THE SINGER JUNIOR
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
THE SINGER JUNIOR
Sir,
I really must take up the cudgels in defence of the Singer “Junior,” which you damn with faint praise. Having run my 1931 saloon for five years I feel I can speak with some authority, and I have nothing but praise for it.
A friend of mine bought it. in 1941, when it had 19,000 miles on the clock, and was in excellent condition. Between us we put the mileage up to the region of 60,000, and I think the only involuntary stop of any serious nature which either of us had was when the timing chain tensioner packed up. Even this did not matter unduly, as retiming was a simple affair. I ran it for about a month in that state, having to retime every time I switched off the engine ! My record time was 7i minutes! Try that over on a modern.
I never found the road holding good, but it improved after fitting a set of Hartfords. Steering was good, but tyre pressures were vital ; 261b. per square inch front, and 28 lb. rear was about right, but any lower pressure in the rear provoked a Suicidal overstear.
Brakes were none too good, owing, I think, to expansion of the unflanged drums. However, one had an excellent four-speed box to slOw down with if necessary. The box really was good, and I do not think a drop from 5.25 to 7.96 (I speak from memory) is unduly large for the size and type of car. Anyway, I could always wipe the floor with Ford Eights and Tens on a local “one-inairier,” which brought me down to third, but Dagenham products to second !
The. aluminium body was roomy and well equipped, if somewhat queer in appearance, and altogether, if I was offered the choice between a ” Junior ” and any other semi-vintage small car, I should not hesitate to choose the former. I am, Yours, etc.,
Wolverhampton. J. COOMBES. * * *