Mine is a Morris too.  Have had it since 78.

it’s been a long time since I owned a (junk) wet suspension Austin Mini but wouldn’t the proper place to determine wet vs dry be looking at the rear subframe because of the springs and some other differences in parts???

My opinion was based on observations of my 63 and 65 UK built cars and my 64 Oz all of which had studs. (Noting that studs are a PITA; I have replaced the ones in the 65 with the proper bolts.)

My 67 edition factory shop manual has a drawing that appears to show a stud.

All my cars are Morriss (Mori ?????)

Cheers Ian

The Morris factory used studs on the front subframe and the Austin factory used bolts. This is generally for MkI & MkII cars although it could have changed with the introduction of hydrolastic, I'm not sure. Keep in mind that there were Austin badged cars built in the Morris factory.

Kelley

Ian could you please elaborate. On my 64 it’s held in by two bolts and it’s a dry suspension. According to my heritage certificate it was built October 1, 1963

Which is, to the best of my knowledge, correct for a 64 .... and would be dry.

Cheers, Ian

The "Tabs" on the subframe that hold the displacers in.

Hey folks. I've got a '64 Mini and my subframe seems a little odd. Instead of a single bolt, or two bolts, I have two threaded studs. Normally, I'd assume this was a Hydrolastic subframe, but I see no indications that it is a hydrolastic sub. What other things should I be looking for on the body and subframe to determine if this is wet or dry?