As a relatively new member of this excellent forum, I was wondering if many members had come across cars that needed more then one chassis replacement (apart from crashes!) ?
Obviously galvanised ones shouldn’t rust, but what about replacement Lotus and Spyder ones, some of which must be quite an age now.
Having owned various Lotus models in the past, I am now looking for an Elan Sprint, and am keen to learn as much about them as I can.
Thank you.
Michael, I replaced a chassis on my S3 Coupe back in 1978, and that lasted 3 or 4 weeks…I hit a kerb a bit hard! I replaced the bent chassis straight away, and that’s still on the car and is fine.
Bottom line is that any of the chassis will outlast most folks, unless you hit a kerb or have another sort of accident. Rust won’t be an issue, unless you drive the car all year round for many years.
Mark
I replaced my chassis in 1978 and gave the new one 5 coats of hammerite.
Iit lasted till 2008; being used as a daily driver in London and trips to Sub-Aqua diving sites all over England Wales & Eire
See:
lotus-chassis-f36/rusty-chassis-t16513.html?hilit=welding
lotus-suspension-f42/how-repaired-rusty-front-suspension-turrets-t16727.html?hilit=turret
I think that if an owner has replaced a chassis themselves and had to do the work involved they will take every precaution to ensure the replacement chassis is adequately protected from the elements, and will check regularly that the chassis is rust free. Obviously no amount of rust protection will protect a chassis from crash damage or stress cracks, although cracks can be repaired if spotted early.
Mick
The early chassis protection was poor and my car was rusted when I bought it at four years and 50,000 miles though I didn’t realise it until a front turret folded at 60,000.
The replacement Lotus chassis was red-leaded and bitumen covered, as supplied, but needed patching around those turrets after another 13 years and 100,000 miles and was worrying when I had it replaced in 1990 after 21 years and 125,000 miles. The latter half of those years it was kept in a garage but used continuously.
The new galvanised and Waxoiled Lotus chassis has lasted 26 years and 85,000 miles continuous use and shows no signs of corrosion anywhere.
Out of interest is there many out there with there original chassis?
I only ask as i work for a place that restores Classic cars and changing chassis rather than repairing just isn’t done (it would have to be Missing or servilely damaged to be changed). That said it seems common in the Elan world?
I believe mine is. 73 +2, indicated 48k miles. Spent first 20 years in the UK, and last 25 off the road in the US.
It’s had the front towers repaired, engine mounts re-enforced and needs a couple other things addressing.
If I was in the UK I’d be planning to replace it but here the cost (shipping) is much higher so planning to just keep a good eye on it for now.
I’m with Grizzly on this-and I too worked, until recently, in a restoration shop. On other brands of classic cars a chassis replacement is a definite no-no.
On my own S2 the chassis is original and was in very good condition when I stripped it a couple of weeks ago. After sand blasting I was careful when painting it to make sure that the number stamped into the chassis was still visible through the paint-I may even high-light it.
The other extreme from Elans is this business of “matching numbers”. i.e. The engine, transmission, body and chassis numbers must all match the build sheet. It seems to have started with the Corvette collectors and now has spread through the whole classic car movement.
Ah, but the Elan ‘chassis’ is not a chassis of the classic car type. it is merely a subframe of the fibreglass.
Ho many classic Minis still have their original subframes?
I think that the Elan ‘chassis’ is much more of the car than a mini sub-frame.
I believe the chassis was orignal when I bought my Elan in 1974. Taken off the road in 1985 when I broke the engine racing and didn’t start the restoration/modification process until 19 years later. It was stored in a leaky wooden shed so I decided to source a clean used chassis. I needn’t have bothered, as the original was in pretty good shape with only surface rust.
A Mini is a bad example, as above it’s not got a chassis and the Mini Subframes aren’t Numbered (even though they are slightly different so will always be kept if possible(really not hard to repair a mini subframe next to the amount of welding most mini shells require)) a Lotus Elan is a Numbered Chassis and to me it doesn’t make sense to loose the numbers matching as its such a simple structure to repair? i get some may be beyond redemption but most people just replace as a matter of course in a restoration which baffles me.
I spend most of my time working with Jags and there can be thousands of pounds difference in a full matching numbers car and one fitted with a new engine/Body/Subframe etc i just find it odd that Lotus isn’t the same.
Maybe its just that most people don’t know where to look for the number or assume it doesn’t have one??? Duno…
There is, of course, the small matter of the factory’s insistence that the chassis should not be repaired.
When mine was patched by an engineering company, not a garage, with identical material from a +2 chassis, the welder found it didn’t weld properly until he ran the torch over it a second time. I had cleaned everything to bare metal.
My chassis is original and as far I can tell, quite rust-free which is really surprising considering that it spent most of its life in coastal Florida.
There is a completely different mindset with regard to replacement chassis on old Lotus cars versus other manufacturers. You cannot compare values of a standard road going Elan with say an E type or a Ferrari of the same period. They are not remotely seen in the same light, and never will be, and values reflect that. Lotus Elans, +2s, Europas, even Elites, will ALWAYS been seen as horrible little unreliable plastic kit cars, by many in the motoring world, and anyone with a view, and that will never change.
That is the reason why it makes very little / no difference to a Lotus’ value if it retains its original chassis or not. Indeed, if a restored Elan was offered for sale at say ?45k, and it retained its original chassis, that would almost certainly be seen as a negative for the car, it not having a new galvanised one. The perceived thought being that the chassis will have to be replaced at some point.
Back in the day, it was not uncommon for a chassis on an Elan to have to be replaced after as little as 4 years from new, due to rusting of the front uprights, they were so poorly protected against rust, and original chassis on cars today must be in the tens rather than hundreds.
Leslie
If correct numbering became an issue then I wonder how many chassis would have the piece with the correct number being welded into the new chassis; not hard to do!
The Factory and Spyder have been Reconditioning chassis for years (you might find thats due to it being of heavier gauge rather than being made from any thing exotic)
Of course you know its against the law to tamper with ID numbers? its called Ringing but your right if you wish to mislead a potential buyer it’s not hard to do.
A properly protected sub frame (aka chassis) will last indefinitely. Most people restoring their cars these days protect the chassis properly one way or another and the cars are garaged and driven in fine weather only. The original chassis had no corrosion resistance and in most climates had a short life in everyday use.
As for matching numbers cars and changing the sub frame ( aka chassis):
One of the reasons Lotus owners dont worry about it is they are not wKs like other car owners. Lotus owners drive their cars because compared to most other classic sports cars they are actually good to drive still 
!!!.
Another reason is that given Lotus’ ability to not keep records or build cars consistently to a specification then it is impossible to actually know with certainty what an Elan was when it left the factory in terms of both numbers and specification even the colour is hard to determine for many cars
Another reason is that with the good record keeping of most manufacturers it is very easy to create a matching numbers car especially if that adds value so it becomes a self reinforcing outcome. My original sub frame ( aka chassis) had no number on it. Lotus must have lost the metal number stamps that day. It would not be to hard to stamp my replacement sub frame (aka chassis) that came from Lotus with no number with the original unit number.
cheers
Rohan
Yes i’ve heard that before but the world i live in that would just make a numbers matching car even more valuable because of its rarity. I completely understand why given the choice of having it repaired for ?600 and a new Galv chassis for ?1200 considering the amount of work to remove / refit it may well be tempting to fit the Galv one that you would never need to revisit but seems the lazy route (No offense meant)
Thing is i can’t think of another GRP bodied car that the chassis is swapped as a matter of course? but then next to many other GRP cars of the day the Lotus chassis is very simple and there for cheap.
As for comparing Jags and Ferraris etc i get what your saying but it doesn’t have to be big money cars, we recently restored a Jenson 451, Scimitar se5a and a Tuscan. they where all on there original chassis.
But as you say maybe Lotus cars are just looked at differently.
And long may it stay that way 
cheers
Rohan
Your probably right, We Rebuild cars all the time and we can send the finished car to lets say Ferrari for example for inspection and they will confirm the car’s spec,Numbers etc and put it on a register which adds anything from ?10k up to a cars value. Jag, Mercedes, Aston etc all do a similar thing but with Lotus if your lucky you get a Laminated Certificate that anyone could knock up 
(If the records still exists that is) So maybe there just isn’t any point of going for the Full Concourse because how would you prove it?