Talk:British Motor Corporation

Is de-mergers an actual term in use for this process? I would have said spun-off or sold off. Rmhermen 00:07, Oct 16, 2003 (UTC)

Don't know. "Sell-offs" if you like. But not "spin-offs" - I think that's when you have a small unit that grows and is then made independent - e.g university spin-off companies. Andy G 00:20, 16 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Your help requested

The Mini article is in the Wikipedia:Peer review process - perhaps heading towards Featured Article status. I would greatly appreciate experts on BMC taking a look at it. (If you find a problem, please either fix it or post your concerns on the Talk:Mini page. TIA SteveBaker 20:50, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BMC commercials/trucks

Suggest that there should be some discussion on the truck and LCV line, it wasn't just cars.

The BMC name is still used by BMC at Izmir, Turkey, who manufacture a range of trucks and LCVs using this tradename. Originally the vehicles were derivatives of the UK designs, but since BMC Turkey left BLMC, in 1983 or thereabouts, they have developed their own range. BMC are a strong player in Turkey, and export into Africa, ME and CARs.

I have added a list of the commercials I know of. There could be more.Malcolma 09:01, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Project number list

In the project number list, we have the ADO number linked as well as (and separately from) the corresponding model name. In every case I looked at (which was admittedly not all of them) the ADO link was simply a redirect to the article on the model name...except for the cases where nobody had created a redirect - so we got a redlink.

We need to either create all of those additional redirects - (in which case it's kinda redundant to have the ADO number be a link as well as the name) - or we should not have the ADO's be links.

SteveBaker 13:50, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, and as there have been no objections I have taken out the links to ADO pages that either do not exist or do not have a redirect and also corrected the FX4 Taxi link. Malcolma 08:29, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK - now, without the redlinks, it's possible to see that we still have a messy situation were some ADO numbers are redirected to articles named after the car and other cars have no ADO redirect. There is still no point in linking to both from this article since it just makes the table look messy.

So should we:

Go ahead and create all of those missing ADO redirect pages?
Remove the existing ADO redirect pages?
Just stop linking redundantly to both the ADO redirect *and* the page it redirects to?
Both (1) and (3)

Any one of those things would clean things up nicely. IMHO, both (1) and (3) need to be done. SteveBaker 11:53, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

1 and 3 is good - bearing in mind that many enthusiasts refer to the models by the most common design code as a form of disambiguation. Meanwhile non-experts may only remember the model name from the brochures. --D.C.Rigate 21:18, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

YDO numbers?!?

On this website [1] (the Cambridge-Oxford owners club), they say that the ADO40 (the Wolseley 24/80 or ADO40) was also numbered 'YDO 3'. What the heck is that all about? Was there another set of 'Design Office' numbers - in which case, what does the 'Y' stand for? Enquiring minds want to know! SteveBaker 15:12, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Within BMC, BMH and British Leyland, there were actually several design number sequences due to reasons including, but not limited to: each absorbed company retaining a degree of independence, reorganizations due to changes of the percieved future range, Pocket personal empires, or vehicles designed for specialised purposes (such as Crash safety, Jet propulsion, military vehicles, etc) Mergers or other managment changes also resulted in changes in a design code's designation. As to the ADO40 specifically, I'm not sure. --D.C.Rigate 21:10, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]