Talk:Austin Motor Company

Your help requested

The Mini article is in the Wikipedia:Peer review process - perhaps heading towards Featured Article status. I would greatly appreciate experts on Austin taking a look at it. (If you find a problem, please either fix it or post your concerns on the Talk:Mini page. TIA SteveBaker 20:50, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

That Austin Allegro pic

I think the pic of a 1979 Austin Allegro is actually a Vanden Plas either 1500 or 1750 model. You can tell by the raised grille attached to the bonnet - the VP was a luxury (sic) version of the Allegro mark 2 model produced between 1975 and 1979. It had a classic wood and leather interior including walnut picnic tables recessed into the backs of the front seats, and the different frontal treatment you can see hints of in the pic. The VP was something of a freak - who was it aimed at in marketing terms and did anyone ever associate Allegros with luxury motoring? It was probably produced because Ford was having big success with the Ghia versions of some of its models, upgraded and laden with extras for which a premium price was charged, and cash-strapped BL was desperate for some of the action. The reason for raising this is that VPs weren't actually badged as Austins (or Allegros for that matter), but sold as a separate marque albeit through the same BL dealderships,so the pic shouldn't appear on the Austin history page cos it isn't. Pedantic Big Mike

I think you are right. Malcolma 19:22, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Princess

I replaced this inaccurate stuff about the Princess. It was never officially the "Austin Princess" in its home market. "The larger Princess was a wedge-shaped large saloon that began life as a Wolseley in 1975, but adopted the Austin badge a year later."

Austin Rover era

The original article said that the Metro, Maestro and Montego became Rovers. They didn't. The Metro did, eventually, but spent three years marqueless. In fact, in some markets the Montego did gain a Rover badge. I saw one in the Netherlands once. But in the home market, the Montego and Maestro were never Rovers (although the bonnet badges were Rover-esque).

This info comes from Austin Rover marketing boss Kevin Morley and chairman and chief exec Graham Day, and is from the authoritative Unofficial Austin Rover website; "The renaming of the company also served to heighten the brand, “I admit there was a danger of adding to the confusion”, when asked to his motives for doing this, “but Rover was the oldest name we had, and it applied directly to the products we make - Rover cars, Freight Rover, Land Rover, Range Rover. I hoped it would not so much confuse as remind.” This of course, left the Austin marque out in the cold - and the first decision made was to de-badge the Austin range so that the only identification on the Metro, Maestro and Montego was the model name - Austin was now effectively dead. Day added, “Our research indicates, particularly in the 17 to 34 age group, that people do not wish to drive an Austin.” And that was it - the Austin name would be consigned to history by the new incumbent, just as the Riley, Wolseley and Morris name had at previous changes of management."

Allegro

I don't think it's correct that the Allegro, - awful as it was - was prone to rust. By the standards of its day, it was better than many of its contemporaries in this respect. In just about every other area it was dreadful.

Ian mcrae (talk) 22:12, 19 January 2008 (UTC) IanIan mcrae (talk) 22:12, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

As I understand it, the Allegro had pretty good rustproofing - but terrible steel quality and bad water traps. So long as you didn't let rust get started, it did pretty well - but once it got into the car, it would rust out in record time. You're right though - there were other cars with similar problems. Over the years, popular cars like the Mini got the tiny little tweaks to the design that would gradually eliminate the water traps in later model years - but the Allegro never did. There were enough other things wrong with it that it was horribly un-loved which makes separating out the fact from the fiction rather difficult. SteveBaker (talk) 00:52, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Austin Allegro publicity shot.jpg

The image Image:Austin Allegro publicity shot.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

• File:Austin Rover.png
• Image:Austin Rover.jpg

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --10:05, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Metro Photograph

I am going to change the photo of a Metro to an Austin model instead of an MG model, any objections? Mtaylor848 (talk) 20:12, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Austin aircraft made by a separate business? company?

There is reference in an Austin article to something called Austin Aero Ltd. I have searched in many places and so far all I have come up with is:

• 1917-1922 Aircraft Design Department (of The Austin Motor Company Limited)
• 1936-1946 Aero Division or Aero Works (of The Austin Motor Company Limited)

No mention anywhere else of the company named in this extract from the Longbridge plant article: "During the Second World War the main plant produced munitions and tank parts, while the nearby East Works of Austin Aero Ltd at Cofton Hackett produced several types of aeroplane such as the Short Stirling and the Hawker Hurricane."

Can anyone come up with more information? Eddaido (talk) 01:25, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Use of US $ to discuss tax incentives in interwar UK?

This just doesn't make any sense to me and it doesn't say what era USD at that, surely it would make much more sense to give us the figures in the pre decimal Sterling that wree used at the time and let people work it out for them selves if they want to know what that is equivalent to in a completely different currency and time.