Morris Minor Owners Club

The wood on my traveller is mostly good with a few patches of rot i the usual spots. I have hardened and filled these but they look unsightly. Has anyone considered using iron-on ash veneer to improve the look of the woodwork without replacing it? If so what are the pitfalls and please can you offer any advice. Ash veneer is advertised on e-bay up to 50mm. wide.

It'll just peel off.

I'm afraid 'hardened and filled' timber is not a satisfactory solution. The timber frame is structural......not just cosmetic. It needs to be repaired properly.

How structural is "structural"? Is the chassis being over bent and deformed each time you hit a bump as a result of the woodwork not being rigid enough or is there just a risk of the roof collapsing?

Its structural to the effect that it will fail its MOT if unsound.Its part of the structure of the car!

Look at the Trav sideways and think of the structure. If the wood doesn't form a rigid frame you've basically got a long beam flexing back from the B post, far too much stress for it to last very long, even if isn't corroded.

Mark

Exactly - it's just a flappy platform with an axle hanging on the end....and the timber frame supports the cab roof... It's VERY structural.

So the metal chassis is self supporting but would deform too much when driving over bumps were it not for the rigid woodwork?

Its not a rigid chassis, its a monocoque structure. High risk of deforming, strong possibility of stress fractures. Without the timber it would be as bendy as a clown car!

Thanks for the information. I had assumed the chassis was stronger as in the convertibles So I presume it would be bad to jack the car with the wood off as well?

Is there a problem if the wood filler is strong and flexes as much as the wood for 6-9 months while money is saved up for a full repair?

I would certainly take care jacking the platform with no timber attached...... Even the Convertible has the massive strength of the rear seat and boot assembly - where there is absolutely nothing on the Trav.

tysonn wrote:Its structural to the effect that it will fail its MOT if unsound.Its part of the structure of the car!

I might be wrong but Im sure I read that timber parts are no longer assessed in the MOT test...

Taupe

If the rear wheels are off the road temporarily (e.g. a bump affecting both tyres), the greatest chassis stress will be just behind the front wheels. In the convertible, this is has no reinforcement above the chassis right as the doors will not transmit a force. Is the convertible chassis stronger here than the Traveller?

That said, I can believe that the convertible rear is supported by the rear seat and boot assembly while the Traveller relies on the wood. The wood filler should be stronger in compression, but I realise tension could rip it apart.

bmcecosse wrote:Exactly - it's just a flappy platform with an axle hanging on the end....and the timber frame supports the cab roof... It's VERY structural.

Listen to the expert here . and stop trying to justify running a car on wood filler and Venner and Xmas dust,put the traveller off the road and save life's and your cash till you can get it repaired professional,and forget all about a back street bodge

taupe wrote:

tysonn wrote:Its structural to the effect that it will fail its MOT if unsound.Its part of the structure of the car!

I might be wrong but Im sure I read that timber parts are no longer assessed in the MOT test...

Taupe

Total wrong am afraid

alexandermclaren wrote:

taupe wrote:

tysonn wrote:Its structural to the effect that it will fail its MOT if unsound.Its part of the structure of the car!

I might be wrong but Im sure I read that timber parts are no longer assessed in the MOT test...

Taupe

Total wrong am afraid

Yes indeed,if so every morgan,(ash framed) would have no checks made on chassis.Wood filler is what it is Filler,not heard of wood that can be welded,

Speaking of my own, I cannot believe that it would have gone from being structurally sound to having a 5cm by 3cm hole of mush trapped in by 2mm of wood which didn't rot (suspect the stain stopped it). Surely the MOT would at least involve jabbing every piece of wood with a screwdriver if wood was covered?

But I agree that the MOT isn't so much important as avoiding a fatal fracture of the chassis while driving. However there seem to be conflicting views between whether the Traveller should be taken off the road, whether it's fine for six months and whether it's fine for three to four years.

If the wood filler chosen wasn't bearing the loads while driving, wouldn't you get cracks emerging in the wood filler?

Many traveller owners are driving around with wood thats been patched,filled,bodged up etc.Theyre either cheapskates,cant afford the cost of replacement,enjoying driving their cars while they save up to do a proper job etc,(bear in mind its only necessary to replace the sections that need it if time/money are factors).Can't see anything wrong with this, it doesnt sound as if your cars gonna imminently self destruct but I think the replies to your thread are in response to your original question of what we think about using iron on veneer to cover the problems up.They are trying to tell you that a purely cosmetic fix isnt the answer,plus it would be a waste of money.
Mick

The greatest stress on the floor structure won't be near the front wheels, it will be around the B post and centre cross member area, as it acts as a cantilever rearwards of here unless braced by the timber frame. You are correct that a convertible is weaker here and places greater reliance on the sill strengthener than the Trav. This is precisely why many convertibles have doors which don't fit - the sill strengtheners are notorious rust traps.

The filler may well stay in place for many months with no cracking. The problem is that failure doesn't tend to occur gradually, it happens during extreme stress, eg emergency braking or swerving or a collision. These are generally not great times for the rear end to declare independence....

Mark

I think the replies to your thread are in response to your original question of what we think about using iron on veneer to cover the problems up.

☺
Actually the veneer suggestion came from the OP, who appears to have lost interest...

Mark