Morris Minor Owners Club

Hi, before I start my rant, let me say that I love Minors.
With all due respect to the designers and all of the owners (not just purists) who keep their cars maintained with often a load of time, money and frustration spent.. Why hasn't anybody dealt with the obvious (to me) design problems with traveller wood?

What I mean is that when the car was drawn up and/or the prototypes made, why didn't the team spot the flaws in the joinery?
As the traveller sides slope in they create almost flat places on their top edges, allowing water to sit and potentially cause rot, this occurs at many places on the car, also the way the joints are made they actually encourage water ingress!
I know that 'proper mainenance and application of finish' is essential to keeping the wood in good condition BUT it can't be relied on.

Wood was once alive, we know it's been cut apart and converted to suit our needs, it doesn't! It reacts to humidity and dryness by expanding and contracting, cracking joints and the varnish along it's grain allowing water ingress, rotting the timber from the inside.
The principle and cure is simple but likely to offend many.

Take account of the curvature of the panels, increase the slope of the mouldings to compensate (only by 2-3 degrees) which will encourage water shedding so that it will follow the line of least resistance and run off the timber.

The joints at the bottom of the 'B' & rear post where the wheel arch timber need 'easing' (sloping to remove the really neat area where water sits), don't take my work for it, just look at your car and see what the water does, multiply this by forward movement when driving and you can imagine where the rain is going to be forced in, instead of being shed away!

Like I said, it's my soapbox and my rant. Thing is I've driven on radials for years, crossplies? No way, Not as safe as radials, more up to date, last longer, etc. there's a link there surely?
I'd like the cash and/or the facility to come up with an 'improved' frame, realistically it hasn't a chance though, pity.

Go the American way .... Plastic coated steel timber effect.

Seriously though theres nothing stopping you doing those mods to the timber whilst revarnishing.

The traveller timber is always going to be a maintenance headache but we love them just as they are

Taupe

If you look after the wood, you might have to replace it every 30 years or so- thats not too bad when the average lifespan of a modern car is only 8 years.

I don't see the problem with the wood. BTW, by the time the wood has rotted, the metalwork underneath will need replacement as well, so why not do it all in one go and the car is good for decades more!

As for crossplys, my traveller had them when new, great fun on a wet roundabout! Sadly, they wore out and had to be replaced with boring old radials.

The US plastic coated timber effect is just Yuck! A real traveller has real wood.

Hello Ken,

when new they were a cheap car made down to a price, and certainly BMC did not expect them to still be used today?

Alec

Also when new the wood was treated, boiled in Cuprinol, I believe.
There is still a certain amount of original wood still in use over 40 years later, hardly cause for complaint.

Hello Marky,

that's interesting, I wonder whether the modern pressure treating of wood could be done and how effective it would be?

Alec

That's certainly what I'd do if I had a traveller that needed new wood.

when the average lifespan of a modern car is only 8 years.

Where did you get 8 from? Generally I've heard 12 but those figures are skewed by accident write offs. Write-offs are common in cars over 3-5* years old due to the small amount of damage needed to make a car written off.

If you take out the ones written off due to accident damage, it's probably more like 15.

rayofleamington wrote:

when the average lifespan of a modern car is only 8 years.

Where did you get 8 from? Generally I've heard 12 but those figures are skewed by accident write offs. Write-offs are common in cars over 3-5* years old due to the small amount of damage needed to make a car written off.

If you take out the ones written off due to accident damage, it's probably more like 15.

As long as most modern cars haven't done galactic mileage they tend to stay together fairly well. If anyone on here has ever been to spain and looked at the odometer on a taxi they will know what I mean! 400K+ and still being driven loads!

Thanks for the replies, it's apparently an area that invokes a response!
A bit of background though... The first car I had was a 'maroon b' 2 door saloon for about 5 years until it got nicked and burnt out, that had crossplies on so I had the fun bit of rally driving on the road, in the rain & snow!
Other models have followed, for much of my driving life.

The point I was trying to make is that the wood's design can be improved by subtly changing the machined profile during production.

I'm in agreement about the American 'poly'' finish, pragmatically it does have merits but I don't like the looks of what I've seen so far, anyway it's not just about aesthetics is it?

If the Ash stays in better condition for longer then - as a structural part - it will be safer for the passengers/driver as it will stay stronger.
Logically, if this is achievable by reviewing and adapting the design to improve water dispersal then it should be seriously considered. I feel responsible for this, I won't cut corners maintaining the mechanics or bodywork, so I'm not going to start with the wood.

The pressure treatment of the timber is possible although 'dipping' will probably be the method employed, there's distortion of the frames/components to consider and integrity of the glue joints as well due to the process, again the life of a maintained rear frame is quite impressive for the average age so we're doing something right with what we've got.

To sum up, if I had the opportunity - or need - to replace the rear wood (it's going to be soon) then I'd want to make some small but effective changes to the new frames before assembly or fitting.
If I didn't at least try, then I'd be betraying my experience, qualifications and knowledge of the industry, knowing that things could be better.

As a foot note, near to where I live there's a heritage site where heaps of both car and motorcycle rallies/autojumbles take place.
A great day out and a 'goldmine' for the elusive parts too with a chance to catch up with cronies!
At times I see classic bikers walking out of the entrances carrying their prized 'Avon Roadrunner' tyres over their shoulder (complete with wrappings) back to their cars, saying they will 'get them fitted for the next run'. Lost in their enthusiasm- or maybe competetiveness - they are effectively stating that tyre technology hasn't moved on a micro second since those tyres were designed!

I admire their devotion to authenticity, honestly, also their bravery.. If I was riding - or driving - a vehicle that's over a couple of decades old with a 'footprint' onto the road that's about the size of a hen's egg then I'd want tyres.
Think about the analogy, that's what I'm suggesting.




As for modern cars lasting for 8, 10 or 20 years, does that matter if we're dealing with Minors? Try and keep on track guys!

quote=" they are effectively stating that tyre technology hasn't moved on a micro second since those tyres were designed!

Ken

I have been one of those motorcyclists and yes technology has moved on..... The old british made tyres for motorcycles were state of the art and used proper quality rubber compounds. The modern 'alternative' is flimsy, slippery, out of balance and third rate quality tyres made in Korea or China with none of the high quality modern manufacturers supporting most of the old british motorcycle tyre sizes. You just have to look at the Minor rubber hoses as an example ... the old stock ones are rightly highly prized.

Tyres for modern bikes are superb quality and are suitable for very high speeds and power transmission. But they generally need changing after 3-5000 miles as because of the compound they are worn out!!!

Taupe

I agree with you there about the high quality of the raw materials used at that time, also the phrase 'recycled coke cans' comes to mind when I think about some of the GM/Vauxhall and Ford cars produced during the seventies!

As a biker myself, it seems that they're putting their lives - and others - on the line by relying on a tread and tyre design/profile that is dated, notwithstanding the superior materials the tyres are made from.

It was meant as an analogy in context with how design has moved on, often through trial and error.
As for timber joinery, techniques for jointing and assembly, superior adhesives and preservative use has advanced leaps and bounds since the first cars rolled out. Otherwise we'd be sitting still and not fitting improved heaters, headlamp cowls, servo assisted brakes, disc brake kits, telescopic suspension, poly bushes, Saab/Metro seats, inertia front and rear seat belts, 'Kenlowe' fans, 1275/1300 engines (unleaded anyone?) and so on...

I think you are on shaky ground suggesting headlamp cowls are any kind of improvement.

The design of the wood on a traveller probably has more to do with traditional coach building techniques than thoughts of longevity, that was taken care of with the wood treatment.

Boy, you guys take this quite seriously don't you!

The headlamp cowls were just randomly chucked in as a gesture to the range of people's tastes and not representative of my personal preferences, you must surely get what I'm on about by now?

It's all about sensible, feasible and achievable changes to improve the product, make things work better and (hopefully) for longer with less maintenance and therefore lower costs.
Concours owners and folks who want to keep things original can make their own choices about what to use, this is about exploring options.

If you're happy and satisfied with the way things are, then fine... Go and listen to your valve radio and read books by a gas mantle in front of a coal fire, because those are things that haven't moved on either.

This was meant to be an open-minded debate.

No hard feelings meant, the owners club was a bit jollier when I first joined in 1979.

Ken, I agree with your sentiments.

It's good fun improving then I find out somebody did that 5 years ago

Try the http://morrisminorowners.co.uk forum, plenty of thinking outside of the box there

I totally agree with the OP.

Everything evolves, while it was good in the day, it was ultimately made to a price. Now that we are preserving these cars I feel that there should be an amount of artistic licence allowed. From what your saying I would imagine that several cars have accidently gained the profile that you describe through over zelous sanding.

I remember reading about some fibreglass sides but they were "spew yellow" in colour and not that attractive.

Heres another thought for the masses, what about the roof guttering? modern cars do not have this, is there an alternative? the reason I ask is that its often a place where minors get scabby.


To all the purists, I respect your side of the debate however, would you use lead loading on your panels or isopon? If we should all be super critical of the details then a good few of us would be on crossplys!

Im not trying to fuel the fire, just a firm believer of "each to their own"

Thanks Millerman, I've just joined them. You sound like you're informed about their set-up, will I see you there?
K

I'm not a purist by any means, and never suggested there aren't improvements to be made, like pressure treating the timber.
I'd be very interested to know how traveller wood could be better shaped and I don't even own one.

Apologies for this, it'll be boring!

The machined profile is set to (I estimate) at about 3-4 degrees from horizontal, that's a reasonable slope to encourage the run - off of water in most parts of the UK.

As the sides and other panels of a traveller are leaning in - by design - the slope is then negated, almost to the point of becoming horizontal (you can see how this is a MAJOR problem) which can be remedied by changing the machined slope to re-instate the original one.

Now the trade bit... All of the parts/components are made on machines and with the use of jigs, this is standard practice for safety, consistency, productivity and accuracy.

Cutter blocks are set up (spindle moulder cutters have variable pitch cutters, easily adjusted) and the planed and shaped pieces are fed through the machine by hand or with a 'power feed unit'.
This can also be done on a multi-cutter machine (CNC) which produces the whole section with all of it's shaped mouldings, etc.

The angle of the cutters can be adjusted in a matter of minutes, the tenon ends of the joints will need to have their shoulders changed to be close fitting, again a very easy job.

Put a section of timber through and check the fit, adjust if needed, check again and then you're set.
The set-up process is the most time consuming, once it's done then you're flying!
I make it sound easy, it isn't, I've been doing this stuff as a fully qualified City & Guilds machine woodworker for years, I've taught it and assessed competency in it.

If the rain/water can be encouraged to run off (sorry to be over simplistic but it behaves like gas, electricity or many people, taking the line of least resistance) there will be less chance of it entering the joints.
Prevention is better than cure, if this is done and we carry on treating the timber as we have been then it will possibly double it's life!

As Minor owners, we've bought into the responsibility of the marque, we actively research the history and heritage of our car(s) and maybe want to pass on our enthusiasm and passion to the next generation.
This is a way that, when the time comes to replace an integral part of a unique designed car, we can do the best job we can.

K