Steering Arm routine bring up

[Ruairidh Dunford]

Rapid demise of a Seven is rarely the fault of the designers in my experience. Road surface, speed, (lack of) rebuild skills and general driving style can be utterly disastrous.

I learnt this the hard way, like most.

[Andy Bennett]

It does continue to surprise me how some forum members are subtly misquoted. Bob said that 'It is indisputable that compared to many others and particularly moderns, Sevens are relatively fragile, unreliable and dangerous'. This was challenged, but it seems like simple logic to me.
My modern does 10,000 miles between having the bonnet lifted, and is fitted with more safety devices than could have been imagined 20 years ago a let alone 80. These days you don't even hear about new exhausts being needed let alone clutches or crank shafts.

Wonderful as they are, I don't see how anyone can suggest that an A7 is close to being as robust, reliable or safe as a modern car.

To the subject. On buying my A7 nearly 10 years ago I was advised by a well respected club member to check or change the steering arm. After 70 years of use and abuse who knows what condition it would be in. I decided to change it. Whilst many failures will simply result in grinding to a halt, a steering arm failure at speed is clearly a potentially much more serious scenario.

As for the space race, NASA learnt the hard way about failures and had 5 layers of computer redundancy in the Shuttle. Despite that they still lost 2 due to people thinking they knew better and bypassing the flight safety protocols.
I would rather be safe...
Andy B

[Phil Kingdom]

How about starting a what goes wrong thread covering all the things that can be potentially dangerous right down to the basics of oil leaks and minor announces, I know that just about covers every thing that moves but it would make people aware of what could go wrong and what to look for at servicing time.

[Ruairidh Dunford]

I understand what you are saying about robustness Andy but my Austins have so far outlived all of my modern cars, excepting the present one of course!

With the exception of one year I have done more annual mileage in my Sevens than any other type of car since the age of 17.

Most of the clutches in my Austins were fitted in excess of 60000 miles ago and they still give perfectly good service. The exhaust system on two of my cars are over 30 years old and one in excess of 40 years old. The crank in my Ulster is nearing 100000 miles of hard service, two others are closing in on that figure fast.

This was not always the case and, in my early years of ownership, I thrashed the hell out of the cars, driving one to destruction, twice - a mixture of poor workmanship/understanding and recklessness was the root cause. I imagine that many early (and even today) experiences in Sevens plagued with similar.

Whilst recognising the dangers, I do consider my self safer at 30mph in my sevens on the single track roads of Scotland than at 70mph on the 4 lanes of the M8 in my Volvo - I too like to be safe.

Logic is assessed in validity and one source of such is limiting.

[Alan]

Bob said that 'It is indisputable that compared  to many others and particularly moderns, Sevens are relatively fragile, unreliable and dangerous'. This was challenged, but it seems like simple logic to me.

Really? well I dispute it.

Fragile? Well since the early twenties, Austin Sevens have figured highly in Trials results. Ive been involved with Trials as a competitor and official for many years. I dont remember Austin Sevens as being particularly fragile. If you don't believe me, read Steve Jones' earlier posting.

Unreliable?  Well Ruaridh does a mile or two quite successfully, and I'd remind you that the Austin Seven still holds outright British endurance records for 10,000 km, as well as most of the Class H records. That isn't because no one has tried to take them away, its because, so far, no one has been able. Don't confuse reliability with maintenance requirements. You can't neglect a Seven like you can a modern car, but to suggest a well maintained Seven is unreliable is ludicrous.

Dangerous? Well, I admit that if you drive it dangerously, there are less safety systems than you'd have on a modern car, but I thought that was part of the attraction. Isn't it?


Of course should your Austin Seven experience be based on worn out bangers driven in the fifties and sixties, and you haven't driven the Seven which is rotting in your garage  for the last fifty years, you might well feel the need to be controversial. might you not?

[David Cochrane]

If my maths is correct the total recorded failures represents  0.55% of remaining cars and 0.022% of total production - I have used conservative figures of 10000 and 250000 respectively.

This is to be taken seriously but not pandemic - in my opinion.

Please bear in mind that the figure of 55 recorded failures only consists of the breakages that I personally know about and have noted. I feel that a statistic based on this data is probably not particularly meaningful because 55 is almost certainly considerably below the actual number. This is not easy to ascertain accurately because, as far as I know, no-one else has bothered to compile this data before.

[Ruairidh Dunford]

"...lies, damned lies and statistics."

I understand what you are saying David - your figure got me thinking, that's all.

[Mike Costigan]

Actually, 55 is quite a significant number; of the 10,000 survivors quoted, it wouldn't surprise me if 50% are not even roadworthy, and the number of cars which actually do a significant mileage is probably only a few hundred. I use mine as frequently as I can, but only manage around 1,500 miles per year, and there are any number of local cars which are in 'regular use' but probably do fewer than 500 miles per year.

[Stumpi]

I started trialling sevens in the 80's and in all that time I can only remember 1 failure on a Pre WarA7 event[he borrowed my spare and went on to beat me].I have probably averaged six events a year in that time and marshalled on many more.
Andy

[Ian Williams]

Unreliable, fragile and dangerous? Well, you have to compare apples to apples. As several members have already said any of us who have been around sevens for years will have an appreciation and understanding of just how bloody good the cars are, yes they have their weaknesses, and yes there are design aspects that with the benefit of todays knowledge could have been better. If we are talking about design, put into the context of 1922 the seven is an absolute triumph and masterclass in design, and the yard stick from which all modern's developed! And you can't compare a seven with a modern that is ridiculous, very few moderns would make it through some of the trials sections and come out unscathed! If you compare a seven with ANY of its competitors from the same era, name just one that could challenge a seven for strength, reliability, safety and versatility as well as being extremely user friendly
Newer less experienced owners should to be made aware of the safety aspects which need to be checked, these are 90 year old cars lets not forget that, but there is no excuse for sensationalising these points, and worse attempting to provoke people for amusement or otherwise is unforgivable.