Replacement chassis: how long might it last?

[Robbie693]

Lets not forget Spyder and Lotus do/did a Recon service for your Original Chassis so when you say Original Repaired i don't see Bird s**t welding by some DIYer i see it properly done on a jig by a pro. I suspect a new chassis is just more convenient thats all (also i don't think you can buy new Galv chassis as they had issues with them just like early Spyder space frame chassis did as well)

I'm a bit late to this one but if I could back-track slightly; Chris - what were the issues with the early Spyder space frame chassis?

[john1180]

"Bragging about having an original factory chassis is about as useful as bragging about having original factory valve guides, and it adds a similar value to the vehicle". I totally agree!

Are you going to look at it, or drive it!!

[jimj]

Firstly, a replacement chassis, given the short life spans of the originals is a must regarding values. Just ask Mattys.
Secondly, with regard to the chassis/subframe myths; of course it`s a chassis, it`s not a subframe bolted to a monocoque or separate chassis. Once Lotus realised that the chassis would need replacement before long they negotiated with the DVLA to accept that a pragmatic misnomer, subframe, would avoid needless bureaucracy. Otherwise owners wouldn`t inform the DVLA anyway, just as they don`t with Spyder conversions.
Jim

[512BB]

There are certainly a few statements here that I cannot agree with, you wont be supprised to learn

'But this matching numbers rubbish is merely a foible of the rich car collectors; It could go out-of-fashion as easily as it came in'

This is total nonsense. 20 odd years ago, you barely read anything about matching numbers when a car was advertised for sale. Then Ferrari dreamt up their 'Classiche' certification, whereby a car is inspected by an official Ferrari dealership, and verified as have all major components original to the car, or not ! They can do this, because all major components are numbered and listed. Then sellers of lesser makes, cottoned onto the fact that it looks great when selling a car, you mention that the engine no. and possibly chassis are original to it. It has nothing to do with rich car collectors, or even poor car collectors for that matter. It is just seen as a way of achieving the highest price for the vehicle, by the seller. And as for matching nos going out of fashion, trust me, it wont, it is here to stay. Just as sure as picking up a Daytona for ?100k today, it aint going happen.

'A motor mount crack is of no significance except for what it means: endless future repairs resulting in eventual chassis failure'

You cannot possibly state that as a fact. The pictured chassis with crack to the engine mount, is a very early chassis, before they were strengthened in that area, with a double thickness piece of steel where the bolts run through. I have not seen any failures to chassis' with strengthening plates in that area.

'Bragging about having an original factory chassis is about as useful as bragging about having original factory valve guides, and it adds a similar value to the vehicle.

This would be true with a run of the mill tired Elan, that has had 12 owners and covered 180k miles, with a worn out interior. But if you are lucky enough to own Lotus cars that still show one or two owners, are competely original with low miles, say 40k or less, then having an original chassis, IF it is in good order, is a bonus.

Leslie

[Grizzly]

Lets not forget Spyder and Lotus do/did a Recon service for your Original Chassis so when you say Original Repaired i don't see Bird s**t welding by some DIYer i see it properly done on a jig by a pro. I suspect a new chassis is just more convenient thats all (also i don't think you can buy new Galv chassis as they had issues with them just like early Spyder space frame chassis did as well)

I'm a bit late to this one but if I could back-track slightly; Chris - what were the issues with the early Spyder space frame chassis?

The Wishbone pickups weren't double buttered and the round Vac tank cross member was too thin. If you do a search you will see a few round cross member type Spyder chassis with cracks round the front Wish bone studs and even the odd one that has completely torn out.

[Grizzly]

"Bragging about having an original factory chassis is about as useful as bragging about having original factory valve guides, and it adds a similar value to the vehicle". I totally agree!

Are you going to look at it, or drive it!!

Buy an MX5 then?

I get Lotus weren't bothered if the car lasted ten years (its not there problem by then) but i am failing to think of any Car that had such a large structure deemed a serviceable item? In my opinion a Chassis IS the car with a body hung over it so makes no sense to me to change the chassis as you would change a rusty exhaust etc? The fact they said "the immenseley strong welded steel backbone chassis which is fully rustproofed;" in there sales brochure makes me think it was poorly maintained after sales rather than any design to keep customers buying big expensive parts?? Out of interest how many of the owners that ran them every day wax oiled there cars? I know the Rust protection in the 70's needed redoing on a regular basis but how many actually did?

Gus, will you stop assuming all repairs are the same? Because you have had a bad experience with your repair does that mean its unrepairable?

O And yes i told anyone that would listen i'd got my factory Valve guides to run as intended without burning oil (it was a major thing for me)

[Grizzly]

There are certainly a few statements here that I cannot agree with, you wont be supprised to learn

'But this matching numbers rubbish is merely a foible of the rich car collectors; It could go out-of-fashion as easily as it came in'

This is total nonsense. 20 odd years ago, you barely read anything about matching numbers when a car was advertised for sale. Then Ferrari dreamt up their 'Classiche' certification, whereby a car is inspected by an official Ferrari dealership, and verified as have all major components original to the car, or not ! They can do this, because all major components are numbered and listed. Then sellers of lesser makes, cottoned onto the fact that it looks great when selling a car, you mention that the engine no. and possibly chassis are original to it. It has nothing to do with rich car collectors, or even poor car collectors for that matter. It is just seen as a way of achieving the highest price for the vehicle, by the seller. And as for matching nos going out of fashion, trust me, it wont, it is here to stay. Just as sure as picking up a Daytona for ?100k today, it aint going happen.

'A motor mount crack is of no significance except for what it means: endless future repairs resulting in eventual chassis failure'

You cannot possibly state that as a fact. The pictured chassis with crack to the engine mount, is a very early chassis, before they were strengthened in that area, with a double thickness piece of steel where the bolts run through. I have not seen any failures to chassis' with strengthening plates in that area.

'Bragging about having an original factory chassis is about as useful as bragging about having original factory valve guides, and it adds a similar value to the vehicle.

This would be true with a run of the mill tired Elan, that has had 12 owners and covered 180k miles, with a worn out interior. But if you are lucky enough to own Lotus cars that still show one or two owners, are competely original with low miles, say 40k or less, then having an original chassis, IF it is in good order, is a bonus.

Leslie

Spot on..... Its the Triggers Broom scenario, when your talking top money the cars need to be the same one that left the factory not some thing that has been changed so much there isn't much of the Factory car left, people like to experience what the car was like NEW with all its eccentricity's.

[gus]

>>>>>>>>>
Spot on..... Its the Triggers Broom scenario, when your talking top money the cars need to be the same one that left the factory not some thing that has been changed so much there isn't much of the Factory car left, people like to experience what the car was like NEW with all its eccentricity's.
>>>>>>

Baloney

Car with an original chassis are widely view with suspicion, simply read the requests for opinion on various cars for sale over time, check the chassis is usually first on the list.

A pretty paint job means nothing when the chassis is failing. And how exactly is changing one replaceable part with another one just like it, albeit galvanized changing the car?

Rubbish

There is a constant conversation about restored vs original, and in most markets and most cars without a particular provenance, restored cars vastly out price un-restored. With the particular issues with our cars, stress cracks, short lifespan components etc,

[Grizzly]

>>>>>>>>>
Spot on..... Its the Triggers Broom scenario, when your talking top money the cars need to be the same one that left the factory not some thing that has been changed so much there isn't much of the Factory car left, people like to experience what the car was like NEW with all its eccentricity's.
>>>>>>

Baloney

Car with an original chassis are widely view with suspicion, simply read the requests for opinion on various cars for sale over time, check the chassis is usually first on the list.

A pretty paint job means nothing when the chassis is failing. And how exactly is changing one replaceable part with another one just like it, albeit galvanized changing the car?

Rubbish

There is a constant conversation about restored vs original, and in most markets and most cars without a particular provenance, restored cars vastly out price un-restored. With the particular issues with our cars, stress cracks, short lifespan components etc,

Gus, I am not saying Lotus's are the same as other marques but you have it very wrong if you think an E-type or a 300SL isn't worth 20-30% more if its a Numbers matching car.

My origanal question was Why don't Lotus Owners try to keep there cars Numbers matching? after all if an Elan sells for big money it drags all the other cars value up and you can't have a Concourse car if its not Number matching...... Just look at how the E-Type world went mad when some of the Flat floor 3.8 cars went for south of ?200k, Ferrari's have also gone mad in much the same way but strangely Lotus have stalled at about ?30k for a Minter even though there iconic cars in there own right.

[gus]

precisely, they are a different car, and if those cars had chassis as a failure point they would have similar values WRT replacement chassis.

In the end, if you really all about originality, a replacement chassis painted as original is less detectable than a repaired original

[Grizzly]

precisely, they are a different car, and if those cars had chassis as a failure point they would have similar values WRT replacement chassis.

In the end, if you really all about originality, a replacement chassis painted as original is less detectable than a repaired original

In your opinion!!

It's only a failure point if its been neglected. Just like any car will rust if you don't look after it, the problem is people thinking because its a grp car it won't rust.........

[peterexpart]

Just a point, did Lotus ever actually stamp the Chassis Number into the Chassis or was it just a number stamped into the Data Plate which did not appear anywhere else ?
And I think with most other manufacturers an accurate record was kept of Chassis and Engine Numbers this did not seem to be the case with Lotus which makes it almost impossible to claim originality for any given car

[pharriso]

Just a point, did Lotus ever actually stamp the Chassis Number into the Chassis or was it just a number stamped into the Data Plate which did not appear anywhere else ?
And I think with most other manufacturers an accurate record was kept of Chassis and Engine Numbers this did not seem to be the case with Lotus which makes it almost impossible to claim originality for any given car

Yes they did, like:

Not exactly hard to reproduce... Note the body number (unit#?) on the flange below...

[Grizzly]

Just a point, did Lotus ever actually stamp the Chassis Number into the Chassis or was it just a number stamped into the Data Plate which did not appear anywhere else ?
And I think with most other manufacturers an accurate record was kept of Chassis and Engine Numbers this did not seem to be the case with Lotus which makes it almost impossible to claim originality for any given car

Yes they did, like:

0262K chassis 2.JPG

Not exactly hard to reproduce... Note the body number (unit#?) on the flange below...

Yep but it would be a dead give away if it was a Galv Chassis or a Spyder

You have to be very careful, lets not forget changing a chassis number is illegal and by claiming its a Numbers matching original car to command a higher price would be fraud. All that said your right it wouldn't be a huge surprise to see ringed Classis cars.... still doesn't alter the fact there worth more in many cases and the cars it makes the most difference to are the higher end of the price scale. This is why i asked in the first place as i always saw the Elan as one of the top Iconic cars of the 70's but its value seems to be badly lagging behind other Iconic cars and people don't seem to care about keeping them original which goes against the rest of the Classics car world philosophy, most restorers would do anything they can to keep them as original as possible but elan owners seem to be more bothered about cosmetically looking original than fundamentally being Original..... I wasn't criticizing as its your car too do with as you wish but it just seems odd to me that's all.

rgh0 and 512BB sum it up well.

[gus]

precisely, they are a different car, and if those cars had chassis as a failure point they would have similar values WRT replacement chassis.

In the end, if you really all about originality, a replacement chassis painted as original is less detectable than a repaired original

In your opinion!!

It's only a failure point if its been neglected. Just like any car will rust if you don't look after it, the problem is people thinking because its a grp car it won't rust.........

Again, baloney.

While there is a certain amount of preventative maintenance that can be done to improve the longevity of an original chassis, there is absolutely no way of telling whether that has been done, as the outside appearance of the chassis is not indicative of the absolute structural integrity of the chassis.

And it is not only my opinion, but that of the market, which unlike other vehicles does not devalue this particular replacement. The only sensible financial assumption is that any 40 to 50 year old chassis is questionable.

Implying that there is 'nothing wrong' with an original chassis does no service to the marque. All it does is cause failures in service as people may choose to ignore decades of advice regarding this matter and further imprint the Lots of trouble usually serious reputation, which in the end devalues the cars

Collectors and car polishers don't care as they value them as precious objects, not cars, and have never hit redline or risked their precious paint drifting in a corner