I note from the M type register that this M type is a (minor chassised) Clone!
Facinating, as it was owned by the late John Peckam, the guy who finished the restoration and was a long time owner of my car! In a back-to-back test with my car for The Autobile in 1983 they proudly stated that the M type was a 'Genuine one' but that the factory had hacked one of the outrigers off badly!
Presumably someone out their has lovely looking M type, that everone snubs! Shorly John knew it was a bitsa?
John crashed the original SC 3436 when he was younger and it was scrapped. But he kept the logbook. In the seventies, he 'rebuilt' it around the logbook on a SV Minor chassis. I gave him the 'differences training' so he could get the spec. right - add 5.5" to the steering column, cut the running boards outriggers off, fold the ends and weld, modify the front cross member, etc. It is pure Minor.
A similar example is the M at Beaulieu. M owners have used this 'highly original' car as a rebuild reference for decades. I have a full set of pics of it from all angles, which I took on a visit with John. In more recent years, the museum were cleaning it up and checked the chassis number on the front dumbiron - it is also a SV Minor.
We will never know how many of the 400+ 'surviving' M Types are the genuine article, but we do know that a good half of them have Minor engines fitted, since their engine numbers are higher than the production run of M engines (don't be misled by the 'genuine' engine numbers quoted in the Master Chassis Register - these are likely to be numbers recorded in the build data). My guess is that at least a third of them are bogus. Most were built in the seventies when the price of MGs took off, while Minors remained worthless. Others have been created in more recent years since the VSCC accepted M Types. The process continues to this day and will continue until the VSCC's eligibility rules change. This was one of the Register's arguments used in our bid to have SV Minors granted eligibility last year - the current rules encourage the destruction of non-eligible cars to build fake 'eligible' cars. This situation is not limited to Morrises.
Sounds like John was a 'little economical with the truth' about this car with the (then) editor of the Automobile, Malcomb Jeal. The Car was proudly displayed on the cover of the Dec 1983 Edition! I hope someones having fun with it to-day as the end result was a smashing looking little sports car with a 4 speed box and J2 style remote!
I remember the article well, with nice shots of your car too. Yes, a lovely replica. As has been said many times elswhere, an owner of a car has a perfect right to do anything he likes with it - as long as he doesn't try to kid everyone that it is something which it is not, becuase with the passing of time, the truth gets lost, which would be the case with this car if I had not helped him build it!
I've just been reading about your advice to John on altering the SV chassis to M spec. and you said he had to modify the front cross - member. What is the difference? I thought they were all the same. Regarding Minor engines in M types, not only are the numbers on the blocks different but the heads on Ms Have MG stamped on a boss on the side of the head, although the only difference is a higher compression ratio.
I agree that it's a great shame that side valve Minors were considered less desirable than the overhead cam types, most of the time the side valve cars produce the power that they are meant to, unlike the OHC. The side valve has always struck me as very 1920s engine in design, and I wonder when it was first thought of as against appearing in a car. I assume a prototype engine would have been built and tested well before it went into production. Does anyone know?
The OHC Minor and M front cross members are identical. The SV Minor cross-member was improved y adding a semicircular section in the middle to make changing the fanbelt easier. Since the M had no fan, presumable, there was no need to change the M chassis when SV Minor production took over from OHC production (there was a few months overlap).
The prototype Hundred Pound VS 2-seater Minor was presented to the Stuart & Ardern employees at their 1930 New Year's Eve party in London, so we know it was extant in 1930. This car has survived (just) and is therefore currently the only VSCC-eligible SV Minor. We therefore presume that the first SV engines were being built and tested in the autumn of 1930. Production got under way in January, the first chassis being laid down on the 15th January.
Standard M Type compression was indeed higher, and to achieve this with a Minor head, it is only necessary to skim the head such that its overall thickness is reduced to 3.500" from head gasket face to cam cover gasket face. This, combined with the fitting of a 12/12 cam make the Minor much more sprigtly, albeit still with the 1 1/8" Minor carb.
See my post three posts up. The standard M head is 3.500" thick. This gives an individual capacity of 43.5 cc, which is equivalent to a compression ratio of 5.5:1, compared to the standard Minor's compression ratio of 5.04:1. For better performance, you can take another 3/32" off, which will give an individual capacity of 36.9 cc and a compression ratio of 6.2:1. Go much further than this and you risk breaking into the water jacket. Use a regular copper asbestos gasket.
Interesting. I got the 1 1/8" for the M from the profile Publication, as Blower doesn't give a figure. And I know (I believe?) that the Minor is 1/8" down from the M. I also believe that the McEvoy is 1 1/4" but I don't have the car here yet, so don't quote me. I could measure the carb. on the tourer, but its 30 below in the workshop right now, so I'll take Jeremy's word for it!
With regard to the Minor carburetter you are both 100% correct, it all depends upon which end of the carb you measure, I have just measured a spare one. The air inlet end is 7/8 inch and the butterfly end is 1 inch. The SU book, from memory refers to it as 1inch diameter. The M Type carb is 1 1/8 inch as fitted my OHC Jensen with M Type manifold.
