MG-Cars.info

Welcome to our Site for MG, Triumph and Austin-Healey Car Information.

Parts

MG parts spares and accessories are available for MG T Series (TA, MG TB, MG TC, MG TD, MG TF), Magnette, MGA, Twin cam, MGB, MGBGT, MGC, MGC GT, MG Midget, Sprite and other MG models from British car spares company LBCarCo.

MG MG Y Type - Article from the Independent June 2004

I happened to come across this article and a very robust response from Phil Waltham - quite an amusing read - 1-0 to Phil!
Or do you think Brian Sewell hits the nail on the head ... will we end up with a score draw as Sewell's
damming text sticks the boot into the Y??

Views would be very interesting - somehow I dont think that you guys out there are likely to line up in Sewell's team (though he is spot on with his assessment of the VA!)

Sincerely

Jerry

FROM THE INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPER (UK) 1 JUNE 2004

Classic Cars
MG YA/YB
Minor contender of modest charms
'The Y-saloon was part of a generation of gutless and over-bodied British cars with snob appeal, says Brian Sewell'
Tuesday, 1 June 2004


Long before MG and Rover came together in their current seemingly improbable coupling, there was a small MG that perfectly represented the family values of the traditional Rover - the Y-saloon in variations A and B.

I am, perhaps, not alone in my irredeemable confusion with MGs; those few measured in litres and dubbed with names such as Midget, Magna, Magnette and Montlhery. I manage well enough, even with T-Types. But with the plethora and proliferation of Types J, K, N and P, the SA, VA and WA, which all appeared in the 1930s with engines ranging from 847ccs to 2,561ccs, I lack the nerd's enthusiasm to distinguish one from t'other. The Y-saloon I remember only as the 11/4-litre, which I am certain was its name when I was a spotty boy.

Even on its introduction in May 1947 it was described in The Motor as "designed on conservative lines'' - yet a whole decade earlier MG had built a saloon to rival the early Jaguar: long and low with swooping lines and parti-colours that marked it as Art Deco, flamboyant and exuberant, yet with a hint of the real upper-crust traditions of the larger Alvis and the Derby Bentley. Its body was daring as a coachbuilder's dream, not the commonplace of mass production.

Nothing of this survived in the Y-saloon - a car entirely without sporting aspirations in looks or engineering; a car that on the boulevards of southern France would raise only the eyebrow of ridicule and a mocking smile, a particularly, obstinately British car, too small and underpowered to do what it set out to do, a Morris of a car.

But weren't all MGs a Morris of some sort under the skin? Had they not been from their very beginning, in the early 1920s, put together from the parts bins of Mr William Morris and his Wolseley subsidiary? Wasn't the 2.6-litre of the swish WA-saloon a boxed-out version of the straight 6-cylinder that powered the staid Wolseley 16, the smallest of the marque's so-called Super Sixes? Yes, indeed, bored-out and tweaked to give 95bhp and match the performance of the 2.5-litre Jaguar. And, by the way, wasn't the Jaguar's engine the good old 20hp Standard's lump with a revised cylinder head and other transformations? Truth to tell, both engines were old mutton in bodies dressed to look like lamb.

With the Y-saloon, MG's stylists didn't even try to make it look like lamb. An entirely new car, we thought in 1947, it had been developed in 1939 for the 1940 Motor Show, but the Second World War had intervened. This makes its dullness still more inexcusable, for when it was on the drawing-board, the elegant WA of August 1938 was on the streets, new, sparkling, brilliant, carving through traffic with aplomb.

How could they fail to translate such character into the smaller car? Fail they did, and the dead hand of William Morris, by then Lord Nuffield, dictated that it should be even more a parts-bin hybrid, with body panels from his favourite car, the Morris 8 of 1939; the engine came from the MG TC two-seater, but reduced to a single carburettor and down-tuned from 55bhp to 46bhp.

With a little magic-wand waving by a draughtsman the bits were packaged in a saloon that, at a pinch, could be described as having classic lines - Autocar, hard-pressed by disappointment, damned it with faint praise as "a nice little car''. And so it was, in its way, nicely made in detail, its paint a proper cellulose, its upholstery leather, its dashboard and door fillets in traditional walnut. But it was little too, with scant room for four adults and their luggage, yet it weighed a ton.

A sometime MG racing driver took one at once to Italy, where engineers were teasing 100mph out of 1,100cc Fiat engines and screaming round the Mille Miglia faster than big Bentleys, and wrote that the Italians "specially liked the fine leather upholstery, the sunshine roof, the hydraulic jacking system and adjustable steering-wheel. They have none of these good things.'' How smug we were.

The Y-saloon was very like the Rover 10, which, though larger by an inch or two all round, an extra 140ccs and 25 per cent more weight, was smart enough to win a coachwork prize or two (no MG ever won a Grand Prix d'Honneur in a Belgian Concours d'Elegance) and sport a now very rare 2-door close-coupled coupe. Both could be persuaded to reach 70mph and cruise at 55mph; both might just manage to average 30mpg - the Rover with the benefit of free-wheeling (yes, free-wheeling, with clutchless gear changes); and both had acceleration and hill-climbing abilities that The Motor critic kindly described as "inconspicuous''. The MG's suspension, engineering and steering, he observed, were "anything but untried ... an unhesitating affirmation of the orthodox school of thought." He used the word orthodox in almost every paragraph.

I confess that I have only once driven a Y-saloon - London to Aldeburgh and back. It went very well with 20th-century English music and the revival of folk-song - other manifestations of the orthodoxies that afflict us. It is a thing of modest charms, a minor classic sprightly enough for urban traffic now - the sort of car that inspires old codgers with rheumy eyes to murmur: "They don't make them like that nowadays.''

Well, no they don't, and thank the Lord for that - nowadays they give us engines powerful enough to draw the weight and we are not smitten hip and thigh every time we squeeze ourselves even into Smarts and micro-cars. But the comforts and efficiencies of today's small cars are banished from immediate memory when we encounter this MG - it revives recollection of thatched cottages, Copper Kettle tea-rooms and the bright optimism of the post-war years.

Were the Y-saloon a dog, every passer-by would pause to pat it. They would pat the Rover too, and the Lanchester, and the Sunbeam-Talbot -- a whole generation of gutless over-bodied Tens with snob appeal. Perhaps we are a little less deluded now - labelling the dreadful Montego, Maestro and Metro with the MG octagon surely cannot have convinced anyone that they had bought a better car.


MG YB
philip_waltham wrote:
Thursday, 30 April 2009 at 03:39 pm (UTC)
Oh dear me, what a misleading report written by someone who once drove an example of a YB to Aldeburgh!

Well I never. Must be some knd of whizz kid I guess so let me give him some information on my personal YB KMJ 539 which I have owned for 10 years and in which I cover some 5000 miles per annum with (so far) no problems or breakdowns. The handling is fantastic being rack and pinion coupled with lever arm IFS as on the later A's and B's. Twin leading shoe brakes which are powerful and efficient. It certainly can be "persuaded to just over seventy" because easily reaches 75 and I hold it back at that because of the risk to a fifty five year old crankshaft (speed verified by following cars). Yes it does accelerate well and I hold the cruise at 65 but assure you it wil easily do more and it does hold a good oil pressure hot. The interior is wood and leather as your expert states. One joy is a nicely fitted sun roof which drops to slide away out of sight inder the solid roof and above the headlining.

Sorry friend but my experience is that this is a fantastic little car which performed well for its time and is an absolute joy to drive. It has no problem in keeping up with modern traffic and is as reliable as anything ever made (why shouldn't it be?). Incidentally I doubt if the Rovers of the day were similar as they lacked the steering and suspension set up of the Y type and were in any case much heavier because of their chassis and body construction. Finally, what Morris Minor can keep up with the MG Y type? I have owned and driven all kinds of Minor and have yet to find one any where near the Y for performance but if you really want to be picky please play fair and compare the Y with the side valve Minor or later OHV 803cc. I can't remeber either of those nearing 70 yet alone exceeding it, and as for brakes!

Sorry but I am a Y type owner and operator of many years standing (three over thirty years) and I know that your report is innacurate and misleading. If any one wants verification they may contact me. Phil Waltham..


J P BIRKBECK

Clearly Mr. B Sewell is still "a spotty boy" as his reseach is totally inadequate, inconsequential, unfounded, biased and down right WRONG - well done Phil Waltham! Like Phil, I have great delight in putting my Y against modern cars on the Freeways out here - it gives me a blast to pass them at 65 and still know the little engine wants to go faster!

Paul
Paul Barrow

To some extent Mr Sewell is correct Morris did very much restrict its performance, but for what reason I have no idea although most small cars then could hardly stagger past 60. With a TC engine however it would have become a real tear-away possibly topping 90. In the 60s I soon learnt not the challenge a Lancia, but a 1200 VW beatle was no problem.
Bryan

Brian Sewell is an art critic in England, well known for his extraordinary high class accent. He was tutored by Anthony Blunt who you may remember was exposed as having been as Soviet spy in the Cold War, while being the keeper of the Queen's art collection. The idea of Brian Sewell critiquing the Y Type is so preposterous I laughed myself silly. Try and find a sound clip of him talking and imagine him reading the article.
Peter
P S Sharp

Lets hope he know more about art than he does about cars ... for his sake!

Probably thinks the Mona Lisa is a dour-faced old woman!

Paul
Paul Barrow

Come on, let's take a little tongue in cheek critism. I remember as a lad one day in 1949 being absolutely stunned by the sight of an XK 120 in the local garage, I thought it had arrived from another planet standing there next to a motley collection of Wolseley's and Morris 12's etc. Even the Austin Devon or Standard Vanguard and Morris Minor were more progressive in style than the Y type. What made the YA outstanding was the most advanced suspension and steering then on the market. Why Morris didn't drop the TC engine into the YB we will never know since by 1950 the market was really hotting up.
Bryan

The YB with an XPEG engine would have been a really good combination, but they missed each other by a few years.
R A WILSON

This thread was discussed between 26/05/2009 and 07/06/2009

MG MG Y Type index

This thread is from the archives. Join the live MG MG Y Type BBS now