Lotus Elan and Lotus Elan Plus 2 Forums

I am planning a redux, as there are many stress cracks. chrome trim holes, one exterior mirror hole unfilled.
I have never been too keen on the nose. So I will go slow.
long term, I may want to trim down the sharp edge between the bonnet and fender. Alas, maybe its fine.

Outside of making a mold of the bumpers, and starting with that as a template. I expect a more organic form/shape to be desirable. Both fore and aft.
It seems the front is much of a no brainer, while the rear has some challenges. First, the lip which is in-part of the boot. The lines are clean from the underside. I want it clean.
How the quarters meet the underside, and incorporate to the boot-lip will be the difficult process.

I do desire to keep the car original. In that, whatever modifications are made are obvious. And fairly easily returned to original. So, I wont be cutting. Only gluing some foam, and shaping.

One question, maybe the only. What would others think is tasteful. I don't mean extra lighting, or aero. Maybe there is something you have thought/think could work on a 50. Without bumpers!

I wouldn't bodge the body - leave it be and maintain its classic good looks.

I hope your sticks on the ice Bill. I got a couple of sweet goals last night, a few others not so sweet. Snows falling and we are off to the alpine ski-in cabin this weekend.

When I got this pre federal +2, it had no rear bumper. I didnt have the funds to purchase one either. So I built one out of some old backcountry skis. Laid glass, had a mold. I then had a rear bumper for inspection, and it passed.

Truth is, bumpers on a +2 is an after thought. They simply do not look correct.
Further, how dumb is a chunk of metal dangling on the end of some sweet composite. Truly, people have done better. Suppose the one other thought is maybe the chrome bumpers tie all the chrome work together. Since fitting orange sort of gold minilights. My perspective has changed. Maybe I need to paint the mini lights chrome/silver and think about it again. Or take the bumpers off and think more.
The racing +2's ive looked at on the internet seem to carry them selves fine. I am lowering the stance, to UK specs. So it will be different then too.

Again, any changes will easily be returned.

Ahh - a plus 2 is a different story!! You should have said so.

Do it tastefully as I think will.

Our snow is 200 feet above us - we live on the waterfront-happy skiing
Bill

This plus2 has a profiled nose:
https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi ... xfordy.jpg

The m20 prototype for the +2 had painted front bumper and no rear bumper, just painted bodywork

http://lotuselan-plus2.be/trevorsparrow ... esign1.htm

Hi h20hamelon & Bill

Just introducing my self I am doing a 1969 S4 Fed Sprint Resto-Mod

I am in Sidney on the Island BC. nice to meet some "neighbours"

Jaman

I have a '72 S4 Sprint on a Spyder chassis that will be a Zetec conversion to be a restro mod as well.

I am in Ladysmith, phone me @ 250 245 7240 and we can commiserate.

Bill

Here is a pic of my first Elan with front bumper molded out. It looked okay, considering the rest of the car was kind of rough.

Some of the content of Kevins +2 book. Covers the design of the +2
Probably the BRM turbine, and the Metier 2 are what will inspire me.

I suppose when you are in a rush to add a bumper to a clean lined car, this is what happens. But maybe that?s how it has to be to meet impact regulations. I doubt it, as in the rear. The distance between the metal bumper, and the chassis is a few feet. Don?t know how the metal would do anything in the event of an accident.

Well, hate me as you must. I suspect a molded rear bumper, and a front more like the baby will suite me just fine. I will of course sleep many nights deciding on rear round signals. Like the Metier 2. Aka how it was designed. I will consider some hidden reverse white lighting, maybe hidden in a fake bolt holding a fake rear bumper... dont know yet.

h20hamelan wrote:Further, how dumb is a chunk of metal dangling on the end of some sweet composite.

Were they required in some major market? I suspect so. USA required bumpers even way back whey were hard-mounted to frames. But I don't think the pre-1974 requirement specified much about how they were mounted.

Or maybe they were seen as an easier way to repair the small damages from 'parking by ear' and other light impacts, i.e. it's easier to replace a bit of bolted-on metal than to do paint and fibreglass repairs.

I suspect the former of those two rather than the latter, because Chunky wouldn't have allowed the extra weight of them if they didn't have to be there. Or maybe he was busy-enough with other things not to care and had delegated authority on the development to somebody else.

I dont think they were absolutely required back then but steel chrome bumpers were more of a design convention for most manufacturers - Lotus 7 did not have them for example. These days the design convention is a large moulded plastic end cap, front and rear that is integrated into the overall body.

For the Elan and Plus 2 bumpers I think they were a convenient way to cover the front and rear mould joining seams and comply with the market required looks also, especially for the Plus 2 which was aiming at a different Market segment that probably demanded steel chrome bumpers at the time.

regards
Rohan

Or maybe they were seen as an easier way to repair the small damages from 'parking by ear' and other light impacts, i.e. it's easier to replace a bit of bolted-on metal than to do paint and fibreglass repairs.

No longer offered, as a used item. Never available here in Na. America

Even the ?mold? joining seams in my Elise are covered.

The +2 chrome work is great. I do hate to change how it comes together. Like said. Will be easily returned.
Having said how fine the chrome is. It?s nothing more than weight and glare if the sun hits it right. Race cars do not have chrome.
Clive Chapman would not be happy to change the best Lotus ever made. Ask him