Eclat V8 for auction

[Loose Cannon]

...at Brightwells with no reserve! Last seen on Ebay a few years back this smart looking car sadly still hasn't seen an MOT or the public highway. So describing it as "an effortless grand tourer" is perhaps a little premature of the auction house

 

http://classiccars.brightwells.com/viewdetails.php?id=4312

 

[Herc]

And no ugly bonnet bulge either. Quite tempted myself....

 

Herc

[Loose Cannon]

How would one achieve that? Low profile filter, low rise intake manifold, or clever engine mounts?

[mikeeech]

so with the rover v8 the advange (other than the sound) is torque?

[Don.Hasi]

How would one achieve that? Low profile filter, low rise intake manifold, or clever engine mounts?

I have read many reports in the nearer past and it said, that it is only the right choice which of the multiple Rover ending es you choose. I had to search for it... But there is a top advise from some owners who have this flat bonnet also.

[rocket63]

Nice

[Dunc]

An Offenhauser 360 low rise manifold, a Holley carb and a circular filter fits under the standard bonnet.

 

Some say the offenhauser is performance limiting at higher RPM though, and is more suited to torque applications like 4x4's.

 

Using an excel bonnet also gains you another inch in height under the hood.

 

Best one I have seen is the red elite that had the capri bulge grafted into the bonnet. It looked factory and really complimented the lines of the car.

[Dunc]

so with the rover v8 the advange (other than the sound) is torque?

 

The main advantage is a faster, nicer, smoother better driving car.

 

the main disadvantage is thirst, as our cars gearbox and final drive ratio's are designed for screaming twin cams that rev hard. Getting gears that work well with a lower reving V8 is tricky.

[Denis247]

The main advantage is a faster, nicer, smoother better driving car.

 

the main disadvantage is thirst, as our cars gearbox and final drive ratio's are designed for screaming twin cams that rev hard. Getting gears that work well with a lower reving V8 is tricky.

Got a Jag 3.07:1 diff in mine, with the bonus of inboard discs.

[Loose Cannon]

Is that one of the benefits of a Spyder chassis then?

[Dunc]

Spyder made some direct replacement chassis which used all the standard bits, and you could make selections on what you wanted them to do with track width and upper rear links if you wanted to. The spider donning ton was a special chassis pack that they sold that was designed especially for the v8 conversion, which had the mounts all ready and utilised an all new rear end. The donnington package used the heavier duty Salisbury 4HU from the centre of the jag IRS

to allow for a CW&P selection that was far more suited to the torque and rev range of the v8 engine. Power lock LSD centres were also fairly plentiful in those days from scrap jags.

There are pro's and cons from this option however. It all fits together and gets rid of a couple of the flaws, but unfortunately it also introduces some new ones.

[moriniman1]

Got a Jag 3.07:1 diff in mine, with the bonus of inboard discs.

Denis,  What size radiator are your running on your car as mine is running too hot.  

I have the original 3 core Lotus one with the inlet confirgured for the V8 . inlet is top lhs and outlet bottom rhs. Creeps up to 125 centigrade as normal running temp.

.  

[Dunc]

Still running too hot Simon? Are you sure it is not just the gauge? Might be worth verifying the temperature with an infra red thermometer or suchlike?

[Clive59]

If the 10V regulator is bad, it will affect the temp gauge, as well as the fuel gauge of course. it is only a simple bi-metal strip giving an average of 10V, very crude. It is located on the rear of the speedo.

Mine failed and I made a PWM solid state version, works a treat.

[Denis247]

Denis,  What size radiator are your running on your car as mine is running too hot.  

I have the original 3 core Lotus one with the inlet confirgured for the V8 . inlet is top lhs and outlet bottom rhs. Creeps up to 125 centigrade as normal running temp.

.  

Hi

I use a lotus rad with extra core. My inlet is on the RH (as per Lotus, not Rover) and outlet bottom lh. I use 2xelectric fans (12" from memory) , I also replaced the electromechanical 8v voltage regulator with an 7805-device regulator. My car runs fine temperature wise, I also made sure there is no air bleed around the radiator.

 

Dunc.  I consulted with (can't think of the Irish fellows name now, he also worked on Lotus F1 chassis, Ronnie Peterson etc, such a long time ago now) Spydersport when they were designing this chassis, and I have number 2. I know of a flaw the original Donington chassis introduced but wondered what flaws you were referring to? 

My chassis (or frame to give it it's correct name) has been modified by me to correct what I saw as a flaw around the rear suspension.

This chassis was also sold with an optional front lower-link assembly that located the wheels much better and removed the dependence on the anti-roll bar for location.

I further modified mine for coilovers all round, the easily-available range of standard springs making it very easy to get the correct spring rate for the car, mainly by trial and error. That nice Jag powerlock diff, available in a range of ratios from 2.88:1 to 3.31:1 (I finally settled for a 3.07:1 from an E-type), with the large inboard disc brakes, is quite heavy and the standard Lotus springs not suitable.

The rear hub-carrier also has a top-link as per Excell, removing a lot of the load on the outboard driveshaft UJ's (Inboard is a CV joint).

Rev counter was recalibrated by me, as was the std speedo (by stroking the right part with a magnet).

The combination of a large torquey engine and higher gearing has transformed the car from the std little high-revving screamer into something much lazier, and much faster, and much more useable imho. This Lotus was supposed to have a V8 in from the start according to many rumours.

mpg is about the same (even though 4.6l with typhoon cam, big valve heads, 500cfm carb), there's no bonnet-bulge or anything (except V8 badge) to give away this from a std car.   

Lotus purists will hate it.

[Loose Cannon]

 

Lotus purists will hate it.

 

 

Au contraire, Blackadder!

[Dunc]

It seems that the rear top mounts were mounted too low and affected the geometry at the rear changing the roll centre of the car. I've never driven one, but an engineer owner who fitted it and hated it changed back to the standard setup. He then did some engineering analysis and discovered that the Spyder top link geometry caused rear end roll oversteer, and it needed further improvement/development in changing the top link mounting position.

 

Here is a link to his analysis:

 

http://home.btconnect.com/lotus/suspension_design_issues.htm

 

The improvements are valid and a great idea (stronger hook joints, better gearing, easily available LSD), but it seems it also has a downside in its geometry which affects the handling. a 4HU is also a fairly massive diff compared to the 7HA. I guess it sort of depends on if you view this as being a good thing or not....(strong and robust vs heavy).

 

NB my cooling is triple core with a kenlowe and it runs super cool.

 

I LOVE the pics and concept of your car Dennis.

[mat grant]

It will be interesting to see what this goes for.... I remember when it came up on ebay a little while ago

[moriniman1]

Hi

I use a lotus rad with extra core. My inlet is on the RH (as per Lotus, not Rover) and outlet bottom lh. I use 2xelectric fans (12" from memory) , I also replaced the electromechanical 8v voltage regulator with an 7805-device regulator. My car runs fine temperature wise, I also made sure there is no air bleed around the radiator.

 

Dunc.  I consulted with (can't think of the Irish fellows name now, he also worked on Lotus F1 chassis, Ronnie Peterson etc, such a long time ago now) Spydersport when they were designing this chassis, and I have number 2. I know of a flaw the original Donington chassis introduced but wondered what flaws you were referring to? 

My chassis (or frame to give it it's correct name) has been modified by me to correct what I saw as a flaw around the rear suspension.

This chassis was also sold with an optional front lower-link assembly that located the wheels much better and removed the dependence on the anti-roll bar for location.

I further modified mine for coilovers all round, the easily-available range of standard springs making it very easy to get the correct spring rate for the car, mainly by trial and error. That nice Jag powerlock diff, available in a range of ratios from 2.88:1 to 3.31:1 (I finally settled for a 3.07:1 from an E-type), with the large inboard disc brakes, is quite heavy and the standard Lotus springs not suitable.

The rear hub-carrier also has a top-link as per Excell, removing a lot of the load on the outboard driveshaft UJ's (Inboard is a CV joint).

Rev counter was recalibrated by me, as was the std speedo (by stroking the right part with a magnet).

The combination of a large torquey engine and higher gearing has transformed the car from the std little high-revving screamer into something much lazier, and much faster, and much more useable imho. This Lotus was supposed to have a V8 in from the start according to many rumours.

mpg is about the same (even though 4.6l with typhoon cam, big valve heads, 500cfm carb), there's no bonnet-bulge or anything (except V8 badge) to give away this from a std car.   

Lotus purists will hate it.

 

Thanks

So its sounds like I'm using the right size radiator so will check for air locks etc as twin kenlowe fans cannot seem to cool it down in warm weather regardless of temp reading. It did boil over and have been topping up ever since

 

Would like to see some pics of your car. I bought Guy Abbots old car which also looks completely standard externally.  Will post up pics in due course as its had some additional interior work done.

[Denis247]

It seems that the rear top mounts were mounted too low and affected the geometry at the rear changing the roll centre of the car. I've never driven one, but an engineer owner who fitted it and hated it changed back to the standard setup. He then did some engineering analysis and discovered that the Spyder top link geometry caused rear end roll oversteer, and it needed further improvement/development in changing the top link mounting position.

 

Here is a link to his analysis:

 

http://home.btconnect.com/lotus/suspension_design_issues.htm

 

The improvements are valid and a great idea (stronger hook joints, better gearing, easily available LSD), but it seems it also has a downside in its geometry which affects the handling. a 4HU is also a fairly massive diff compared to the 7HA. I guess it sort of depends on if you view this as being a good thing or not....(strong and robust vs heavy).

 

NB my cooling is triple core with a kenlowe and it runs super cool.

 

I LOVE the pics and concept of your car Dennis.

 

I'm surprised he didn't pick up on the rear wishbone front mounting. Spyder changed the front rubber mount from vertical to horizontal, and thus allowed movement of the front of the wishbone, causing the rear handling problems you describe. And they were quite severe. I have modified mine back to vertical as per Lotus original and that solved that. The top link chassis mount is not too bad, I've ditched the std Spyder  top links and made a set using Rose-type joints. I don't notice any rear-steering now at all.

The extra weight of the diff counterracts nicely the extra weight of the LT77 gearbox, I have almost exact 50:50 weight distribution front/rear (incl driver).

The extra unsprung weight of the rear hubs I never notice.

One other not-so-good point was in the light gauge metal and tubing used on the rear wishbone.

I must dig out some photo's someday, but as Spyder only ever made a small number, I doubt there's many of these conversions left these days.

btw, have you ever checked the measurements between the front to rear towers on each side?, even many genuine Lotus frames are not symetrical. All good fun eh. 

Edited May 15, 2014 by Denis247

[Dunc]

Intriguing comment on the light gauge metal and tubing on spyder tubular rear arms... I have a set of tubular rear arms sitting in a garage which were acquired second hand and described as being from Spyder:

 

http://www.thelotusforums.com/forums/gallery/image/2693-pict0206/

 

and they are flippin heavy! In fact I was fairly unimpressed with just how heavy they were.

 

I also have a set of galvanised original ones tucked away which I had intended to put on the V8, and when I felt how heavy the tubular ones were, I decided I would have to weigh both and fit the lighter ones to the race car.

 

Maybe these tubular rear wishbones I have are not from spyder? anyone recognise them?

[Denis247]

They could very well be Spyder, but they are not the ones used on the Donington chassis. They have the std front mounting (vertical rubber mount on chassis) for a start. Probably Spyder's direct replacement for the std car.  Shame they never used something similar.

[mikeeech]

So v8 engines a cheap. 4.6 litre rover unit on ebay at the moment for £200 - since my engine needs rebuilding anyway this is tempting!

[Denis247]

So v8 engines a cheap. 4.6 litre rover unit on ebay at the moment for £200 - since my engine needs rebuilding anyway this is tempting!

Some 4.6's  were prone to suffer cracked liners, have a read up on the V8Forum.co.uk for a wealth of info on the Rover.