent years but performance has risen exponentially. I would rather see my grandson in a well maintained 948cc Minor than a 120 mph eurobox any day

Driving a Minor as a first car will make YOU a much much better driver, and far less likely to be in an accident in the longer term.

However it won't make anyone else drive better, and your parents are entitled to their opinion. I know someone who bought a cheap little new car for their daughter (in the years when crash protection wasn't seen as a selling point) - it got completely flattened in a crash and the rest is history.

Morris Minors were not designed with crumple zones. So when they are involved in a crash with modern cars, they rely on the safety engineered into the modern cars to provide some protection the Morris occupants. But what happens when a Morris hits a power-pole or a brick fence or a truck or a 4x4 or something else that doesn't have crumple zones? A very different outcome for the Morris occupant(s)!

A Minor is probably far better in a crash than a lot of 80's cars. However compared to 2004+ NCAP 3 or 4 rated cars it's chalk and cheese.
One probem with the Minor is that it's light, so in a collission with a heavy car it'll get shoved a lot harder.

Hi captain_70s, it's funny but I have your situation but in reverse. My daughter has been driving just over a year and she wouldn't even consider a classic. So she spent a about two grand on a Clio £600 on a replacement cam only to sell it for £200 after she pranged it. She now drives a Fiesta that is a banger.

Maybe just as well to wait a year or so for your dream car your parents are looking out for you. However you could argue that the Moggy has proved itself over the years as a reliable car. You can access the engine and fix most problems without a diagnostic computer. As for the steel body of the Morris I know what I'd rather be in in a crash and it wouldn't be a pug 106 or anything like it. One thing about a Moggy everyone is aware that it's on the road because it's a little bit special.<br><br>

Pyoor_Kate wrote: whereas the modern car will be written off much more easily.

My next door neighbour has just bought a written off, 40000 mile, '55 plate Golf. So he tells me, it was a Category D write off. The damage was a broken engine mounting and a missing front bumper (There was a scratch on the rear bumper). I don't know how the damage occurred (Or if any other damage will creep out of the woodwork) but I would hardly call it grounds to write it off.

Blaketon wrote:

Pyoor_Kate wrote: whereas the modern car will be written off much more easily.

My next door neighbour has just bought a written off, 40000 mile, '55 plate Golf. So he tells me, it was a Category D write off. The damage was a broken engine mounting and a missing front bumper (There was a scratch on the rear bumper). I don't know how the damage occurred (Or if any other damage will creep out of the woodwork) but I would hardly call it grounds to write it off.

Well, considering the price of parts for new cars parts and work to be carried out on them I wouldn't be suprised if it costs more than the vale of the car.

Cheers for the advice, thinking about it more though I'd prefer to move out at this point in time. It would deifnatley make my future car ownership more secure asI'll only get one when I'm sure I can afford it myself.

I have seen a Minor van after it had hit the side of an army Land Rover. Land Rover driver's fault, he drove across a dual carriageway in front of it. I seem to remember that the Land Rover ended up on its side. The Minor Van was a write off but it was reassuring to see that the engine and gearbox had gone back and down under the floor and away from the driver.

A driver I know had a Ford Focus.He was not concentrating one day and had a relatively low speed collision with a kerb (less than 30 mph)
Result, all air bags deployed, blew out the windows and because the front suspension was out of line it was a right off.I think a Mog would have fared better.

For a car supposedly without crumple zones, Minors do pretty well. I know this was relativeley slow speed, but it just pushed the inner wings back and left the cab area unharmed:

Where modern cars score, though is the softness of the interior, even without airbags. The attractive shiny painted parts, chromed handles, and sticky out switches of the Minor become quite painful when you arrive at them quickly...
The other car had a creased roof and iffy door gaps, so obviously a write off, the driver though was unharmed. I suppose thats development, though glad I've still got the Minor even if theres a few scars involved.

Members might be interested in this recent newspaper article that refers to new research here in Australia.

http://www.theage.com.au/national/young ... -khnx.html

In essence, it shows that young drivers in Australia and New Zealand place themselves at much higher risk of death or injury by poor choice of vehicle from a safety perspective.

In general older and smaller vehicles have the worst safety.

Some cheap cars have very good safety performance.

Of course, they weren't looking at Morris Minors. Many of the models referred to were not sold in the UK. But the general principles are worth noting.

If anyone is interested in following-up I can point them to the original research.

Cheers
Don

Minors are tough little beasties. From a survivability factor I seriously think that I would be less likely to have a serious injury in a major accident if I was in the trav than the Rover.

I swear blind that the reason I've never crashed a car, got points etc after 7 years is that I started out with a minor - they teach you how to really drive rather than just pilot a computer. Provided you stay within the limits of yourself and the car the minor is a very predictable car, even in the wet and you should be a-ok.

The insurance is a major factor too - expect to pay at least half what you would for a modern.

All said and done if the purse string holders have an absolute say then a late "proper" mini scrapes in with their requirements and is likely to be a lot more fun than some modern eurobox (and using specialist insurance companies you should get a decent price for the insurance too).

Oh, and on the point of view of buying a cheap banger from your own pocket - my current car is the most expensive I have ever bought at £275 - rover 114gta with 76k on the clock and in very good nick. R100s can be picked up for peanuts.

Morris Minor Insurance for a 17 year old ,is cheeper than that for a newer Car eg: Corsa the Insurance companys, want to make a profit I bet they make more money on the unsafe Morris Minor ,than on the Safer Corsa

How well do Holden Kingswood's survive crashes?

Not that well according to this page:http://www.drive.com.au/Editorial/Artic ... 22&IsPgd=0

To prove the point, 10 years ago NRMA Insurance paid $100,000 for a crash-test analysis on a Holden Kingswood into an offset barrier at a modest 64kmh. Subsequent analysis found that injuries to the dummies were eight times more likely to result in serious injury or death than a then-new Holden Commodore.

"The difference would be even greater today and, by all accounts, we'd expect a 10- to 15-year-old large car to have the same difference in crash protection as one of today's five-star cars," he says.

Pictures say it all really, car saftey has grown a huge ammount.

Heres a crash test between a 1959 Chevy and a 2009 Chevy, obvious to see the passangers in the classic would all have been killed. I dread to think what would happen to a car as small as a Minor if hit by a standard size family car.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xwYBBpHg1I

Besides it looks more and more likely that I'll use this money to move out rather than get a car because it will be more benificial to me. However much I love cars I'm not going to be getting one any time soon it seems, and probably not a Moggy or other classic either.