Lotus Elan and Lotus Elan Plus 2 Forums

Toad has adjustable spring seats & dampers. With the Spyder rear end it also has adjustable camber and, now, toe in. That should give me plenty to ruin.


Plan of attack - all the pivot point bolts are loose - front and back.
1. Load it up with half a tank of fuel and about 300 lbs on the front seats. All dampers set at "1".

2. Give it a good bouncing and set all the ride heights. Screw the spring seat down, spring preload drops as does the ride height? Tighten the suspension bolts.

3. Set the rear camber.

4. Set the rear toe in.

That sound about right?

If it is of any interest I made a simple 4mm ply shield to protect the wheels from hammer strikes.
It works well.

Good idea on the shield.

I'm reminded of Colin Chapman's comments when asked about making the suspension adjustable.

"Good grief, look what happens when someone with a screwdriver "adjusts" a set of carburettors......."

Or something to that effect

reb53 wrote:I'm reminded of Colin Chapman's comments when asked about making the suspension adjustable.

"Good grief, look what happens when someone with a screwdriver "adjusts" a set of carburettors......."

Or something to that effect

You beat me to it, just what i wanted to say.
Sorry but it's like building another car but cheaper and no type approval required
Alan

Nothing to do with Mr Chappers being unwilling to pay for any adjustability then!

reb53 wrote:I'm reminded of Colin Chapman's comments when asked about making the suspension adjustable.

"Good grief, look what happens when someone with a screwdriver "adjusts" a set of carburettors......."

Or something to that effect

Which would have been fine if all the Lotus suspension components were within tolerance to start with. A frames usually need a bit of tweaking.

Mazzini wrote:Which would have been fine if all the Lotus suspension components were within tolerance to start with.

There must have been a few Rob. Those would be the one kept back for Magazine road test duties.

vincereynard wrote:

Mazzini wrote:Which would have been fine if all the Lotus suspension components were within tolerance to start with.

There must have been a few Rob. Those would be the one kept back for Magazine road test duties.

Nope, those were the ones with the worked over, blue printed engines. And, purely coincidentally, had faulty bonnet catches so you couldn?t go poking around under the bonnet.....

I heard Graham Arnold say that there were ranges in specification and those that performed best were put on press cars.
With a large wink he said there was no truth in the rumour that engines were tuned up a bit!

reb53 wrote:

vincereynard wrote:

Mazzini wrote:Which would have been fine if all the Lotus suspension components were within tolerance to start with.

There must have been a few Rob. Those would be the one kept back for Magazine road test duties.

Nope, those were the ones with the worked over, blue printed engines. And, purely coincidentally, had faulty bonnet catches so you couldn?t go poking around under the bonnet.....

I hope you're not saying the had been tweaked and were not standard (whatever that is in the Lotus World).
If nothing is to tolerance and it has fantastic roadholding then Chapman performed miracles and should be made a Saint. It's not too late, many have been made Saints after their death
Alan

ps At least they had a standard looking Sump just in case someone did some upskirting.

MarkDa wrote:I heard Graham Arnold say that there were ranges in specification and those that performed best were put on press cars.
With a large wink he said there was no truth in the rumour that engines were tuned up a bit!

So quite unlike the famous 150 mph E Type with what was essentially a D Type engine in it .....

I thought that was the XK150 150mph
Alan

alan.barker wrote:I thought that was the XK150 150mph
Alan

Maybe, but I think people had problems replicating that famous 150 mph for the E Type.

There was a rumour of a possible deal between William Lyons and Chapman. What a fascinating
negotiation that would have been! With Arnold as referee ?

I had a brief job once building C and D replicas. Customers would appear with a humungous file of EXACTLY what they wanted down to the curve of the hydraulic pipes. Now they were a bit special.

I've fitted the arms and loosened all the suspension pivot nuts. (The offside rear top wishbone was little more than finger tight!)
Then loaded the car up with
Front Seats 77KG
Fuel tank approx 7 gallons
Boot 25Kg.

This this load, winding the spring seat fully down then up1 turn and the bones were near as makes no difference horizontal. (They were originally screwed about half way up.)


Doing the same at the front still leaves it a bit high. It may be that the springs are simple too strong / long or they may settle.

I then had to tweak the springs seats a bit to level the car and got it to within a mm. Problem is one change effects another and every time it is jacked and then lowered they all change a bit!

Gave it a serious bouncing and tightened all the pivots. A crude measure with a spirit level shows very small amount of negative camber offside and a bit more on the nearside. A job for tomorrow perhaps?