Durable car Ownership
In 1976 when interest in classic cars was less common
Charles Ware chose the Morris Minor as the basis of a business plan.
He re-invented the concept of durable car ownership, whereby the cost of running a durable,
infinitely repairable, car was compared to that of running a "disposable Euro-box"
He used this argument to encourage people to take part in a long term maintenance and repair scheme
at his "Morris Minor Centre", maintaining their cars on a similar basis to maintaining a house.
At the outset, the condition of the car was assessed and recorded using a simple form showing an outline view of the car.
The essential structural faults were addressed first, and the car put into daily use.
The remaining work was prioritised, and was carried out in a staged manner over several years to suit the owner's budget.
As a consequence many Minors were saved from being scrapped, while still being used as everyday cars.
Interestingly his choice of the Morris Minor does not seem to have been based on his passion for the marque,
but rather because it was relatively abundant, had a good spares supply, was mechanically simple,
structurally over-engineered (or properly engineered as Maurice Wilks would have said)
and was therefore more or less indefinitely repairable.
An accepted problem with the P4 is that values are not high and people think that it's not economic to
restore them. This is certainly true if you consider the resale value only.
The key to Charles Ware's argument was to make people realise that they are going to want to drive some type of car,
and if you take into the account the depreciation and replacement costs of running an equivalent modern car it can still
work out cheaper to run and restore a durable car instead. It's a different mindset.
Don't think about your classic as an appreciating asset in addition to your modern car,
think about it as a viable alternative, and maintain it indefinitely.
Could it be that P4s have contributed to their fate, by appealing to the optimism and inertia of their owners?
The chassis is so massively strong, it can keep on passing the MOT for years after serious corrosion in the body has
taken hold. The mechanical components are virtually indestructible.
By the time the thing fails the test, and something has to be done,
there can be quite a few nasty problems developing, which in total will be dauntingly expensive to put right in a
durable way. Isn't it tempting at this point to either get rid of the car and find a better one,
or simply patch it up as it slides down the slippery slope to the scrap yard?
I don't want to accuse large numbers of people of willfully running their P4s into the ground,
but I am suggesting that without encouragement, an infinite supply of cash or very good bodywork spares situation,
it is difficult to avoid! This ties in with my own experience and peoples' comments when trying to buy a good P4.
Could this also explain why so few of us take our cars to the rallies?
So many of the pictures in Overdrive are of lovely shiny cars.
Even though I have had my P4 for eight years and it is far from neglected,
I admit that until recently I hadn't attended any rallies because
I was worried that people would look only skin deep. This is not what running a durable car is about,
the emphasis should be on preservation rather than presentation.
I am pleased to see that we have managed to keep quite a high P4 presence in the classic car magazines,
but I think it's counter-productive that some magazines keep insisting how common P4s are.
There are only about 1600 known to the Guild. How many of these are on the road? and what proportion of the remaining
number does this represent? Don't be fooled, we really do need to look after them.
As members of the Guild we should be committed to encouraging
all owners to run their P4s as durable rather than a consumable cars.
With this in mind, I would like to suggest that it would be a really excellent thing if one of our specialists
could provide a similar staged restoration scheme for the P4.
Of course nothing is stopping owners doing this on an individual basis at the moment, but I feel that a recognised scheme
will bring the option to the forefront of owners' minds.
Moreover, the difficult bit of prioritising the work, and spreading the cost adequately,
would be done for them in a way they could understand.
They would also know that the work would be carried out to a durable standard.
If owners had this option, they may be less inclined to write off their "trusty-but-rustys",
and realise that they can still provide sustained economical transport.
Why not have a look at Charles Ware's Morris Minor Centre Site
if you're interested how such a staged restoration scheme can be implemented.
I have designed an assessment form for the P4 which could be used to plan the work.
Eventually I would like to use it as the basis of a survey of the condition of all surviving P4s,
which will help our spares men supply the parts we need to keep our cars on the road.
It could also form one way of accurately describing the condition of cars which are for sale.
I really hope that what I have said makes sense.
This is a critical time for the P4 and we have to face up to what may be happening,
and decide if we have the power to do anything about it.
HOME