Internal combustion engines founded in GBR and car industry collapse

[user079622]

I try to find which ICE engines founded in GBR.

I find Perkins, Lister
In car industry I read all GBR cars have other's engines(BMW..), along the way why British car industry collapse?
Any other brands?

 

[Baluncore]

What is GBR ?

 

[user079622]

What is GBR ?

You never heard for Great Britain?

 

[Baluncore]

The use of the abbreviation only, lacks context.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GBR

 

[Baluncore]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Engine_manufacturers_of_the_United_Kingdom

+ Rover + Land Rover + Nuffield + BMC.

 

[Baluncore]

The UK car industry collapsed in the 1970s because the class structure in Britain paid mechanics and labourers low wages. UK designed cars were expensive and higher quality, but labour-intensive. When labour costs rose in the 1970s, it became uneconomic to build and maintain UK designed cars. Labour strikes in the 1970s disrupted production. There has always been somewhere that can make it cheaper, by paying lower wages, then wages rise, and so the car industry moves on. The sequence has been something like: Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, Malaysia, China, India, ...

Beginning in the late 1960s, overseas exports of UK manufactured vehicles were reduced by Japanese competition. That was done using clever accounting principles. The Japanese production lines, built cars for Japan and depreciated the line equipment during the day. At night, Japan built cars for export, without the cost of depreciation. That artificially reduced the cost of cars for export, without it appearing to be dumping.

 

[Vanadium 50]

What is GBR ?

Guaranteed Bit Rate. Guided Bone Regeneration. Please...no context! It will spoil the fun!

 

[user079622]

The UK car industry collapsed in the 1970s because the class structure in Britain paid mechanics and labourers low wages. UK designed cars were expensive and higher quality, but labour-intensive. When labour costs rose in the 1970s, it became uneconomic to build and maintain UK designed cars. Labour strikes in the 1970s disrupted production. There has always been somewhere that can make it cheaper, by paying lower wages, then wages rise, and so the car industry moves on. The sequence has been something like: Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, Malaysia, China, India, ...

Beginning in the late 1960s, overseas exports of UK manufactured vehicles were reduced by Japanese competition. That was done using clever accounting principles. The Japanese production lines, built cars for Japan and depreciated the line equipment during the day. At night, Japan built cars for export, without the cost of depreciation. That artificially reduced the cost of cars for export, without it appearing to be dumping.

How do you know all that if you dont know what is GBR?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Engine_manufacturers_of_the_United_Kingdom

+ Rover.

Rover exist?

What is with Jaguar and Land rover, who make their engines?

 

[Baluncore]

How do you know all that if you dont know what is GBR?

Because I left the UK in 1965, when some cars had a GB sticker.

GBR must be some new code, that I am now too old to accept.
I ignore most TLAs.
Is GBR retrospective? Does it cover the period in the UK before 1970.

If you do not identify clearly the abbreviations you use, I will not risk investing the time needed to reply.

 

[BillTre]

Guaranteed Bit Rate. Guided Bone Regeneration. Please...no context! It will spoil the fun!

 

[Vanadium 50]

I don't know about "GBR", but "Great Britain" is not a synonym for the "United Kingdom" whose full name is the "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland".

I don't know why the OP is making this distinction. That excludes the Delorean, for example. I don't recall where the TR7 was built - I wanted to love that car, but, well, let's just say that some companies looked at the reliability and quality of American cars of that era and said "Why?" Triumph asked "Why not?"

 

[user079622]

I don't know about "GBR", but "Great Britain" is not a synonym for the "United Kingdom" whose full name is the "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland".

GB and GBR are used instead of UK in some international codes to refer to the United Kingdom, including the Universal Postal Union, international sports teams, NATO, and the International Organization for Standardization country codes ISO 3166-2 and ISO 3166-1 alpha-3, whilst the aircraft registration prefix is G.

In sports always write GBR near British flag and they call country Great Britain(even this is just island) not United kingdom of.....

 

[Baluncore]

The video in the previous post is not available in my country.

Rover exist?

What is with Jaguar and Land rover, who make their engines?

Your OP title, and that question are ambiguous. The industry collapsed in the UK half a century ago. Many names were once companies, building their own engines, but have now become brands, owned by international corporations using one design.

1. In the OP title, does "founded" refer to the engine block and crankshaft "casting process" in a foundry, or to the "original corporate start" of engine design and manufacture in the UK.

2. Are you asking who designed, or who built, the engines?
3. Are you asking about now, or the period 50 to 100 years ago?

4. Do you use the code "GBR" retrospectively, before its first standardisation in or after 1974?
5. Did standardisation have anything to do with the collapse of the ICE industry in the UK?

 

[hutchphd]

Are you implying that having 43 different kinds of screw threads is not a good thing? Piffle...

 

[Baluncore]

Are you implying that having 43 different kinds of screw threads is not a good thing? Piffle...

Standardisation has caused more unemployment, and loss of national industry, than any other change in the last century.

 

[hutchphd]

What does the term mean? Perhaps I misunderstand.

 

[Baluncore]

What does the term mean? Perhaps I misunderstand.

What term?
The term of your imprisonment?

 

[hutchphd]

@Baluncore I'm a lifer. Standardisation

 

[Baluncore]

Standardisation has certainly reduced costs to the end-user and driven economies, but it has also forced a flat playing field onto the global economy. It has eliminated industries from some nations, that are now totally reliant on the good-will of others. The savings in costs arise from not employing locals, hence the unemployment and loss of diversity.

 

[hutchphd]

But the lack of standardization would mean that my computer (and all of its integrated circuits ) would need to be built by Ralph's "pretty good circuit shop" down at the corner. This might impede Moore's Law by a factor (or two). Of course I am not in the UK, but I happilly have two sets of wrenches for my variety of stuff. But the computer might suffer.
The world is not flat. I understand the sentiment, but the cost of local flattening is higher than I wish to endure.

 

[berkeman]

Are you implying that having 43 different kinds of screw threads is not a good thing? Piffle...

Standardisation has caused more unemployment, and loss of national industry, than any other change in the last century.

What does the term mean? Perhaps I misunderstand.

What term?
The term of your imprisonment?

@Baluncore I'm a lifer. Standardisation

Standardisation has certainly reduced costs to the end-user and driven economies, but it has also forced a flat playing field onto the global economy. It has eliminated industries from some nations, that are now totally reliant on the good-will of others. The savings in costs arise from not employing locals, hence the unemployment and loss of diversity.

But the lack of standardization would mean that my computer (and all of its integrated circuits ) would need to be built by Ralph's "pretty good circuit shop" down at the corner. This might impede Moore's Law by a factor (or two). Of course I am not in the UK, but I happilly have two sets of wrenches for my variety of stuff. But the computer might suffer.
The world is not flat. I understand the sentiment, but the cost of local flattening is higher than I wish to endure.

I'm getting dizzy. I tried to click my Mentor lock-the-thread button, and missed. So dizzy...

 

[Astronuc]

Standardisation has certainly reduced costs to the end-user and driven economies, but it has also forced a flat playing field onto the global economy. It has eliminated industries from some nations, that are now totally reliant on the good-will of others. The savings in costs arise from not employing locals, hence the unemployment and loss of diversity.

Or perhaps automation, and commodity prices to make automobiles affordable.

Not too many folks can afford a custom, hand-made car for $/£100k - $/£1+ M.

 

[russ_watters]

Are you implying that having 43 different kinds of screw threads is not a good thing? Piffle...

Standardisation has caused more unemployment, and loss of national industry, than any other change in the last century.

Or perhaps automation, and commodity prices to make automobiles affordable.

Not too many folks can afford a custom, hand-made car for $/£100k - $/£1+ M.

I see several true facts/no falsehoods and I'll note the lack of explicitly stated value judgement in the second and third posts, while saying I agree with the first and implied judgement in the third. Yup, a mess of different standards creates jobs/work to be done and in my value judgement that's not a good thing. It's an inefficient/wasteful use of valuable worker resources and consumer money.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Are you implying that having 43 different kinds of screw threads is not a good thing? Piffle...

My French colleagues remind me that the difference between France and the US is that the US has dozens of nuclear reactor designs and one kind of cheese.

 

[user079622]

Your OP title, and that question are ambiguous. The industry collapsed in the UK half a century ago. Many names were once companies, building their own engines, but have now become brands, owned by international corporations using one design.

Which companies in United Kingdom of Great Britain and North Ireland(homeland of Mr. Bean, Isac Newton and James Bond) made their own engines?

1. In the OP title, does "founded" refer to the engine block and crankshaft "casting process" in a foundry, or to the "original corporate start" of engine design and manufacture in the UK.

Second

2. Are you asking who designed, or who built, the engines?
3. Are you asking about now, or the period 50 to 100 years ago?

2. Both
3. from car industry beginning until today, last 100years..

4. Do you use the code "GBR" retrospectively, before its first standardisation in or after 1974?

I am using this code from time since Romans called that island Britannia.

5. Did standardisation have anything to do with the collapse of the ICE industry in the UK?

Standardisation of what?

 

[Baluncore]

Which company in United Kingdom of Great Britain and North Ireland made their own engines?

The link in post #5 answered that question.

 

[user079622]

The link in post #5 answered that question.

So Aston Martin, Jaguar, Rover, Land Rover, Lotus,Mclaren,Rollce Roys,Bentley etc never made their own engines for production cars?

 

[Baluncore]

So Aston Martin, Jaguar, Rover, Land Rover, Lotus,Mclaren,Rollce Roys,Bentley etc never made their own engines for production cars?

Where did you get that idea?
Most of those made their own engines at some time.
There are too many manufacturers, making too many models, over too many years, to give a simple answer.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_car_manufacturers_of_the_United_Kingdom

 

[PeroK]

Standardisation has caused more unemployment, and loss of national industry, than any other change in the last century.

When I was working in IT, I proposed writing a paper (for internal consumption within the company I worked for) on the disadvantages of over-standardisation, but was advised against it. And so the corporate juggernaut trundled on.

 

[user079622]

What standardisation you are talking about?

 

[Baluncore]

What standardisation you are talking about?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standards_organization

 

[user079622]

How much Brexit has to do that UK economics is falling down?

 

[berkeman]

Let's be careful not to digress into a political discussion... Thanks.

 

[Vanadium 50]

The UK car industry collapsed in the 1970s

Brexit

I think one can safely conclude that the UK car collapse was not caused by something that happened 50 years later.

 

[OmCheeto]

I'm a bit confused.
Compared to the rest of the world, UK vehicle production seems to have been quite stable over the last 73 years.

ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_motor_vehicle_production

 

[Baluncore]

Compared to the rest of the world, UK vehicle production seems to have been quite stable over the last 73 years.

But if you increase the scale, you will see a significant fall through the 1970s.

 

[user079622]

I think one can safely conclude that the UK car collapse was not caused by something that happened 50 years later.

I talk in general, because UK economics fall after leave EU.

Let's be careful not to digress into a political discussion... Thanks.

But this is general forum

 

[OmCheeto]

But if you increase the scale, you will see a significant fall through the 1970s.

One man's 'significant fall' is another man's 'correction from a bubble'. It doesn't look bad to me at all. Just normal fluctuations, IMHO.

Not sure about the UK, but I've noticed a huge rise in the number of electric scooters here in the colonies. I've actually been researching buying one as traffic is so bad here that a scooter would probably make it much easier to get to the market and back. I suspect global vehicle production will go down for quite some time. And with it, the UK's numbers.

 

[berkeman]

But this is general forum

Doesn't matter. Political discussions are against the PF rules, and you wouldn't want to break any rules here, would you?

 

[Baluncore]

It doesn't look bad to me at all. Just normal fluctuations, IMHO.

Cars built in the UK prior to 1980 were UK designed.
During the 1970s, imports began to displace local production.
The bubble that burst, was the manufacture in the UK, of UK designed cars.

Take a look at; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Dagenham
It no longer assembles vehicles, but it builds diesel engines for use overseas in Ford and Mazda vehicle plants. In the statistics, engines are not counted as vehicles manufactured, until the VIN is issued outside the UK.

 

[user079622]

https://www.carlogos.org/british-car-brands/

 

[user079622]

Are Brits really lazy like video suggest, what are their work habits?

I know Germans and Japanese in person, they are like robots, these type of mind set is ideal for success..

 

[Baluncore]

There is some truth in all the points made, but there cannot be only one reason why it collapsed. They all played a part.

It takes a decade to build a new efficient factory, and to start volume production. Germany and Japan were forced to do that after WWII. Meanwhile, Britain used its old inefficient infrastructure and worn machines, during those 10 years to increase sales, but that all began to collapse, when it had to compete, in the international market, with the newly tooled up Germany and Japan. Japan only lost the first physical battle in their claimed 'hundred year economic war'.

If new machines being installed in British factories would last for 25 years, then they could only be depreciated at 4% PA. Overseas manufacturers used shorter, or zero depreciation schedules to build new factories. There was no incentive for the British to invest in building new factories in Britain, but overseas companies could lease-lend equipment, at low foreign depreciation rates, to their subsidiaries in Britain. The principle weapon, used for international economic warfare, is dynamically changing economic factors.

To compete in the international market requires a dynamically levelled playing field. Over the last 20 years in Australia, we have lost the last of the car industry. Depreciation rates have responded by falling from 25 years, down to 3 years, and for many things, can be written off the books in the year of purchase. That tells us something about the financial agility needed by a company, to survive in the competitive world market.

British production workers did not stop long for tea and biscuits during the day. If management had paid a fair living wage, and provided a safe workplace, the skilled workers would not have left the industry, and those who stayed would not have gone on strike. The inefficiency of the old industrial structure, caused management to underpay and exploit the workforce, in a failed attempt to survive. The 'British owned' factories could not be rebuilt economically, so the fate of the British owned industry was sealed.

 

[user079622]

There is some truth in all the points made, but there cannot be only one reason why it collapsed. They all played a part.

It takes a decade to build a new efficient factory, and to start volume production. Germany and Japan were forced to do that after WWII. Meanwhile, Britain used its old inefficient infrastructure and worn machines, during those 10 years to increase sales, but that all began to collapse, when it had to compete, in the international market, with the newly tooled up Germany and Japan. Japan only lost the first physical battle in their claimed 'hundred year economic war'.

If new machines being installed in British factories would last for 25 years, then they could only be depreciated at 4% PA. Overseas manufacturers used shorter, or zero depreciation schedules to build new factories. There was no incentive for the British to invest in building new factories in Britain, but overseas companies could lease-lend equipment, at low foreign depreciation rates, to their subsidiaries in Britain. The principle weapon, used for international economic warfare, is dynamically changing economic factors.

To compete in the international market requires a dynamically levelled playing field. Over the last 20 years in Australia, we have lost the last of the car industry. Depreciation rates have responded by falling from 25 years, down to 3 years, and for many things, can be written off the books in the year of purchase. That tells us something about the financial agility needed by a company, to survive in the competitive world market.

British production workers did not stop long for tea and biscuits during the day. If management had paid a fair living wage, and provided a safe workplace, the skilled workers would not have left the industry, and those who stayed would not have gone on strike. The inefficiency of the old industrial structure, caused management to underpay and exploit the workforce, in a failed attempt to survive. The 'British owned' factories could not be rebuilt economically, so the fate of the British owned industry was sealed.

In comments below of my video, people also write that engineering was poor, car was not realiable, failed all the time...etc

 

[Baluncore]

In comments below of my video, people also write that engineering was poor, car was not realiable, failed all the time...etc

That must be partly true of all cheap cars built anywhere.

"Failed all the time" is an emotional exaggeration. The parts were available, at low cost, so it was repaired several times, and the car was not replaced. There is a tradeoff between purchase price, fuel economy, reliability, and the cost of repair.

Over-engineering of cars is also a bad thing, because it increases design and manufacturing costs. Rovers were well-designed, but more expensive, a professional's car. Rolls-Royce were reliable, but very expensive and costly to run, an aristocrat's car.

 

[user079622]

@Baluncore

People from outside dont understand how such a big strategic mistakes can happen to one nation, ruining biggiest car industry in Europe, now Brexit ....

 

[Baluncore]

People from outside dont understand how such a big strategic mistakes can happen to one nation, ruining biggiest car industry in Europe, now Brexit ....

Who are those misinformed "people from outside" ?

Brexit is politics, so has more than two sides. For example, three times now, Britain has worked with the USA, to end a war in Europe. There was WWI, WW2 and then the Cold War. Maybe it is better for Europe, that Britain is somewhat separated from Europe, because based on history, it is happening now, and is probably going to happen again.

Britain survived alone through 1939-40. It provided the base for the USA, that ended the German Third Reich. Britain was totally exhausted by that fight. The British car industry was the oldest in Europe, its collapse was triggered by the economic instability following WWII. If the German blitzkrieg had done more damage to the British car industry, then in the long term, the outcome for the British industry might have been different. Rebuilding German industry after WWII was critically important for Europe then, and now. The USA assisted German reconstruction after the war, it did not support Britain economically. It could be said that the British car industry was sacrificed for stability in Europe. Don't blame the British for Europe's mistakes.

 

[berkeman]

Thread closed temporarily for Moderation...

 

[berkeman]

Are Brits really lazy like video suggest, what are their work habits?

After a brief Mentor discussion, this thread is too political and will remain closed.