• Hi Guest!
    If you appreciate British Car Forum and our 25 years of supporting British car enthusiasts with technical and anicdotal information, collected from our thousands of great members, please support us with a low-cost subscription. You can become a supporting member for less than the dues of most car clubs.
    There are some perks with a member upgrade!
    **Upgrade Now**
    (PS: Subscribers don't see this gawd-aweful banner
Tips
Tips

The Sprite and the Metropolitan

Share this page

E

Ernst Blofeld

Member
Offline
I'm from the UK and don't know so much about the Nash Metropolitan even if it was built here under licence from Nash.

What perplexes me is the relationship between the Nash, and the Austin A30/Farina A40 and the Sprite.

It's said that the Metropolitan used A30/Sprite front suspension but a little net research into that has shown me that the Metropolitan did not employ the lever-arm damper/upper link arrangement so mystifyingly popular with BMC - a company that kept faith with leaky, ineffective lever arm shocks for no earthly reason.

It seems that the Metro had a proper upper wishbone with the coil spring and telescopic damper atop that. Does that mean the Nash only used the A30/Sprite bottom wishbone?

The very fact that the Metropolitan was at one point the second best selling import in the US behind the Beetle makes me wonder why BMC could not have adopted if the Nash's upper wishbone/telescopic damper arrangement for the Sprite? (Too tall for the low-slung roadster? If so, could the Metro's upper wishbone have suppanted the Sprite's lever arm damper with the coil spring kept in the usual position and a telescopic damper mounted within the spring?)

A similar thought occurred to me with the MGB. Back in 1952 MG launched the handsome, Italiante MG ZA sedan, featuring rack and pinion steering and a coil spring independent front suspension, but one that unlike the A and B did without the lever arm damper. I cannot think why this effective set up designed by Gerald Palmer wasn't adopted for the A and the B - or the awful 1958 Austin A55 sedan which needed all the help it could get.

This sort of component sharing and rationalization could only have helped BMC's bottom-line, not to mention improved its cars, so why didn't it happen?

Makes me think of that line Andy Griffith said in "A Face in the Crowd."

"Those limeys. They act like they're a real first-class outfit, but the truth is the shop's closing all over the world."

And never was a truer word spoken. All a bit scary if you're on this side of the pond.
 
I really can't contribute to your observations except to say that had they listened to you, you might have also have been able to finally defeat James Bond! :grin:
 
Interesting observation's but I have wondered why US cars were so quick to get rid of the lever shocks. The brit shocks have always given me reasonable service and from a cost standpoint are cheaper to use than a tube shock setup. [Shock is also a lever arm]. In that day the tube shocks were nothing all that exceptionable. As for the brit car industry lets not forget that the Japonese copied it to a tee but while England refused to correct the fault's in their cars the Japonese went after them with hard. I like to give lucar connector's as an example. We are all familiar with Lucar connector's corroding and giving us fits yet the Japonese copied them only they enclosed them in a WATERPROOF neopreme sleeve. Very little trouble on old Japonese vehicles. I personally blame Englands decline on the fact they could no longer defend their colony system and on international money games. The US, unfortunatly, is following them. We no longer produce much that is of value to the rest of the world.
 
Interesting.... sort of. In fact, the Met used 2 of the dreadful threaded trunions per side. One on top and 1 lower! Same part as the Spridgets.

A later iteration of independent front suspensions, as used on many modern cars, are a McPherson strut that, get this, incorporates a control arm with damping! What a feature!

There is nothing inherently inferior about lever shocks, except they can't be made as cheaply as tube shocks, which can often be purchased for $3.00 for the least well-made units.

Just one of many thoughts..... Peter C
 
I think the Spridget front suspension is a beautiful example of minimalist simplicity.

Just sayin'.
 
bthompson said:
I think the Spridget front suspension is a beautiful example of minimalist simplicity.

Just sayin'.
Click to expand...

describes a lot of owners too, simple that is.
 
Peter and other's thought's make sense but I would like to say once again that the lever shock makes up the top link. When the american auto manufacturer's went to tube shocks they had to make a separate top link. Not cheap.
Of course now almost everything is McPherson strut. Doesn't work great for turning but is the cheapest to build. Of course since everything has power steering and you no longer can feel the road I guess it doesn't matter.
 
Back
Top