RE: Spotted: 1965 Lotus Seven

[Sam_68]

Pat H said:

Is it really being argued that the S4 Seven was a true production sportscar and that the S3 Caterham was not?

Yes, because in an attempt to take on more mainstream cars like the Midget, and to reflect Lotus' move up-market, it was available as a standard production model (or, in fact several models, with different engine options) complete, ex-works... if you wanted to, you could pay your money to Lotus - including purchase tax - and drive out in a Seven S4.

It was a production car.

You couldn't (legally) do that with a Caterham or a Seven S3... at the very least you had to pay one company to purchase the kit, and another, separate company to assemble it for you as a dodge to avoid purchase tax.

These days, of course, the distinction lies with type approval rather than with purchase tax.

It's always going to be difficult to draw the line between production cars and kit cars (or homologation specials), but the fact remains that the authorities have tried to do so not because there's not another car in the world that can compete with the mighty Caterham, but because (in their view) it crosses the line into kitcardom and thus is permitted to race with other kit cars. It hasn't been 'banned from racing' - that's pure nonsense.

[Pat H]

Sam_68 said:

Yes, because in an attempt to take on more mainstream cars like the Midget, and to reflect Lotus' move up-market, it was available as a standard production model (or, in fact several models, with different engine options) complete, ex-works... if you wanted to, you could pay your money to Lotus - including purchase tax - and drive out in a Seven S4.

It was a production car.

Sam, with the very greatest of respect, I beg to differ.

If you look at the HSCC Historic Road Sports Championship, you will see, in effect, exactly the same championship as the '70s Road Sports Championship, but geared for cars of the 1960s.

The Historic Road Sports Championship has exactly the same requirement that entries are "production" cars.

Lotus Seven S2 and S3 are allowed to compete and there are sections of the regs that deal with permitted and prohibited modifications.

Your argument that the S4 was created to take on mainstream cars and that it was marketed differently by Lotus (and is therefore a production car) is superficially attractive.

But the fact remains that the S2 and S3 Lotus Sevens are permitted to compete in the Historic Road Sports Championship, whereas an almost identical 1970s Caterham is not allowed in the 1970s Road Sports Championship. It is irrational and inconsistent.

I simply don't understand why they prohibit Caterhams, yet happily admit almost identical Lotus Sevens in the sister championship.

Let's be honest, an early Caterham is certainly no better than a S3 Lotus Seven and is going to be even less of a competitive threat against more modern 1970s machinery.

But whatever the reason for the Caterham's exclusion, I certainly wouldn't jump on the bandwagon that it was "too fast to race".

I have said it before and I think it is worth saying again. An early Caterham would get its arse kicked in the '70s Road Sports Championship.

On a different note, I am sorry to read that you have sold your Elan. I recently sold my Seven and already regret the decision.

[Sam_68]

Pat H said:

If you look at the HSCC Historic Road Sports Championship, you will see, in effect, exactly the same championship as the '70s Road Sports Championship, but geared for cars of the 1960s.

Lotus Seven S2 and S3 are allowed to compete and there are sections of the regs that deal with permitted and prohibited modifications.

A fair point - and as you say it seems to be an unjustifiable inconsistency.

The only possible argument I could think of (...and I'd be playing Devil's advocate) is that '60's sports cars tended to be more basic and lighter than their more sybaritic and safety-legislated 70's descendants, so the performance gap against lghtweights like the Seven is more pronounced. I agree, though - excluding Sevens in one championship but allowing them in the other is an unacceptable inconsistency.

But never the less, as you acknowledge, there's a big difference between saying that Caterhams are amongst a group of cars that are excluded from a particular class and that the specific marque and model has been 'banned from racing'.

You could almost say the opposite with the Historic Road Sports Championship, as the Seven is specifically allowed (with its own references in the rules), whereas many similar spaceframe roadgoing specials and kits are not?

Pat H said:

On a different note, I am sorry to read that you have sold your Elan. I recently sold my Seven and already regret the decision.

Yes, I was sorry to see it go, but I simply wasn't getting the chance to use it enough and it was beginning to deteriorate as a result.

I'm kind of drifting out of cars and back toward boats at the moment, anyway - the Westfield will probably go up for sale this summer and I'm thinking about something a bit tamer, to suit a middle-aged grumpy fat bd... a Maserati 3200 or another Elise are current favorites.

[Pat H]

Sam_68 said:

the Westfield will probably go up for sale this summer

I wish you hadn't mentioned that...

Despite having owned a couple of Caterhams, I have a great deal of time for Westfield cars.

My first car was an ally bodied Westfield Seven that I built with my late father back in 1985, and I have very nearly bought an Eleven on more than one occasion. In fact, now that they have built yet another final batch of Eleven kits, it might still happen.

How on earth are you going to put a value on your FW400?

I am going to upset lots of people now by saying that they are more impressive than anything that Caterham has produced.

I can't remember what year it was, but I saw it at the NEC Motor Show and it absolutely blew me away.

I would love to have one in my garage along with an Eleven and a +2 Elan and a S2 Seven and and and....

[Sam_68]

Pat H said:

How on earth are you going to put a value on your FW400?

I know what they've sold for previously (including what I paid for mine, of course) and quite sensibly that pitches them between a top-end second-hand 'conventional' Westfield and an R400/500 Caterham. That does make bit of a bargain, IMO, considering the rarity, technical/historical importance and performance, but then they're quite a specialised purchase, too.

Pat H said:

I am going to upset lots of people now by saying that they are more impressive than anything that Caterham has produced.

Technically they are, certainly. They have their pros and cons, though... the performance and handling is certainly up there with the R-series Caterhams and the steering feel is better (super light and super precise), but the build quality and detailing was quite rightly criticised (the run of 6 cars that were actually built were basically cobbled-together prototypes for a proper 'productionised' version that never happened), the Hewland LD200 gearbox is painfully noisy and is a bit-hit-and-miss on the downchange from 5th to 4th due to inadequate spring loading on the centre plane.

A properly detailed version with an R500-spec. K-series or RST V8 and the Hewland JFR 6-speed sequential (which is pretty much a straight swap for the LD200) would be awesome, though, and would make anything Caterham has produced (including the Levante) look very sad indeed... I heard rumours that Westfield (Potenza) was considering something 'very similar' to the FW400 a couple of years ago - there was talk of them wanting to re-acquire one of the originals for analysis - but sadly it seems to have come to nothing and the company appears to have lost its way a bit since Chris Smith left.

Pat H said:

I can't remember what year it was, but I saw it at the NEC Motor Show and it absolutely blew me away.

The one you saw at the motorshow (it would have been 1999?) will have been mine - it's the only one with full carbon bodywork as well as carbon tub, and it did all the motorshows and most of the magazine road test work as the factory demonstrator.