I would like to rebuilt the vacuum system for headlamp (it has been dismanteld from the prvious owner) on my elan federal sprint.
I need all the parts; Paul Matty has some parts but not the Connecting Rod, Bracket for Vac Unit & Control Valve.
Thank you for any help.
Umberto
[email protected]
Hi Umberto,
Como stai?
I rebuilt my vacuum system when I first got my +2 and they can be built to function pretty well. My failsafe system lights stay down ‘indefinitely’ etc…but do take an age to go down when switched off…i.e. after use.
This makes me often think of moving to a motorised system…
To your question:
I got a lot of things from my local engineering companies.
But a great resource is Sue Miller at Mick Miller Classic Lotus. If she can’t get parts she usually knows where they can be got!
Susan Miller - [email protected]
Website - www.mickmillerlotus.com
Tel - +44 1728 603307
Best of luck!
Ciao,
Peter 1973 +2S 130/5 - with vacuum operated headlights…
For the one way valve i use one of these
hello,
many thanks for the info.
Regards,
umberto
Umberto,
I have the actuators, springs, wires etc. from when I ripped-out the vacuum system of my Sprint to change to electric lifters.
I was going to sell them on fleabay, but never got around to it.
They are standard European units - I am not aware of what the Federal were and how they operated.
You can have them for a nominal amount, but I would recommend changing to electric as long as you have some basic automotive skills.
Brian Clarke
(1972 Sprint)
Brian Clark,
thanks for the info; now i have a very simple and efficient system made by the previous owner. It is working by a “robe” and a clip from the headlamp to the foot passenger area (it is a similar system very popular on sail boat…
You and others are saying that it is better to forget for the original system…
May be i can buy all you have, just in case i don’t want to follow frendly advise…
Thank you,
Umberto
I use the original vacuum systems on an Elan S4 and a +2. Once you sort out leaky connections (and assuming your chassis front crossmember is air-tight 
), it works just fine… 
It seems to me like some people go looking for jobs to do, even where there is really no need… Perhaps it adds that ‘I made that’ personal touch when most of the rest of the work has been done by others 
Matthew
Matthew,
thanks. I forgot to check the condition of the front crossmember of chassie; it seems good, but…; maybe it is better to forget to replace the original system in order to avoid problems when now everything is working perfectly by a symple robe…
thank you.
ciao,
Umberto
I agree with Matthew. My original failsafe system works great. The headlights go up and down rapidly and they stay down at least for a couple of days of non use. Ripping out the original ingenious system in which Colin took advantage of his notion that it was an advantage if he could make one part perform two functions (front cross member) and then replacing it with a couple of electric motors is not exactly adding any lightness to the car either.
On the other hand, we all know that the radiators on these cars, especially the later ones are marginal at best plus their location crowds the engine compartment. A custom made nose mounted radiator could solve both problems. Yes I realize that a nose mounted radiator will raise my polar moment of inertia, but I’ll take that than over an overheating engine.
So the only way I would consider a headlight conversion to electric motors would be if I found that a nose mounted radiator would interfere with the original headlight actuating system.
Just my opinion.
Frank,
have a look of my engine bay; the radiator has been modifyd… and maybe is difficult to rebuilt the vacuum system…
Umberto
Umberto,
Nice picture, and very helpful too. The top of your radiator appears to be located just behind where the horizontal shaft that connects the two headlight pods together is supposed to be so this shaft would probably fit. On the other hand, the bottom of your radiator is located where the actuator is supposed to be so it will not fit. I was planning on mounting my radiator much further forward, in front of the entire mechanism.
You can toss that beautiful radiator and custom build a smaller one that will fit much further forward and hopefully not interfere with the original headlight mechanism, or you can go to electric motors to actuate the headlight pods. I would be loath to throw away that radiator so in your case, electric motors seems like the best solution. Hope this helps.
Frank,
you are correct: on the top the radiator is just behind the lever connecting the two headlamps and on the bottom very closed where the vacuum has to be fixt;
In front of the radiator just behind the mouth of the nose i have the small oil radiator and so small space is available; the original ar filter box is in my garage and sobstitute by a K&N cone filters taking air directly from the mouth…
Ciao,
Umberto
You could use electric motors for the pods or go to the UK specification vacuum pods i.e. one vacuum unit for each pod. IMHO the electric option is the better one. There have been previous threads on this forum covering the electric conversion. IIRC Mazda MX5/Miata units were used.
A number of points:
As I thought, I clearly did not understand the Federal system, as my vacuum units are as Steve says; one unit per pod.
The weight of each vacuum actuator is a couple of ounces less than the electric actuator.
Yes Matthew, you?re right, too much time on my hands now I?m retired. But, the first thing I promised myself when returning to the lunatic Lotus world was that I would rid myself of the unbelievably crap headlight system that dogged me during my youthful S2 days. My electric lifters were out of a Toyota Celica from a scrap yard, and I enjoyed the challenge of fitting them ? particularly the electrical circuit which was freely obtained via this forum.
I find it very difficult to believe that CABC would not have chosen the now ubiquitous headlamp motor systems if they had been available in the early 60?s. The Elan was introduced, the headlamp system was generally considered a joke by the motoring enthusiasts of the day ? and even today when being discussed generally gets a rueful shake of the head by non-Lotus enthusiasts.
Umberto,
Is the vacuum switch and hoses still fitted to your car? If not, it will be a real PITA to fit new ones.
Brian Clarke
(1972 Sprint)
Umberto,
I shouldn’t butt into your thread but since it concerns the headlamp vaccuum system, my question is not far off track.
With headlamps up and car accelerating, the lamps dip up and down depending on engine speed. All the connections seem correct so I have to believe it is caused by a air leak in the cross-member of the chassis.
Can anyone confirm that, and if so any solutions for repair?
Thanks,
LoTex
65 Elan S2
Lotex,
Check that the non return valve is functioning. Similar problem occurred to my car which had previously been fine,traced it to the NRV malfunctioning.
Brian,
This comes as news to me. It’s my understanding that developing the headlight system was one of the last engineering challenges that Chapman and Hickman faced on the Elan. And the fact that Chapman and/or Hickman designed the front cross member to double as a vacuum tank is even more evidence of genius. If you look at other sports cars from 1963, you will be hard pressed to find one with disappearing headlights, especialy at the price point of an Elan.
If non-Lotus enthusiasts ruefully shake their heads, this is just confirmation that non-Lotus enthusiasts don’t know much about Lotus. I use my car as my daily driver and my original vacuum system works perfectly. If yours didn’t before you replaced it, there was probably something wrong with it, that’s all.
Sorry, I get a little testy when someone criticizes Chapman for his engineering capabilities.
Frank,
My vacuum system also worked ?perfectly?, but having been in automotive design and development for over 30 years, it still remains embedded in my retired brain that continuous improvement is the key to success. I wonder who said that at one of our youthful seminars???
If I gave the impression that the vacuum system was not an elegant solution to address a problem that only existed in one part of the world ? then I apologise. The system was elegant in that it was very quickly implemented to get the car through Federal regulations ? if it wasn?t for that requirement, the 26R would have remained the better looking and more cost effective norm.
I?m sure it was never the intention that the Elan should be the first production car with disappearing headlights ? to obtain Federal approval was definitely an after-thought, and a panic to comply. And of course, Lotus even had to ?cheat? to achieve this (by raising the body at the front by 1?).
I still maintain that an electric lifter design is a better engineering concept, and would have been adopted very quickly by CABC if the motors had been readily available at the time.
I feel sure that all the modifications I have done, or about to do to my car, would have had CABC approval ? even if they do offend the purists.
And by the way, the only criticism I ever had of CABC was to demand (sorry, persuade) Jim Clark drive in a Formula 2 race 1968.
Brian Clarke
(1972 Sprint)
I think you’ll find the Elan was designed with pop-up headlights to make a lower front wing line and to meet British safety laws, not to pass US laws! And the pop-up design pre-dates the 26R…
However, the raised front suspension WAS ‘created’ to help pass Federal laws…
Matthew
Lotex
I had a similar problem in my +2. It was finally traced to cracks in the front crossmember where the wishbones attach. (its a Spyder service exchange chassis) Now all welded up (by Spyder) and working perfectly. Before fing the cracks I also replaced a corroded actuator. They can rust badly on the underside where they are bolted to the bottom of the nosecone.
Good luck
Andy
