Chassis swop, crazy or not?

[djb222]

I have a crazy thought in the back of my mind that seems to tap me on the shoulder whenever I add more jobs to do to the list for my 68 S4. The thought is swop the chassis back to original from the spyder chassis. The reasoning would be to keep the car as original as possible, which it pretty much is.

Now the paint looks good from a few feet away but up close and personal it's obvious whoever resprayed the car did absolutely no prep work, so at some point it needs doing properly, i'll prep the body before a respray. So it will be a body off and that's when I could maybe change the chassis.

Has anyone done this themselves for the sake of originality, the jury in my mind are still debating. Thoughts of wisdom appreciated.

David

[Spyder fan]

Hi David,
A good question would be to ask how long ago was the folded metal chassis replaced with the Spyder spaceframe chassis? If it was a long time ago it could be argued that perhaps it needs replacing again and whilst you are at it you can make the decision over folded metal chassis versus spaceframe.

The folded metal chassis although original equipment were not actually made by Lotus and the replacements have absolutely nothing to do with the Lotus factory.

Spyder will sell you a folded metal chassis to the original specification that they make in house to extremely accurate jigs, there is a choice of finishes available.

The arguments about whether the Spyder spaceframe chassis is better than the original and whether it detracts from the value of a car have been around for almost as long as the car itself, but it does have certain advantages mostly for access to some components and there's a little more thought gone into rust proofing.

Mark Kempson (Elan in the Forest) had a complete S2 project for sale last year, (one of the members on here bought it and is posting his build progress on the forums), all the right bits were there to make a really nice complete car, it just needing assembling, it had a choice of either a built up Spyder spaceframe chassis or Mark said the chassis could be stripped and he had a folded metal type to take it's place if required. I was tempted at the time to buy it, but I would have kept the Spyder chassis and not even have thought twice about the folded metal item.

[trw99]

David, interesting question and I see a replay of the originality v modified debate brewing - again.

You said "The reasoning would be to keep the car as original as possible, which it pretty much is."

There is only one answer - forget about Alan's final sentence and go for the original item!

Tim

[Spyder fan]

David, interesting question and I see a replay of the originality v modified debate brewing - again.

You said "The reasoning would be to keep the car as original as possible, which it pretty much is."

There is only one answer - forget about Alan's final sentence and go for the original item!

Tim

ME --------------------------------------TIM

[djb222]

Kittens on a Lotus forum surely it's Reliant.......

[Geoffers71]

Mark Kempson (Elan in the Forest) had a complete S2 project for sale last year, (one of the members on here bought it and is posting his build progress on the forums), all the right bits were there to make a really nice complete car, it just needing assembling, it had a choice of either a built up Spyder spaceframe chassis or Mark said the chassis could be stripped and he had a folded metal type to take it's place if required. I was tempted at the time to buy it, but I would have kept the Spyder chassis and not even have thought twice about the folded metal item.

Which of course is what I did !

[Tahoe]

I was going gone back and forth on this personally, and indeed could have bought a used original chassis not too long ago. My Spyder chassis was one of the first ones according to Spyder, and it's still in excellent shape.

I'm attempting to go back to original up to a point, but there are some very good reasons to stay with the Spyder for me. Since removing the roll bar I needed a way to install 3 point seat belts and my early Spyder chassis has the seat belt outriggers so I was easily able to install the 3 point belts. Also, I'm not looking to sell my car any time soon and I do want to drive it a lot. So the way I look at it changing the chassis back at some point way down the road is always a possibility. Right now I like all the advantages it offers me and I see no disadvantages, but I can certainly understand why someone would want to go back to the original style.

[alexblack13]

I personally would not replace your Spyder frame if it is in good condition. It would be a condition issue for me.

If it needs changing and you wish to go (more) original then go for it. It's not a huge job to do and you can give the bits a good refurb during the process...

Al' ....

[UAB807F]

Hi David,

Ah, the old "but it's not original" debate....

There are as many answers as Spyder have sold chassis and no matter how long you debate the topic, it's down to "your car, your choice".

In my case I'm not selling so I don't care if my car is devalued or not and I'm still running a 1980s vintage Spyder chassis. It's lasted far longer than the original, I haven't had to weld bits back on (yet) and although there's some surface rust in places, it's still solid. Perhaps that tells you what my choice would be

But if I were building a car as a 100% new restoration and expecting to sell it on for ?30k or more, or maybe rebuilding a car which had a significant history then yes, I'd use the engine test rig that Lotus decided to adapt for the Elan chassis because it was cheap to make. The buyers would expect it on a "factory fresh" concourse restoration and the customer is always right.

And so we're back to ...... your car, your choice !

Brian

[AHM]

For me part of owning and driving a classic car is that it is 'Original'. I like to see other people's modifications, but often wonder why they do it?

One of the things that the elan is known or is the folded steel backbone chassis, and I don't believe it is considered a weakness in the design.

[gjz30075]

There is only one answer - forget about Alan's final sentence and go for the original item!

Tim

+1!!

[rgh0]

All designs have weaknesses. The Elan in general and its chassis in particular is no exception. I enjoy its strengths and tolerate most of the weaknesses. Some weaknesses I choose not to tolerate for various reasons - performance, reliability, engineering purity etc etc. other people make different choices.

The original chassis design had many weaknesses ( rust, cracks, access) and many strengths (simplicity, lightness, cheap, reasonably stiff). The spyder chassis improves on a few of the weaknesses ( stiffer, better access, less cracking and rust) but has an additional weakness to some people i.e. not an original design.

If you value originality or want to sell the car in the near future for maximum money then use an original chassis if you intend to use the car long term and the spyder chassis does not offend your desire for originality then it is the obvious choice.

I am unbiased as I have an original chassis on my Elan - its required for my racing class, but a Spyder in my plus 2 so I have a foot in both camps

The original Lotus chassis is a thing of beauty --- I have one hanging from the ceiling in my house as a light fitting for that reason. The Spyder chassis is perhaps even more beautiful to the engineer in me

cheers
Rohan

[djb222]

Thank?s for all the opinions, makes interesting reading.

Although not strictly pertinent, I bought the car in May this year during a visit to view an Elise. Seeing the Elan, amongst other classics reignited a love of cars I had put on the back burner for many years. In the past I?ve rebuilt a Spitfire, built a couple of Westfields and am currently in the process of completing an Ultima GTR. The Elan was purchased listening to the heart with a knowing nod from the head.

Back home looking the car over although completely useable I decided to make a project of the car. Having covered very few miles over the past 20 years or so, in between finishing the GTR, the Elan needs good mechanical refurbishment to give me confidence to fully use it next year.

So the ultimate aim of the project is currently what I am trying to decide. Go down the originality route, upgrade or fast road track use.
I see the car as it currently stands as a blank canvas, my decision is not dictated by a need or a desire to sell in the near future.

Just to throw another spanner in the works, the Ultima will be sold next year and some of the funds may be used to purchase an Elan fhc with a view to sprinting. If I do that then the current Elan should stay original !!!!!

Apologies if I come across as a little scatty and indecisive but a health scare and the sale of a business seems to have had that effect this year. That?s my excuse anyway.

Not wanting to cause any argument, logic would suggest that building a sprint or track car, a FHC would be the one to go for over a DHC ????

David

[Spyder fan]

Thank?s for all the opinions, makes interesting reading.


Not wanting to cause any argument, logic would suggest that building a sprint or track car, a FHC would be the one to go for over a DHC ????

David

The racers here will correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that most of the "interesting" historic formulas are for pre 1965 cars, hence the only option would be an S1 or S2 Elan with a hard top. If however you are going for the Paul Matty Hillclimb type formula's an S3 or S4 FHC makes more financial lower cost sense.

[alan.barker]

David djb22,
for me there can only ever be one possible reply "Lotus Lotus and Lotus" same as original and if possible Galvanised chassis. Imho if the chassis is painted with ?poxy paint it will crack and humidity creep between the chassis and the ?poxy, which will then rust.
I have a replacement galvanised chassis on my Elan Sprint and it is as good as the day it was fitted by the guru Miles Wilkins 25+ years ago. Imho you do not need to paint a galvanised chassis. Galvanising is better than any paint.
In answer to Alan Thomas there are many parts on a Lotus not made by Lotus but at least the Chassis was sub-contracted and made to Lotus Spec. To my knowledge Miles Wilkins is the one and only authorised person by the Lotus Factory to remake Lotus Chassis. If someone can prove otherwise i stand corrected.
well that should put the cat among the pigeons
Alan