Make the Hillman Imp a success

IMO, the Hillman Imp was an interesting and marketable concept that was wrecked by stupid mismanagement, poor materials, premature launch, destructive union unrest and government interference.

IMHO, with its compact size, all-aluminum liquid-cooled engine located above the drive wheels, 4-speed all-synchromesh trannie, and spacious interior, the Imp, if well executed could have been a winner in Britain, Europe and elsewhere.

http://www.imps4ever.info/tech/

imp.jpg


pr342.jpg


So, what can we fix to make the Imp a success? For starters:

1) No Linwood plant, refuse gov't money if that's the mandatory condition. Make the Imp at Rootes' base at Coventry.
2) Don't launch the Imp until it's ready.
3) Don't bet the farm on the Imp. Keep making the good selling Minx, Super Snipes, Hawks, Rapiers, etc, with range consolidation where sensible.
4) Make the cars outside of Britain for the non-UK/EC market:
- Australia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rootes_Australia
- Japan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isuzu_Hillman_Minx
- India https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile_Products_of_India

With Japanese manufacturing and industrial skill, the Isuzu-Hillman Imp would have been a huge winner in 1960s Japan. If the cars can be made well, the Indian model could dominate the market.
 
Last edited:
Now we know some form of air dam at the front would have reduced the front end lift at speed. Reducing the negative camber at the front would aid handling. Making a 1 litre version of the engine was feasible and a factory backed racing version would have given it a positive cachet like the Mini. In club racing they were faster than the minis with the same capacity engines. Crucially build the thing in Coventry.
 
I remember maybe 1971, 1972 - was given a lift from Cardiff to Eastbourne. John the driver, was one who liked to 'put his foot down' and the car may have been a Chamois rather than the standard Imp. We go there in good time, and I never felt we drove on the 'edge' of the car's capabilities.
I'd driven in Minis before and it was interesting to see the difference - more room, not so good at corners, but fine with bends.
 
Had it been a success, I wonder if Rootes would have expanded the rear engined idea into larger 4-door cars to compete with the Chevrolet Corvair, akin to:

Škoda 130 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Škoda_130

161965_extra1index.JPG


Hino Contessa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hino_Contessa

Designed by the same guy who penned the Triumph Spitfire and Herald and many more iconic British cars https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giovanni_Michelotti#Standard_Triumph

640px-HINO_Contessa_1300_at_London_Science_Museum.jpg


VW Type 3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Type_3

640px-VW_1600_4P_1969_ftl.JPG


And sportscars like the Type 34 Karmann Ghia, Hino Contessa 900 Sprint or Renault Caravelle.

640px-VW_Typ_34_Karmann-Ghia_1600_L.JPG


d5e4a84cacdd6c9b04302a2bdeb68ed8.jpg


640px-Renault_Caravelle_ca_1968_doing_gregarious.jpg
 
Last edited:
My main memory of the Imp is getting a lift home from the pub in the back of a friends metallic blue Imp. Somehow we got five adults in it and off we go along a twisty country road till we came to a tight bend the driver who is a bit enthusiastic and alchohol fueled leaves his braking a little late and we went straight on through a hedge and into a ploughed field. The driver and front passenger jump out and run away shouting that they can smell a fuel leak. There are three of us jammed in the back (no seatbelts in the back in those days) and we cant get out we are a scrambled mess of arms and legs jammed in so tight we can barely breathe. Took us about 10 minutes to get out, Oh how we laughed as we chased the driver around the field threatening to kick his head in.
 
Would need the following PODs to work in order for Rootes to have enough money to help it successfully undergo the biggest phase of expansion in the company's history as well as further develop the Imp and related models:
  • Rootes does not buy Singer Motors in 1956 (along with the latter's debts), with Singer either collapsing or instead being acquired by Chrysler and merged with Simca to produce UK built re-badged Simca (later Chrysler badged) models.
  • Rootes gets permission to expand Ryton plant in Coventry to built Imp instead of being forced by the government (in return for an unpayable loan) to move to Linwood in Scotland, avoiding a crippling 600 mile round trip where engine castings made in Linwood had to be sent to Ryton to be machined and assembled, then sent back up to be put on the cars.
  • Butterfly away the 1959-1961 Acton strikes at Rootes owned British light Steel Pressings (also known as the 1961 Honeymoon Strikes) that were disclosed to be communist planned and directed, which not only caused irreparable damage to the Rootes Group and its finances (during the OTL development of the Imp and Linwood plant) but also forced Rootes to rush the Imp into production before it was properly developed.
  • Another year's worth of extra development to iron out the OTL bugs and initial problems so the Imp reaches production in 1964 instead of 1963.
As for the Imp itself:
  • Would develop a 4-door version inspired by the SEAT 850 4-door (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEAT_850)
  • Bring the Rootes Asp into production along with a micro-truck / microvan / microbus variant similar to the Suzuki Carry and Fiat 850T (aka Fiat 850 Familiare) / Fiat 900T (http://www.aronline.co.uk/blogs/concepts/concepts-and-prototypes/hillman-imp-rootes-asp/)
  • Originally the Imp was to feature 800-1000cc engines before the 800cc version was abandoned and the dry-liners caused problems for the 998cc version resulting in the Imp initially being limited to 875cc (apart from the 998cc Rallye models), instead the ATL Imp would either feature linerless alloy blocks allowing easy increases in engine displacement to be made or a new taller block long-stroke engine with dry-liners allowing the engine to be reliably bored out up to 1150cc. Would also produce an Imp with the 800cc engine as a lower-tax special.
A successful Imp would have also allowed Rootes to bring the rear-engined 4-door Swallow project into production that was to be powered by 1250cc / 1500cc / 1750cc Coventry Climax engines derived from the 1220cc FWE used in the Lotus Elite, which could have also spawned Swallow-based rear-engined sportscar (replacing the Sunbeam Alpine) and truck / van variants to rival the VW Microbus. (http://www.aronline.co.uk/blogs/concepts/concepts-and-prototypes/hillman-hunter-the-swallow-project/)

It would have also allowed Rootes to avoid being acquired by Chrysler though government pressure might have meant ATL Rootes ends up merging with Leyland Motors (that was very successful in OTL pre-BL), butterflying away British Leyland with BMC either being left out to dry or managing to overcome its problems after walking away from Leyland during merger talks.
 
Last edited:
Had it been a success, I wonder if Rootes would have expanded the rear engined idea into larger 4-door cars to compete with the Chevrolet Corvair, akin to:

Aside from the Swallow project cannot say, might be the case that the conventional front-engined rear-wheel drive Rootes Arrow is re-purposed into a larger 2.0+ car above the Swallow. There is also the fact that while the Imp and Swallow would be successful, the success of the Ford Cortina would have likely encouraged Rootes to pursue more conventional replacements down the line.

The fairly distant possibility also exists that Rootes might consider a rear-engined / mid-engined replacement for the Sunbeam Tiger along the lines of the Corvair Coupe Speciale by Pininfarina and Rover P6BS / Rover P9, powered by 1.8-2.5 CFF / CFA V8 engines from Coventry Climax. Especially in a Rootes-Leyland merger where Leyland Motors acquires Jaguar (who in OTL purchased Coventry Climax in 1963) instead of Rover, not only bringing everything under one roof but also allowing for the 1.8-2.5 CFF / CFA V8 engines that were originally intended for a Baby XJ project to be utilized elsewhere.
 
As Yulzari said, 'Airdam'.

Agreed. Totally. Absolutely.

IIRC, the handling characteristics at speed in a head-wind were, um, unsettling. Especially if you have a heap of stuff in the back...

As I recall, the lift was very, very sensitive to 'apparent wind' direction. Like a yacht, even a dozen degree shift could make a LOT of difference. Add non-optimal road conditions like surface water or a mild frost and you had a serious fight on your hands. Nearly lost several cousins thus but, some-how, they flattened a hedge rather than adding yet more scars to the tree on a notorious bend...

Also, a *modest* spoiler over the boot / trunk / tailgate ?

And, yes, tossing those Bolshie wild-catters' shop stewards under a passing bus would have helped, too...
==
FWIW, we had a Cortina Mk#1, with those 'Martian Eyes' 'Y' rear-light clusters. It, too, would have benefitted from an air-dam due to its vast boot (US: trunk) which could be loaded until our headlights barely lit the road and the front-end tried to take flight...
 
4) Make the cars outside of Britain for the non-UK/EC market:
- Australia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rootes_Australia
- Japan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isuzu_Hillman_Minx
- India https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile_Products_of_India

With Japanese manufacturing and industrial skill, the Isuzu-Hillman Imp would have been a huge winner in 1960s Japan. If the cars can be made well, the Indian model could dominate the market.

Forgot this part

As for Australia not sure the rear-engined models would fare that well compared to conventional cars such as the Avenger, Arrow and a non-Chrysler version of the 180.

A more limited tie-up between Rootes and Isuzu might have worked to produce a smaller Imp-derived Kei Car with the Imp being an Isuzu-badged 1960s "national car" of Japan to rival the Toyota Publica, Mazda Familia and Subaru 1000. With Isuzu continuing to produce the Bellel and Bellett. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_car#Japanese_market

Cannot see how the Imp could work in India as it would have to be significantly simplified and costed down (e.g. 4-door only with a less advanced engine), on the other hand the related microvan might achieve some success.

Going back to Isuzu, it is also possible to have Hino Motors remain part of Isuzu (instead of being split off in 1942) with an enlarged ATL Isuzu manufacturing both the Hillman Minx and Renault 4CV under license with the alternate Isuzu Contessa slotting below the larger Bellett prior to being replaced by the GM T-body dervied Isuzu Gemini.
 
Last edited:
It is interesting that only today are British vehicle manufacturers realizing the benefit of building off shore for more than those home markets. Sure, Britain's Royal Enfield had a plant in India, but only for the Indian home market, as with Rootes in Australia making cars for the Australian home market. Whereas today, Triumph has a motorcycle factory in Thailand for the world market. In the late 1960s, Triumph's Edward Turner visited the Japanese motorcycle industry, and his report included a suggestion that Triumph or BSA consider making bikes in Japan for the world market.

It seems the best way to get away from the crazy industrial relations of 1960s-70s Britain while keeping British automotive firms alive is to move production partially offshore for the world markets. Yes, you need to overcome tarrif issues in the final destination market, but if Honda can export Civics to 1970s USA, why can't Rootes export Japanese-origin Imps to the USA or other markets?
 

Nick P

Donor
Wasn't there a problem with the engine overheating and warping when used for stop-start journeys? I vaguely recall a TV show mentioning great long distance runs by business men but their wives at home would have breakdowns because the engine needed a good run to warm up and being driven to and from the shops was not such a good thing.
 
It is interesting that only today are British vehicle manufacturers realizing the benefit of building off shore for more than those home markets. Sure, Britain's Royal Enfield had a plant in India, but only for the Indian home market, as with Rootes in Australia making cars for the Australian home market. Whereas today, Triumph has a motorcycle factory in Thailand for the world market. In the late 1960s, Triumph's Edward Turner visited the Japanese motorcycle industry, and his report included a suggestion that Triumph or BSA consider making bikes in Japan for the world market.

It seems the best way to get away from the crazy industrial relations of 1960s-70s Britain while keeping British automotive firms alive is to move production partially offshore for the world markets. Yes, you need to overcome tarrif issues in the final destination market, but if Honda can export Civics to 1970s USA, why can't Rootes export Japanese-origin Imps to the USA or other markets?

Not sure about other British vehicle manufacturers though BMC seems to be the most well placed to move production partially offshore and did in fact do so in OTL (yet could have made better decisions as early as before WW2 when Austin and Morris were separate companies), while much smaller Rootes might have a chance by merging with Leyland though it is a tough call since the unions would need to dealt with in order to achieve goal.
 
BMC would have been smart to build cars in Canada. In Jan 1965, Canada and the USA signed the Auto Pact, allowing the free passage of newly manufactured cars across each other's borders. Before Britain's entry into the EEC in 1973, there were strong trade agreements between Britain and Canada.

Meanwhile, Studebaker Canada was desperately looking for a new car to first import and then produce or assembly, with its last Hamilton, ON car rolling off the line at the end of 1966. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Studebaker_Canada#Importer_status

Rootes and the Imp wouldn't work as Chrysler was already involved with Rootes, but BMC could make cars in Hamilton for the USA market. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Motor_Corporation#BMC_designs

The larger BMC cars of 1965 would have been acceptable to 1960s North America, like the 1965 Riley or its MG clone below.

640px-1965.riley.4slash72.arp.jpg


800px-MG_Magnette_Mk_IV_ca_1966.jpg


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMC_ADO17
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riley_4
 
Last edited:
Getting back to Rootes, but not the Imp in this case, I think two of the pre-Chrysler cars that would have produced and sold well in the USA:

Humber Super Snipe, especially with 3L I-6.

640px-Humber_Super_Snipe_Series_II_first_reg_nov_1959_2965cc_and_having_now_become_a_red%28dish%29_car.JPG


Humber Imperial, especially if V-8 powered.

640px-Humber_Imperial_rear.jpg
 
BMC would have been smart to build cars in Canada. In Jan 1965, Canada and the USA signed the Auto Pact, allowing the free passage of newly manufactured cars across each other's borders. Before Britain's entry into the EEC in 1973, there were strong trade agreements between Britain and Canada.

Meanwhile, Studebaker Canada was desperately looking for a new car to first import and then produce or assembly, with its last Hamilton, ON car rolling off the line at the end of 1966. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Studebaker_Canada#Importer_status

Rootes and the Imp wouldn't work as Chrysler was already involved with Rootes, but BMC could make cars in Hamilton for the USA market. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Motor_Corporation#BMC_designs

The larger BMC cars of 1965 would have been acceptable to 1960s North America, like the 1965 Riley or its MG clone below.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMC_ADO17
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riley_4


Given the success of the Volkswagen Beetle and other Volkswagens one could argue that BMC should have built cars in Mexico and Brazil. Another helpful POD would be for the ATL 1968 U.S. safety regulations and emission standards to be lenient enough to allow even a properly-developed near-OTL Canadian spec Mini Clubman and other models to be sold in the US until the late-70s (1980 at the very latest), powered by emissions compliant 1275cc A-OHC and 1600-2000cc B-OHC / O-Series engines. - http://www.aronline.co.uk/blogs/car...ions/international-variations-canadian-minis/

The mk4 Magnette and Riley 4 were already old inferior designs due to be replaced, with all Farina B designs originally intended to be replaced by ADO17 before it grew into a bigger car (though would have been better off developing an early-60s Marina). The ADO17 aka BMC 1800 itself meanwhile, due to growing into a larger car then originally intended needed to be up-gunned with a 2-litre B-Series and wrapped in an attractive body for it to succeed in North America let alone be as successful as the smaller Mini and ADO16.

Studebaker Canada's only hope is to either strike a deal with Nissan or meet to strike a deal with Toyota first, BMC is more likely to acquire Borgward given its OTL interest then Studebaker Canada and was focused on other priorities.

Getting back to Rootes, but not the Imp in this case, I think two of the pre-Chrysler cars that would have produced and sold well in the USA:

Humber Super Snipe, especially with 3L I-6.


Humber Imperial, especially if V-8 powered.


The Humbers were by the mid-1960s old designs that used an Armstrong-Siddeley based inline-6 design, while a Chrysler V8 was looked at one point Rootes would have been better off looking into the stillborn Armstrong-Siddeley V8 derived from the Sapphire 234 or via a merger with an ATL Leyland Motors that owns Jaguar utilizes the Daimler V8 (bored out to 3-litre and 5-litres respectively).

The latter scenario is assuming that Jaguar still has a Not-Invented-Here syndrome regarding the neglected Daimler V8 despite such an engine's advantages in the North American market, then again by the the time the Rootes-Leyland merger happens it might be too late for Humber in the mid/late-60s to use the Daimler V8.

Jaguar also was overly paranoid about protecting its position as a prestige luxury marque and while it might have been able to tolerate Triumph within Leyland and see the latter as complimenting Jaguar, Humber as an old-fashioned luxury marque would be another matter entirely with all Rootes marques likely being re-branded as Leylands.

Then again OTL Chrysler-owned Rootes did develop a V6 for the Chrysler 180 that was said to be a reverse engineered version of the UK Ford Essex V6 (so a Chinese copy of an existing V8 is not entirely out of the question), perhaps Rootes manage to produce their own non-Chrysler (possibly Triumph Puma-based) version of the the 929 project with Chrysler (minus Rootes) choosing the Simca proposal for the ATL Chrysler 180. - http://www.aronline.co.uk/blogs/concepts/concepts-and-prototypes/concepts-and-prototypes-projet-929/

Don't forget that even if the Imp along other rear-engined Rootes models are successful and Rootes remains independent after its successful expansion, it would still be a small player in need of rationalizing down its many marques.
 
Last edited:
IIRC Daimler had explored with Vauxhall putting the 2.5 V8 into the Cresta and it is said that Crestas were made with Daimler mounting points as a relic of the plan. However that would be GM competing with GM in the USA or Canada.
 
IIRC Daimler had explored with Vauxhall putting the 2.5 V8 into the Cresta and it is said that Crestas were made with Daimler mounting points as a relic of the plan. However that would be GM competing with GM in the USA or Canada.

That was indeed the case though Daimler got cold feet due to the frantic rust issues of the Vauxhall Cresta's body-shell, they would have been better off working with Jaguar much earlier then OTL to produce a Daimler version of the Jaguar Mark 1 (along with the Jaguar XK150 butterflying away the OTL Daimler SP250) prior eventually selling Daimler (and Lanchester) to Jaguar.
 
Top