1971 Hillman Avenger Deluxe

1971 Hillman Avenger in Troppo rischio per un uomo solo, Movie, 1973

Class: Cars, Sedan — Model origin:

Background vehicle

Comments about this vehicle

Author	Message
Ingo ◊ 2019-03-10 23:29	some Avenger-ish Rootes-crap
dsl ◊ 2019-03-11 00:12	1971 J (for jewel) plate
Jan2 ◊ 2024-01-25 04:51	ingo wrote some Avenger-ish Rootes-crap You are shit.
antp ◊ 2024-01-25 07:05	Please don't insult people, even if they insult cars
johnfromstaffs ◊ 2024-01-25 12:32	antp wrote Please don't insult people, even if they insult cars He's obviously new here, and doesn't understand our modus operandi
rjluna2 ◊ 2024-01-25 15:49	Jan2 wrote You are shit. You better watch your language here, bub
Jan2 ◊ 2024-01-26 06:44	rjluna2 wrote You better watch your language here, bub What german even knows about Rootes-cars? Is he even seen one in real life?
night cub ◊ 2024-01-26 08:12	He's quite familiar with them. And he likes to post that to tease the pre-Rootes members here. He is one of the few posters that have been here since almost the start.
chicomarx ◊ 2024-01-26 08:25	Jan2 wrote What german even knows about Rootes-cars? Is he even seen one in real life? You certainly wouldn't see them in Finland with that one hour of daylight! But enough trashtalking about Rootes cars.
dsl ◊ 2024-01-26 13:24	We have a fairly respectable scattering of Rootes-jewels in Finland. Our first Sunbeam Rapier H120 was a Finnish sighting.
zodiac ◊ 2024-01-31 12:08	I don't understand this aversion against some British cars. When I've read contemporary tests my impression is that the Hillman Avenger were considered somewhat bland, but never really bad. Have someone's memory been exaggerated in that way, or did the build quality prove them short lived? It can't be that the "I don't like the design" statement overpower a proper judgement, or can it?
johnfromstaffs ◊ 2024-01-31 12:12	There are two reasons for poking fun at such cars, 1.they are/were cheap and cheerful, but not Fords. 2. you can annoy dsl.
Baube ◊ 2024-01-31 17:45	valid points
Ingo ◊ 2024-02-02 10:58	night cub wrote He's quite familiar with them. And he likes to post that to tease the pre-Rootes members here. He is one of the few posters that have been here since almost the start. fun fact: since 3 1/3 years he even owns a Chrysler-crap clunker - and is very happy with it
Ingo ◊ 2024-02-02 11:07	zodiac wrote I don't understand this aversion against some British cars. When I've read contemporary tests my impression is that the Hillman Avenger were considered somewhat bland, but never really bad. Have someone's memory been exaggerated in that way, or did the build quality prove them short lived? It can't be that the "I don't like the design" statement overpower a proper judgement, or can it? It's a relict from the 70ies and 80ies, when British cars -Rootes a bit more than others- had a worst reputation about reliability and rust protection. The desastrous circumstances in the British automotive industry back then were annother factor.
zodiac ◊ 2024-02-03 22:59	@ingo: I agree that the unions were organized in a peculiar way, but British cars were no better or worse than from any other country. I'd like a source on the "reputation".
dsl ◊ 2024-02-04 01:04	I've stayed out of this because I'm excluded from playing the "annoy dsl" game. And because Rootes-jewels are beyond criticism. However, in a very quiet voice, I have to admit that they were enthusiastic rusters, which killed many Avengers. And Alpines. And Horizons. And similar period Fords, Vauxhalls, BMC/Leyland things etc at much the same rate - they were all pretty much as bad as each other - you can argue between them, but there's not much point. Another problem is we stopped putting gravel on winter roads and started using mountains of salt, which led to rust worm epidemics. And it took a good few years to work through the system before cars got adequate rust-proofing. Some Rootes-jewels had reliability problems due to being under-developed when launched, so their reputations IMPloded. But so did the Mini, Jag XJ6 2.8 (which gobbled pistons faster than you could say piston-gobbler) amongst others. Which meant Brit designers tended to stick to bog standard templates so you ended up with porridge-mobiles a lot of the time - Avenger, Cortina, Marina etc. Another problem was cost-cutting manufacture in the 70s - components were made more cheaply, so broke/wore out more easily. The Avenger was launched with the slogan "More car in your hands" which it literally delivered - my dad had three which steadily snapped stupid little things like door handles, window winders, seat levers etc. The oily bits were fine, but the plastics were shite. 70s Brit factory quality control was pants too across pretty much everyone from Jag downwards. All of which meant many imports mushroomed here in the 70s - particularly German (Opel, Audi, VW, BMW etc) and Japanese (once they'd learned how to rust-proof) because they got the simple things right and didn't melt in the rain.
chicomarx ◊ 2024-02-04 08:10	It's not the salt, Britain had more of a class struggle than Germany, you had a situation were factory workers would resent factory owners, like serfs against lords, even more fueled by socialized unions, which leads to poor job performance and a willingness to strike until the whole industry is gone.
johnfromstaffs ◊ 2024-02-04 09:31	Much as it annoys me to have to agree with dsl (he knows most of it is just a leg-pull anyway) there was not much to choose between the British manufacturers. There was also substantial change in the perception of the various marques between the 50s and the 80s, most of it based upon perceptions gained from the use by marginal motorists of clapped out cars that had of necessity survived WW2. To summarise my views: Vauxhalls - strong mechanics, especially engines, the rest was junk, don’t buy one. Fords - cheap and reliable, but a bit “common”, if you had any social pretentious. Hillmans - unimaginative and a bit better than a Ford or Vauxhall. Austin - one step above a Ford, but a bit stodgy. A wide range from the bargain bucket Seven right up to limousines. The fact that they built so many taxis shows that they could build a reliable vehicle if it suited them. Morris - 30s designs a lot more stylish than the equivalent Austin, but, the fabulous Minor 1000 apart, completely lost it after WW2 until fwd arrived. Eighties - The fashionable thing to have was a Ford or a Vauxhall, BMC/BL and Rootes were fading away, their perceived quality above a Ford or Vauxhall attacked by the Ford and Vauxhall having improved designs, improved rustproofing and generally more imaginative ranges, quality and marketing. Despite my Dad’s love of Morris cars, a Major, a Ten, a Minor 1000, a Cowley bought new in 1955, two Oxfords (MO and S3) I never had one, my choices, when I had choices, were Vauxhall or Ford. Before two Golf estates, an Audi A4 estate and two Mercédès C-class estates. -- Last edit: 2024-02-04 09:34:35
daimlere20 ◊ 2024-02-04 11:25	Yet again.....
zodiac ◊ 2024-02-04 11:58	Thank you for the responses, but to take it from there and to state the conclusion that all the other cars from any other country were excellent pieces of engineering is a bit far fetched. I don't even know where to start. Perhaps I begin with the problems with the unions. In Sweden there is a company-wide union that take care of all the aspects of a car manufacturing process, usually it's part of the LO organisation for the blue collars (like 'IF Metall') and TCO or SACO for the white collars. That organisation negotiate an agreement with the company for a period of time where they promise not to go on strike. These negotiations are difficult but not impossible and results in something that is known as a 'collective agreement'. Tesla is at the moment refusing to agree on such an agreement in Sweden which has caused big headlines. If I understand this correctly, the problems in the U.K. is (was?) that there's no 'collective agreement'. A consequence is that if the welders go on strike all the other areas of the manufacturing process are affected until they get the pay rise they want, then the painters get jealous and go on strike and so on... I understand this caused some problem with the production, but not with the quality. Or..? Speaking of quality. I know VW used to put some pieces of Zinc , which acts as a sacrificial anode for a short while, on various pieces of the car. That meant they could offer a short warranty against rust until the zinc had been eaten up. After that they rusted as quickly as before. Mercedes put a coat of PVC underneath. That lasted for a while, but when the water eventually penetrated it could rust without control until it was noticed at a MOT. Engineers at Saab noticed that the trouser legs sometimes got dirty when the driver got seated. The solution was to fold the doors around the sills which meant they had to take all the stone spray from the front tires which meant the doors rusted in no time at all. Volvo experimented with sheet metals and paint layers in the early 70's which meant the early 240's rusted horrendously when the paint fell of. There're loads of examples which affected all manufacturers, not just the British. -- Last edit: 2024-02-04 12:00:52
johnfromstaffs ◊ 2024-02-04 15:10	daimlere20 wrote Yet again..... ?
dsl ◊ 2024-02-04 15:31	Coming back for a second go, just to pick off a few points raised, rather than an overview. I'm not implying all foreign stuff was better for quality/rust resistance/reliability than Brits - 70s/80s stuff from France or Italy for instance had the same problems on the UK market. But German things developed a reputation for solidity and being a better choice - I agree with jfs about Ford and Vauxhall pulling clear in the 80s of other Brit makes, with part of the probable explanation being they became more integrated with the German arms of the parent companies. Intrigued by this example zodiac wrote Engineers at Saab noticed that the trouser legs sometimes got dirty when the driver got seated. The solution was to fold the doors around the sills which meant they had to take all the stone spray from the front tires which meant the doors rusted in no time at all. OK - it was a flaw only identified after being put out there. But presumably not catastrophic - doors can be replaced, but it protected the sills which were structurally significant, so overall the cars could last longer?? The issues with the unions are to me a parallel factor in all this, not a direct cause. I probably won't convince chico (and maybe not jfs??) but as I see it the root was the huge inflation rate in the 70s. Private sector workers could largely ride the waves with matching wage increases (a huge generalisation with probably holes big enough to drive buses through, but follow the principle) but we had substantial sectors of the economy under nationalised ownership for various reasons (some of which can be put down to 60s mis-management??) including the sprawling Leyland mess, ship-building, steel, mines, railways and so on. The spectacular confrontations which followed stemmed from those workers and their unions attempting to get wage increases up to inflation rates to maintain parity with their private sector counterparts. This stand-off became portrayed as a class struggle (the British media have got a lot to answer for in terms of selective sensationalism .... ) when the government refused to budge and responded by closing things down, making workers unemployed en masse. So it became unbalanced and a struggle for survival. Maybe it was inevitable - in economic terms - that these nationalised organisations were unsustainable, but the devastation created was immense and its brutality unnecessary. I lived in Sheffield in the 80s and 90s, working as a civil servant to develop labour market regeneration schemes in desperate efforts to try to mitigate the effects of this displacement, so saw at close quarters the starkness of this abandonment of governmental responsibility. Some parts of Britain never recovered, with the ripples still evident today. I'm not going to go down all the potential rabbit holes here (which is probably a relief for anyone still reading this) but I think there is a tangible link to the rise of Scottish nationalism and Welsh semi-nationalism which is still playing out. Rigid union practices and demarcation lines - "one out, all out" etc - made things more difficult and confrontational, but were the barbed wire on top of the barricades rather than the barricades themselves. And if you're looking up from the bottom of a deep hole, these tactics were all you could try to deploy. (* Puts soapbox away *)
johnfromstaffs ◊ 2024-02-04 15:58	^^ I can’t argue with any of the above from dsl, except to add that if you are stupid enough to let your industry get nationalised by government A, don’t be surprised when government B drives it into bankruptcy and shuts it down. Equally, if you’re stupid enough to fail to get your industry nationalised, don’t be surprised if incompetent grasping management drives it into bankruptcy and shuts it down. The British partiality towards placing highly educated idiots into senior positions in both government and management may have something to do with it.
chicomarx ◊ 2024-02-05 07:09	UK policy from 1980 was pure Milton Friedman, who was called in as an advisor, control inflation by controlling the money supply and shut down unprofitable sectors. The unemployed just had to learn new skills and cars were to be built abroad, the lower manufacturing cost would benefit the consumer. That's the globalist view of economics. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbS51BNnVZA
jcb ◊ 2024-02-10 05:40	We lived in a seafront house facing the North Sea in Northern England. My father in the 60s 70s 80s had a succesion of British cars ( admittedly mostly old bangers but back then 10 year old cars were very much old bangers unlike today) that literally dissolved in the salty sea air , Vauxhalls being the worse except for a notable Chrysler Apine that appeared to be made of tissue paper ! Then mid 80s he bought a 5year old Volkswagen Polo , this showed no sign of rust after being parked on the seafront for a year and despite being a low spec small car was self evidently of much better material and quality than contemporary British cars and from then on he only bought VW. Maybe not the case these days though. -- Last edit: 2024-02-10 06:22:07
chicomarx ◊ 2024-02-10 07:51	A Polo Mk2 then? A Mk1 couldn't have lasted much beyond 10 years either. VW only had serious rust protection late into Golf 2 production.
jcb ◊ 2024-02-10 16:15	It was actually a Derby and he kept it for quite a while and it never showed any rust despite being parked on the seafront. It definitely had better material and build than British cars of the era. -- Last edit: 2024-02-10 16:19:25
Ingo ◊ 2024-02-11 23:39	chicomarx wrote It's not the salt, Britain had more of a class struggle than Germany, you had a situation were factory workers would resent factory owners, like serfs against lords, even more fueled by socialized unions, which leads to poor job performance and a willingness to strike until the whole industry is gone. In Germany the automotive industry payed always the highest wages. Since the 90ies not so generous any more, but this happened in other branches too. But still today with perpetual working contract of a main company there, not a subsidiary firm you are on the bright side of the world of work.

1971 Hillman Avenger Deluxe

1971 Hillman Avenger in Troppo rischio per un uomo solo, Movie, 1973

Comments about this vehicle

Add a comment

Advertising