1960's Viking Conquest

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
OP
OP
Illaveago

Illaveago

Guru
I have freed up the rear derailleur, it was seized up but after some 3 in 1 and a bit of manipulation. A bit more de rusting and polishing of the frame. Here it is in the sunshine looking all nice and shiny .

IMGP1211.JPG


IMGP1209.JPG
 
OP
OP
Illaveago

Illaveago

Guru
I found some useful information last night on the net . On The Drops. Nimrod . Road Tests of classic British cycles from the Cycling Weekly .
The road test for the Viking Conquest was published on May 31st 1961. The model they road tested was so new that they hadn't had the Conquest transfers for it . It was interesting to read that the model came with the new to Britain Huret Allvit rear derailleur a MK2 version as it was beefed up by the addition of steel frame . The test also said that the frames came with Nervex lugs .
So it would seem that the earliest date for my bike would be around 1961 .
 
OP
OP
Illaveago

Illaveago

Guru
It was slow progress today . More de rusting on the pedals cranks and head set . I also did some work on the wheel nuts and saddle frame rails. Those are cleaning up quite well despite being covered in brown rust . I will have to drill the rivets off so that I can glue some leather underneath the saddle to repair some splits . I need to find some copper rivets .
 

Cycleops

Legendary Member
Location
Accra, Ghana
That is according to one set of statistics. If you were to ask what the price of a Mini was then as it would be now you would get from £470 to £6,400. If you were to base it on the standards of quality and workmanship then to now you would be talking of thousands of pounds.
The case of the Mini is an interesting one. After its huge sales success Ford took one and tore it down to cost it. BMC were making a loss on every one it sold.
 
The case of the Mini is an interesting one. After its huge sales success Ford took one and tore it down to cost it. BMC were making a loss on every one it sold.

And it wasn't a small loss, either... There was a certain deliberateness about it, because it undercut most of their competitors. Flip side, if they'd sold them at cost, they'd have hardly shifted any because they would have been perceived as being far too expensive despite being far superior to the Ford Anglia and Hillman Imp.

Superbly engineered little things though, so damn innovative in so many ways. But then, seeings that she's owned by one, muggins here is kind of biased. :blush:
 
OP
OP
Illaveago

Illaveago

Guru
The case of the Mini is an interesting one. After its huge sales success Ford took one and tore it down to cost it. BMC were making a loss on every one it sold.

It is the way in which accountants work . The Mini carried the main development costs of later BMC cars. The transverse engine layout was first used on the Mini and I think so was the hydrolastic suspension . The engine and gearbox in one unit one above the other was a clever idea.
I started off working in a Ford main dealer. You should have heard all of the criticism about the car's back in the 70's. Funny thing is that we had a reunion the other day and one of the old mechanics now has a classic mini and likes it . :laugh:
By the way I have had 2 minis and had fun in them . I have also had a Metro but I preferred my mini.
Had a few original minis in my time as have an awful lot of people

Watched them rust away in front of your eyes

Most cars did in those days . Vauxhalls and especially Italian cars .
 
With the Italian cars, that was down to the contract their government had to buy Soviet steel. It was cheaper, but it was sh*te. Bottom line was, the Soviet system was all about hitting production targets (looks good in propaganda), and corners were cut.

Minis are the most fun you'll have in a car while keeping to the speed limit, they're just so wonderfully chuckable. ^_^
 
Top Bottom