Regarding the letter of C. R. Langley in your October ’63 issue. If Mr. Langley used a measuring tape instead of his imagination he would find that the exaggerated attitude that he claims the Morris 1100 adopts with rear end load and under braking does not occur. Having measured it under a variety of conditions some significant facts are as follows:
1. The car is substantially horizontal in the empty condition. This shows that the manufacturers know the back does not sag unduly under load otherwise they would arrange for it to be slightly tail high in the empty condition (which almost all manufacturers resort to with “normal” cars).
2.With two people in the front and two in the rear, the rear-end over the wheels is 3/4 in. lower than the front end over the wheels. With 100 lb. load in the boot as well as the four adult passengers the rear-end over the wheels is 1.4 in. lower than the front end measured over the wheels. This is in no way excessive, quite the contrary in fact.
3. Trailing rear arms counteract the nose-diving tendency under braking of any car and in the case of the 1100 does it to a large degree.
The avoidance of an excessive pitch attitude which is the case with some other designs using interconnected wheel suspensions has been achieved by B.M.C. in a variety of novel ways. It will take most people far more than the few minutes that Mr. Langley claims make it all painfully obvious, to sort it out, if they ever do.
Dunstable. H. J. R. Balderson.