Page 1 of 1

Gearbox tail housing

Posted: Sat Jan 23, 2016 11:10 am
by Chicken Hawk
In the process off checking over the Marina and have noticed that I'm missing the small detent spring, plunger and cap. Can snyone please tell me what other cars share the same gearbox tail housing so I can order replacements. I can remember its triumphs but what models? Thanks :-D

Re: Gearbox tail housing

Posted: Sat Jan 23, 2016 11:20 am
by MarinaCoupe
Spitfire 1500, Tr7 4 speed, Dolomite 1850 (not Sprint).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: Gearbox tail housing

Posted: Mon Jan 25, 2016 6:38 am
by Chicken Hawk
Cheers Chris..

Re: Gearbox tail housing

Posted: Sun Jun 15, 2025 9:11 pm
by henrydedrick
Don"t forget the MG Midget, 1975-1979. Due to rationalization, it had the same basic engine, and same trans as the Spitfire(no OD option tho). Rationalization, is that a Brit euphamism?

Re: Gearbox tail housing

Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2025 11:49 am
by MarinaCoupe
henrydedrick wrote: Sun Jun 15, 2025 9:11 pm Don"t forget the MG Midget, 1975-1979. Due to rationalization, it had the same basic engine, and same trans as the Spitfire(no OD option tho). Rationalization, is that a Brit euphamism?
Kinda - The pre-1975 Midget gearbox was a hangover from the days of the Austin A40 and the Morris Minor. The low volume Midget had always used mechanical parts from other higher volume cars in the BMC/BL stable, e.g. the entire front suspension had been adopted from the Austin A30/A35/A40, it’s all about economies of scale. The last A40 Farina was built in 1967 and the last Morris Minor in 1971, so by 1975 it wasn’t economic to continue to build a low volume gearbox, when a more modern high volume gearbox was available.

The engine choice is less obvious as the Marina carried on with the A series in one form or another until 1984. The key was that the Triumph 1500 unit could already pass US Federal smog regulations, whereas the A Series couldn’t without a lot of new development effort. The US was the biggest market for both the MG Midget and the Triumph Spitfire, so it was “rational” to use an existing compliant inline engine rather than spend a load of money working on an engine to make it US compliant.

Another phrase for “rationalisation” is/was “shoe-string budget”.