Some even made a claimed 600bhp.

Yeah, I wasn't trying to diss them, I liked themJPB wrote:Considering that some brave souls extracted North of 300bhp from the 5's hemi-headed version of the good old Cleon engine (a specific output rarely seen even now and now only in track cars that would toil to get close to 5,000 miles from each engine, never mind 50,000), I reckon they weren't too shabby and were certainly capable of spectacular bang for the buck.
Some even made a claimed 600bhp.From what was essentially the same bottom end as you'd find in a peasant's shopping car. Checking youtube briefly, I couldn't find much film footage of these things exploding in service.
I know, I apologise for having given the impression that I thought you were.ian65 wrote:..Yeah, I wasn't trying to diss them...
My family's last one was a City X and that didn't even have the split folding arrangement. I remember when Mother bought it new in 1988, the major USP of that one was that it came with those damned awful TD tyres and their metric wheels. I still never worked out why they were considered a good idea.Murray wrote:A whole host of adverts on here...//...Austin Metro, a british car to beat the world,complete with split rear seats!!
You'd think BMW would know better than to "copy" the idea. I gather the modern BMWs have a similar type of tyre that also ruins the ride! I wouldn't mind, but that must be the third iteration of the idea: Dunlop's Denove, the TD and then whatever BMW have.JPB wrote:
My family's last one was a City X and that didn't even have the split folding arrangement. I remember when Mother bought it new in 1988, the major USP of that one was that it came with those damned awful TD tyres and their metric wheels. I still never worked out why they were considered a good idea.