trw99 wrote:Thank you for your kind words.
I would take issue with you about all Sprints being S4s. If that were so, Lotus would have marketed them as S4s, surely. The Sprint was an upgrade in the same way that say, a Mini Cooper was upgraded to Cooper S spec.
The main reasons for my anorakish distinction for the S4/Sprint is to provide guidelines to potential owners when some sellers try to pass their S4 off as a Sprint; to also provide some historical accuracy and to record for future Elan enthusiasts how their car originally left the factory.
Does it matter? As far as driving the car is concerned, nope, not a jot; all Elans are great to drive. As far as understanding the context in which the cars left the factory and what was going on there at the time, I would argue yep, it is of interest - though admittedly to just a few nerds like me!
Have a great New Year!
Tim
I agree that buyers should beware cars masquerading as Sprints (and paying hiked prices) and your guidance is certainly helpful. I painted my own S4 Yellow over white with Sprint style stripes but I determined it would say "Elan" on the doors and not "Elan Sprint" Purists may frown but it's my car and I think the two-tone scheme just looks so nice on an Elan but it is not intended to deceive.
I may be wrong but I have always understood the (factory) Sprint to be a sprint spec' S4 (in other words a S4 Sprint)
Otherwise I'm sure Lotus would have designated it as a S5.
We classic car enthusiasts are all anoraks
I do understand the distinction you are making and it
is part of the Elan history so is worthy of note (despite my views on the matter
)
Anyway, as I say I do like your website and wish you a great new years motoring