Austin Seven v Bugatti

[Colin Morgan]

With the intended purpose of the two cars being so different, there are bound to be significant differences in design, materials and manufacturing methods employed. However, I started this thread after reading a copy of Conway's Bugatti book last week - I hadn't realised how small some of the early Bugatti cars were - nor what type of suspension was employed. It is very likely that Sir Herbert would have been properly aware of the Bugatti design, and probably its manufacturing costs, and where with his design he needed to do something different to achieve his aims. Perhaps being aware that a well-engineered small Bugatti made for a highly practical vehicle perhaps helped provide confidence that a well-engineered Seven could work well on the same scale?

One of the really clever aspects of the Austin chassis - as pointed out in David Morgan's book - is the complex nose piece that carries out so many vital functions - e.g. holding the front suspension, body and radiator supports and the chassis itself. The Bugatti has a more conventional layout at the front end.

The track on the Type 13 6'6" chassis was 3'9" - so that is quite a bit wider than the Austin's 3'4" - and wider than the rear on the longer Austin chassis at 3'7". This hints at a bit more stability, but the racing Austins didn't seem to need it, once the suspension was lowered?