I had an Imp and I can vouch for the economy and speed. I went on a touring holiday with my wife and 2 kids and all our luggage. We covered 900 miles in a week on 18 gallons of petrol, and I didn't spare the horses. That's 50 mpg, unknown in that time even for a small car. It could also burn off an Austin/ Morris 1100 which had the advantage of over 200cc. I would buy one of the few survivors now if I could afford it, because it was the best small car ever, and it matches today's city cars for fuel economy and speed.
@@Vics251 The Mini did not sell well at first, but it gained a boost from its adoption by prominent celebrities as a trendy runabout. The Mk1 Imp suffered from a poor reputation because of various design faults, entailing a too small clutch, inferior head gasket, and the odd front suspension geometry, which was a makeshift correction of a shocking design flaw which would have made the headlights illegally low. All of these matters were addressed in the MK2, making it the car it should have been from the beginning. As always, a car which which gains a bad name initially, never really recovers from it. An good example was the F/FS Vauxhall Victor, which was the worst rustbox ever, with floor pans rotting through while still under 12 month guarantee. This knocked Vauxhall sales and the marque took more then a decade to live it down. The FB Victor was the opposite, a reliable rust free car, but too late to salvage Vauxhall's reputation. My Imp was a used Mk.2, and was truly a little gem, making the Mini look primitive and boring by comparison. Many police forces adopted them as panda cars because of their speed, agility and ability to perform a high speed U turn without rolling over, unlike the Mk.2 Escorts which replaced them. Many cops rolled them while trying to perform the same maneuvre that they were used to doing in Imps.
The launch of 'The Imp' got me into the motor trade - the Rootes dealer wanted help in the showroom to answer customers' questions. The Imp was an improved 'Mini' - roll down windows, rear hatch-back, stumpy little gear shift, proper door handles (the Mini had nasty sliding windows, a long, floppy gear shift, bit of string for a door handle). As the video here relates, it was built at the Linwood Plant in Glasgow - at the instigation of the government, to provide employment. The day after the launch, with Rootes Group fortunes hanging on its success - the plant went on strike. This was a cameo of the story of the British car industry. It's all very fashionable to 'slag off' Margaret Thatcher now, people forget the suicidal insanity of Britain around that time.
My dear old Dad, had a 1962 Humber Super Snipe. Now, that was luxury. And talk about good looking,...it surely impressed my buddies at school ,...and my girl friend at the time, loved the plush carpeting and soft leather upholstery. The exterior colour was a smokey green,....beautiful car. So, I really liked this series of videos and thank you for putting them here on RU-vid.
At least Roots learned from GM's mistakes with the Corvair's rear suspension. But, it seems that both cars were doomed by high productions costs due to their uniqueness. If rear-engine cars had taken off in the marketplace, it might have been different, but the layout had too many limitations for anything more than a niche market. I don't know if Imps ever had air conditioning, but with a Corvair, you could either have AC or a turbocharger, not both, and when the USA required an air-injection-reactor in 1968, you couldn't have either. VW seemed to have the most powerful, luxurious, modern rear-engine car imaginable with the 411, but it couldn't compete with front engine cars in terms of raw power for the buck. All of these cars were really cleverly disguised "poor man's [or women's] Porsches".
My first car was the Singer chamois. Used to eat minis ( after I modified the suspension at the rear and bigger wheels) but it ran out of fuel on steep hills in the lakes and the heater never worked loved it
@@jackkruese4258 Not really, no. Rootes stuff was always a cut above UK Ford, Vauxhall, and BMC/BL. They just weren't popular enough to make it. As always, marketing rules the day.
@@jakekaywell5972 most of the cars from this era are forgotten today for the same reason....besides would anyone consider the Imp a cut above anything ?
@@jackkruese4258 The Imp was actually a cut above its intended competition, the Austin/Morris Mini. It was the first British mass-produced car engine to have its block and cylinder head cast in aluminum, be rear-engined, and to use a diaphragm spring clutch. It also incorporated many design features which were uncommon in cars until the late 1970s, such as a folding rear bench seat, automatic choke and gauges for temperature, voltage and oil pressure. The only thing that let it down was government interference, as the British government forced the Rootes group to build its new factory for the Imp in Linwood, Scotland. This is an area formerly known for shipbuilding, so of course they'd have trouble with cars.
@@jakekaywell5972 Oh boy the Imp a cut above it’s intended competition, never thought of that, well if you insist on that I won’t argue with you. I was aware of the industrial problems with building the damn things though. Admittedly I was born in 1970 and I only remember them as they were getting older. My dad a Hillman Avenger, abt 1978 and it was not a bad car certainly better than the Imp in my opinion. But the Imp was definitely no VW Golf slayer.
