Standard, although not among the largest of British car makers, did reasonably well in the the post war period, and even took over Triumph Automobiles in 1945. Eventually it was taken over by the expansive Leyland in 1960. So seeing a Standard car anywhere is now an event. Spotting what looks like a restorable Standard Vanguard should make a Curbivore stop.
The Vanguard was Standard’s mid-range offering, competing with the likes of the Hillman Minx, Austin Cambridge, Morris Oxford and early Vauxhall Victors – not the upmarket ‘executive’ market that Triumph invented with the its nominal successor the 2000 in 1963.
The first Vanguard (later known as Phase I) came in 1947, with a very distinctive swept tail design – not unlike a pre-war Chrysler, perhaps. The name was the same as the Royal Navy’s last battleship, HMS Vanguard , of 1944 – the Navy’s permission had to be obtained to use it, allegedly. It was deliberately chosen to give an image of strength and robustness, at home and in historically British territories overseas.
Wheelbase was 94 inches, in line with the contemporary Hillman Minx and a couple of inches shorter than an Austin A40 or a Vauxhall Velox.
Underneath, the Vanguard was, not surprisingly, more traditional than its looks suggested. The separate chassis had a live rear axle and leaf springs, with coil springs at the front. The engine was essentially that of the Ferguson tractor, the real money maker in the Standard catalogue, with all that that implies for smoothness and quietness.
Internally, the Vanguard offered a good package by contemporary standards, and the car was strong and well built. This was a key point for Standard – Australia, New Zealand and India, where durability in harsh conditions was key, were important markets. Remember this was the time of ‘export or die’, with as much production as possible exported to boost post war economic recovery.
From 1952, the Phase IA had a lower bonnet, wider rear window and other detail changes. Estate bodies and, outside the UK, pick-ups were now available as well.
In 1953, Standard showed the Phase 2 Vanguard. Mechanically unchanged and on the same chassis, it sported a new more conventional body in what we now call a ‘three box’ style, although changes in front of the rear doors were few. Boot capacity and passenger space were increased. From the side, it looked like a smaller version of the Rover P4; from the rear, it could have been a Rootes product, but from the front it was still clearly the same Vanguard.
The Phase III Vanguard of 1955 was a step-change from this now tired old configuration. The body was now a monocoque, with a sharp modern body that would not have disgraced Ford or Vauxhall, and the same 2 litre four now produced 68hp, with the option of a floor mounted four speed gearbox at last. Wheelbase was up by 8 inches, to 102.5 inch, matching the contemporary Vauxhall Velox and Ford Consul rather than the Hillman Minx. With the standard bench seats front and rear, this was, by British standards, a six seater, capable of over 80 mph – on paper, a very competitive product in the British market.
The Phase III lasted to 1958, and the range expanded to include a base model Standard Ensign – same body, less trim, 1670cc – and a performance focused Vanguard Sportsman (in relative terms – 90 hp, 90 mph and 19 seconds 0-60), which featured a grille that looked very like Rover’s.
The low spec Ensign variant was an attempt to bridge the gap in the range to the much smaller Standard Ten and Pennant, with an engine of just 1670cc.
From 1958, a facelifted Vanguard Phase III became the Standard Vanguard Vignale, with larger front and rear windscreens and revised grille and trim. The four on the floor became the standard, with the three on the tree an option; overdrive and automatic were options. This was a visually successful update, and the Vignale looked a good deal more modern than the Phase III.
Finally, there was the Standard Vanguard 6, using the 6 cylinder 2000cc engine destined for the upcoming Triumph 2000.
But time had run out for the Vanguard – modern competition from Ford, Vauxhall and Rootes showed up its dated underpinnings, and the money for a replacement was not available. Standard-Triumph sold the tractor business, invested the proceeds in the delightful but compromised Herald, and then sold itself to Leyland to fund the Triumph 2000 to replace the Vanguard with a very different product; by 1963, the Vanguard had faded away, and the Standard name went with it. It was never a big seller: over 16 years, including production in Australia and New Zealand, approximately 350,000 were built, fewer than half what Rootes did with the Minx alone.
This Phase III Vanguard was spotted in Polis, a small town on the west coast of Cyprus in May this year, parked up outside a family run taverna. It has clearly been here for sometime, but the dry hot climate appears to have treated it well. I was surprised by the all-over salmon pink colour, which is not the sort of colour I would have associated with a 1950s Vanguard, but its uniformity and matching interior suggest it probably is original.
Cyprus was a typical Standard market – part of the British Empire from 1878 to 1960, and needing sturdy no nonsense vehicles.
A country doesn’t enjoy / endure 80 years of British rule without picking up some of our habits – English is very widely spoken, and is the default language of the large and vibrant tourist industry, Cypriots drive on the left, and as well as many British visitors looking for sunshine, there is a large ex-pat community. And to this day, the RAF has two bases there, on British Sovereign territory – the Red Arrows train there, with the guaranteed 300 sunshine days per year being a bit more than the British average.
But the cars are no longer British – Japanese pick-ups have displaced most of the Land Rovers, and the rest is the usual European blend of German, French, Japanese and Korean, although I did spot a Massey Ferguson tractor, using the same engine as the Vanguard. And on the other end of the spectrum, the whole range of Triumph sports cars, from the TR2 through the TR4, also used the same engine, to considerable success.
In 1956, Standard introduced the Vanguard Sportsman, which used a twin-SU carb version making 90 hp; this engine was very similar to the TR3 engine, and made the Vanguard a very good performer for the times.
So finding a Standard Vanguard resting outside a taverna, slowing joining the undergrowth, was a pleasant surprise. It looks like a battery, a can of oil, a splash of four star petrol and a few cranks on the starting handle could have it going again. Who knows?
Related reading:
Storage Yard Classic: Standard Vanguard Vignale – The Rarest CC Find Yet? David Saunders
Great find. What an absolutely superb colour.
Agreed ;
.
A nice looking car with a lovely pastel color .
.
Who knows ? maybe some younger Family member will resurrect it .
.
-Nate
Neat! I’ve never even seen a picture of this one. A few of the plugugly Standard Tens made it to US streets. Too bad Standard didn’t push this model harder. It’s unoriginal (’54 Plyford) but nicely shaped and appears roomy inside. Might have competed with early Ramblers.
It fell into the Ford Consul Vauxhall Wyvern category mid size cars with poverty pack fours instead of the more popular six, the Standard eight andTen were a size smaller competing in the Morris Minor Ford Prefect category.
The Phase II must have looked pretty modern in the UK in ’55. The grille on the Sportsman isn’t entirely unlike the MG grilles on the Farina 1500/1600s.
Colours in the latter part of the ’50s were quite adventurous, perhaps as a reaction to all the Austerity the afflicted life from ’45 well into the ’50s.
Great find in a remarkable location. Perfect color for the spot!
I love these articles on the British brands.
The Vanguard 6 front end is very 56 Chrysler:
Thanks for the treat you’ve given us.
And that pictured Phase III front end is very ’53 Plymouth. Looks like Standard’s designers had one eye on Mopar in those days!
Great color on a car I knew very little about!
When I see one of these, I think “Gatsonides!”
It was actually Standard that took over the bankrupt Triumph company in 1945, not the other way round.
Standard was a fairly major player in the post-war years, and when they tooled-up for that new 2 litre engine, the SS Jaguar company bought their old machinery and used it to manufacture their XK engine.
Quite true, and so obvious that it slipped by me when I reviewed it. Fixed now.
Gap in my knowledge, actually, not Paul’s. You live and learn
Triumph tried but failed post war the Mayflower being a huge blunder ugly and underpowered and aimed at the US market but the equally raxor edge styled Reknown hung around untill 52 using that same Standard 2088cc Four
All of the postwar Triumph cars, including Mayflowers, were made under Standard ownership, not the prewar owners.
Peter Garnier, who was Sports Editor of Autocar magazine in the late 50s, managed to persuade Standard to sell him a one-off plain-looking Ensign saloon with a Triumph TR engine. “Q” cars were pretty rare in the UK in those days.
I’m a bit perplexed by that, since the 1956 Vanguard Sportsman came standard with a 90 hp twin-SU version of the four that was almost identical to the TR3’s; in fact it had slightly greater displacement, which would have given it a bit more torque. It did make 5hp less than the Vanguard, due to slightly different porting.
I remember seeing a photo of the Vanguard Sportsman when I was a lad, but I never saw an actual car, so it may have been short-lived. Either way, a TR-engined Ensign would have been less conspicuous and a great deal cheaper.
Not many old Vanguards about now the weak front suspension and chronic rust saw most of them off round here though the odd original can still be seen at shows, Utes were made in every body style not just the phase one model and it came in two wheelbases long as pictured and short known as a stumpy in OZ.
The engine is quite similar to the one used in early TEA Fergusons but absolutely is not the same at all, Ferguson began replacing Continental engines with the wet sleeve four from Standard in 1947, the phase one or ‘beetleback’ launched at a later date 48 if memory serves, very cramped inside with little luggage space the wagon version being much roomier, the phase two or ‘spacemaster’ was a better car for passengers and also had the gearshift moved to the left side of the steering column saving a lot of knuckles from bleeding being torn open on the quarter light window of the phase ones. The phase three was almost but not quite a modern car but it improved greatly when the twin carb six was inserted near the end of production, the fours though rugged were vbery slow even the sporting variety.
“The engine is quite similar to the one used in early TEA Fergusons but absolutely is not the same at all,”
Completely erroneous, matey. Not the same at all? Incorrect. It is the same engine. You bought the spin S-T put about at the time to muttering rotters, eager for free wet lunches, free baccy products, and the occasional all expenses-paid hotel stay at press intro for a new car model. S-T had the notion that if word got out about the origin as a tractor engine, the public would turn its collective nose up at the Vanguard. And everyone bought the scam sham.
Tell me, how many different engines do you think Standard could afford?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_wet_liner_inline-four_engine
So of course the engine was the same. Standard originally made the engine for Ferguson to power the tractors outside the North American market. Then used the identical block to make the engines for the Vanguards and TR2, 3 and 4 sportscars. Beng a wet liner design, it was easy to change bores and hence displacement. Instead of 3,000 rpm max in the tractor, well it was unleashed in the cars with better breathing, cams and carbs. But same engine. A big vibrator in the TRs, based on my youthful experiences. A Volvo B18 was in a different and better league, but the B16 was similar. Three main bearing crudo crankshafts.
The 1850 cc tractor engine was quite a bit better than the crappy TO20 Continental used on Fergusons in North America — the production castings of that wetliner engine are basic to say the least. But as Ferguson’s deal with Ford for engines fell through, and his innovative drawbar system meant huge North American sales were likely, and they DID materialize, Ferguson wisely chose to use a US engine to avoid cheesing off the US. It was not as good as the new Standard enginr — you should see one torn down, if you want a laugh. Try “Jamsi” machine shop 2024 Youtube videos for the horror.
Time to update the little grey cells, m’sieu. Sorry to be eight years late with my take. And of course, the biggest fib of the UK car industry was that the Imp engine was designed by Cpventry-Climax. In a pig’s eye. Its Chief Engineer was Leo Kuzmicki, Rootes employee of then recent Norton 500 engine and Vanwall F1 engine fame. Rootes was selling itself off to Chrysler at the time, and those guys recognized a star when they met one. Kuzmicki was off to Detroit in a hurry by ’64, so the Imp engine’s failings remained throughout its life into the late 1970s. No development to mitigate itsoverheating problems, nowt. PR spin led to the claim that Coventry Climax, who made fire-pump engines of aluminum and had some F1 fame in the early 1960s with the 1.5 litre V8, had designed the Imp engine. Sure and I’m a Martian, but the average punter bought the guff. Kuzmicki wrote an Institute of Mechanical Engineers paper on the design amd development of the Imp engine, and he was a Rootes employee. He acknowledges CC “help” but likely knew those guys across town in Coventry from his Vanwall F1 days. So why not seed a little white lie? Die-casting an Imp block was outside the expertise of C-C, which made sand cast alloy blocks in relatively small quantities. A scratch my back situation. Same deal with PR on the Standard Vanguard four cylinder throbber.
Spectacular colour – Standard having delusions of grandeur perhaps! My grandparents had a Phase I as their family car through the 1950s – I remember Mum saying the back seat was over the axle and the ride was consequently bouncy. Once they bought their ’59 Belvedere new, the Phase I became the runaround car. My Aunt’s parents had a Phase II, pale yellow, through the 1960s. There were a lot of the Phase III and Vignales still around in the 1980s as I was growing up; not many left now – although a local lawn-mowing contractor still drives a Phase III ute.
Anyway, an interesting and enjoyable read, thank you Big Paws.
A lovely colour, but not one that I remember. These Vanguards were all over the place in Australia in the fifties and sixties and had quite a reputation for toughness. The big four was much the same size as the Holden (and Zephyr, and Vauxhall) six, and for the Phase I and II much was made of the fact that they were on a proper chassis, unlike that new-fangled Holden.
Also, back in the fifties the local assembly plant had a habit of putting out frequent updates to the grille and chrome side trim, and even tacked on little tail fins.
http://www.australianstandardvanguard.net.au/history.html
As long as they were greased regularly and often they held together once that stopped however demise was imminent. yeah 2.1 litre four with lots of torque.
I’m a bit of a Triumph fan but didn’t know much about the company and it’s pre-Standard days….great write-up on that count. For some reason I always thought it was Triumph that acquired Standard and not vice versa.
Standard stylists must have been influenced by Chrysler styling….the only thing missing was fins.
BTW, my reference book says that the Vanguard Phase II was available as a convertible and a rare 2 door station wagon body style.
While I like this car (but especially like the pickup truck), I can’t imagine buying one over a Ford.
The Vanguard was designed by an American, Tucker Madawick.