10 Euro cars that were better than their British rivals

The ’70s wasn’t a great time for UK marques…

Not every car to come out of Britain in the 1970s was a disaster, but the combination of an outdated manufacturing sector, industrial unrest and the British Leyland debacle certainly made it look like that.

Over on the Continent, things were much more rosy, with French, German and Italian marques in particular turning out many brilliant models.

The result? If he or she had any sense, the savvy ’70s car buyer looked to Europe rather than the UK for their automotive thrills. Here are 10 examples of an unfair motoring match-up.

1. Alfa Romeo Alfasud vs Austin Allegro

The Allegro (pictured) was the front-drive, ‘high tech’ 1100/1300 replacement that BL hoped would take the family car fight to Europe.

Had Harris Mann’s sketches been less compromised it might have ended up as pretty as the Alfasud, an all-new design built in a new factory.

But looks were only the beginning of the Allegro’s problems, particularly in comparison with the Alfa.

1. Alfa Romeo Alfasud vs Austin Allegro (continued)

The Boxer engine in the ’Sud (pictured) sang where the Allegro’s A- and E-Series donkeys croaked and wheezed: its slippery, superbly packaged Italdesign body was as well proportioned as the ADO67 was dumpy.

1. Alfa Romeo Alfasud vs Austin Allegro (cont.)

Dumpy, yes but not uniquely unattractive: for me the Allegro’s visual problems were its pinched nose and excessive ride height on Hydragas suspension.

High-tech on paper it underwhelmed on the road; where the Alfa got rave reviews for its benchmark chassis the Allegro, supposed inheritor of the great BMC tradition of making fine-handling saloons, rated only average. If that.

1. Alfa Romeo Alfasud vs Austin Allegro (cont.)

But, while it was nothing like as bad as the hindsight-benefiting pundits would have us believe, the tragedy of the Allegro was that it was the one car – the big-volume car – which Leyland really needed to get right.

By contrast, for a first attempt at a real mass-market car the Sud was masterful; shame about the rust.

2. Fiat 131 Mirafiori vs Morris Marina

The Fiat 131 (pictured) was the replacement for the 124 and while in no way a sensational vehicle, it was a masterclass in how to produce a traditional three-box, rear-drive, Cortina-sized family saloon for the mid 1970s.

2. Fiat 131 Mirafiori vs Morris Marina (cont.)

It had a good range of engines (including the 2-litre twin-cam), plus a very acceptable ride/handling compromise from a well-located solid rear axle. It also looked modern and efficient – which it was.

2. Fiat 131 Mirafiori vs Morris Marina (cont.)

This kind of austere and rational thinking had given birth to the 1971 Marina (pictured), a Cortina-baiting saloon rapidly conceived along strictly traditional lines.

Like the Fiat, the Marina used as many well-proven in-house components as possible, including Morris Minor front suspension complete with lever-arm dampers.

2. Fiat 131 Mirafiori vs Morris Marina (cont.)

Unfortunately, this was a step too far in the cause of ruthless cost-cutting, and resulted in deeply uninspiring handling; the Marina got equally poor notices for its noise levels and ride.

Designed to be easy to produce, easy to service and easy to sell (particularly to the increasingly important fleet market) somebody forgot the poor buggers who actually had to drive the things.

3. Renault 16 vs Austin Maxi

The first of the five-door hatchbacks, the 1965 Renault 16 (pictured) was a brilliantly conceived product that drew the first battle lines for the ’70s as to where the mid-sized saloon was heading.

It recognised that modern families required a vehicle that could ‘do everything’: its rear seats folded to make an estate-car-like load space or a makeshift bed.

3. Renault 16 vs Austin Maxi (cont.)

Front driven by an all-alloy four-cylinder engine, the 16 had long-travel torsion-bar suspension that acknowledged the then-poor state of French roads. The pay-off was lots of body roll but, like a 2CV, the R16 hung on.

The 16 duly enjoyed a well-deserved 15-year success that helped Renault put its rear-engined days firmly behind it – and true rivals were few and far between in the late ’60s and ’70s.

3. Renault 16 vs Austin Maxi (cont.)

Thus, BL had a perfect opportunity to topple the R16’s dominance in the ‘lifestyle’ family saloon stakes with the five-door, five-speed 1968 Maxi (pictured).

If anything, it had an even roomier and more easily adapted interior and a much lower load sill to recommend it – but not much else.

3. Renault 16 vs Austin Maxi (cont.)

Poor quality, gutless engines and a terrible cable-operated gearchange on the early cars tarnished its reputation: later 1750 variants were much better and the Maxi had a reasonable 12-year / 500,000-unit run, but found little acceptance outside of the UK.

4. Citroën CX vs Austin Princess

Not everyone considered the complication of the CX’s high-pressure braking system, sensitive power steering and hydropneumatic suspension worth the effort, but it was certainly one of the best looking and most comfortable European saloon cars and perceived as a worthy successor to the DS.

4. Citroën CX vs Austin Princess (cont.)

The Princess (pictured), launched as the Austin/Morris 18/22 series and Wolseley Six, was actually one of BL’s better efforts of the period: it was based around the sound-but-unappealing ‘Land crab’’s front-wheel-drive architecture but with a new, modern wedge-shaped body.

4. Citroën CX vs Austin Princess (cont.)

The Princess challenged the Citroën on roominess and comfort (thanks to Hydragas suspension and excellent seats), but rather blotted its copybook with driveshaft problems.

Yes, its engines – B-Series and 2200 E Series – were dated, but then so were the CX’s; and at least you had the option of a six-pot with the Princess.

4. Citroën CX vs Austin Princess (cont.)

Both were cars that looked as though they should have had a fifth door: that oversight was addressed when the Princess was relaunched, for a second time, as the short-lived Ambassador in 1982.

The BL wedge, a good effort in many respects, in the end simply lacked the panache of the CX or, indeed, any of its European rivals.

5. Fiat 127 / Renault 5 vs Mini

The Mini had no serious rivals for the first dozen years of its career.

Sales remained strong and, with its modest resources aimed at more pressing projects, there was little urgency within British Leyland for creating a more civilised version of this neat, nippy saloon, even in the face of opposition from European marques.

5. Fiat 127 / Renault 5 vs Mini (cont.)

The Fiat 127 (pictured) and Renault 5 were the first of the European ‘superminis’: cars that adopted the space-efficient, wheel-at-each-corner philosophy of the original British design, but took it half a class up in both overall size (the 127 was almost 2ft longer than a Mini Clubman) and refinement.

5. Fiat 127 / Renault 5 vs Mini (cont.)

In terms of ride, noise levels and crash worthiness they were much more grown-up cars. They also had more luggage space and, in the case of the Renault 5, that all-important third door.

In early 1-litre form both the 127 and the R5 somehow managed to return mpg figures equal to the 40mpg Mini, yet were faster cars overall.

5. Fiat 127 / Renault 5 vs Mini (cont.)

In the end, all the Mini had to offer was its still-remarkable handling and a certain timeless appeal.

UK buyers, a more staunchly patriotic breed when it came to cars in those days, stayed loyal to the lovable BL brick but, fondly mythologised as it is, the Mini was embarrassingly out-classed in the ’70s.

6. Mercedes-Benz 350SL vs Triumph Stag

The Triumph Stag was of course a much cheaper car than the notoriously expensive W107 Mercedes SL (pictured), yet both cars were aimed at a decadent and hedonistic section of the market not noted for its sensitivity to a stiff price tag.

6. Mercedes-Benz 350SL vs Triumph Stag (cont.)

You can’t help wondering that if Triumph had produced a faster, more thoroughly engineered version of this stylish open-topped 2+2 (and charged twice the price for it), they would have cleaned up. 

That would surely have been the case in North America, where its V8 engine, combined with a safety-conscious but stylishly integrated roll hoop, would have had a lot of appeal.

6. Mercedes-Benz 350SL vs Triumph Stag (cont.)

Sadly, as was so often the case with British Leyland, a good idea was undermined by poor execution: the Stag’s engine-overheating problems ruined the car’s reputation.

With hindsight it would have been easy to have used Rover’s bulletproof ex-Buick 3.5-litre V8, but inter-marque pride put a stop to that.

6. Mercedes-Benz 350SL vs Triumph Stag (cont.)

Instead the Stag’s premature demise in 1977 left the field clear for the Mercedes 350SL: a faster, stronger and much more reliable luxury sports car but, arguably, not such a pretty one. And with only two seats, not such a practical one, either.

7. BMW E12 5 Series vs Rover 3500 SD1 (cont.)

If, in many ways the Rover P6 (and its nemesis, the Triumph 2000) had invented the idea of the ‘young Executive’ car in the ’60s, it was BMW that perfected it in the ’70s, gaining strengthen and credibility with each new model, such as the 528 (pictured).

7. BMW E12 5 Series vs Rover 3500 SD1 (cont.)

By the time the 5 Series appeared in 1972 the Rover was still selling well, but looking somewhat dated.

Its eagerly awaited 1976 replacement, the five-door, shovel-nosed 3500 SD1 (pictured), should have been the car to beat the German opposition into retreat.

Cleverly rationalised compared to the complex, expensive-to-build P6 the almost all new SD1 was fast, high geared and surprisingly economical for a 126mph V8-engined five-seater.

7. BMW E12 5 Series vs Rover 3500 SD1 (cont.)

It was also practical, following the then-current fashion for five doors and folding seats that that Germans seemed resistant to adopt in their big cars.

The new Rover was in fact a shockingly modern saloon, but also shockingly built, its poor paint quality and shoddy interior trim only serving to highlight how carefully crafted the somewhat matronly looking BMW really was.

7. BMW E12 5 Series vs Rover 3500 SD1 (cont.)

In fact, other than the engine, there was nothing spectacularly good about the BMW 5 Series – and it was also much more expensive than the Rover, even in 2-litre four-cylinder 520 form.

With its responsive steering and impressive handling the Rover should have been a world beater. Instead, it squandered the marque’s reputation for excellence.

8. Lancia Beta vs Triumph Dolomite Sprint

The Dolomite Sprint (pictured) was a classic example of a great engine looking for a car; its clever, gutsy 16-valve, 127bhp ‘four’ always seemed slightly wasted in the Dolomite body.

Only a few of these units found their way into prototype TR7s, a more obvious home for an engine that could have made it a really good sports car.

8. Lancia Beta vs Triumph Dolomite Sprint (cont.)

It’s hard to believe they were still selling Sprints in 1980, by which time the age of the Volkswagen Golf GTi and its hot hatch imitators was already well underway.

In fact, the Dolly Sprint had already been left well behind by four-door, Euro sports saloons such as the Alfa Romeo Alfetta and the Lancia Beta (pictured) – the latter regarded as a class-leading car in its pre-rust-scandal days.

8. Lancia Beta vs Triumph Dolomite Sprint (cont.)

The Lancia was yet another booted ’70s car that looked like a hatch: instead of giving it a fifth door they supplemented the two-box Beta with the three-box Trevi (complete with its bizarre ‘swiss cheese’ facia design), while hatchback buyers were pointed towards Beta HPE, a sports estate faced on the Beta Coupé.

At the height of the Beta’s popularity in the late ’70s, Lancia outsold BMW in the UK market.

8. Lancia Beta vs Triumph Dolomite Sprint (cont.)

The Sprint, meanwhile, was far from a bad car: it was nicely finished and furnished, came with overdrive as standard on later models and was a genuinely quick saloon that was fun to drive on a smooth road. All told, it was a bright spot in the BL wilderness years.

9. Mercedes-Benz 450SEL vs Jaguar XJ12

Even the Germans quietly admitted that Jaguar’s single-overhead camshaft 5.3-litre V12 was the best production engine in the world: smoother and quieter than Stuttgart’s V8 and able to eclipse the 450SEL in terms of acceleration and top speed, at least until the 6.9 version arrived.

9. Mercedes-Benz 450SEL vs Jaguar XJ12 (cont.)

It was certainly hard to believe this svelte and low-slung super saloon was a product of the Leyland empire, or that on such limited funds Jaguar had been able to create a car that rode and handled better than the German opposition.

9. Mercedes-Benz 450SEL vs Jaguar XJ12 (cont.)

Painstakingly developed to give many years of reliable service, where the Mercedes S-Class scored was in terms of quality – in detail and overall – and in reliability, the Germans, unlike Jaguar, having long since got the durability of out-sourced components under control.

9. Mercedes-Benz 450SEL vs Jaguar XJ12 (cont.)

There was also a general sense of solidity about the S-Class, although it felt a less special experience than the Jaguar.

Odd to consider that mighty BMW, still wedded to 6-cylinder engines of a mere 3 litres, were not even in the ultimate saloon game at this point.

10. Volvo 145 / Peugeot 504 vs Triumph 2000 Estate

Peugeot had offered large load and family-carrying estate cars since the ’50s, but they didn’t make significant inroads into the British market until the 504 (pictured) in the early ’70s.

10. Volvo 145 / Peugeot 504 vs Triumph 2000 Estate (cont.)

BL’s offerings were limited to the miserable Marina wagon, the charmless five-door Maxi and the estate versions of its ageing Triumph 2000 (pictured) and 2.5PI.

In the mid ’60s this had been an innovative product; a good looking and luxurious estate car with all the prestige of its saloon counterpart.

10. Volvo 145 / Peugeot 504 vs Triumph 2000 Estate (cont.)

By that time, the big Volvos such as the 145 (pictured) were already well established and the Ford Granada estates were on the way.

All were rugged cars offering huge load space, acceptable performance and the sort of middle class prestige that today’s hideous SUVs exude.

10. Volvo 145 / Peugeot 504 vs Triumph 2000 Estate (cont.)

Ten years later there was still a surprisingly good market for the Triumph estate, which had never been built in huge numbers because the production process was more long winded.

In many ways its success showed there was a market for prestige estate car; Mercedes took note and built its ‘T’ series wagons from 1978.