British Leyland’s Hidden History
Former development engineer reveals all
Ifind British Leyland endlessly fascinating. Firstly there’s the diverse mix of cars – saloons, hatchbacks, sports cars, off-roaders and GTs, luxury cars and budget transport, some technically ground-breaking, others miserably conservative. That BL was largely dysfunctional, kept running out of cash and had weak, indecisive management just adds extra spice to the mix. And then there’s the ways in which some of its best ideas were hobbled by cost-cutting or coming to market before they were finished.
However, one of the most fascinating and often heartbreaking aspects of the British Leyland soap opera is the cars that were developed, tested and readied for production that were suddenly dropped. Were these brave decisions narrowly avoiding commercial disaster or tantalising missed opportunities?
It was these questions that got me talking to development engineer and test driver, Gordon Birtwistle, whose career began at StandardTriumph in 1958 and ended at BL in 1980. Having worked on everything from the Herald to the TR8, Gordon is still smarting about a couple of classic BL ‘ What Might Have Beens’, chiefly the V8-engined Triumph Lynx and the proposed follow-up to the Rover SD1 and replacement for the Dolomite, the SD2 hatch.
And so, to get the inside story, we meet at the British Motor Museum’s Collections Centre where surviving prototypes of the Lynx, SD2 and ECV3 awaited us…
ALEX RILEY Let’s start with the SD2 prototype Gordon, which is probably the car here you had the greatest hand in engineering. Go on, hop on inside.
GORDON BIRTWISTLE It’s nice, don’t you think? There’s a good width between occupants, you’re not rubbing shoulders with everybody, so the proportions are quite good. I could set off in this now and just drive hundreds of miles.
It is comfortable. Tell us about the rear wheel travel that you were passionately gunning for and how that was accomplished.
It was easy to achieve, really. It was just a case of getting the turrets in the right place so you could get the right damper length in there. And really, my argument was always that we’ve got to have shock absorbers on the car, the length of which is immaterial.
And that of course would be to the benefit of both ride and handling, I see – and SD2 had more wheel travel than anything else in British Leyland at the time?
Yes. Look at the Marina; that was on cart springs at the back – not much travel out of those.
And describe for me the experience of driving this prototype.
Well, it was like a mini SD1, really. It had a good ride but I must say the handling was a very strong point because of the Watts Linkage and the anti-roll bar, plus the right spring rates. The basic dimensions are also favourable. Certainly compared with the Dolomite, the SD2 was on another level.
And you think the SD2 could’ve been a means of generating further sales for the SD1?
Yes, exactly. One of the discussions had at the time was using Opel as an example. They’d have a little Kadett that would be so enjoyable to drive it would entice you to buy something bigger and even better.
And yet, despite having developed this car for five years or more, BL cancelled it and decided to bring out the Acclaim instead.
It was sad but what upset me most was that BL still considered it to be an economical route; for a company to take a pre-engineered car and just bin everything that’d been done. Although in hindsight, the Acclaim was the most reliable Triumph they made!
Oh gosh, I suppose you’re right. Next we’ve another car which almost made it into production, the Lynx. You don’t get too many cars like this – a 2+2 with a huge boot. It’s hugely
practical. I understand you did some cold climate testing in Canada with one of these – what was the assignment?
We were in Timmins, Northern Ontario, where the maximum daytime temperature was -20 degrees Celsius. We were only out there to judge the performance of the heating primarily; we weren’t out there to destroy any engines or transmissions. Nonetheless, we’d find things like problems with the shock absorber seals. You’d drive off and probably there was no wheel travel on the front because the oil in the dampers had become so thick. Also things like not being able to fill the Lynx with fuel because the filler cap had iced over because, just like on a TR7, it’s flush with the rear deck. Those are things you’ve got to go there to find out.
Did you ever bump into other engineers testing other makes of car?
Yeah, Nissan was in the same hotel while we were out with the Lynx. We were asked not to discuss anything we were doing in the bar at night and all our prototypes had to be kept locked away. And yet, I was having a drink and this Japanese guy came up to me and said: ‘You must come and have a look at our engine! We have two sparking plugs!’ They were as open as a door! The difference was pretty stark.
The TR7 was another car whose testing you were heavily involved in. What are your thoughts on that?
It should have been better. You get in a TR6 with 150bhp and plenty of torque and you’re always going to like it more than a four-cylinder. And the TR6 had a bigger personality. I used to run a TR7 with the Sprint engine and fuel injection, all covered with black plastic to keep it disguised. That was fabulous.
So was that a serious consideration at some point?
Yeah, it was a possible American-spec model which would have been mated to an automatic gearbox. Sadly, it didn’t happen.
And how would you have improved the TR7?
It needed a Watts Linkage or a Panhard Rod – that’s what it was crying out for. It’s the first thing they did with the rally cars and it transforms them, because you can’t have multi-function top link arms without a lot of rubber in them, so you’ve a lot of wishy-washiness as a result.
And then there’s the ECV3, which would have been a project after you left BL. What do you think of it?
It looks great for the back; its doors look almost like a Honda Insight.
Tell us about Spen King. What was he like to work with?
He was passionate about everything. The ECV3 is a reflection of the man’s ethos, definitely. By this point he would have had a much freer rein with his designs. I can tell he was frustrated in the 1960s and 1970s. I remember when I went to Switzerland with him for the GT6’s press launch, he said: ‘You know, thinking about it, we’ve got the family tree upside down. We’ve got 53 chief engineers.’
That’s crazy. 53? And that’s just before BL all came together in 1968?
That’s right; to get something off the ground upon which all those lot would agree was nigh-on impossible.
And I presume that even when something could be agreed, you often found yourselves at loggerheads with the accountants?
Well a prime example of that was the Triumph 2500S. It had Stag wheels but it didn’t have a front anti-roll bar. There was an increase in the performance from the tyre and the wheel kit and yet it felt like it wanted to fall over when you pushed it into a corner. We in engineering and experimental put an anti-roll bar on and it transformed the car. Our report went back to product planning and got thrown out because it would have cost extra.
So would you have fitted stiffer springs to overcome this?
We did nothing; we kept the springs the same and the bar on. We fought the case.
And did they give in? Oh yes. But it should never have been on the table as a consideration – we were calling it an
‘S’ version. I always queried how somebody who didn’t have the appreciation of a final end product could make the decision whether or not it had this component or that. They only judged it from the cost element. Agreed. And I understand that you were the very man who drove the Triumph 2000 saloon down to Giovanni Michelotti to create his prototype for the Turin Motor Show – the car that would become the Stag?
Oh, well that was normal; there was a time when I used to go probably every month for something at Michelotti’s, be it work on the Herald, Spitfire or GT6. I remember on one occasion I drove the Stag Fastback prototype back to Canley and ran out of fuel in the middle of France! Unbeknown to me, Michelotti had changed the fuel tank for a smaller one! What was Michelotti like? I mean, he designed hundreds of cars.
Oh, he was brilliant. I used to go to his design studio and occasionally he’d tell me to contact Harry Webster to tell him that there’d been ‘a small delay’ so that the two of us could have more time together. In the evenings we’d be off into Turin to have the time of our lives. He was a real gent. And the Stag fastback – what are your impressions of that car?
Oh, it was a beautiful thing. It handled very nicely, too. I never understood why they didn’t make it. In the end we used it as a development tool for the normal Stag to get rid of lift-off oversteer. There were no negatives, really – it would have fitted into the market without jeopardising the Stag itself. Just another ‘What Might Have Been’, I suppose… Yes, I suppose your right – thanks for your time Gordon, it’s been a pleasure.