47 replies to this topic

[MarkWill]

Hi,

A friend of mine is looking into restoring a Lotus 6. I dont know much about these cars; are there any Lotus 6 owners out there who have already been through this experience and found it to be too daunting? On paper the performance of these machines looks fairly poor (I'm guessing that they must have been modified quite a bit for racing, and I imagine that a more powerful version - Lotus 7 - must have been one the drawing board almost as soon as enough Lotus 6 cars were sold to make it viable). I'm just being curious - I admit that I haven't done any research yet (I will do) but my friend is very entheusiastic about the whole thing (its not his first project by the way but he normally does American Muscle Cars) so I thought I'd ask on the forum and get a bit of the "flavour" of the whole thing so that next time I see him I can nod sagely or throw in a couple of useful hints.

[Tim Murray]

The people who 'know' about these cars are the Historic Lotus Register. TNFer Charles Helps is the HLR Registrar for the model:

http://www.historicl...ecars/Helps.htm

Both the Lotus VI owners I know love them dearly, and would never be parted from them.

[Ray Bell]

It might depend on what powerplant is fitted...

I've driven one with a Climax FWA in it. The owner, Graham Howard, used to say it was like a 'constant speed device', but it was pretty quick for what it was. It had the independent rear end and finned alloy brake drums, I don't know if they were on all of them.

Really, though, restoring any car is a rewarding thing to do. This type of car can be much less of a challenge than something like, for instance, a Morris Minor, where rust in body panels is a serious matter to overcome.

If there is major work to be done to the chassis, usually this is farmed out. But if the restorer is pretty useful, he can make up a rough jig and do it all himself.

[Allan Lupton]

It had the independent rear end and finned alloy brake drums, I don't know if they were on all of them.

None of them as built, I'd say.
Powerplant was 1172cc Ford ten in most but MG, Ford Consul and even BMW were used according to Crombac.

[Sharman]

None of them as built, I'd say.
Powerplant was 1172cc Ford ten in most but MG, Ford Consul and even BMW were used according to Crombac.

A Climax in a 6 is over-egging the pudding. The engine would have cost 5 times the value of the car if it was done in period and there does not appear to be a valid reason for a retrofit

[D-Type]

Some Lotus VIs were fitted with Climax engines in period.

[ianselva]

Some Lotus VIs were fitted with Climax engines in period.

I'm sure I remember a roadtest of one in a mag ( Autosport ?) in the 60s by Graham Hill

[David Birchall]

Wasn't that Graham Hill's own Lotus Seven?

[ianselva]

Wasn't that Graham Hill's own Lotus Seven?

I think you may be right.
However I have just looked in Ian Smiths book on Lotus and it says that several were fitted with a Climax motor -John Harris, Fred Marriot and Doug Chivas . The last two also having De Dion rear suspension. Other engines fitted included Ford Consul, MG 1250cc and 1500cc and even 2 litre BMW. As most Mk 6s were 'kit cars' the build spec varied quite a bit.

[MarkWill]

This one apparently has an FWA engine which he thinks was the original. I will try to get a hold of the chassis number if this heps get more info. He was wondering if he shouldn't swap it for an FWB engine (I dont know if this is a "drag and drop" type substitution); he, too, had heard that the FWA was a one-speed motor, and that the FWB should be more flexible with more power. Was this a common change at the time (and, if so, I wonder why Colin Chapman didn't adopt it as an upgrade)?




I will take a look at Tim's link - the car is on its way to Arkansas at the moment in various boxes.

[D-Type]

The perpetual question restorers have to answer "Originality or useability?" It's not my car, but if it was I would go for originality.

At that time, Chapman was selling complete cars, chassis or anywhere in between to order. If a customer wanted to fit an FWB I'm sure he would have obliged.

Edited by D-Type, 19 April 2012 - 19:54.

[john aston]

Chris Rea's Lotus Six is certainly not slow judging by his drives at the recent Silverstone Classics I have attended... Kept up with some very serious machinery- and of course lapped significantly quicker than Mrs Lyons F5000 Eagle.

[Red Socks]

Bear in mind you may struggle to get an HTP for it. Neither the 6 nor the 7 ever complied with Appendix C as applied to two seat racing cars(Sports racing cars) in that there was always a requirement that the car should have at least one door. Thus technically neither could take part in an International competition -thus no HTP.
One or two did sixes do International sprints I understand/beleive and have managed to get papers thus , but it could prove problematical

[Bloggsworth]

I wouldn't be surprised if it had a De Dion rear end, but not an independent. I have a dim recollection (1957/58 ish) of seeing one with the Lotus 9 De Dion rear suspension.

Something along these lines....

Edited by Bloggsworth, 11 January 2011 - 20:10.

[Ray Bell]

Yes, it was a de Dion rear end...

Which is an independent suspension of the type favoured by many in the early fifties.

The car in question figured in a momentous battle at Bathurst in October '56, driven by Doug Chivas it diced for a full hundred miles (John Medley assures us) with the MG TC Special of John Ralston at Bathurst.

I'm sure the car was completely ex-factory, though at a later stage (by the early sixties) it had a new frame to the same design, but in a heavier gauge tubing.

[r.atlos]

Neither the 6 nor the 7 ever complied with Appendix C as applied to two seat racing cars(Sports racing cars) in that there was always a requirement that the car should have at least one door. Thus technically neither could take part in an International competition -thus no HTP.

But wasn't the 7 homologated as a GT car ?

[RogerFrench]

Yes, it was a de Dion rear end...

Which is an independent suspension of the type favoured by many in the early fifties.

I am quite sure that those of us who were around in the early 50s knew that de Dion was not a form of independent suspension, neither do my remaining marbles consider it so today.

That whacking beam connecting the rear wheels puts paid to that idea.

Edited by RogerFrench, 12 January 2011 - 03:42.

[Allan Lupton]

But wasn't the 7 homologated as a GT car ?

Somewhere on this forum is the story of the Seven with a Fibrepair hardtop at a Racing Car Show being measured and declared too narrow to qualify. . .

Oh, and Roger is of course right about the non-independence of the de Dion system (a pedant he say: probably we should have called it a Bouton rear end, as it was probably Georges Bouton who thought it up for Count de Dion in the 1880s. .)

Edited by Allan Lupton, 12 January 2011 - 08:05.

[Ray Bell]

Originally posted by RogerFrench
I am quite sure that those of us who were around in the early 50s knew that de Dion was not a form of independent suspension, neither do my remaining marbles consider it so today.

That whacking beam connecting the rear wheels puts paid to that idea.

I would have to agree, of course, but it's also true that they were 'loosely' but commonly referred to as independent rear ends in the period.

They certainly had some savings in unsprung weight...

[elansprint72]

Another thread on Lotus history- I love it; folks shooting from the hip and saying this or that was or was not done, only for someone to come along later and prove that, actually, it was; or wasn't!


Presumably those who mentioned the 7 were not referring to the Clairmonte but to the rather later Seven?

[Red Socks]

But wasn't the 7 homologated as a GT car ?

No.

[Sharman]

Somewhere on this forum is the story of the Seven with a Fibrepair hardtop at a Racing Car Show being measured and declared too narrow to qualify. . .

Oh, and Roger is of course right about the non-independence of the de Dion system (a pedant he say: probably we should have called it a Bouton rear end, as it was probably Georges Bouton who thought it up for Count de Dion in the 1880s. .)

That was me Allan. it was Vic Derrington at the Racing Car Show who pointed out that the cockpit was 1/2 inch too narrow

[Bloggsworth]

That was me Allan. it was Vic Derrington at the Racing Car Show who pointed out that the cockpit was 1/2 inch too narrow

That would have been 12.7mm - It seems that the French invent the regulations for all sorts of sports; they have a mania for making rules to spoil the fun...

[Ray Bell]

Like how many wheel studs you're allowed to cut off?

Nothing like referring these things to French engineers...

[Joe Bosworth]

Mark

I wish to throw a few details in to these discussions that may add confidence and dispel some misconceptions that are developing in this thread.

I comment with the advantage of having driven the ex-Chivas/Howard Lotus 6 in anger. I drove that car to a podium position at the 1982 Ameroo Park Frank Matich Trophy race for that era sports cars. I actually built the Climax FWA that was in the car at that time. I also have built a half dozen other FWAs and faced the starters flag with other FWA powered cars and similar in the era. These include the FJ that John Medley has owned for years and which is still most competitive in class. Without counting I have faced over 100 starters flags in a variety of similar under 1100 cc cars, (many more starts with larger engines).

I will place quotation marks from queries and then follow with my comment.

Query– “are there any Lotus 6 owners out there who have already been through this experience and found it to be too daunting?”

Comment - The Lotus 6 is one of the most utterly simple cars of all time to build/rebuild/restore. There are really very few mechanical elements and almost all still available from several sources. The chassis and mechanics are well within the capabilities of anyone with mechanical skills and patience. IMHO one of the greatest temptations will be to keep it period correct which would be an absolute corruption of a car for which there are only a handful in the guise of the one that you describe.

Q – “On paper the performance of these machines looks fairly poor (I'm guessing that they must have been modified quite a bit for racing”

C- Entirely wrong. The FWA engined, dedion sprung Six is a very strong performer. In the Matich Trophy Race mentioned above I had a routine drive to the podium and beat cars from the era including the Gavin Bain Ferarri that I chased down for a few laps to pass on the inside of the loop at the top of the hill and then simply drove away from. You can expect similar results on shorter tracks. Admittidly the Bain Ferarri would blow the Six away at places like Road America but the Six will be competitive at all shorter tracks including those like Mid-Ohio.

Q – “I imagine that a more powerful version - Lotus 7 - must have been one the drawing board almost as soon as enough Lotus 6 cars were sold to make it viable.”

C- Quite wrong. The Six was born in 1953, first raced in July 1954 and went out of production in 1955. The Seven was born in 1957. As well, the Seven was originally certainly not more powerful than the Sixes. Often at the early days of the Seven very similar engines were applied to both. The Seven had the advantage of improving on the rather flexible flyer chassis of the Six. This allowed it to morph in time into more powerful engined applications than the Six would have lived with.

Q- “This one apparently has an FWA engine which he thinks was the original. I will try to get a hold of the chassis number if this helps get more info. He was wondering if he shouldn't swap it for an FWB engine (I dont know if this is a "drag and drop" type substitution)”

C – It is a drag and drop swap but it would be an absolute corruption to do so and I would expect that no responsible organisation would log book such a thing. Not the least is that the FWB did not arrive until something like 1957, well after the Six was past its normal competitive life. In addition, while the Six’s original state was outstandingly good for FWA tourqe/power things, you would find problems with the FWB type power and torque.

Q – “had heard that the FWA was a one-speed motor, and that the FWB should be more flexible with more power. Was this a common change at the time (and, if so, I wonder why Colin Chapman didn't adopt it as an upgrade)?”

C – Partly answered as above. As well, Serias 2 and 3 FWAs are far from being a one-speed motor, (engine). The Series 2 provides in stock form some 84 HP at 6900 rpm with a max rev of 7200. Max torque is/was 71 lb-ft at 5000 rpm. The series 3 provided 90 HP at 7300 an 72 lb-ft at 5250. I spent most of my time with a Series two with a series 3 top end and was fully competitive in the US and Australia with the later engines including the Weber carbed Series 3 that were supposed to give 96 HP at 7300 rpm but I seriously doubt the accuracy of that claim. In fact my up-graded series 2 engine provided an under 2 liter sports car lap record at Oran Park for quite some time.

Regards

[MarkWill]

Wow! Thank you very much for this information, and your very interesting anecdotes. I have asked my friend to get me pictures of the car when it arrives (I forgot to ask who he's getting it from but I'm sure that will help nail down the history - there cant be that many of these cars still around). I appreciate your inputs, especially re. the engine which I will faithfully pass on. I can't wait to get more information on the car. One last question for people while I wait - how big was Colin Chapman's workforce when these cars were being produced? I have the idea that it was still a small garage-type operation with a couple of good craftsmen welding up frames (I'd be a bit disappointed to learn that this was sub-contracted out; this seems like a car with a bit of soul).

FYI I found this link while trawling through: forums.autosport.com/.../index.php/t74555.html

Mark

I wish to throw a few details in to these discussions that may add confidence and dispel some misconceptions that are developing in this thread.

I comment with the advantage of having driven the ex-Chivas/Howard Lotus 6 in anger. I drove that car to a podium position at the 1982 Ameroo Park Frank Matich Trophy race for that era sports cars. I actually built the Climax FWA that was in the car at that time. I also have built a half dozen other FWAs and faced the starters flag with other FWA powered cars and similar in the era. These include the FJ that John Medley has owned for years and which is still most competitive in class. Without counting I have faced over 100 starters flags in a variety of similar under 1100 cc cars, (many more starts with larger engines).

I will place quotation marks from queries and then follow with my comment.

Query– “are there any Lotus 6 owners out there who have already been through this experience and found it to be too daunting?”

Comment - The Lotus 6 is one of the most utterly simple cars of all time to build/rebuild/restore. There are really very few mechanical elements and almost all still available from several sources. The chassis and mechanics are well within the capabilities of anyone with mechanical skills and patience. IMHO one of the greatest temptations will be to keep it period correct which would be an absolute corruption of a car for which there are only a handful in the guise of the one that you describe.

Q – “On paper the performance of these machines looks fairly poor (I'm guessing that they must have been modified quite a bit for racing”

C- Entirely wrong. The FWA engined, dedion sprung Six is a very strong performer. In the Matich Trophy Race mentioned above I had a routine drive to the podium and beat cars from the era including the Gavin Bain Ferarri that I chased down for a few laps to pass on the inside of the loop at the top of the hill and then simply drove away from. You can expect similar results on shorter tracks. Admittidly the Bain Ferarri would blow the Six away at places like Road America but the Six will be competitive at all shorter tracks including those like Mid-Ohio.

Q – “I imagine that a more powerful version - Lotus 7 - must have been one the drawing board almost as soon as enough Lotus 6 cars were sold to make it viable.”

C- Quite wrong. The Six was born in 1953, first raced in July 1954 and went out of production in 1955. The Seven was born in 1957. As well, the Seven was originally certainly not more powerful than the Sixes. Often at the early days of the Seven very similar engines were applied to both. The Seven had the advantage of improving on the rather flexible flyer chassis of the Six. This allowed it to morph in time into more powerful engined applications than the Six would have lived with.

Q- “This one apparently has an FWA engine which he thinks was the original. I will try to get a hold of the chassis number if this helps get more info. He was wondering if he shouldn't swap it for an FWB engine (I dont know if this is a "drag and drop" type substitution)”

C – It is a drag and drop swap but it would be an absolute corruption to do so and I would expect that no responsible organisation would log book such a thing. Not the least is that the FWB did not arrive until something like 1957, well after the Six was past its normal competitive life. In addition, while the Six’s original state was outstandingly good for FWA tourqe/power things, you would find problems with the FWB type power and torque.

Q – “had heard that the FWA was a one-speed motor, and that the FWB should be more flexible with more power. Was this a common change at the time (and, if so, I wonder why Colin Chapman didn't adopt it as an upgrade)?”

C – Partly answered as above. As well, Serias 2 and 3 FWAs are far from being a one-speed motor, (engine). The Series 2 provides in stock form some 84 HP at 6900 rpm with a max rev of 7200. Max torque is/was 71 lb-ft at 5000 rpm. The series 3 provided 90 HP at 7300 an 72 lb-ft at 5250. I spent most of my time with a Series two with a series 3 top end and was fully competitive in the US and Australia with the later engines including the Weber carbed Series 3 that were supposed to give 96 HP at 7300 rpm but I seriously doubt the accuracy of that claim. In fact my up-graded series 2 engine provided an under 2 liter sports car lap record at Oran Park for quite some time.

Regards

[Sharman]

A point which may or may not be perinent is that Peter Gammon won the British Empire Trophy on handicap in 1954 driving a Lotus Vl, which should qualify it for acceptance as an historic sports racer, one door or no door.

[elansprint72]

Mark,

Can I recommend "Lotus the Early Years" by Peter Ross (a TNF member, I believe). He was there at the time and the book is a fascinating read, not some third-hand regurgitation of "the facts" like we often see in magazine articles these days.

Joe,
Well said.

[Red Socks]

A point which may or may not be perinent is that Peter Gammon won the British Empire Trophy on handicap in 1954 driving a Lotus Vl, which should qualify it for acceptance as an historic sports racer, one door or no door.

The general overview from FIA HMSC has always been that organisers accepting cars which don't comply with the regulations does not automatically entitle the car then to claim rights in this matter. In the same way that cars which , for instance, admit later that they were running oversize engines don't get the right to run them now.
In short historic cock ups and historic cheating don't count.

[Sharman]

The general overview from FIA HMSC has always been that organisers accepting cars which don't comply with the regulations does not automatically entitle the car then to claim rights in this matter. In the same way that cars which , for instance, admit later that they were running oversize engines don't get the right to run them now.
In short historic cock ups and historic cheating don't count.

I rather think that this predated all the homologation hoohahs

[GregCozier]

I am quite sure that those of us who were around in the early 50s knew that de Dion was not a form of independent suspension, neither do my remaining marbles consider it so today.

That whacking beam connecting the rear wheels puts paid to that idea.

DeDions were used to reduce unsprung weight, not be independent. The idea was to have the advantages of a live axle (wheels always perpendicular to the road) with the advantages of independent suspension (differential and 1/2 driveshaft weight supported in sprung chassis). Same reasoning for putting beam (dead) axles in the back of Minis.

[Red Socks]

I rather think that this predated all the homologation hoohahs

It wasn't about homologation-which begins as you indicate later- it relates to the International regulations of motor sport in this case Appendix C which deals with the specifications of two seat racing ( sports) cars which are eligible to take part in International events and by which organisers of events were bound.

[CoulthardD]

Q – “I imagine that a more powerful version - Lotus 7 - must have been one the drawing board almost as soon as enough Lotus 6 cars were sold to make it viable.”

C- Quite wrong. The Six was born in 1953, first raced in July 1954 and went out of production in 1955. The Seven was born in 1957.

Didn't Nigel Allen race the Mk 6 at Silverstone a couple of times in 1952?

DC

[Robin Fairservice]

I have a copy of the book "Lotus The First TenYears" by Ian Smith. In it the the Lotus VI story is told in great detail. The first race was on July 5th 1952 at the MG Car Club Silverstone meet. The car was first driven by Michael Allen, then by Colin when it finished second to Peter Gammon's very fast MG TC. Colin then took part in a handicapped team race, where they finished second. During that summer the car was also driven by Nigel Allen and Hazel. Michael and Nigel Allen also practiced at Boreham, but Nigel damaged it. Nigel was then involved in a road accident returning to Boreham after the car had ben repaired back at the shop, and the car was written off. When Lotus received the insurance money they were able to settle all outstanding bills and reform the company.

This was the car with the 1500cc Ford Consul engine built up from new parts because Ford would not sell them a new engine!

[bradbury west]

Points arising
In his lecture to the SAE in Cleveland Oct31/Nov 2 1960 Walter Hassan stated that "in standard form, 76bhp@6200rpm, torque of 69lb.ft and bmep of 156lb.sq.in at 5000rpm the engines were most reliable, had good low speed torque and built up an excellent reputation for high speed, power and reliability. Most users were able to race for a full season without overhaul, something quite unknown at the time."

For a detailed explanation of the handling characteristics of the split axled, swing axle Six with a de Dion rear and the driving technique needed, I recommend the relevant pages in Mr Ludvigsen's new Lotus book

Was the 6 in which Patrick Thomas was killed at Goodwood in June 1961 , chassis 6/41, the ex Jon Derisley car?

The FWB was a reluctant compromise design, according to Walter Hassan, its long stroke and poor breathing limiting revs and being regarded as asthmatic by him, qv Climax in Coventry. However in a light car like the 6 it would still provide lively performance. I am sure Charles Helps will answer any 6 queries.

Complete power curve graphs for Climax engines are to be found in Des Hamill's excellent book on Coventry Climax.
Roger Lund

Edited by bradbury west, 14 January 2011 - 21:25.

[Charles Helps]

Sorry Roger et al, I missed this thread completely and only came across it today when searching for something else.

To answer your question about Patrick Thomas, I am fairly certain that he was driving a Lotus Seven when he died. Mk6/41 never belonged to Jon Derisley - it was the ex-Fred Marriott Morris 10 engined car registered VPK 3. He sold it in 1957 and in 1959 the car went to John Townend who according to the previous owner was killed in it on 26 September 1959 during practice at Goodwood.

As for Jon Derisley's Mk 6, it's sitting in a garage a few yards away from me at the moment.

[willga]

Looking at Mr Brotherwood's photos, the dash instruments of the 'VI' look very similar to (and I guess would have been the same as) those on the 'IX' - in particular, the saucer-sized 8000rpm rev-counter.

I'm doing a small restoration project myself, and am trying to source one of these large rev-counters.

Does anyone know what car it would have originally come out of?

[Repco22]

QUOTE (RogerFrench @ Jan 11 2011, 23:41)
I am quite sure that those of us who were around in the early 50s knew that de Dion was not a form of independent suspension, neither do my remaining marbles consider it so today.

That whacking beam connecting the rear wheels puts paid to that idea.

I would have to agree, of course, but it's also true that they were 'loosely' but commonly referred to as independent rear ends in the period.

Ray, I've just come across your interesting explanation. Do you mean like the use of the term, "FX Holden"?

[RJE]

Can I partly hi-jack this thread to try and get an answer to a question that I have been curious about for may years.

In 1963-6 while I worked in Canada I used to help a fellow ex-pat who owned and ran a Lotus 6 and who lived on the outskirts of Toronto, Mississauga if my memory is correct. The car had a Climax FWA which I recall I rebuilt while working at Portland Garage in Port Credit. The Lotus owners name was Dave Hunt who originated from the UK Bristol area and later went on to race a Pontiac GTO before it was wrecked in a trailer towing accident. The Lotus was kept along with a number of other local racers cars in a lock-up near the centre of Toronto where we generally worked on it in the evenings before crossing the road to the local inn.

The car was not particually competitive but provided a bit of fun, including a visit to the Drag Strip in Niagara Falls as can be seen in the photograph. This proved quite lucrative as the locals hadn't a clue what a Lotus 6 was and paid, if I recall, $10 US each time you won your match race. By the time we had accumulated about $60 (a small weeks wages in 1963) the organisers realised we were sandbagging and set the local hot shoe in his Chevy on us who promptly blew us away.

Now my question. I cannot recall Dave ever telling me the previous history of the car, which I would dearly like to know. Also does anybody know what happened to it? I do not know the chassis number, such things did not seem to matter in those days. I remember the FWA ran on SUs and was not particually potent. Sitting here now I can see on my book shelf, the Climax workshop manual I was given when I did the motor.

I have attached three pictures of the Lotus 6, taken in 1963. One shows the car behind the pits at Mosport, one outside Dave Hunts apartment in Toronto being towed behind my A40 and the last at the previously mentioned Drag race.

[bradbury west]

To answer your question about Patrick Thomas, I am fairly certain that he was driving a Lotus Seven when he died. Mk6/41 never belonged to Jon Derisley - it was the ex-Fred Marriott Morris 10 engined car registered VPK 3. He sold it in 1957 and in 1959 the car went to John Townend who according to the previous owner was killed in it on 26 September 1959 during practice at Goodwood.

Motorsport memorials site gives Thomas as driving 6/41 reg VPK3 as above, killed in race 2 at Goodwood on June 10 1961, based on details from Robert Edwards. My interest was in Derisley's comments when I interviewed him years ago. Motoring News cites it in its report as a 7. I have not checked in MS or Autosport reports today.
Roger Lund

[Charles Helps]

RJE, the three pictures of the Mk VI in Canada are fascinating. I think that it may well be the ex-Tom Gilmour car that Ollie Clubine owned.

He wrote to me many years ago: "I also owned this Lotus (in 1958 & 1959, I believe)... It was originally 1466 cc MG powered but was changed to 1100 cc Coventry Climax in about 1960 or 1961 and retains this engine today..."

One especially nice thing about the car is the Mk IX finned 11" brakes on the front axle visible in the front view. This was also a feature of Graham Howard's car but his had the Mk IX de-Dion axle as well complete with long radius rods for fore and aft location.

Roger, Jon Derisley drove his old car, SNK 6, at the 50th Anniversary meeting at Silverstone. My preparation wasn't up to much and he ran out of fuel during one session but he said that it was interesting when on his way down to Stowe corner during a demonstration session he was passed, one on either side, by two black and gold Lotus F1 cars going very much more quickly than him. He said that he was doing 90 mph, based on the feel of the wind on his overalls!

I think that the question of which Lotus Thomas and Townend respectively were driving could be further investigated. I remember finding that a P Thomas appears on the list of original owners of a Lotus Seven.

Lastly, willga, the 5" chronometric tachometers are not easy to find or cheap when you do. I am collecting parts from a smaller Smiths chronometric instrument for rebuilding into a 5" case. There are at least two instrument rebuilders/restorers who can help here: Patrick Henry in Ireland and David and Philip Woods in the South of England. An internet search on either of their names with the word chronometric should find them.

Edited to change 'Alexander' to 'Townend' - Alexander was the previous owner of Chassis 41.

Edited by Charles Helps, 23 April 2012 - 09:26.

[RJE]

Thank you for that. The point you make about the brakes reminds me of a mixed blessing that the car had. It may have braked well but at one point we found it impossible to get any replacement part for the front brakes so we took all of the cylinders shoes and linings from off the back plates and plugged up the three way 'T' piece to the front so that only the rear brakes worked. We then took the car to the Drag races where tech inspection people didn't seem to notice or mind.

[Ted Walker]

Charles. This must be the car that lived in Bath in the late 60s, It was owned by a chap called Brian ......... .My late father used to tune it for him. It had Alfins ,Climax and a steering wheel that was removable that was supposed to have come fromthe Auto Union designer.

[Charles Helps]

Charles. This must be the car that lived in Bath in the late 60s, It was owned by a chap called Brian ......... .My late father used to tune it for him. It had Alfins ,Climax and a steering wheel that was removable that was supposed to have come fromthe Auto Union designer.

Ted, the car that Tom Hunt had and RJE worked on was in Canada from new. There was a car (PTX 999) in the Radstock, Somerset area with a Climax FWA for over 20 years from about 1965 but it was bought from Woolacombe in Devon and it didn't have 'Alfins' and the steering wheel looks like the standard upright Ford Popular unit.

I wonder which Mk VI your father worked on?

RJE, a friend with a Mk IX told me that the 11" brakes were common to milk floats. Apparently there was a dairy in London at the top of a hill and the fully loaded milk floats kept running away down the hill so they were fitted with the larger diameter brake drums (not necessarily with fins) with greater width shoes to solve the problem.

[llmaurice]

Hi,

A friend of mine is looking into restoring a Lotus 6. I dont know much about these cars; are there any Lotus 6 owners out there who have already been through this experience and found it to be too daunting? On paper the performance of these machines looks fairly poor (I'm guessing that they must have been modified quite a bit for racing, and I imagine that a more powerful version - Lotus 7 - must have been one the drawing board almost as soon as enough Lotus 6 cars were sold to make it viable). I'm just being curious - I admit that I haven't done any research yet (I will do) but my friend is very entheusiastic about the whole thing (its not his first project by the way but he normally does American Muscle Cars) so I thought I'd ask on the forum and get a bit of the "flavour" of the whole thing so that next time I see him I can nod sagely or throw in a couple of useful hints.

To me ,the Lotus 6 was the epitome of what Chapman set out to do,that being to make a sporty car for the enthusiast of the day that would bring in much needed revenue for Lotus to move forward from .
The front suspension ,almost 100% derived from a car that the local hooray henry would not be seen dead in was almost a match for Maserati in its strength and durability. Yes it ended up with the now dreaded swing axle suspension across the front but if you ever try sawing through that Ford axle beam,hacking perch pins about to start making the components you would know there would NEVER be a problem of it rusting away.
Lovely little cars both to build ,work on and I really feel to drive even with a 100e motor. If that wasn't enough for every day open air motoring ,as others have mentioned there were a variety of other motor one could use but then it was getting away from what the car set out to be in road form.
I can't think of a nicer little car for one to have the good fortune and pleasure of owning and rebuilding (when necessary )
I'm sure this chap will really enjoy what he has ,even more so if he considers what it would cost in 1955 and most importantly what its worth today if it is in genuine standard condition unlike the many depreciating "exotic" dinosaurs of supercars .

[Charles Helps]

A bit more on the finned brakes. I think I'm right in saying that the car that is referred to in the first post is to be fitted with the Lotus Mk IX brake system. A former owner of a car with this system told me:
"The finned brakes used Humber Super Snipe brake shoes. I discovered the magnesium backplates flexed. Because the shoes were so wide (2 1/4 inches, from memory) it was essential to adjust them to the same clearance right across the drum liner.
My car had the Mk9 dual master cylinder system, with a tiny pivot-bolt in single shear for the balance bar. Mine broke once, just as I parked in the pits after a race. If you look at The Autocar's long article about the Mk9 you will see they pick out the balance-bar as offering alternative front-rear ratios. All that happens is you can choose which of two threaded holes on the brake lever you screw the bolt into. The ratio of the balance bar is unchanged."

Next post should be a snippet from the 1955 Lotus Mk 9 description in Autocar magazine

The master cylinders are the same as those fitted to the MG TC.

Edited by Charles Helps, 24 April 2012 - 08:36.

[Charles Helps]

Mk9BrakeMasterCylsMtgS by charles.helps, on Flickr

[Allan Lupton]

Uncharacteristic error both in the mechanical engineering of the proportioning system and in the reporting by The Autocar's scribe.
In those days the technical journalists would normally have known better and pointed the error out to Chapman - and he didn't usually design that badly himself, or employ others that did.
On the subject of wide brake shoes, they would work well if the drum were designed properly and didn't bell-mouth as they heated up. The 2¼" wide Girling front brake system on a car I had took hard linings well as the drums were good.

Edited by Allan Lupton, 24 April 2012 - 09:02.