Similarly (anecdotal) over n-years
LIkely the $5K reflects my occasional gear-head auditions. (Also see TTAC--The Truth About Cars site for likely some discussions).
That is: it seems to have ~Rep as did, Way-back... early post-WW-II years: most Brit. cars,
not because they're dumb or bad engineers: but, 'The War, stupid'.
ie Their entire Mfg.-base in tatters, massive National debt, thus Machines-making machines worn out, metallurgy well, 'bad'. Ex: Morris Minor: a cute, small OK machine (I owned one for a time). But, as a Physicist at Lab remarked: the cylinder-head-bolts kept stretching! (he had some made of appropriate metallurgy; Fixed. And like that. (Mine was a '52 side-valve [!!]--gutless but utterly reliable).
Ergo: for Mini-C to have earned its (hear-say) Rep ..I no explanation for the overall design flaws it seems to have. Low miles usage and 2K/year? would seem to give it an easy life, but that's a w.a.g.
Aside: re the REAL Issigonis-designed Mini- (no Cooper attached) there's a small gear-head tale:
A friend, Teacher-of-Mechanics (trade school) Don C. was approached by Mini- Mfg. (he had earned a Rep) re leaking seals at one end of transmission. He learned that they had copied [by simply "scaling-down" a successful (!) design used by Packard.
[Do you see the brain-fart here? ... ... hmmm?]
Science! ... given that the Pounds/sq. inch loading placed on the elastomer (and its composition as also affects: proper loading specs) is not Linear! He er 'squared-away' the math--pun intended: collected generous-Fee IIRC--and His Worked. Physics! ..don't leave home Without it.
That is: it seems to have ~Rep as did, Way-back... early post-WW-II years: most Brit. cars,
not because they're dumb or bad engineers: but, 'The War, stupid'.
ie Their entire Mfg.-base in tatters, massive National debt, thus Machines-making machines worn out, metallurgy well, 'bad'. Ex: Morris Minor: a cute, small OK machine (I owned one for a time). But, as a Physicist at Lab remarked: the cylinder-head-bolts kept stretching! (he had some made of appropriate metallurgy; Fixed. And like that. (Mine was a '52 side-valve [!!]--gutless but utterly reliable).
Ergo: for Mini-C to have earned its (hear-say) Rep ..I no explanation for the overall design flaws it seems to have. Low miles usage and 2K/year? would seem to give it an easy life, but that's a w.a.g.
Aside: re the REAL Issigonis-designed Mini- (no Cooper attached) there's a small gear-head tale:
A friend, Teacher-of-Mechanics (trade school) Don C. was approached by Mini- Mfg. (he had earned a Rep) re leaking seals at one end of transmission. He learned that they had copied [by simply "scaling-down" a successful (!) design used by Packard.
[Do you see the brain-fart here? ... ... hmmm?]
Science! ... given that the Pounds/sq. inch loading placed on the elastomer (and its composition as also affects: proper loading specs) is not Linear! He er 'squared-away' the math--pun intended: collected generous-Fee IIRC--and His Worked. Physics! ..don't leave home Without it.
