They both had the same diff, and gearbox.

Tim

_________________
1951 Morris Commercial J Type Van
1955 BSA C11G
1961 Morris Mini Traveller
1969 Triumph TR6R
1977 Leyland Moke Californian

It's pretty harsh to compare 1100's to 1275's when they are no longer stock - changes in cam profile especially can drastically affect fuel consumption.

For a true picture why not compare the fuel consumption of say, a mini K to a 1275GT in the UK or an Aussie 1275LS - they have more-or-less the same engine spec, and I think you'll find the consumption figures pretty damn close...

cheers,

Jacob

_________________
'72 Clubman Van - 1022cc, 295 head, 731 cam - Daily Driver
'69 Morris 1100 S - Dinged by a bus, in shed under repair
'64 Morris 1100 - Early 1100, long term project

Thats exactly what I was saying. That the fuel consumption between both motors was pretty close. I was also saying that it was because the 1275 didn't have to work as hard to do the same thing.

I also then said that the 1275 becaame thirstier when it was driven hard but the bottom line was that in conservative city and suburban driving it was pretty damn close.

Mike

I once had a stock 1100 in a Moke and from memory (it was a very long time ago) it got about 26 mpg on the open road. It was then modified and had similar output to a stock 1275, in that form it got about 25 mpg (only very mild mods). A 1275 (stock) was fitted and am now getting around 43 mpg......as well as being way nicer to drive.

_________________

In a Moke, I'm not surprised. Most of the power produced to move a car at highway speeds is used to push air aside, so a Moke is going to fare really badly with an 1100 from a fuel economy point of view. A big bore will get much better fuel economy because it's not as stressed.

_________________
Simon

The adventures of an owner builder in the Tallarook Ranges