BMC no-merger sanity options?

[phx1138]

Would put the limit for the ATL Rover V8 at around 5.0-litres to 5.2-litres at most, which is not too out of the ordinary for a European luxury V8 engine.

No, just thinking if the factory could go bigger without a complete redesign. Looking at the Buick V6s (which I should have before... ), it seems the 3.5 V8 design would allow up to 3.8" bore & 3.71" stroke, or 336ci (5.5 litres). That big might not be really essential for Brit/European markets, but could be useful for North America.

The E-Series based V6/V8s would not be an immediate replacement for the Rover V6/V8s, rather it would gradually be supplanted by the former of the latter in a case of medium to long-term rationalisation and commonization by BMC (yet with BMC still producing crate versions of the ATL Rover V6 / Rover V8).

Fwiw it seems the maximum bore and stroke of the 1984cc (82.5x92.8mm) EA827/EA113 engine is 84.5x100mm, equating to a maximum 4-cylinder displacement of 2243cc with a doubled up hypothetical V8 equating to around 4486cc (roughly putting out 445 hp naturally aspirated via 414 hp mk2 Audi RS4 4.2 V8 or 477-630 hp twin-turbo via 444 hp Audi RS6 4.2 Bi-Turbo V8 and 375 hp mk1 Audi RS4 2.7 Twin-Turbo V6). The latter would roughly be the maximum initial displacement envisaged for an ATL E-Series based V8 that replaces the lower-capacity versions of the ATL Rover V8.

That's impressive stuff. My bias is probably showing, tho; I lean toward using the Rover. (Too unfamiliar with the E-Series.)

It is bit sad seeing unfulfilled potential in general.

That's for sure.

Apart from alliances / joint-ventures (and less likely outright acquisitions) with Nissan and BMW who both have historical ties with Austin (with BMW reviving Glas / Isetta in place of the OTL BMW MINI and family), cannot really see where a secure and thriving BMC would go from here as the world's 4th largest carmaker.

I could easily see that. A BMW-BMC joint venture model could be seriously cool.

GM is another matter.

That was less a serious proposal than an idle passing thought.

Maybe ATL BMC decides to focus on improving and expanding its commercial vehicles division, make a further push in the motorcycle industry above Lambretta (via Innocenti possibly renamed Austin) by either reviving Rover as a premium motorcycle manufacturer or indirectly promoting MG as a fledgling motorcycle marque (possibly by acquiring Moto Guzzi as well as Benelli before De Tomaso in OTL during the early-1970s - along with potentially Laverda).

Another is an earlier collaboration with Van Doorne on an earlier late-70s to early-80s introduction of the Transmatic CVT gearbox (mentioned on page 57 of Popular Science - July 1976), which instead appeared on the Volvo 440/460 in 1987 (followed by a few other cars including supposedly the OTL Rover Metro/100) and was said to be a significant improvement over the parallel Ford CTX developed by Ford, Fiat and Van Doorne (both the Transmatic and CTX CVT gearboxes were developed for use in FWD cars unlike the original Variomatic CVT). Eventually laying the groundwork for BMC to be the first to introduce Multitronic CVT before Audi.

BMC motos? That's about the last thing I'd have expected. I do like BMC leading with CVT, especially if we're giving them a lead with hatchbacks: get BMC in the habit of being first with innovations. (Bosch FI, too, then.)

If BMC's more involved with the Italian motor industry, by way of Innocenti, Lambretta, Moto Guzzi, & whoever else, do you see a chance for a takeover of Ferrari? Or would that crash on Enzo wanting independence for the race team, same as OTL? (Or, more probably, BMC management not seeing a use for a race team to begin with... )

Or, thinking of De Tomaso, adding them as a luxury-performance marque?

 

[Dr Dee]

If BMC's more involved with the Italian motor industry, by way of Innocenti, Lambretta, Moto Guzzi, & whoever else, do you see a chance for a takeover of Ferrari? Or would that crash on Enzo wanting independence for the race team, same as OTL? (Or, more probably, BMC management not seeing a use for a race team to begin with... )
Or, thinking of De Tomaso, adding them as a luxury-performance marque?

If we think about where BMC (would it still be called that?) would be in 2020, perhaps Pininfarina would be an interesting acquisition. Obviously, there's the historic styling link with BMC but if Mahindra can own OTL Pininfarina as a boutique high performance EV maker, then I'm sure ATL BMC could be in the same position ITTL. I just associate Ferrari with Fiat just a little too much, although I guess the same could be said about Pininfarina and Ferrari! I can't see how De Tomaso would fit in because I'd like to think ATL BMC would continue with (Austin) Healey as its hairy chested sports car brand.
As far as motorbikes are concerned, I wasn't aware of BMC having the link to Lambretta via Innocenti; it's an interesting link and one I can imagine surviving for a long time. As far as other motorbike manufacturers are concerned, I wonder if a successful BMC might have been in a position to take on/save AMC (not American Motors but Associated Motor Cycles), makers of AJS and Matchless. The Matchless logo even reminds me of OTL MINI!

Going beyond that, I think someone mentioned earlier in the thread the possibility of BMC working to improve its commercial vehicle interests. If successful ATL BMC didn't acquire Rover, I can see them coming to an arrangement with another brand that has a MINI/Morris like logo: AEC. I'm sure I've read somewhere that BMC and AEC considered a merger before AEC was picked up by Leyland.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

No, just thinking if the factory could go bigger without a complete redesign. Looking at the Buick V6s (which I should have before... ), it seems the 3.5 V8 design would allow up to 3.8" bore & 3.71" stroke, or 336ci (5.5 litres). That big might not be really essential for Brit/European markets, but could be useful for North America.

Understand, guess Rover, Land / Range Rover and Healey could afford to reach a 5.5-litre / 5506cc limit for the V8. A Dieselized 5506cc would roughly equate to 156 hp naturally aspirated and about 195-234 hp turbodiesel using the 100 hp diesel and 125-150 hp turbodiesel figures for Project Iceberg. An ATL E/S-Series derived V8 4486cc turbodiesel meanwhile (derived from the ~380 hp 4134cc / 4.2-litre V8 TDI used in various Audis, etc) would have a potential output of 412 hp.

That's impressive stuff. My bias is probably showing, tho; I lean toward using the Rover. (Too unfamiliar with the E-Series.)

Am using the maximum capacity of the OTL Volkswagen EA827/EA113 engine as a rough guide for the ATL E-Series, since the latter features a number of similarities which (albeit much better developed and executed) later appeared on the Volkswagen EA827 for it to be a benchmark for the ATL E-Series to strive towards (in addition to the EA827/EA113 forming the basis of a large modular family of petrol/diesel engines that suited the needs of the Volkswagen Group above the small block Volkswagen EA111/EA211). The Nissan CA/SR engines being another benchmark.

Was also previously reluctant on the notion a better developed E-Series/S-Series could have been a more then suitable replacement for the B/O/M/T-Series engines (plus diesel derivatives), the 2-litre M/T-Series Turbo engines after all were said to be capable of reaching 275 hp without major modifications (being detuned to 197 hp or so only to prolong the life of the gearbox) until discovering the 275 hp 2-litre EA827 turbo engine used in the unbuilt mk3 Volkswagen Golf A59.

However eventually replacing the properly-developed ATL Rover V6 / V8 engines with ATL E/S-Series derived V6 / V8 does make sense by reducing ATL BMC's engine families down to two, additionally with potential figures as above the ATL 4.5-litre V8 Twin-Turbo does a more than adequate job of succeeding a properly-developed Rover V8 engine.

I could easily see that. A BMW-BMC joint venture model could be seriously cool.

ATL Glas (or BMW Glas) would be a German analogue of the OTL retro Rovers producing equivalents of the R30, R55 and R75 models (the latter two being longitudinal FWD 3-Series+ and 5-Series+), while the Glas Isetta (or BMW Isetta) would be producing FWD analogues of the OTL BMW Mini and derivatives with styling drawing inspiration from the BMW Isetta, BMW 600, BMW 700, Goggomobil, Glas Isar and Glas 1004.

BMC motos? That's about the last thing I'd have expected. I do like BMC leading with CVT, especially if we're giving them a lead with hatchbacks: get BMC in the habit of being first with innovations. (Bosch FI, too, then.)

If BMC's more involved with the Italian motor industry, by way of Innocenti, Lambretta, Moto Guzzi, & whoever else, do you see a chance for a takeover of Ferrari? Or would that crash on Enzo wanting independence for the race team, same as OTL? (Or, more probably, BMC management not seeing a use for a race team to begin with... )

Or, thinking of De Tomaso, adding them as a luxury-performance marque?

An expanded presence in motorcycles for BMC is indeed far fetched despite Lambretta already being owned by Innocenti in OTL with the latter in turn becoming integrated into ATL BMC, the idea behind eventually renaming Lambretta and Innocenti (plus Authi) to Austin would be to help establish and further bolster the Citroen-like italianate image of Austin on the European Continent. Basically ATL Austin Motorcycles (formerly Lambretta) would be BMC's equivalent of OTL Peugeot Motorcycles, though it seems previously a modified Austin Seven engine was used to power the pre-war Brough Superior Austin Four.

Moto Guzzi is more coincidental as well as a gamble being it is a renowned marque that just happens to share the same initials as MG (aka Morris Garages) and in other circumstances could have been acquired by an ATL thriving BMC instead of De Tomaso to further bolster the upmarket and sporting reputation of the MG marque, where it is associated with motorcycles like both OTL BMW and Triumph.

Would have BMC be involved in CVTs via Transmatic / Multitronic as well as fuel-injection via the Brico Fuel-Injection system, along with Ethanol fueled Brazilian versions of the ~1596cc A-Plus (including descendants) similar to the Renault Cleon-Fonte derived Ford CHT engine.

Alec Issigonis did look at a Gearless transmission for the 9X project (see 9X Gearless Mini - also here) however the design was flawed similar to how the OTL 9X itself adopted a variation of the in-sump gearbox instead of the end-on layout. Curiously it seems Honda looked at a similar albeit more production viable Geared variation of Issigonis's Gearless idea via the Hondamatic H2 along similar lines.

ATL BMC would have no need for Ferrari due to acquiring and merging both Cooper and Repco in F1*, nor De Tomaso for that matter which probably produces its own cars (and a possible tie up with the likes of Monteverdi).

*- Like the idea of Weslake getting involved with either updating the aging Repco V8 or playing some role in the development of an all-new properly-developed Repco V8 challenger to the Cosworth DFV in place of (or soon after) the OTL Ford Weslake V12.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

As far as other motorbike manufacturers are concerned, I wonder if a successful BMC might have been in a position to take on/save AMC (not American Motors but Associated Motor Cycles), makers of AJS and Matchless. The Matchless logo even reminds me of OTL MINI!

Might be workable, OTOH having both Lambretta and even Moto Guzzi under BMC gives the latter a presence on the continent. The British Motorcycle industry also needs much earlier pre-war PODs to both survive and thrive (with few exceptions) beyond this thread as well as marque rationalisation (though have see a post-war scenario where Triumph Motorcycles becomes part of ATL Leyland Motors).

Going beyond that, I think someone mentioned earlier in the thread the possibility of BMC working to improve its commercial vehicle interests. If successful ATL BMC didn't acquire Rover, I can see them coming to an arrangement with another brand that has a MINI/Morris like logo: AEC. I'm sure I've read somewhere that BMC and AEC considered a merger before AEC was picked up by Leyland.

You are probably thinking of the proposed BMC and Rolls-Royce collaboration that was to also include Associated Commercial Vehicles (ACV) before all three got cold feet with ACV soon being acquired by Leyland Motors.

 

[Dr Dee]

You are probably thinking of the proposed BMC and Rolls-Royce collaboration that was to also include Associated Commercial Vehicles (ACV) before all three got cold feet with ACV soon being acquired by Leyland Motors.

I guess that's what made me think of BMC and Rolls Royce eventually getting together permanently...although I guess we would need them both to be in far less trouble at the end of the 60s/early 70s than they were in OTL...otherwise, they'd make as much of a swamp of failure as the BMC/Leyland tie up.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

I guess that's what made me think of BMC and Rolls Royce eventually getting together permanently...although I guess we would need them both to be in far less trouble at the end of the 60s/early 70s than they were in OTL...otherwise, they'd make as much of a swamp of failure as the BMC/Leyland tie up.

Additionally having ACV remain part of Leyland as in OTL would already be a pre-existing sanity option for Leyland and would leave it as is.

If it is about having Rolls-Royce remain independent then butterflying its OTL issues would help matters without needing them to be acquired by either ATL BMC, Leyland or other possible candidates let alone separated later on like BMW with Rolls-Royce and Volkswagen with Bentley in OTL.

A successful collaboration between BMC and Rolls-Royce that is limited to an ATL earlier ADO24 (AH 4000), ADO58 (Vanden Plas-ized Burma 4-door / Korea 2-door) and 200-268+ hp 4-litre G60 Twin-Cam engine (for use by BMC). Would together with Rolls-Royce avoiding their bankruptcy in the early-70s and thereby helping bring the Brico fuel-injection system into production have allowed Rolls-Royce to be in a better position look at a smaller largely in-house 5-Series class car years before either the 1982 Rolls-Royce SX Proposal or (BMW E34-based) 1994 Bentley Java concept proposals that either carries over an iteration of the 200-300 hp 4-litre G60 inline-6 or another engine*.

*- One idea includes an ATL 3-litre V6 and/or a 3.5-4-litre V8, think earlier production version of the David Wood designed bespoke 250 hp 3-litre V6 in the OTL MG Metro R64 (and later production Jaguar XJ220 as well as the experimental Lotus SID project) which used some of the engine architecture of the Cosworth DFV.

Another is an earlier version of the 4.5-6.0-litre Rolls-Royce N-Series V8 prototype engines (known as N80/N81), more about this unbuilt engine is mentioned in Karl Ludvigsen's Bentley's Great Eight book.

 

[Peg Leg Pom]

It would help if BMC found someone who could work out accurate production costs so they end up selling the Mini for a profit rather than losing money on every one they sell for quite some time.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

It would help if BMC found someone who could work out accurate production costs so they end up selling the Mini for a profit rather than losing money on every one they sell for quite some time.

It could have been done much earlier had Joe Edwards succeeded Leonard Lord in 1961 before Issigonis became BMC technical director to keep him in check (as well as Edwards playing a role in keeping an eye on the production costs before he replaced Lord) and allowed Duncan Stuart along with the rest of the misused BMC Research Department to go in such a direction to make an earlier version of the more profitable and better costed ADO20 instead of being made to pursue blind alley projects that never reached production. - https://www.aronline.co.uk/facts-and-figures/when-bmc-led-the-world/bmc-story-1962/

In late 1962 Duncan Stuart of BMC’s Research Department approached the company Chairman. ‘I went to see Harriman at about the time they turned down our V4 engines for the 1100 and 1800. I said “You know we are doing all this research but you don’t use any of it, so why don’t you put the whole of my Research and Development Department on cost cutting the Mini? We could easily take £20 out of the production cost.”’

‘He said “That’s a good idea. Talk to Alec.” I replied “Surely it is you who should talk to Alec?” He answered “If Alec is in favour, I’ll support you.” In effect he was telling me that Alec was running the company. I’m sure that’s where things went wrong, because the gearbox itself was a disaster and the problems of the synchros, and the water and so on, could all have been avoided really.

‘To divorce all our research work from any product planning strategy was almost criminal. We had about a hundred people in East Works (Longbridge), a complete drawing office with test beds and a road test department.’

At the same time it is worth considering the following Essay in mind, since when Ford infamously costed the Mini it was a few years before the 1100/1300 appeared in 1962 whose component sharing with the Mini was said to have been as high as 30%. https://www.aronline.co.uk/opinion/essay-did-mini-cars-mean-mini-profits/

Though a more austere version of a better-costed ATL Mini (akin to an earlier ADO20) resembling the de-chromed 1958 minimalist prototype below (with detachable Minivan grille as in 2nd image) and powered by a 30 hp 720-750cc A-Series (akin to the larger 603cc Renault R3 and 777cc 4CV version of the Simca 1000) could have been developed and sold for below £500 (e.g. £496.95 in OTL) at a profit, whilst the Mini 850 and larger engined Minis are priced some £20-30 higher compared to OTL.

Despite what George Harriman thought of the 1958 minimalist prototype in OTL with following quote below, such a model could have played a role in making the Mini more profitable under Joe Edwards in ATL. - https://www.aronline.co.uk/cars/mini/ado15-development-story-1/

When BMC Managing Director George Harriman was shown the first pre-production Mini he was not impressed with its bland, plain and austere appearance. He is alleged to have said to Issigonis: ‘What a bloody mess! We’ll never sell that. Spend another few quid on it Alec, and jazz it up a bit. Put some chrome plate on it or something.’

The positive of this ATL Mini 720-750's Minivan grille being detachable would be its potential for customization as it could theoretically be replaced by an aftermarket chromed (as on existing Mini) or even a pre-Bertone Innocenti Mini-like grille in black (as in 3rd image) or body-coloured forms.

 

[phx1138]

BMC (would it still be called that?)

I'm inclined to think so.

It would help if BMC found someone who could work out accurate production costs so they end up selling the Mini for a profit rather than losing money on every one they sell for quite some time.

It could have been done much earlier had Joe Edwards succeeded Leonard Lord in 1961 before Issigonis became BMC technical director to keep him in check (as well as Edwards playing a role in keeping an eye on the production costs before he replaced Lord) and allowed Duncan Stuart along with the rest of the misused BMC Research Department to go in such a direction to make an earlier version of the more profitable and better costed ADO20 instead of being made to pursue blind alley projects that never reached production. - https://www.aronline.co.uk/facts-and-figures/when-bmc-led-the-world/bmc-story-1962/

At the same time it is worth considering the following Essay in mind, since when Ford infamously costed the Mini it was a few years before the 1100/1300 appeared in 1962 whose component sharing with the Mini was said to have been as high as 30%. https://www.aronline.co.uk/opinion/essay-did-mini-cars-mean-mini-profits/

I've been presupposing that from the outset. Three things:

1. Mini is costed to the pence.
2. Production & design engineering are done to minimize the number of parts & assembly steps. (Nothing like 12-piece grilles that take 27 steps to assemble. {Not that OTL Minis had that, just sayin'. })
3. MSRP at a sensible level, so Mini isn't selling at a loss just because.

I take platform sharing & "raiding the BMC parts bin" to build Minis, & anything else, as a given. My model is GM: if F-body (Camaro/Firebird) brakes & axles will swap across to FWD A-bodies (Celebritys & clones), & IIRC they do, I see no reason Mini, 1100/1300, *Apache, & *Allegro brakes, axles, & such shouldn't. (To be clear, I don't mean forcing use of doors & such, like the 1800 OTL, unless you're badge-engineering it, or building a 3dr on the original 2dr platform.)

In essence, I'd turn the hot rodders or tuners loose on the parts bin, let them build the best Mini (or MGC, or Stag, or Dolomite, or whatever) they can build by raiding the parts bin, & make it the production standard.

Though a more austere version of a better-costed ATL Mini (akin to an earlier ADO20) resembling the de-chromed 1958 minimalist prototype below (with detachable Minivan grille as in 2nd image) and powered by a 30 hp 720-750cc A-Series (akin to the larger 603cc Renault R3 and 777cc 4CV version of the Simca 1000) could have been developed and sold for below £500 (e.g. £496.95 in OTL) at a profit, whilst the Mini 850 and larger engined Minis are priced some £20-30 higher compared to OTL.

Despite what George Harriman thought of the 1958 minimalist prototype in OTL with following quote below, such a model could have played a role in making the Mini more profitable under Joe Edwards in ATL. - https://www.aronline.co.uk/cars/mini/ado15-development-story-1/


The positive of this ATL Mini 720-750's Minivan grille being detachable would be its potential for customization as it could theoretically be replaced by an aftermarket chromed (as on existing Mini) or even a pre-Bertone Innocenti Mini-like grille in black (as in 3rd image) or body-coloured forms.

I have no problem with that at all. I would go a slightly different direction. While I agree on the 700cc-range "stripper", I'd also do that for a GT/GTS, a bit like the Road Runner: make the hottest model affordable. (Yes, offer a GT with the top-range luxury goodies & lots of chrome, but also a "boy racer" version that's a stripper.) That means you can get something like a Roadster GT, but also a stripper Roadster GTS (or GT+ or something). I'd also "package" it, rather than offer the '60s-style GM insanely long option list, to avoid adding cost on the production & sales sides to having to accommodate a zillion possible combinations (which GM did do, until they finally learned how crazy expensive it was).

Additionally having ACV remain part of Leyland as in OTL would already be a pre-existing sanity option for Leyland and would leave it as is.

Works for me. (That's getting further afield than I intended...but I'm finding it interesting, even so.)

If it is about having Rolls-Royce remain independent then butterflying its OTL issues would help matters without needing them to be acquired by either ATL BMC, Leyland or other possible candidates let alone separated later on like BMW with Rolls-Royce and Volkswagen with Bentley in OTL.

A successful collaboration between BMC and Rolls-Royce that is limited to an ATL earlier ADO24 (AH 4000), ADO58 (Vanden Plas-ized Burma 4-door / Korea 2-door) and 200-268+ hp 4-litre G60 Twin-Cam engine (for use by BMC). Would together with Rolls-Royce avoiding their bankruptcy in the early-70s and thereby helping bring the Brico fuel-injection system into production have allowed Rolls-Royce to be in a better position look at a smaller largely in-house 5-Series class car years before either the 1982 Rolls-Royce SX Proposal or (BMW E34-based) 1994 Bentley Java concept proposals that either carries over an iteration of the 200-300 hp 4-litre G60 inline-6 or another engine*.

*- One idea includes an ATL 3-litre V6 and/or a 3.5-4-litre V8, think earlier production version of the David Wood designed bespoke 250 hp 3-litre V6 in the OTL MG Metro R64 (and later production Jaguar XJ220 as well as the experimental Lotus SID project) which used some of the engine architecture of the Cosworth DFV.

Another is an earlier version of the 4.5-6.0-litre Rolls-Royce N-Series V8 prototype engines (known as N80/N81), more about this unbuilt engine is mentioned in Karl Ludvigsen's Bentley's Great Eight book.

A "smarter" BMC might help Rolls some, but it looks like their jet engine side is likely to crash the company no matter what. Now, if a stronger BMC can (would?) take over the car side afterward, I wouldn't object. (I'd find it a bit unlikely, I think, but wouldn't object.)

Might be workable, OTOH having both Lambretta and even Moto Guzzi under BMC gives the latter a presence on the continent. The British Motorcycle industry also needs much earlier pre-war PODs to both survive and thrive (with few exceptions) beyond this thread as well as marque rationalisation (though have see a post-war scenario where Triumph Motorcycles becomes part of ATL Leyland Motors).

I'm intrigued by BMC having a motos division, but I know even less about them (Brit or otherwise), so I'll leave that for somebody wanting a British motorcycle industry sanity thread (which I seem to recall seeing... )

Understand, guess Rover, Land / Range Rover and Healey could afford to reach a 5.5-litre / 5506cc limit for the V8. A Dieselized 5506cc would roughly equate to 156 hp naturally aspirated and about 195-234 hp turbodiesel using the 100 hp diesel and 125-150 hp turbodiesel figures for Project Iceberg. An ATL E/S-Series derived V8 4486cc turbodiesel meanwhile (derived from the ~380 hp 4134cc / 4.2-litre V8 TDI used in various Audis, etc) would have a potential output of 412 hp.

I take it you don't think the Rover block would allow DOHC & 4v heads, or the higher horsepower of an E-Series-based V8? Can you say why? (I'm not certain you're wrong; I don't see the top being so low, given the GNX, which is, typically, pretty cautious GM engineering, & limited in part by the TH-200-4R tranny.)

Putting a 5.5 or so in the big Healeys, Triumph Stag, MGC/D, & other sporting products strikes me as almost a given. I'd be inclined to get it in a (earlier) Marina, & an alt-P76, too, just because.

Am using the maximum capacity of the OTL Volkswagen EA827/EA113 engine as a rough guide for the ATL E-Series, since the latter features a number of similarities which (albeit much better developed and executed) later appeared on the Volkswagen EA827 for it to be a benchmark for the ATL E-Series to strive towards (in addition to the EA827/EA113 forming the basis of a large modular family of petrol/diesel engines that suited the needs of the Volkswagen Group above the small block Volkswagen EA111/EA211). The Nissan CA/SR engines being another benchmark.

Was also previously reluctant on the notion a better developed E-Series/S-Series could have been a more then suitable replacement for the B/O/M/T-Series engines (plus diesel derivatives), the 2-litre M/T-Series Turbo engines after all were said to be capable of reaching 275 hp without major modifications (being detuned to 197 hp or so only to prolong the life of the gearbox) until discovering the 275 hp 2-litre EA827 turbo engine used in the unbuilt mk3 Volkswagen Golf A59.

I won't argue the reasonableness of that. I'm just not familiar enough with them, & more comfortable/familiar with the Rover (thanks to the Buick origins... )

However eventually replacing the properly-developed ATL Rover V6 / V8 engines with ATL E/S-Series derived V6 / V8 does make sense by reducing ATL BMC's engine families down to two, additionally with potential figures as above the ATL 4.5-litre V8 Twin-Turbo does a more than adequate job of succeeding a properly-developed Rover V8 engine.

I won't argue against that, either. I don't think that's the route I'd take, as noted, but it's not invalid, by any means. (I guess you'd have to see where I go & judge if you believe it, & me conversely. )

ATL Glas (or BMW Glas) would be a German analogue of the OTL retro Rovers producing equivalents of the R30, R55 and R75 models (the latter two being longitudinal FWD 3-Series+ and 5-Series+), while the Glas Isetta (or BMW Isetta) would be producing FWD analogues of the OTL BMW Mini and derivatives with styling drawing inspiration from the BMW Isetta, BMW 600, BMW 700, Goggomobil, Glas Isar and Glas 1004.

That could be really good for BMC--but could deal a real blow to BMW, it looks like. Unless BMW moves way up-market a lot earlier, & that looks like it needs quite a lot of foresight by BMW management.

An expanded presence in motorcycles for BMC is indeed far fetched despite Lambretta already being owned by Innocenti in OTL with the latter in turn becoming integrated into ATL BMC, the idea behind eventually renaming Lambretta and Innocenti (plus Authi) to Austin would be to help establish and further bolster the Citroen-like italianate image of Austin on the European Continent. Basically ATL Austin Motorcycles (formerly Lambretta) would be BMC's equivalent of OTL Peugeot Motorcycles, though it seems previously a modified Austin Seven engine was used to power the pre-war Brough Superior Austin Four.

Moto Guzzi is more coincidental as well as a gamble being it is a renowned marque that just happens to share the same initials as MG (aka Morris Garages) and in other circumstances could have been acquired by an ATL thriving BMC instead of De Tomaso to further bolster the upmarket and sporting reputation of the MG marque, where it is associated with motorcycles like both OTL BMW and Triumph.

Huh. MG motos? That's one I didn't know about. (Combine the Moto Guzzi & MG badges for the moto side?)

Far-fetched? That may be. I might do it, just because I can.

Would have BMC be involved in CVTs via Transmatic / Multitronic as well as fuel-injection via the Brico Fuel-Injection system, along with Ethanol fueled Brazilian versions of the ~1596cc A-Plus (including descendants) similar to the Renault Cleon-Fonte derived Ford CHT engine.

Alec Issigonis did look at a Gearless transmission for the 9X project (see 9X Gearless Mini - also here) however the design was flawed similar to how the OTL 9X itself adopted a variation of the in-sump gearbox instead of the end-on layout. Curiously it seems Honda looked at a similar albeit more production viable Geared variation of Issigonis's Gearless idea via the Hondamatic H2 along similar lines.

Works for me. CVT in a 700cc North American-market Mini, 1100/1300, or the like seems a really, really good idea, & probably the top-selling models (with manuals for the gearheads & enthusiast drivers as much more "niche" cars)

ATL BMC would have no need for Ferrari due to acquiring and merging both Cooper and Repco in F1*, nor De Tomaso for that matter which probably produces its own cars (and a possible tie up with the likes of Monteverdi).

*- Like the idea of Weslake getting involved with either updating the aging Repco V8 or playing some role in the development of an all-new properly-developed Repco V8 challenger to the Cosworth DFV in place of (or soon after) the OTL Ford Weslake V12.

Fine by me. That's another passing thought or two. Repco or Weslake being the "factory" F1 engine supplier is exactly where I'd go. If I could beat the DFV to the punch in F1 (& F2, & Group B/C), & outperform it, or at least outsell/undercut it, better still. (Taking the lead in the turbo era would be gravy. )

perhaps Pininfarina would be an interesting acquisition. Obviously, there's the historic styling link with BMC but if Mahindra can own OTL Pininfarina as a boutique high performance EV maker, then I'm sure ATL BMC could be in the same position ITTL.

I just associate Ferrari with Fiat just a little too much

Tho I proposed a takeover as a notion, I'd far sooner see Ferrari figure out how to go it alone. How that's done, I could only guess.

I can't see how De Tomaso would fit in because I'd like to think ATL BMC would continue with (Austin) Healey as its hairy chested sports car brand.

That also makes sense; again, just a notion, less than a really serious proposal. (Especially if Healey &/or Triumph &/or Morgan are getting bigger-capacity DOHC 32v V8s & such...)

As far as motorbikes are concerned, I wasn't aware of BMC having the link to Lambretta via Innocenti; it's an interesting link and one I can imagine surviving for a long time. As far as other motorbike manufacturers are concerned, I wonder if a successful BMC might have been in a position to take on/save AMC (not American Motors but Associated Motor Cycles), makers of AJS and Matchless.

It looks like an interesting idea, but I'd guess it makes more sense for that takeover/rescue to be by another moto company, rather than BMC, all considered. Look what happened to Excelsior, for being controlled by a bicycle maker. )

the possibility of BMC working to improve its commercial vehicle interests. ...I'm sure I've read somewhere that BMC and AEC considered a merger before AEC was picked up by Leyland.

That's also outside my (already limited ) knowledge, but better wouldn't hurt. Didn't DAF come up for sale, & have a major company refuse to buy them out? (BMW comes to mind.) If that happened, it could be a real opportunity for BMC.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

I have no problem with that at all. I would go a slightly different direction. While I agree on the 700cc-range "stripper", I'd also do that for a GT/GTS, a bit like the Road Runner: make the hottest model affordable. (Yes, offer a GT with the top-range luxury goodies & lots of chrome, but also a "boy racer" version that's a stripper.) That means you can get something like a Roadster GT, but also a stripper Roadster GTS (or GT+ or something). I'd also "package" it, rather than offer the '60s-style GM insanely long option list, to avoid adding cost on the production & sales sides to having to accommodate a zillion possible combinations (which GM did do, until they finally learned how crazy expensive it was).

In other words you are looking to take a similar approach with an ATL Cooper S and hypothetical Cooper GTS / GTS for example, to how OTL Peugeot made Peugeot 106 Rallye and Peugeot 306 Rallye versions of the Peugeot 106 GTi and Peugeot 306 GTi-6?

I'm intrigued by BMC having a motos division, but I know even less about them (Brit or otherwise), so I'll leave that for somebody wanting a British motorcycle industry sanity thread (which I seem to recall seeing... )

Huh. MG motos? That's one I didn't know about. (Combine the Moto Guzzi & MG badges for the moto side?)

Steve Koerner's The Strange Death of the British Motorcycle Industry book is a useful read on that subject.

It is interesting to note the related history between Lambretta and Piaggio's Vespa, perhaps ATL's BMC's largely continental-based motorcycle division could later be a potential candidate to acquire Piaggio itself

Indeed, it is a very expedient way of enabling MG to be associated with motorcycles like its British arch-rival at Triumph.

I take it you don't think the Rover block would allow DOHC & 4v heads, or the higher horsepower of an E-Series-based V8? Can you say why? (I'm not certain you're wrong; I don't see the top being so low, given the GNX, which is, typically, pretty cautious GM engineering, & limited in part by the TH-200-4R tranny.)

Putting a 5.5 or so in the big Healeys, Triumph Stag, MGC/D, & other sporting products strikes me as almost a given. I'd be inclined to get it in a (earlier) Marina, & an alt-P76, too, just because.

I won't argue against that, either. I don't think that's the route I'd take, as noted, but it's not invalid, by any means. (I guess you'd have to see where I go & judge if you believe it, & me conversely. )

It is certainly capable of featuring DOHC and 4-valves, it along with fuel-injection was what was planned for the Rover P8 saloon by way of the 2.2 P10 engine.

At the same time both the ATL Rover V6 and Rover V8 would eventually need replacing due to the reality of it being an aging design with no commonality with other BMC engines and increasingly stringent emission standards, which was ultimately the case with the recently discontinued Bentley L-Series V8 in OTL. Butterfly or delay the stringent emissions standards by a few decades and that would not be an issue. That is not to say the ATL Rover V6 and Rover V8 engines could not play more of a legacy role and having crate engines be sold whilst slowly being replaced by the ATL E/S-Series derived V6 and V8 engines (the max and theoretical displacements of the latter using the EA827/EA113 as a guide being 4486cc and 4540cc respectively).

Also the Triumph Stag does not figure in this scenario seeing as it is a part of Leyland in ATL, the Rover analogue in this scenario would be a Rover P6 Coupe and Convertible followed by P10 and P8 based successors.

That could be really good for BMC--but could deal a real blow to BMW, it looks like. Unless BMW moves way up-market a lot earlier, & that looks like it needs quite a lot of foresight by BMW management.

Am basically envisioning a more equal collaboration between ATL BMC and BMW instead of OTL where BMW acquired Rover, which would not be a negative for BMW in this scenario given the only thing the 1100/1300-sized BMW MINI carried over from the original classic Mini was styling cues mated to BMW engineering and Tritec engines.

It can be argued an ATL BMW Isetta analogue of the OTL BMW MINI with BMW 600 and BMW 700 styling cues could have worked just as well given the popularity of retro styled cars during that period, ex-BMW boss Bernd Pischetsrieder being distantly related to Alec Issigonis would likely mean some collaboration with BMC still happens in ATL and possibly even butterflies the circumstances of his resignation and move to Volkswagen (perhaps BMW buys the rights to Riley off of BMC for a sporting version of the revived Glas cars).

Also worth noting that BMW would have probably been tempted to produce its own Motorcycle-engined equivalent of the Smart Fortwo via a production version of the BMW Z13 concept which it seriously considered before acquiring Rover. - https://www.motor1.com/news/226055/bmw-z13-concept-we-forgot/

Works for me. CVT in a 700cc North American-market Mini, 1100/1300, or the like seems a really, really good idea, & probably the top-selling models (with manuals for the gearheads & enthusiast drivers as much more "niche" cars)

With the ATL Mini II featuring an end-on gearbox layout, a BMC equivalent of the OTL Hondamatic H2 could work much better compared to Alec Issigonis's Gearless idea prior to later featuring a late-70s to early-80s Transmatic CVT gearbox similar to what appeared in the OTL Rover Metro/100. The AP Automatic meanwhile (including a 5-speed version) probably ends up in older non-Western versions of BMC's cars for a period a time, due to Western BMC models abandoning the in-sump gearbox layout.

Fine by me. That's another passing thought or two. Repco or Weslake being the "factory" F1 engine supplier is exactly where I'd go. If I could beat the DFV to the punch in F1 (& F2, & Group B/C), & outperform it, or at least outsell/undercut it, better still. (Taking the lead in the turbo era would be gravy. )

The idea is both Cooper and Repco would be merged (possibly the latter absorbed by the former or both being renamed Rover or MG), with Weslake contributing to the development of a DFV challenging V8 design capable of displacing between 2500-5000cc (whereas the DFV V8 was said to be capable of displacing between 2500-4000cc) after managing to temporarily give the existing Repco V8 a few lease of life for a few more seasons at minimum before being replaced.

Essentially Cooper (plus Repco and Weslake) would become ATL BMC's equivalent of Cosworth, managing at minimum to acheive at least 1/3 to 1/2 of the DFV and other derivative's success. Even better if the new V8 F1 engine and other derivatives by BMC's Cooper/Repco/Weslake combine is loosely derived from an BMC car engine like the BMW M10-based BMW M12 turbo F1 engine (am sure there are other examples including the 215 Oldsmobile V8-derived Repco V8 itself). - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_M12

A "smarter" BMC might help Rolls some, but it looks like their jet engine side is likely to crash the company no matter what. Now, if a stronger BMC can (would?) take over the car side afterward, I wouldn't object. (I'd find it a bit unlikely, I think, but wouldn't object.)

What other issues were there for Rolls-Royce aside from the RB211 and the Lockheed TriStar project?

Could see Rolls-Royce managing to remain independent and thriving at least on the automotive side of things, yet do not see the company meshing well with either ATL BMC or ATL Leyland Motors. For it to remain in British hands, another domestic automatic player would need to become a suitable candidate yet that is not relevant to this thread.

 

[phx1138]

In other words you are looking to take a similar approach with an ATL Cooper S and hypothetical Cooper GTS / GTS for example, to how OTL Peugeot made Peugeot 106 Rallye and Peugeot 306 Rallye versions of the Peugeot 106 GTi and Peugeot 306 GTi-6?

You're on the path. I'd have something like the base Mini be a Chevy (cheap), the GT a Buick (comfortable), the GT+ a Pontiac (cheap & quick), & the GTR (or something) like a Yenko (at least the pretense of street legal); with Cooper, I'm seeing "not street legal", so race only--but I could be wrong. In this case, there's also the option of MG filling one (more?) of those niches, so the GT could be the MG (a bit pricey, maybe a bit more comfortable) or GT++ (pricey but quick?)--but I don't want it getting crazy complicated, because that just means more cost for BMC in the long run.

Steve Koerner's The Strange Death of the British Motorcycle Industry book is a useful read on that subject.

I'll have to try & get my hands on it.

It is interesting to note the related history between Lambretta and Piaggio's Vespa, perhaps ATL's BMC's largely continental-based motorcycle division could later be a potential candidate to acquire Piaggio itself

Getting Piaggio could have very interesting butterflies. Am I right they were also building airplanes, including business jets?

Indeed, it is a very expedient way of enabling MG to be associated with motorcycles like its British arch-rival at Triumph.

It looks interesting. It's also very much something I wouldn't expect, which is a good thing.

It is certainly capable of featuring DOHC and 4-valves, it along with fuel-injection was what was planned for the Rover P8 saloon by way of the 2.2 P10 engine.

At the same time both the ATL Rover V6 and Rover V8 would eventually need replacing due to the reality of it being an aging design with no commonality with other BMC engines and increasingly stringent emission standards, which was ultimately the case with the recently discontinued Bentley L-Series V8 in OTL. Butterfly or delay the stringent emissions standards by a few decades and that would not be an issue. That is not to say the ATL Rover V6 and Rover V8 engines could not play more of a legacy role and having crate engines be sold whilst slowly being replaced by the ATL E/S-Series derived V6 and V8 engines (the max and theoretical displacements of the latter using the EA827/EA113 as a guide being 4486cc and 4540cc respectively).

Emissions would be a killer in time, but seeing how long the OTL Buick V6 (on the same design, more/less) lasted, developing an E-Series spinoff might reasonably wait until the 1990s, & perhaps later--& that was without GM going to 4v/cyl or S/DOHC, & with being comparatively late with FI, both of which I would do ASAP: in short, turn up something like the '95 (or so) GM 3800 as an all-aluminum 24v in the '80s.

Also the Triumph Stag does not figure in this scenario seeing as it is a part of Leyland in ATL, the Rover analogue in this scenario would be a Rover P6 Coupe and Convertible followed by P10 and P8 based successors.

Just trying to pick out potential users off the top of my head...

Am basically envisioning a more equal collaboration between ATL BMC and BMW instead of OTL where BMW acquired Rover, which would not be a negative for BMW in this scenario given the only thing the 1100/1300-sized BMW MINI carried over from the original classic Mini was styling cues mated to BMW engineering and Tritec engines.

It can be argued an ATL BMW Isetta analogue of the OTL BMW MINI with BMW 600 and BMW 700 styling cues could have worked just as well given the popularity of retro styled cars during that period, ex-BMW boss Bernd Pischetsrieder being distantly related to Alec Issigonis would likely mean some collaboration with BMC still happens in ATL and possibly even butterflies the circumstances of his resignation and move to Volkswagen (perhaps BMW buys the rights to Riley off of BMC for a sporting version of the revived Glas cars).

Also worth noting that BMW would have probably been tempted to produce its own Motorcycle-engined equivalent of the Smart Fortwo via a production version of the BMW Z13 concept which it seriously considered before acquiring Rover.

That works for me. I suppose I was thinking of earlier in BMW's history, & by the time this comes in play TTL, BMW is solid enough to weather it. (I'm not a fan of the Smarts or the microcars, so I'd steer BMW away from anything like it. Leave that for EMW or somebody. Or maybe Lambretta. Or Riley.)

With the ATL Mini II featuring an end-on gearbox layout, a BMC equivalent of the OTL Hondamatic H2 could work much better compared to Alec Issigonis's Gearless idea prior to later featuring a late-70s to early-80s Transmatic CVT gearbox similar to what appeared in the OTL Rover Metro/100. The AP Automatic meanwhile (including a 5-speed version) probably ends up in older non-Western versions of BMC's cars for a period a time, due to Western BMC models abandoning the in-sump gearbox layout.

Either of those looks good to me. I tend toward wanting to see some Western AP-equipped cars (Minis & others), because I don't see CVT coming along soon enough, but given alt-BMC is more aggressive with new tech, the numbers might be low.

The idea is both Cooper and Repco would be merged (possibly the latter absorbed by the former or both being renamed Rover or MG), with Weslake contributing to the development of a DFV challenging V8 design capable of displacing between 2500-5000cc (whereas the DFV V8 was said to be capable of displacing between 2500-4000cc) after managing to temporarily give the existing Repco V8 a few lease of life for a few more seasons at minimum before being replaced.

Essentially Cooper (plus Repco and Weslake) would become ATL BMC's equivalent of Cosworth, managing at minimum to acheive at least 1/3 to 1/2 of the DFV and other derivative's success. Even better if the new V8 F1 engine and other derivatives by BMC's Cooper/Repco/Weslake combine is loosely derived from an BMC car engine like the BMW M10-based BMW M12 turbo F1 engine (am sure there are other examples including the 215 Oldsmobile V8-derived Repco V8 itself).

That definitely works for me. TTL, I'm picturing the *Repco never actually happening, since Rover (or BMC) gets there first with a factory offer by Cooper-Weslake, & that evolves into a direct DFV challenger. Whether the C-W engine would (could) be as dominant as the OTL DFV is open to debate, I suppose; I do see it optioned for Oz Touring Car, on top of F1 & F2 (&, if it's spec-legal, elsewhere).

What other issues were there for Rolls-Royce aside from the RB211 and the Lockheed TriStar project?

That looks like the biggie; I can't say if it would wreck Rolls entire, so I may be overstating. OTL, it led to a breakup; TTL, would the damage be as severe?

Could see Rolls-Royce managing to remain independent and thriving at least on the automotive side of things, yet do not see the company meshing well with either ATL BMC or ATL Leyland Motors. For it to remain in British hands, another domestic automatic player would need to become a suitable candidate yet that is not relevant to this thread.

Agreed. If there is any transfer of tech or models with TTL's BMC, tho, it might be enough to prevent the troubles with the RB.211 being enough to cripple the whole company--& that's what I was thinking before: is there enough to keep Rolls independent? Or must Rolls break up & be taken over in its parts? I very much favor keeping Rolls alive & separate; my only question is, how? (And no, I'm not demanding you answer that. )

Edit:
Word to BMW management re the Z13: build it!

 

[Masked Grizzly]

You're on the path. I'd have something like the base Mini be a Chevy (cheap), the GT a Buick (comfortable), the GT+ a Pontiac (cheap & quick), & the GTR (or something) like a Yenko (at least the pretense of street legal); with Cooper, I'm seeing "not street legal", so race only--but I could be wrong. In this case, there's also the option of MG filling one (more?) of those niches, so the GT could be the MG (a bit pricey, maybe a bit more comfortable) or GT++ (pricey but quick?)--but I don't want it getting crazy complicated, because that just means more cost for BMC in the long run.

Can sort of see where you are coming from though model trim levels could work just well.

As for an MG Mini, cannot really see such a model besides a production version of MG ADO34 as the entry-level MG Mite.

It is possible the MG ADO34 prototype's styling is carried over to a 1300cc+ 2/4-door three-box saloon in place of the Riley Elf/Wolseley Hornet, however it would depend on how well executed the styling is. Even so the in-sump gearbox would limit its power and would have probably been better reserved as a Vanden Plas Newmarket, leaving only the MG ADO34 Mite to serve as MG's entry-level Mini-based model.

Getting Piaggio could have very interesting butterflies. Am I right they were also building airplanes, including business jets?

It seems like they did once. BMC in ATL would potential attempt to buy Piaggio around the 1990-2000s period.

Emissions would be a killer in time, but seeing how long the OTL Buick V6 (on the same design, more/less) lasted, developing an E-Series spinoff might reasonably wait until the 1990s, & perhaps later--& that was without GM going to 4v/cyl or S/DOHC, & with being comparatively late with FI, both of which I would do ASAP: in short, turn up something like the '95 (or so) GM 3800 as an all-aluminum 24v in the '80s.

Even though the OTL Buick V6 was utilized in FWD cars, am envisioning an ATL Volkswagen-like E/S-Series V6 spinoff becoming able to be easily be utilized on Austin and Morris FWD/4WD cars in significantly greater numbers either in parallel or replacing the ATL E/S-Series inline-6.

Either of those looks good to me. I tend toward wanting to see some Western AP-equipped cars (Minis & others), because I don't see CVT coming along soon enough, but given alt-BMC is more aggressive with new tech, the numbers might be low.

The AP Automatic transmission could really only be used on cars with in--sump gearbox layouts, in ATL only the original Mini feature the layout due to its dimensions and the rush to get it into production (prior to being succeeded by the end-on ADO20 Mini II) whereas the ATL 1100/1300 and 1800/2200 would feature end-on gearboxes.

That definitely works for me. TTL, I'm picturing the *Repco never actually happening, since Rover (or BMC) gets there first with a factory offer by Cooper-Weslake, & that evolves into a direct DFV challenger. Whether the C-W engine would (could) be as dominant as the OTL DFV is open to debate, I suppose; I do see it optioned for Oz Touring Car, on top of F1 & F2 (&, if it's spec-legal, elsewhere).

Not sure how you'd resolve the bolt-pattern per cylinder difference between the 5-bolt 215 Buick V8, the 5-bolt later 4-bolt Rover V8 and 6-bolt 215 Oldsmobile V8 that formed the basis of the Repco V8.

Would basically need to create a scenario where Weslake manages to breath some new life into the Repco V8 for the 1968-1970+ F1 seasons as a stop-gap so it is not totally outclassed against the DFV (prior to being replaced by a new V8), which Cooper switches to in place of BRM and outperforms Brabham in the 1968 season onwards to remain in F1 during the 1970s+ with Repco (which is soon acquired by Cooper/BMC in before 1969 as Brabham and others switch over to Cosworth).

Agreed. If there is any transfer of tech or models with TTL's BMC, tho, it might be enough to prevent the troubles with the RB.211 being enough to cripple the whole company--& that's what I was thinking before: is there enough to keep Rolls independent?

Would say it is feasible for Rolls-Royce to remain independent though it would not be easy with only 5-Series and 7-Series class cars. With the rest of the car industry being fine in this ATL and Rolls-Royce car division's low-volumes, a case could be made for it to be owned by the government (or indirectly via government/co-op owned Fedden), though something like a successful Singer Motors (that possibly acquires Riley before Morris in 1930s), an Audi/Mercedes-like BSA Cars (e.g. BSA / Daimler) and BMW/Volvo/Jaguar-like Bristol Cars could work as well via an ATL British equivalent of the Rolls-Royce/Bentley split between Volkswagen and BMW (possibly between ATL Singer and Bristol).

Word to BMW management re the Z13: build it!

Would have a production Z13 carry over the quirky styling cues of the E46 Compact at the front as well as from the BMW Z15 concept, while the E46 Compact in turn features the same front as the related E46 3-Series.

 

[phx1138]

Can sort of see where you are coming from though model trim levels could work just well.

That's what I had in mind, not specialized one-marque models, in case I wasn't clear (except maybe the MG; I picture the MGs as higher performance, so getting the quickest Mini).

As for an MG Mini, cannot really see such a model besides a production version of MG ADO34 as the entry-level MG Mite.

I'd disagree; I don't see a Mini GT as anathema to MG. Odd compared to the MGB/C or Sprite, perhaps, but not out of bounds.

It is possible the MG ADO34 prototype's styling is carried over to a 1300cc+ 2/4-door three-box saloon in place of the Riley Elf/Wolseley Hornet, however it would depend on how well executed the styling is. Even so the in-sump gearbox would limit its power and would have probably been better reserved as a Vanden Plas Newmarket, leaving only the MG ADO34 Mite to serve as MG's entry-level Mini-based model.

Presuming those marques survive (& I'd close them early, I think), I'd agree--except on VP. I see even a top-drawer Mini undermining the VP brand value, in the same way a Chevy Caprice did Buick's Regal: if you can get all the goodies & quality of a Regal for 25% less, why buy the Regal? So, a "luxury" Mini might be a top Morris or Austin model, but would never be badged VP.

It seems like they did once. BMC in ATL would potential attempt to buy Piaggio around the 1990-2000s period.

Suits.

Even though the OTL Buick V6 was utilized in FWD cars, am envisioning an ATL Volkswagen-like E/S-Series V6 spinoff becoming able to be easily be utilized on Austin and Morris FWD/4WD cars in significantly greater numbers either in parallel or replacing the ATL E/S-Series inline-6.

I don't mean to say you're wrong, just that my biases make me resist it; if the logic of the TL demand (& I'd have to wrestle with it), I'd go your way--it just wouldn't be my first choice.

The AP Automatic transmission could really only be used on cars with in--sump gearbox layouts, in ATL only the original Mini feature the layout due to its dimensions and the rush to get it into production (prior to being succeeded by the end-on ADO20 Mini II) whereas the ATL 1100/1300 and 1800/2200 would feature end-on gearboxes.

Same answer, more/less.

Not sure how you'd resolve the bolt-pattern per cylinder difference between the 5-bolt 215 Buick V8, the 5-bolt later 4-bolt Rover V8 and 6-bolt 215 Oldsmobile V8 that formed the basis of the Repco V8.

That's the thing: I'm picturing Rover/Cooper-Weslake replacing OTL Repco entirely, but doing the same thing (more/less).

Would basically need to create a scenario where Weslake manages to breath some new life into the Repco V8 for the 1968-1970+ F1 seasons as a stop-gap so it is not totally outclassed against the DFV (prior to being replaced by a new V8), which Cooper switches to in place of BRM and outperforms Brabham in the 1968 season onwards to remain in F1 during the 1970s+ with Repco (which is soon acquired by Cooper/BMC in before 1969 as Brabham and others switch over to Cosworth).

As said, I'm picturing the C-W starting equivalent to the OTL Repco, & being improved continually, with the hope to beat the DFV to F1, & being something like as good in F1.

Would say it is feasible for Rolls-Royce to remain independent though it would not be easy with only 5-Series and 7-Series class cars. With the rest of the car industry being fine in this ATL and Rolls-Royce car division's low-volumes, a case could be made for it to be owned by the government (or indirectly via government/co-op owned Fedden), though something like a successful Singer Motors (that possibly acquires Riley before Morris in 1930s), an Audi/Mercedes-like BSA Cars (e.g. BSA / Daimler) and BMW/Volvo/Jaguar-like Bristol Cars could work as well via an ATL British equivalent of the Rolls-Royce/Bentley split between Volkswagen and BMW (possibly between ATL Singer and Bristol).

I can believe that, except to say I see Rolls more in the MB 500 or 600 class. I'd happily have Bentley offer a 5-series competitor, & indeed, something akin to a Virage or XJ220.

Would have a production Z13 carry over the quirky styling cues of the E46 Compact at the front as well as from the BMW Z15 concept, while the E46 Compact in turn features the same front as the related E46 3-Series.

Honestly, I find the E46 less odd than the Z13. I also like the Z15, so if alt-BMW's building either it or the Z13, I'm in.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

That's what I had in mind, not specialized one-marque models, in case I wasn't clear (except maybe the MG; I picture the MGs as higher performance, so getting the quickest Mini).

Would probably have the quickest non-roadster/coupe Minis as Coopers, while reserving the MG badge for a sub-Midget entry-level ADO34 model that unusually is only available as a roadster and coupe (with costliest non-MG Minis being Coopers and Vanden Plas for other bodystyles).

MG after all has largely been associated with sportscars and thus it makes sense for the entry-level model to be a sportscar to preserve the upmarket pretensions of the marque.

The mk1 Mini-based ADO34 would be powered by a 1300cc engine and the mk2 (e.g. Mini II ADO20) version with end-on gearbox would be equipped with a 1600cc engine, both under the MG Mite name.

The slightly larger ATL EX234 would make use of a 2000cc engine and make use of the MG Midget name whilst moving into MGB territory, with the ATL MGC and MGD+ successor making use of a 3-litre+ engine making overall for a coherent range of sportscars.

Presuming those marques survive (& I'd close them early, I think), I'd agree--except on VP. I see even a top-drawer Mini undermining the VP brand value, in the same way a Chevy Caprice did Buick's Regal: if you can get all the goodies & quality of a Regal for 25% less, why buy the Regal? So, a "luxury" Mini might be a top Morris or Austin model, but would never be badged VP.

Vanden Plas could work on a Mini provided the regular Vanden Plas Newmarket was available only as a 1300cc three-box saloon akin to a downscaled Vanden Plas 1800 prototype, with other bodystyles of the Vanden Plas Newmarket being utilized for more luxurious cost-no-object bespoke models like Radford and Wood & Pickett (think a bespoke luxury automotive analogue of a restaurant's secret menu yet more exclusive and customizable).

Such an approach would not undermine Vanden Plas, rather it would be an expansion of an undeveloped idea that returns money to BMC's coffers that otherwise would have gone elsewhere (to coachbuilders, etc) in OTL as well as allows BMC's to calibrate how they equip their regular models against the well-equipped Japanese and German marques.

I don't mean to say you're wrong, just that my biases make me resist it; if the logic of the TL demand (& I'd have to wrestle with it), I'd go your way--it just wouldn't be my first choice.

Same answer, more/less.

Can understand, it is just a matter of having the heart and head be in agreement based on the TL as well as how things are likely to unfold in this scenario with regards to automotive trends prompted by external factors such as emissions, etc.

That's the thing: I'm picturing Rover/Cooper-Weslake replacing OTL Repco entirely, but doing the same thing (more/less).

As said, I'm picturing the C-W starting equivalent to the OTL Repco, & being improved continually, with the hope to beat the DFV to F1, & being something like as good in F1.

It would not likely work that way chronologically speaking. While Cooper already had ties with BMC as did Austin/BMC with Weslake, Rover would not become part of BMC in ATL until around 1966 with the Rover V8 only appearing in the Rover P5 from 1967 (followed by the Rover P6 in 1968).

By the 1968 F1 season onwards the Repco V8 engine used by Brabham and others was no longer competitive (it is also doubtful Brabham would have been willing to allow other teams to use the Repco V8 in 1966-1967), with Cooper reluctantly opting for BRM despite really wanting to use the Cosworth DFV in 1968.

An ideal POD would be Cooper opting instead for a Weslake update of the Repco for 1968 onwards instead of the BRM engine, which returns Cooper to being at least the 5-4th most competitive team for the next few seasons before receiving an all-new significantly more competitive V8 engine to challenge the Cosworth DFV from the early-1970s.

I can believe that, except to say I see Rolls more in the MB 500 or 600 class. I'd happily have Bentley offer a 5-series competitor, & indeed, something akin to a Virage or XJ220.

The other alternative would be to have Rolls-Royce manage to acquire the rights to the likes of the Riley marque during its collaboration with BMC for smaller sub-Bentley models.

 

[phx1138]

Would probably have the quickest non-roadster/coupe Minis as Coopers, while reserving the MG badge for a sub-Midget entry-level ADO34 model that unusually is only available as a roadster and coupe (with costliest non-MG Minis being Coopers and Vanden Plas for other bodystyles).
MG after all has largely been associated with sportscars and thus it makes sense for the entry-level model to be a sportscar to preserve the upmarket pretensions of the marque.

The mk1 Mini-based ADO34 would be powered by a 1300cc engine and the mk2 (e.g. Mini II ADO20) version with end-on gearbox would be equipped with a 1600cc engine, both under the MG Mite name.

The slightly larger ATL EX234 would make use of a 2000cc engine and make use of the MG Midget name whilst moving into MGB territory, with the ATL MGC and MGD+ successor making use of a 3-litre+ engine making overall for a coherent range of sportscars.

If you're looking at MG as only offering "traditional" sports cars, like the MGB, Spitfire, Alfa Spider, so forth, I'd agree with you, & I think I'd keep the Mini off the MG list entire in that case--even a Mini roadster would seem a bit odd. If, as I was thinking, you're making MG a performance marque, not unlike Triumph, a FWD 2dr wouldn't be out of bounds. By the time you get to a mid-engined option, it would stop mattering, because by then, everybody's offered (or offering) mid-engined sporting models. I could happily go either way.

Vanden Plas could work on a Mini provided the regular was available only as a 1300cc three-box saloon akin to a downscaled Vanden Plas 1800 prototype, with other bodystyles of the Vanden Plas Newmarket being utilized for more luxurious cost-no-object bespoke models like Radford and Wood & Pickett (think a bespoke luxury automotive analogue of a restaurant's secret menu yet more exclusive and customizable).

Such an approach would not undermine Vanden Plas, rather it would be an expansion of an undeveloped idea that returns money to BMC's coffers that otherwise would have gone elsewhere (to coachbuilders, etc) in OTL as well as allows BMC's to calibrate how they equip their regular models against the well-equipped Japanese and German marques.

You think a VP Mini can go that far upmarket? I'd have some trouble believing that. As for the base car, I'm taking you to mean a 1500cc or 1600cc in the base car would be out of bounds; I also take you to mean a "GT" (by whatever name) wouldn't be. (If you're going this way, whatever the limits on the base model, I'd strongly suggest a VP cabrio.)

Can understand, it is just a matter of having the heart and head be in agreement based on the TL as well as how things are likely to unfold in this scenario with regards to automotive trends prompted by external factors such as emissions, etc.

Agreed.

It would not likely work that way chronologically speaking. While Cooper already had ties with BMC as did Austin/BMC with Weslake, Rover would not become part of BMC in ATL until around 1966 with the Rover V8 only appearing in the Rover P5 from 1967 (followed by the Rover P6 in 1968).

By the 1968 F1 season onwards the Repco V8 engine used by Brabham and others was no longer competitive (it is also doubtful Brabham would have been willing to allow other teams to use the Repco V8 in 1966-1967), with Cooper reluctantly opting for BRM despite really wanting to use the Cosworth DFV in 1968.

An ideal POD would be Cooper opting instead for a Weslake update of the Repco for 1968 onwards instead of the BRM engine, which returns Cooper to being at least the 5-4th most competitive team for the next few seasons before receiving an all-new significantly more competitive V8 engine to challenge the Cosworth DFV from the early-1970s.

Huh. So you can't get at the 3.5 early enough... I had the timing of the Repco a bit later, somehow.

The other alternative would be to have Rolls-Royce manage to acquire the rights to the likes of the Riley marque during its collaboration with BMC for smaller sub-Bentley models.

That's about the last thing I'd do. Down in size is one thing; that strikes me as going way, way down-market.

 

[Masked Grizzly]

If you're looking at MG as only offering "traditional" sports cars, like the MGB, Spitfire, Alfa Spider, so forth, I'd agree with you, & I think I'd keep the Mini off the MG list entire in that case--even a Mini roadster would seem a bit odd. If, as I was thinking, you're making MG a performance marque, not unlike Triumph, a FWD 2dr wouldn't be out of bounds. By the time you get to a mid-engined option, it would stop mattering, because by then, everybody's offered (or offering) mid-engined sporting models. I could happily go either way.

A production version of ADO34 still could work without being an MG or Austin-Healey in such a scenario. One idea would be revive/recycle the Sports moniker for ADO34 and a coupe variant as the Mini Sports, which was previously used for the short-lived Jensen-built Austin A40 Devon-based Austin A40 Sports.

You think a VP Mini can go that far upmarket? I'd have some trouble believing that. As for the base car, I'm taking you to mean a 1500cc or 1600cc in the base car would be out of bounds; I also take you to mean a "GT" (by whatever name) wouldn't be. (If you're going this way, whatever the limits on the base model, I'd strongly suggest a VP cabrio.)

The VP Minis would cater to those with lots of cash to spend as well as capitalize on the success of the Mini during the 1960s , instead of going to the likes of Radford and Wood & Pickett to create bespoke luxury Minis (the most recent example being the David Brown Mini Remastered).

The OTL "posh" 848-998cc 2-door Riley Elf/Wolseley Hornet three-box saloon for example only managed to achieve a total sales of 59367 over an 8 year period and were never considered a great success compared to the regular Mini, the ATL Pre-Set VP Minis would pretty much take over the role of the former two to easily exceed such paltry numbers thanks to the addition of a 4-door three-box bodystyle and larger 1098-1275cc engines in ATL. The Bespoke VP Minis meanwhile would be comparatively rarer one-offs / commissions that are tailor-made to the wealthy customers requirements like with the OTL Radford and Wood & Pickett Conversions.

The following ex-Brian Epstein and Ringo Starr Radford Mini conversion is one of many examples as to the type of clientele the bespoke VP Minis would target, ranging from the well-heeled to celebrities, politicians and royalty.

- https://www.thesun.co.uk/motors/492...s-with-unique-boot-for-carrying-his-drum-kit/

- https://drivetribe.com/p/the-radford-mini-dJe1PF34TVCA8Glknkvtgg?iid=GZzzrE75S-CS5oGcCz7YXQ

- https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/cars/article-4670996/Mini-Cooper-owned-Ernest-Marples-sale.html

- https://www.bonhams.com/auctions/24118/lot/46/

 

[phx1138]

A production version of ADO34 still could work without being an MG or Austin-Healey in such a scenario. One idea would be revive/recycle the Sports moniker for ADO34 and a coupe variant as the Mini Sports, which was previously used for the short-lived Jensen-built Austin A40 Devon-based Austin A40 Sports.

I'm not against the ADO 34, & I'd happily make it an Austin/Morris (& even VP) Mini model. My question was, does that put it outside your view of MG? I tend to say it does--but not outside mine. Which leaves the question, which approach is going to prevail? I have no particular problem with it going either way--just so long as it stays on track.

The VP Minis would cater to those with lots of cash to spend as well as capitalize on the success of the Mini during the 1960s , instead of going to the likes of Radford and Wood & Pickett to create bespoke luxury Minis (the most recent example being the David Brown Mini Remastered).

The OTL "posh" 848-998cc 2-door Riley Elf/Wolseley Hornet three-box saloon for example only managed to achieve a total sales of 59367 over an 8 year period and were never considered a great success compared to the regular Mini, the ATL Pre-Set VP Minis would pretty much take over the role of the former two to easily exceed such paltry numbers thanks to the addition of a 4-door three-box bodystyle and larger 1098-1275cc engines in ATL. The Bespoke VP Minis meanwhile would be comparatively rarer one-offs / commissions that are tailor-made to the wealthy customers requirements like with the OTL Radford and Wood & Pickett Conversions.

The following ex-Brian Epstein and Ringo Starr Radford Mini conversion is one of many examples as to the type of clientele the bespoke VP Minis would target, ranging from the well-heeled to celebrities, politicians and royalty.

I'll go along with you, because I'm too unfamiliar with Vanden Plas' sales to judge for sure. 50K-some units in 8yr doesn't sound crazy low for a high-priced model. I'll agree, adding a 4dr, & other variants, would help that. Selling at a healthier price, which VP would certainly allow, can only benefit BMC's bottom line.

That said, looking at those custom jobs (call them "bespoke", if you like; I wouldn't) makes me think, again, BMC was stupid for not making a Mini hatchback standard... (For the record, when you say "bespoke", I think of a bare Mini chassis & a whole new body, by somebody like Guigiaro, that barely resembles a stock Mini. For that, the price could be insane...but it also means BMC only gets the sale price of a bare chassis.)

 

[Masked Grizzly]

I'm not against the ADO 34, & I'd happily make it an Austin/Morris (& even VP) Mini model. My question was, does that put it outside your view of MG? I tend to say it does--but not outside mine. Which leaves the question, which approach is going to prevail? I have no particular problem with it going either way--just so long as it stays on track.

Despite ADO34 and ADO35 (the rear of the latter below along with 1100/1300-like hatchback rear on the Codford Mini kitcar looking like it could have tieded up the Marcos Mini at the back) being FWD it really depends on the styling, IMO it fits with MG as an entry-level ~1300cc sportscar whilst justifying the large Midget growing from 1300 to 1600cc (before being succeeded by 1600-2000cc ATL EX234).

The 1300-1600cc Mini II (ATL ADO20) based successor to the ADO34 roadster / ADO35 coupe would also feature styling by Pininfarina, either something loosely resembling a Mini 9X variation of the Peugeot 104-based 1976 Peugeot 104 Peugette roadster by Pininfarina (as an evolution of the existing ADO34's styling) or what essentially amounts to an early-70s Pininfarina-styled Midas Coupe / Midas Convertible with featuring a more tidied up and tasteful version of the 1973 Autobianchi A112 Giovani by Pininfarina.

An MG Mini saloon was considered in OTL (think two-box MG version of three-box Riley Elf/Wolseley Hornet) before the success of the Mini Coopers made that redundant (mentioned in MG: The Untold Story by David Knowles), the only unofficial example being the so-called "MG Gnat".

Otherwise there would be no MG version of the 1100/1300 in this scenario where MG moves upmarket, with the next model up (with or without ADO34/ADO35) being a possibly ATL MGB-derived Pininfarina-styled equivalent of the Alfa Romeo Giulia (Tipo 105), Fiat 124. BMW 02 and Datsun 510.

I'll go along with you, because I'm too unfamiliar with Vanden Plas' sales to judge for sure. 50K-some units in 8yr doesn't sound crazy low for a high-priced model. I'll agree, adding a 4dr, & other variants, would help that. Selling at a healthier price, which VP would certainly allow, can only benefit BMC's bottom line.

To put things into perceptive two million Minis were built in total over the same period, the small volume of sales also extended to non-Mini derived Riley and Wolseley models (including 1100/1300, etc) that in turn justifies the discontinuing of both Riley and Wolseley and their merger with ATL Vanden Plas (in pre-set form) from the late-1950s in ATL.

The Vanden Plas Mini aka Vanden Plas Newmarket would be unique in featuring a 2/4-door three-box saloon body resembling both the larger Vanden Plas 1800 prototype as well as MG ADO34, which would not be available on regular Minis.

That said, looking at those custom jobs (call them "bespoke", if you like; I wouldn't) makes me think, again, BMC was stupid for not making a Mini hatchback standard... (For the record, when you say "bespoke", I think of a bare Mini chassis & a whole new body, by somebody like Guigiaro, that barely resembles a stock Mini. For that, the price could be insane...but it also means BMC only gets the sale price of a bare chassis.)

Agreed regarding BMC not making the Mini (along with the 1100/1300 and 1800/2200) into a hatchback as standard from the outset. Though would probably make use of the existing 2-door two-box saloon Mini body for the entry-level Mini 720-770 prior to it eventually featuring the hatchback body.

The ATL bespoke or more specifically the one-off/ commission versions of Vanden Plas models could be described as an umbrella term ranging from the most fully specced out luxury Minis being Vanden Plas equivalents of the Wood & Pickett Mini Margrave, Radford Mini de Ville, Hooper Mini, Pavesi Mini and 1997 Rover Mini Limo one-off by John Cooper garages (up to the most garish like the Tickford Mini that was reputedly built for a wealthy oil sheik for £50k in 1983) to in-house commissions contracted out to coachbuilders like Zagato (also here), Bertone (also known as the Cooper Bertone), Ogle, etc with later Mini II/III-derived models featuring retro-like variants such as the "Frogeye" Sprite-inspired Banham Sprint (bearing in mind the Austin-Healey ADO36 versions of the Mini-based MG ADO34/ADO35).


Somewhat OT. As for Triumph, have embraced a different vision compared to previous threads from years back. It would still part of an ATL Leyland that now includes Jaguar instead of Triumph (along with Reliant later own), with further ties/collaboration with Saab-Scania. A variation also including a more successful Rootes Group (that avoided debts, bad logistics e.g. Linwood, communist strikes and Chrysler ownership to succeed in its expansion) and possibly Isuzu Motors if former joins (with the New Minx and Arrow being merged with the Bellett and Florian), the latter either with or without the likes of former constituent branches such as Hino Motors and what became Kawasaki motorcycles (had the Keiretsu been inclined to do things differently during WW2, since both Isuzu and Kawasaki Heavy Industries appear to be under the DKB group).

 

[phx1138]

Despite ADO34 and ADO35 (the rear of the latter below along with 1100/1300-like hatchback rear on the Codford Mini kitcar looking like it could have tieded up the Marcos Mini at the back) being FWD it really depends on the styling, IMO it fits with MG as an entry-level ~1300cc sportscar whilst justifying the large Midget growing from 1300 to 1600cc (before being succeeded by 1600-2000cc ATL EX234).

If you're suggesting the Pininfarina-styled ADO35 project as a VP model, be it 2/3/4/5dr, I'm sold. That's a handsome machine indeed. (The Codford, too.)

The 1300-1600cc Mini II (ATL ADO20) based successor to the ADO34 roadster / ADO35 coupe would also feature styling by Pininfarina, either something loosely resembling a Mini 9X variation of the Peugeot 104-based 1976 Peugeot 104 Peugette roadster by Pininfarina (as an evolution of the existing ADO34's styling) or what essentially amounts to an early-70s Pininfarina-styled Midas Coupe / Midas Convertible with featuring a more tidied up and tasteful version of the 1973 Autobianchi A112 Giovani by Pininfarina.

I do like the 104 roadster.

Otherwise there would be no MG version of the 1100/1300 in this scenario where MG moves upmarket, with the next model up (with or without ADO34/ADO35) being a possibly ATL MGB-derived Pininfarina-styled equivalent of the Alfa Romeo Giulia (Tipo 105), Fiat 124. BMW 02 and Datsun 510.

I'd see that a little later; I don't see anything wrong with the OTL MBG. After that, provided it doesn't resemble the TR7 much, I'm open to almost anything.

To put things into perceptive two million Minis were built in total over the same period, the small volume of sales also extended to non-Mini derived Riley and Wolseley models (including 1100/1300, etc) that in turn justifies the discontinuing of both Riley and Wolseley and their merger with ATL Vanden Plas (in pre-set form) from the late-1950s in ATL.

I'm not out to defend Riley or Wolseley's survival. I'm thinking, for a marque akin to Cadillac (for the British market), maybe 50K isn't crazy low. More wouldn't hurt.

Agreed regarding BMC not making the Mini (along with the 1100/1300 and 1800/2200) into a hatchback as standard from the outset. Though would probably make use of the existing 2-door two-box saloon Mini body for the entry-level Mini 720-770 prior to it eventually featuring the hatchback body.

I wouldn't wait, honestly. Start with 3/4/5dr model options from Day One. Why sacrifice potential sales?

The ATL bespoke or more specifically the one-off/ commission versions of Vanden Plas models could be described as an umbrella term ranging from the most fully specced out luxury Minis being Vanden Plas equivalents of the Wood & Pickett Mini Margrave, Radford Mini de Ville, Hooper Mini, Pavesi Mini and 1997 Rover Mini Limo one-off by John Cooper garages (up to the most garish like the Tickford Mini that was reputedly built for a wealthy oil sheik for £50k in 1983) to in-house commissions contracted out to coachbuilders like Zagato (also here), Bertone (also known as the Cooper Bertone), Ogle, etc with later Mini II/III-derived models featuring retro-like variants such as the "Frogeye" Sprite-inspired Banham Sprint (bearing in mind the Austin-Healey ADO36 versions of the Mini-based MG ADO34/ADO35).

Those are mostly pretty stock-appearing, except the Ogle. I was thinking more along the lines of the Jem, or the Mini fastback (both OTL custom jobs): more radically restyled.

Somewhat OT. As for Triumph, have embraced a different vision compared to previous threads from years back. It would still part of an ATL Leyland that now includes Jaguar instead of Triumph (along with Reliant later own), with further ties/collaboration with Saab-Scania. A variation also including a more successful Rootes Group (that avoided debts, bad logistics e.g. Linwood, communist strikes and Chrysler ownership to succeed in its expansion) and possibly Isuzu Motors if former joins (with the New Minx and Arrow being merged with the Bellett and Florian), the latter either with or without the likes of former constituent branches such as Hino Motors and what became Kawasaki motorcycles (had the Keiretsu been inclined to do things differently during WW2, since both Isuzu and Kawasaki Heavy Industries appear to be under the DKB group).

That's a whole 'nother can of worms, ain't it?

 

[Masked Grizzly]

If you're suggesting the Pininfarina-styled ADO35 project as a VP model, be it 2/3/4/5dr, I'm sold. That's a handsome machine indeed. (The Codford, too.)

No. Both the 2-door ADO34 and 2-door ADO35 would be sold as Austins, yet that does not preclude Vanden Plas one-offs of the former or possibly a more unique Vanden Plas Newmarket coupe reminiscent of a tidied up Broadspeed Mini GT 2+2 meets Peugeot 204 Coupe with longer 84-inch Minivan/Estate wheelbase and ADO34-like front/rear-end.

I do like the 104 roadster.

Thought you previously disliked the Peugeot 104's styling or was it just limited to the supermini?

I'd see that a little later; I don't see anything wrong with the OTL MBG. After that, provided it doesn't resemble the TR7 much, I'm open to almost anything.

Am envisioning the ATL MGB and MGC being part of a family of cars in the early/mid-1960s that also forms the basis of MG saloons akin to the previously mentioned cars from Alfa Romeo, BMW and Datsun. Pininfarina styling for the saloons drawing inspiration from the Nissan Bluebird 410, Nissan Cedric 130, IKA-Renault Torino and Peugeot 504.

Their ATL 1970s replacements would draw inspiration from the OTL Rover SD1 though with the sportscars possessing the better exterior styling elements of Project Broadside, MG ADO21 and possibly even the Lombardi FL1 concept as well as more Pininfarina influences such as the the Ferrari Mondial T and Lancia Montecarlo (despite being front-engine rwd).

I'm not out to defend Riley or Wolseley's survival. I'm thinking, for a marque akin to Cadillac (for the British market), maybe 50K isn't crazy low. More wouldn't hurt.

ATL Vanden Plas would be thoroughly differentiated from regular BMC models (pre-Rover) and take over the previous roles of both Riley and Wolseley with the bonus of adding more sales then previous two combined, whilst also maintaining an aura of exclusivity with the more luxurious one-offs / commissions as done by Radford, Wood & Pickett, Hooper, Pavesi and Tickford in OTL for the well-heeled.

I wouldn't wait, honestly. Start with 3/4/5dr model options from Day One. Why sacrifice potential sales?

Because am accounting for the fact there would still be those within BMC who would likely remain unconvinced about hatchbacks and with management being tempted to carry over the 2/4-door two-box saloon layout for the entry-level 720-770cc Mini in a similar role to the Renault R3. Even Innocenti produced the regular A40 Farina saloon alongside the A40 Combinata hatchback in OTL with the latter's sales success putting any doubts to rest.

Those are mostly pretty stock-appearing, except the Ogle. I was thinking more along the lines of the Jem, or the Mini fastback (both OTL custom jobs): more radically restyled.

It would be up to the customer how over-spec or radically restyled they go in customizing their cars.

As for the DART Mini / Mini Jem / Mini Marcos, always wondered if it would have been possible to combine the front of the former and the rear of the Ogle SX1000 or Codford Mini including some form of rear hatchback.

The "Frogeye" Sprite-inspired Banham Sprint does bring up the prospect of later Mini-based one-offs inspired by the larger MG Midget as well as even the Sebring Sprite.

That's a whole 'nother can of worms, ain't it?

It is and dependent on various largely post-war PODs.