“COMPETITION CARS,” I ONCE NOTED, “are a hoot to drive, mainly because they make few concessions to anything resembling practicality.” And back in 1955 R&T wrote along similar lines in its test of the Austin-Healey 100S: “There are two ‘schools of thought’ on sports cars—those who want as much comfort as can be had without sacrificing the need for the lowest possible weight, and the extremist group who will literally give up anything and everything for the goal of maximum performance with minimal weight.”
This and other images from R&T September 1955.
“The Austin-Healey 100S competition model falls into the second category,” R&T said. But it also noted, “… it is surprisingly easy to drive—with none of the traffic-temperament usually found in ‘all-out’ competition type sports cars. The engine is docile, the clutch operates easily and the brakes are light. Nor is there the usual ‘tinny’ noise and rattle of most pure racing machines.”
Gee, does this sound boring?
Well, its right-hand drive sets the car apart in its “advantages for competition work,” observed R&T.
Final-Drive Choices. The magazine recounted the test car’s standard 2.92:1 final drive ratio, a tallish one among the various 100S options also including 2.69:1, 3.66:1, and a particular short 4.12:1. “As our data panel proves,” R&T noted, “the acceleration times are exceptionally good, especially when it is is borne in mind that the ‘high’ gears used during our tests were selected to give the best possible top speed—albeit at some sacrifice in acceleration.”
Acceleration. To put the 100S’s 7.8 seconds to 60 mph in perspective with other cars (admittedly apples and oranges) tested in 1955, the larger-engined (3.4-liter) Jaguar XK-120 MC took 8.4 seconds, the more expensive ($7463) Mercedes-Benz 300SL did 60 in 7.4 seconds, the ($3495) Porsche 1500 S Speedster took 10.3 seconds, and a hot Chevrolet V-8 ($2285) did it in 9.7.
Talk about “apples and oranges.”
Handling. “As might be expected,” R&T observed, “the car is a joy to drive. The A-H has always been noteworthy in the good-handling department and the ‘100S’ is equally good for the simple reason that the ‘100’ couldn’t be much improved. The ride is noticeably firmer and cornering roll is either non-existent or so small as to be non-detectible.”
A Beautiful 4-Speed. The magazine enthused, “But it is the beautiful close-ratio 4-speed gearbox that really ‘makes’ this machine, both in town and on the highway. You can exceed the usual city speed limit in first gear, while second will show 70 mph before you can catch your breath.”
“Out on the open road, sprinkled with politely-spaced Diesels,” R&T continued, “we frequently used second gear for passing, just to hear the exhaust noise as we swept by.”
Imagine the empathy of a young teen-ager reading this stuff in 1955.
The 100S Powerplant. The magazine goes into considerable detail about the S model’s 46.6 percent more power and 16.6 percent more torque: “a nitride-hardened crankshaft, tri-metal bearings, special con-rods and an oilcooler. Every one of these features is a durability item which should contribute to the stamina of the engine, red-lined incidentally at 4800 rpm equivalent to a piston speed of 3500 fpm.”
The 2658-cc ohv four produced 132 hp at 4700 rpm.
Disc Brakes All Around. Most cars of the era still retained drum brakes. (Even the vaulted 300SL had drums, albeit aluminum with cast-iron liners.) By contrast, R&T wrote of the 100S, “The Dunlop disc brakes (generally called spot-type in this country [owing to their Crosley fitment]) need no special comment for the reason that they work admirably and aside from some tendency to squeak they were unobtrusive in action.”
R&T’s Summary: “We can find little or no fault with the Austin-Healey 100S. It offers a genuine competition machine in the not-too-competitive class D at a very fair price.”
And imagine the street range of that 24-gallon fuel tank. Who needs trunk space? ds
© Dennis Simanaitis, SimanaitisSays.com, 2025