LOTUS V SPYDER

[garyeanderson]

We at least have options with this choice. The first and best is an undamaged, unmolested not rotted or cracked stock original unit that the Elan came with. I guess after 37 to 47 years that those are getting to be less and less common. Minor repairs to weld up small cracks are acceptable in my opinion as the next best and cost-effective measure to preserve the original. Once rot has set in and you need to plate the front turrets, fix all the cracks, sandblast, prime, and paint (powdercoat if you want) then you still have the original but not anything that is going to be what I consider a value add proposition. I would call this false economy in that several alternatives exist and when you go to sell it looked upon by most as a plus over a repaired unit. There are some that can make these repairs and do all of the work that it involves and that?s great but it?s still not cost effective to pay to have it done in my opinion. So I guess it?s time to consider the replacement options. Stock steel replacement, stock galvanized steel replacement, TTR 26r or Spyder Spaceframe. That?s a great deal of options and the other is a used chassis in good condition if you can find one. Climate, expected use, and other factors have to be considered before one can decide. Dry year round use you have all options on the table, wet and salted roads present other issues that probably limit ones choice to the galvanized chassis or Spyder spaceframe. Resale needs to be looked at to if you are restoring an Elan and expecting to maximize your potential sale. Everyone that has expressed their view here seems to have a good grasp of the pluses and minuses of the effort. The way I have looked at it in the past, if you are doing the replacement to drive in all weather, then the Spyder Spaceframe is at the top of my list due to the environment in which I live. If you want to drive them hard they don?t crack and are easy to work on as others has noted. I have not weighed them but after moving a Spyder out of a friends garage into the back of my pickup and then hefting a galvanized replacement back into the same garage minutes later the Spyder felt lighter to me. I don?t think there are any real bad choices other than to leave the stock rotten one in the Elan until it fails and does damage to the surrounding fiberglass.

[elj221c]

I have recently dug out some Spyder paperwork for one of our members and I am posting the information I gave him for general interest. (I hope!)

I bought my spaceframe from Christopher Neals in July '82. The reason for this was that it was cheaper than buying from Spyder themselves. Very odd! From Neals it was ?350. The Spyder price list I have from June '82 quotes ?450. I have another price list from May '83 where the price had been reduced to ?395, still more expensive than the amount I paid.
Interestingly, the early list quotes that, as from April '83 the spaceframe would be available with the Spyder double wishbone rear suspension pick-ups and a price for the wishbone, spring, Koni adjustables and upright kit was quoted at another ?395.
There was no mention of this in the May '83 list though so I guess they got a bit behind with the manufacture.

I hope this has been of interest.

Roy
'65 S2

[Jas]

Hi Phil

Back to the difference between the driving experience of the two cars.
It could be due to different damping rates from the shock absorbers.
It?s my experience that the dampers make a big difference to the ride quality of the car.

[p.faurie]

Hi Jannik and all,
thanks for all your opinions and advice,i will investigate the suspension set up and try to speak with spyder and dig out the invoice to see what was supplied and if they can set it up for me. phil

[summerinmaine]

The late Graham Arnold used to maintain that Chapman took into account the stiffness of the chassis when designing the suspension and therefore a stiffer chassis would spoil the ride/handling i.e. chassis flex was a suspension component.

To an extent he was probably right as they designed the suspension around the chassis but I've not doubt that he would have preferred a stiffer chassis, He just might have made the suspension a little more compliant to compensate.

Mike

Prior to buying my first Elan I had owned a couple of Morgan Plus 4 cars (a 1958 and a 1962). IIRC the club newsletter was called "Rough Riders." Morgan suspension was notorious for its stiffness, and in fact knowledgeable folk have argued that suspension compliance was entirely the result of the flexible frame. Taking a driveway cut at anything other than parallel to the slope would show an uncanny amount of flex under the seat of your pants in order to keep all four wheels in contact with the pavement.

But the handling was still quite good for a 60 year old design.

[summerinmaine]

Relative to contemporary thinking the design principles were brilliant - Forcing the execution into lotus economics is a different matter and more likley a source of the failures you note than design ( material spec, production capabilities etc.) . I think the spyder argument is at best, opinion -

I couldn't agree more. Everything about the Elan was sheer genius, including the backbone chassis. It was light years ahead of it's time and of the other sports cars of the day. It was and still is the best ever Lotus (IMO) and one of the greatest cars ever designed and built. I bought one in '74 and loved it and I own one today and love it.

I agree that economics was probably a factor in the chassis failures, but it may have resulted from efforts to keep the car as light as possible bearing in mind that Colin wanted the Elan to be a 'glass monocoque and the chassis was a compromise, albeit a good one.

Re Spyder frames being stronger, all I can offer is my opinion based on my experience ..... it's all I have. Some will agree, others will not. That is the way of such things.

I don't disagree, but I remain an "improvement-over-originality" type (if it doesn't do violence to the original design concepts). Any component of virtually any car is a result of price considerations, and if I'm willing to spend $$$$ to obtain modest improvement, then that is my choice and my right.

[summerinmaine]

Hi nebogipfel

I do sort of agree with your comments, but we're looking at this from our own perspective and we already know that Lotus we're producing somthing very special indeed with the Elan. The point I'm making is did the general buying public appreciate that.

I'm alway reminded of my other favorite car the Toyota 2000GT (the one from the James Bond film You Only Live Twice). That too was somthing very special and although basically an Elan clone, it was built with a money no object attitude. Problem was, in spite of superb engineering and build quality, it cost almost as much as an Aston Martin DB so in the end Toyota only sold around 300 of them.

Andy

I heard an interesting anecdote about the decision to discontinue the 2000GT.

In the late sixties, Datsun and Toyota (i.e. Nissan and Toyoda), were competing head to head on SUV/4WDs (the Nissan L60 Patrol vs. the FJ35 Landcruiser) and sports cars (the 240Z vs. the 2000GT). According to rumor, MITI told them to knock off the crap and pick one, and the rest is history. I owned one of the rumored 400 or so L60s that were in the US.

[garyeanderson]

After watching Beau deal with his head wound the past week and watching the results I was wondering if this sore needs to be opened again.

You see I have a Painted shell for a pretty nice early S2
elan-photos-f18/early-4020-t12947.html
sitting and waiting for some attention. I also have a new Spyder tubular chassis sitting that I bought with this in mind but the market forces have changed. I don't build to sell as I am tired of loosing money so this project has been on hold for 8 years. Seems like with 0% interest rates Elans are going up in value, so should I sell what I consider the better chassis (Spyder) and build it back stock (those words didn't really come from my fingertips did they) or just go with the Spyder and let someone enjoy it if I sell?

Gary

My gut tells me in the U.S. this doesn't matter, people want toys to drive.

Anyone else?

[Elanintheforest]

I think that the most important thing is that a car in bits is pretty useless and doesn't have a huge value, and a car that is up an running has considerably more value and appeal to most people. You have the bits and skills to add value to the car, so do it!

Does it matter what chassis is fitted? Again, to most people absolutely not. Even the experts are firmly divided, with Miles Wilkins declaring that he would never fit anything other than factory original to his restorations, and Brian Buckland much prefering the Spyder. It seems that the more engineering focus the owner has, the more he comes down on the side of the Spyder chassis.

I've never noticed any difference on the road, but I have seen a Spyder crack in the same places that a Lotus original would...engine, gearbox and diff mount areas. I've never seen a Spyder with terminal rot though.

My S2 project car came with a brand new (in 1985) Spyder chassis that Mick Millar had built for the (then) owner shortly before he died. Shortly after buying the project, I came across a new Lotus replacement chassis for half price, so I bought it. My S4 convertible needs a chassis, so it is getting the Spyder, and the S2, which I'm trying to build as close as possible to factory original, will be getting the Lotus chassis.

I don't know why...it just feels right for these two cars! The S4 is super-original as well, but whatever the decision, it really doesn't matter. As I said in a previous post, a car can be restored to original specification any number of times.

Mark

[garyeanderson]

Mark

Funny how you say a runner is worth more than a pile of parts. Up until about a year ago I was thinking just the opposite. I guess thats one reason I bring this back up. Anyone see Brent Jacobs parting out any Elans lately? I don't look at ebay so I don't know.
April 2009 this was well under $5k
elan-f14/elan-field-find-looks-like-good-candidate-t18126.html
and there were several others that up till last fall were around $10k for running S1 and a bit less for an S2.

I guess some folks noticed finally as you can't do that any more. So 30 to 40 years of the market staying flat and finally a bounce. What side of the road does China drive on?

Gary

[cabc26b]

Gary ,

I not convinced you would actually sell, however, were you to sell, originality will help broaden the market and bring the most value. sell/swap the spyder frame for a stock one. An "OK" ( we looked at it) early elan sold a couple of months back for 35K at auction in Monterrey . it was an original spec car, but not 100% original and needing paint . I know yours will be a nicer car when done and spyder frame cars do not bring all the money.

George

[Foxie]

The late Graham Arnold used to maintain that Chapman took into account the stiffness of the chassis when designing the suspension and therefore a stiffer chassis would spoil the ride/handling i.e. chassis flex was a suspension component.

To an extent he was probably right as they designed the suspension around the chassis but I've not doubt that he would have preferred a stiffer chassis, He just might have made the suspension a little more compliant to compensate.

This may be what Chapman did, but imho it was done as a cost/lightness compromise, and not as a best engineering solution.

I had the opportunity to put this question to Spyder Engineering's Vic Moore, in the presence of the late Graham Arnold at a Northern Ireland Club Lotus week-end many years ago.

Vic Moore had obviously answered the question many times before, and immediately replied that a main function of a chassis is to provide as stiff and as strong a structure on which to attach the springs and shocks, which can then be optimally designed to perform their function. The idea of designing a multi-spring/mass/damper system would be completely complex and impractical.

As far as I can remeber, Graham Arnold did not contradict Vic Moore

[rgh0]

Graeme Arnold was a salesman and would have known Sh*t all about suspension and chassis design.

Vic knows a bit more ( maybe a lot more) but it really is around make the chassis stiffer and then its easier to design and setup a suspension which is what he has done. I dont know how good his overall suspension design is for his twin link rear becasue I have not tried it.

In practice the original Elan suspension would have be tuned to suit the tyres and chassis and the preferences of the test drivers / designers of the day and these guys knew what they were doing.

Today its the same process with the tyres and chassis of today that you are using and the test drivers and designers of today ( i.e you and me who know a lot less than the guys at Lotus previously) trying to establish a suspension set up.

We are all hopeless test drivers and designers compared to Lotus of today ( or yesterday) and certainly dont have the time and money and test track and simulation computer time that Lotus has to design a suspension.

I know what I like for an elan or plus 2 of today but I am just an enthusiatic amateur!!!!

1. A stiffer spyder chassis especially in a plus 2 feels better
2. With modern sticky road tyres you need the car stiffer in roll
3. A combination of a little stiffer springs and much stiffer roll bar works in a road car well with todays tyres and handling / ride preferences.
4. The progressive rear spring rate achieved with the aeon rubber springs is important to the ride quality and handling and needs to be maintained.

cheers
Rohan

[garyeanderson]

George

Your right, I not selling any of the S2 Elans anytime soon, I'll probably be buried in one of them. 26/4020 is not going to be on anyones list at Pebble Beach or BCD for that matter, its not red for one thing and its as barnyard find. Left beside a barn on Long Island with 20 years of growth surrounding it. It took a tractor with a rake to clear it away and they might have gotten a bit close to the body (like every panel). After 8 years the paint still looks ok for the surface I started with including some (thousands?) pock mark blisters and character cracks under the finish. It was given what I thought best for the condition it was in and no more. The photos don't lie and they are linked. A pigs ear comes to mind.


As far as chassis stiffness goes you need to step back to the initial design of the Elan. I am referring to the monocoque roadster that was the spec. The type 26 body as designed was probably over built compared to the Later type 36 and 45 bodies as some of this strength had been built into the type 26 body design. So when the new folded steel SUB-frame was thought up as a stop gap design to test the running gear and was further developed into the SUB-frame we know today it was "engineered for the job". When the later bodies came around I guess they took what they did out of the bodies and left the SUB-frame as it was.

Maybe Vic Moore and Spyder just put the strength back to stiffen up the later bodies?

[mikealdren]

Rohan,
I completely agree with your comments. Graham Arnold was indeed a salesman who liked to portray himself as understanding the technical issues but didn't really. I once talked to him about tyres and he couldn't understand why anyone would want to use modern tyres on an Elan - 1960s tyres were good enough for Jim Clark and Colin Chapman so why would mere mortals want anything better was the gist of his argument!

Lotus has employed a long line of experienced test drivers. John Miles was regarded as one of the best in the business for many years, he was reputed to be fantastic at getting suspension settings spot on.

Mike