OK, I am going out on a limb here. Here are some pictures of my car back in 1983 when it was red. These are close to the time the 5th owner ago (Doug Pulver) bought the car. Apparently it came from Oregon. I am trying to track it down so if you think you may know who owned it, I would appreciate you letting me know. I know this is a long shot but you just never know. Thanks in advance.
Graham.
The photos are very interesting. I am guessing your car could be grandpa's axe. the front end looks to be early FF as it is using the Herald upright but still retained the brass trunion, not modified to run a spherical bearing. So front end could be late 60's early 70's. Rear end looks to be a mixture. Rear uprights look Lotus 51, 61 ish but alloy not magnesium. Are they pattern copies?
Rear suspension has been modified. You can see in the photo someone has added the rear section for the two parallel links instaed of a reversed lower A arm. The trans is a coble up. It has an early VW case (two drain plugs) with Mk9 side plates. The inboard brakes and CV's with outboard UJ and ears on the uprights indicate the car was definately something else in a previous life. The rear top chassis cross member looks VD, the rear uprights look Lotus. The body work looks modified Lotus 61. Any chance some one cut the front off the bodywork and glassed on a new section?
Can you post some photos of the bare chassis? It could be early VD, or something else. If so then it would be worth rebuilding it as a FF.
I had a look at your chassis photos. To me the chassis looks to be made from two different cars. You can see a distinct difference in style of construction at the dash board hoop. The front looks early - any chance it is Formula Junior? The rear looks post 70 FF. The 2"x1" under the roll hoop is 'modern'. Could it be a crashed 61 or VD that has had the front cut off . The front looks old because of the suspension mounts and the way the master cylinder mounts are done.
To me you have a period FF that has evolved as it has progressed in it's racing life. I have photos of a Lotus 69 (initially thought it was mine) with a chissel nose, side radiators and titan rear engine cover. These cars get modified. Would love to know what it started as. If it was a Lotus 61 then take the time to rebuild it.
Marty
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred Michael
I have an old May 1985 Wheel (SFR newspaper) that shows Pulvey in the results driving a Lotus 61
Fred, Doug bought it as a Lotus 61 and that is what it was raced as. As he said, he was 20 years old at the time and getting a Formula Ford so he didn't care. He thought it was a 61 and that was good enough for him.
Marty, there are certain parts that look like a 61 except it doesn't have the V rear section. Now I was reading where Lotus made a handful of late 61Ms where they changed the rear V configuration to copy the 69 but round tube and the 69 was a square tube chassis. I agree on the front end possibly being stiched on from something else but if it was, not all the tubes were replaced. The area that has me stumped is where the upper tubes step in at the dash bulkhead. This is where the upper front control arms attach to the frame. I have not seen that before.
The chassis is mostly bronze nickle welded that gives me the impression it is not US built. The parts that are bronze nickled are very nicely done. There are areas that have been brazed also and are not consistent as in one tube has brazing for instance on the left side where the right side has bronze. This appears to be where it has had some replacement done. The brazing is not done by the same welder as the quality is not as good, not bad but not as good. The bronze work is very neat.
The guy that pulled it apart (Randy Tragni) took the suspension pieces, motor, trans, etc. said the front uprights were Spitfire and the rears were Lotus 61 magnesium.
Thanks for taking such a detailed look at the photos.
This is just my opinion so treat it as such. (Qualifying statement).
I think the car may have had a frontal. Cut off original fit front from another. There is a step at the joint. I think some one who was part of the rebuild team had a few good-ish ideas. The front top wishbone is technically correct. Wide base trailing. The mounting point can be hidden at the joint of the two frames (dash hoop). Also not a bad point to feed in stresses. Looking at the lower front suspension mounts it looks to me that someone offered up the lower wishbone and said 'we need a pivot point here'. They are all hanging way out in the middle of no where. Rear lower trailing links show similar thoughts. This is why to me the car is made from two frames. some one has then added square tube from the dash forward. This is not in period with the front fabrication. A good idea though.
The front suspension is plain weird. The took all that effort on the top wishbone but did nothing with the lower. It looks Lotus - complete with trunion. I am a prick - I say Herald because people wank on about Spitfire uprights. The Herald came along first, the Spitfire got the Herald upright. Being the arse that I am I believe I can see you have early spitfire - nee Herald uprights. The steering arm passes through a slot in the upright. Later ones were stronger Herald (whoops Spitfire) that had the stering arm bolt to the stub axle. Your calipers look to be early SP12 two bolt type - early hearld. Nothing wrong with them. If anything it indicates that the car is early english. The Lotus 51, 61 and 69 had SP12's all round.
Strangly someone took the effort to run wide offset rims on your car. The discs are way out in the breeze - complete with drillings. Me being me strange idea. Most of us want heat in our brakes as we generally have a lack of heat issue - check what type of track/course you intend to race at to get a braking consumption idea. Personally I would wide track the car and run a normal offset rim to keep the track but get the disc out of the air stream. Retain heat in brakes, also the heat from the brakes helps get the tyre temp up. Enought said don't want to give too much away ;-)
I agree with the rear V piece. 61 was Tubular. I looked at that and thought Lotus 41. Again just my opinion but whose to say the car hasn't had a rear end whack. Someone decieded to incorporate a few good ideas and change it a bit - just my thoughts.
I am a little confused. You said "some one has then added square tube from the dash forward. " The only square tube on the front is the triangulation at the dash bulkhead where the step is and it is about 100mm x 200mm (2x4"). top trailing arm mount. All the tubing is round.
Graham..
Whoops sorry you are right. Old fart hood kicking in. I thought for some reason the front tubes going forward on the dash were sqaure.
Please don't mis-understand me. I think you have a really interesting chassis. It is the bassis of a good car. I would like to see it returned to FF spec. What suspension parts do you have? do have the radiators, oil tank and fuel tank? any steering rack witht he car? Chances are it could be a modified Triumph rack. Lotus used a lot of modifed triumph racks. I reckon there is definately a few Lotus clues in your chassis too - especially the detail around the engine mounts.
Marty
Quote:
Originally Posted by Earley Motorsports
I am a little confused. You said "some one has then added square tube from the dash forward. " The only square tube on the front is the triangulation at the dash bulkhead where the step is and it is about 100mm x 200mm (2x4"). top trailing arm mount. All the tubing is round.
Graham..
I would give Arnie Loyning a call, he has been building and working on FF's in Oregon for over 30 years. In fact one of his National Championship designs is currently for sale here on Apex. Very good chance he will know the car.
[FONT=Arial]Arnie Loyning
9125 SE 64th Ave
Portland, OR 97206
Phone (503) 775-2999
[/FONT]
Thanks MarkP. Arnie did not know the car. Never mind, it is coming together, I have all four corners uprights now, modified Spitfire fronts and self fabricated rears. I have the front suspension fabricated and motor mounts done. Looking for an engine trans adapter now. I am droping in a Pinto 2.0. Thanks for thinking of it.
OK. Here are a couple of things that might give somebody an idea as the are a couple of what I feel unique characteristics on the frame. These are on the rear. The roll bar bulk head has an offset notch in it I am guessing for the water pump or cambelt or something. The very rear ( I will call it the transaxle bulkhead) is offset when looking at it from the side. The bpttom sits rearward and inch more than the top. Whoever made it like this, did so for a reason as there is quite a bit of work in it. This is a challenge to all you older knowledgable guys. It is very 70's I think. Thanks, Graham.
The main bulkhead at the lower area appears very Merlyn 11A ish, the Merlyn also used round lower tubing and the under engine braces are identical to 11A as well.
What would be really nice is some full dash hoop/bulkhead photos. The front suspension looks a lot like Caldwell D9 in the upper and lower configuration, but front frame def not Caldwell because it had lower square tubing. Did it ever have a front mounted radiator or signs that coolant pipes went forward??
I will wait to make my final decision on what car(s) you have... the dash structure should really help,but I'm leaning the Merlyn direction with changed front suspension and modified rear most frame bulkhead.
How about this photo. It had some real crappy welded on side radiator mounts (not by who built it) but could have had front mounted at some time with external cooling lines. Thanks Mike.
Do the lower frame tubes from dash bulkhead forward tend to bow upward ?,and to say further if the frame were put on a flat table it would touch in the center but not across the entire bottom.
How about another picture at inside pedal area....still thinking a heavily modified Merlyn.
Mike
In my opinion, the original car may have been a copy of a Merlyn in some ways : main hoop bulkhead section at lower area (1X2's), lower /forward engine bay area including braces. It appears to have never had coolant in the frame ever.
The lower frame rails going forward from dash appear to angle up like Merlyns,etc but go back down for custom front suspension. This indicates an original car design, then changed for new design. Front suspension looks like a copied Caldwell D9 ( D9's were originally built from a modified Merlyn 11A)
All dash structure looks custom to me... including bracing above feet/leg area.
I'm curious to get others opinions in the know , I don't know what various Lotus cars had. I only have a Merlyn 11A and two Caldwell D9B's to compare.
Thanks Mike for the input. It looks as though the lower tubes have been replaced where you mention them going down. There are bronze welds at the diagonal on both sides like if it had been "clipped" in that area. See blurred arrows in picture. There are also welds on the upper tubes as well on the other side of the verticle tube. She ain't no virgin Oh, and by the way, the textured part is the ceiling of the garage. It is hanging upside down from there at the moment.
Well, all this time and now I know what it is. It is a quite modified Lotus 61. I have traced the car back 9 owners to 1975 and I have sent an email to the 10th owner back who did the modifications to the rear as he was tired of having to give it a wheel alignment after every race. This is when it got it's lower parallel links and boxed rear bulkhead. This is interesting and thanks to all who have participated in the hunt. Updates will continue.
So now you know it's a Lotus 61 are you going to return it to FF power of stick with the 2lt. I can find a 1600 for you over here easily enough. I even have a good iron FF head you could use. :-)
Hi Marty. I got rid of the 2L and have a 68 1600 out of a Cortina GT. The car has 65000 actual miles on it but was sitting in a field and rotted the bottom out of it. The number on the block is correct so it should be good to get cleaned up and going. The 61 has a lot of history and a lot of the chassis changes were done back in and around 71. I am pretty stoked about it actually.
Cheers, Graham
Last edited by Earley Motorsports; February 22nd, 2012 at 12:02 PM.
I'm guessing you have a very early model 1600 crossflow. Is the block number 2737 .. or 681M ..... . There was a 691M prior to the 711M. As a heads up the engines prior to the 711M have small chambers in the head and no valve cut outs in the pistons. Cam shaft lobes are not as wide, the cam follower stems are smaller diameter. Also the blocks have the early 'round' main caps (apart from 691). The rules are different for the earlier engine, you are allowed a different CR for one. This is to try and bring it closer to the 711M. If you can find a 711M they are a good stating point. I doubt that many people go checking block numbers. Here in NZ I have seen a number of cars come in with South African blocks on cars built well before the South African block was made available.
Hi Marty. Yep it is a 2737. Motors are not that easy to find over here like they are in NZ. The next closest Cortina (not a GT) was 1500 miles away. Finding one as a donor is like trying to find rocking horse crap. Ain't around. This will work in the mean time.
Cheers, Graham.
You can fit the later parts to get added reliabilty/extended life. Camshafts fit, you can get the cam follower bores opened out to suit the later cam followers. I do have a flat FF cast iron head. These just blt on, just flycut the pistons. You want to flycut the exhaust side at least .2" to avoid bending valves should you miss a gear. Re cc the pistons/deck height afterwards .
Not to be a complete jerk but I think you ought to know that very few of the tubes in that frame are from a 61. I took some pictures of a pretty original frame but then my phone quit on me so I can't upload them. I will try to send the photos tomorrow.
I also took photos of the front and rear suspension for you. As someone noted the front upper control arm has been replaced though the lower one looks original. At the rear the uprights are certainly 61's but the parallel links are not nor are the inboard brakes.
My suggestion is that if you like driving, then you should make the car safe and go drive it. If you absolutely must restore a 61, I have some pretty well bent up frame parts that are still closer than what you have.
I think you will be better off keeping what you have and driving it, while you look for a different car, 61 or not, to restore.
Thanks for the photos and the input and no I do not think you are a jerk. I know some of the comments that have been posted, some one may think they are negative but not me. I appreciate all the time and effort you folks have put into reseach and the such for me. I take the good with the bad with no problems at all.
I am going to just put it back together and race it. Not restoring it back to an original 61 as you are correct, there isn't much of a 61 there. The good part is that I have traced it back 11 owners and each one has told me what they did and why they did it. It appears it finished going through it's "changes in life" about 1980. For example, it had the Lotus stamped bulkhead sheetmetal removed as the guy that owned it then was a tall guy and couldn't get in or out very easily. He also added a taller roll bar which was stamped in 76. It has hit a wall or two in it's day hence the changed front and rear. I know that Dennis Firestone also completed changes on it and also mounted the side radiators. He used to send tires to the guy he sold it to as he would run them for a little then replace them and then Malcom would just have tires show up on his door step. Dennis was not the first owner and he is still looking for who he bought it off. Some guy in Orange County he said. It was his first real race car though.
It has been a lot of fun finding out about it and the changes it went through. I didn't start with much so I am fabricating everything and then will just get out and have some fun with it. Oh, one other thing, it did split Jaun Beelkus (?) car in two at Laguna Seca in 85. As I said, lots of history, not all necessarily good, but it is history.
Thanks to everybody for the help. I know I will still need some as I go along.
Graham.
Last edited by Earley Motorsports; April 24th, 2012 at 10:51 PM.
Reason: 87 to 85
Some had mentioned they would be interested to see how the car was coming along. It is getting there and have been working a little here and there. All the suspension is more or less complete, motor etc has been in it, just mounted the new seat, made the clutch, dead and gas pedals (still to build the brake pedal), steering column half done so there has been a little progress. Still looks like crap but it is getting there. It is a lot closer than when I got it. Add your comments, good or bad, it all helps. Thanks for all the help this site supplies.
Graham.
Anybody Recognize this Car
Thanks, Graham.
Oh, and by the way, the textured part is the ceiling of the garage. It is hanging upside down from there at the moment.
