Lotus Europa Community
Lotus Europa Forums => Technical Articles and DIY tools and tips => Topic started by: Dilkris on Tuesday,May 13, 2025, 08:16:56 AM
-
I am writing this on the back of my last post "Dilkris Update - Back at it"
With very little to do now with the "go kart" as I refer to it - my attention is now focused on the body.
It is my intention before I do any work on the body is to place it on top of the chassis to check that there are no areas of interference.
To do this, as I am on my own, my plan is to fabricate a lifting cradle attached to an electric hoist lifting from a single point - balance will obviously be an issue but my questions are:-
1. How heavy (approx) is the TCS body, less screen, doors, bonnet and engine cover? ( I reckon about 80 kg..... wrong? :confused:)
2. Does any body know where is the longitudinal center of gravity in relation to say, the position of the rear screen?
I know it all sounds a bit "off the wall" - but I will post pictures along with a general update when I have done it.
-
Nice yard sculpture you got there, Dilkris!
Only one of my failings is that I often "forget" to test fit things so I applaud you for thinking of this before you drop the body on the frame but what sort of things might you be worried about interfering? The only things I can see getting in the way would be your rigs to run the engine in your frame. You'll also probably have to make sure that your parking brake lever needs to be parallel to the 'T' and take out your seatbelt bolts in the backbone. And then I didn't see the steering column. That will have to go also. But all those are obvious.
Having said all that, I should note that my front right suspension is very close to the body such that I had to use 1/2 height nuts (sometimes called jet nuts). I would just advise that when the time comes, just lower it slowly to be sure there are no obstructions. There shouldn't be, of course.
Can you get three other friends to lower the body by the wheel arches (or one on each front arch and one in the middle of the back so you can watch)? Your weight estimate may not be far off. It's not very heavy. If you can't round up three friends, you could lift it up by the four body mounting bobbins. After the body is on the frame you can jack up the body enough to unbolt the cables from the bobbins and then lower it again. The insulation on the frame may actually cause you to have tp push the body down on the frame the last inch or so which would be handy in that regard. You've probably already sourced some frame insulation but in case you haven't, I'd recommend closed cell foam rubber such as neoprene about 3/8" thick.
-
Thanks for your feed back BDA.
My main problem is that I bought the car in pieces - so I have never seen the body on the chassis - more to the point I never took it off, so it is all very much an unknown to me.
As you may recall from my previous posts over the years - the chassis front T section was rebuilt by Spyder Engineering and I have replaced all brake pipes so it is possible that something may not be where it should be.
Whilst I understand your thinking on lifting the body with 4 people, if I knew it was going to go straight on with no interference from any areas all well and good - but I don't know this and to this end I fancy being able to suspend the body on an electric hoist from a single point so as I can take my time walking around and checking things as I lower it bit by bit. (I'll have the chassis on wheels and on skates to facilitate the the XY movement and rely on the hoist just for the Z. (Up and down)
Give me a couple of weeks and I'll post how it went.
All other points re closed cell foam noted, but this will just be a trial fit, before I start the body work.
-
Now, I see where your hesitation comes from.
I have a Spyder frame similar to yours. Mine was totally a Spyder frame - not just a new 'T' section and also not a tube frame. I would trust Spyder to graft a new 'T' section accurately so I doubt you'll have a problem with it but, as I say, I applaud your planning ahead and making sure ahead of time.
As for lowering in slowly while you inspect, then lowering from the body mounting bobbins would be your best choice I think. An eye bolt bolted in each of the four main attachment bobbins and then ropes to your wench or come-along. A frame or something to spread the ropes so they don't foul the cabin or surrounding fiberglass will probably be needed. I suspect the CG is probably near where the gear shift comes out since the front would be a bit heavier.
From your picture, your brake lines look fine. It appears that you aren't using boosters which makes your plumbing simpler. I ran my brake tubes from the M/C to the rear of the car on the side of the backbone. I know others have done that also. Try to avoid brake tubing on the top of the "legs" of the frame in the rear. As I remember, there is a tube that goes around the apex of the joint in front of the engine. The body does not impinge on it there. There used to be a thick horse-hair mat that covers that corner and IIRC, the brake tube goes under it. In fact I'm pretty sure the horse-hair mat sits on the vertical "flanges" of the frame (that's a little foggy). My point is that except for the "legs", pretty much as long as you keep the tubing close to the frame, you'll be ok. There ia a tube that connects to the brake switch near the battery (behind the left seat and to the left of the front of the engine). I don't remember exactly how that is routed.
-
Just a thought....bolt/attach steel angle or steel channel along the rocker pinch flange with web straps to your lifting hoist. Extend the angle into the wheel wells with multiple holes so when lifting, if the car is out of balance fore or aft, you can set it back down and move the strap locations to correct the balance. Port and starboard balance should be not be much of an issue. Of course the wheels and tires would need to be off but you could support the chassis from the center spine and tee section. I would think the rockers could support the weight of the body, but others may disagree and pipe in. .
-
This cleared everything on TCST …I eliminated the boosters too.
-
Thanks, Turbo! I couldn’t remember how that went together. Those pictures make it really clear.
-
An alternative viewpoint....
When I repaired the chassis on mine I also worked solo. In my case when it came to replacing the chassis I had the body in the air with supports under the side sills, chunky timber from wheelarch to wheelarch. I didn't have the engine in place so it was fairly easy to drag the chassis under the body, line it up and then using 2 trolley jacks, lift it into place. For solo working, a trolly jack at either end gives you a lot of control over the speed of lowering and although it means walking to & fro, you could drop it gently and squarely in place. (or in my case, raise the chassis slowly into place)
The traditional method is 4 guys, one at each wheel arch and then just lift it in place, not so easy if there's only you !
A bare shell isn't going to be that heavy and a conventional engine hoist would do the job easily if you want to drop the body on to a rolling chassis. I think mine is rated at half a ton on full extension and on a flat surface it will shuffle around to line it up - I used it to remove/replace the Elise clamshells, much lighter but with similar alignment problems.
If you have the space then I'd imagine a couple of timbers under the sills with long webbing straps, one front, one rear, should balance the body nicely on a side lift. Yes, the straps will go down over the central spine and get trappedbut you're going to be lifting it off again so I can't see that being an issue ?
The big problem I see is balance and manoevering when it's floating. At this stage where you'll be doing body repairs/paint it's not such a big deal but maybe now is the time to think about how it's going together once painted and try to use the same method both times ?
-
Thankyou again BDA, along with Kram350Kram, TurboFource, EuropaTC - all noted and just a couple of comments to add:-
I am using the brake booster (UK so single unit), but as it is mounted to the body it is not mounted on the "go kart" - refer attached picture showing temporary capped brake lines (flow and return). The configuration of the "go kart" as shown allowed me to run the engine, which is why the header tank, (which is also mounted to the body) is shown here mounted on a temporary support.
The wheels will be on the vehicle when I lower the body, but they will be standing on skates - this will allow me to move the body around in relation to the position of the body when I am lowering it down.
I am targeting the under cills as being the best lifting points for the cradle. (which I have to make)
I intend using a 250kg capacity electric winch - I have seen just 2 people lift a body - so it must weigh 70/100kg surely? :confused:
"Yes" this whole procedure is to ensure that when I have invested time and money in the repair and spraying of the body, it goes straight on in a manner that I not only know works, but I am comfortable and confident with.
Give me a couple of weeks (I am old and with my recent new hip, things happen a bit slowly. :FUNNY:) and I'll post an update.
-
1 - you have that rightmost brake line with red cap where the battery goes. Are you relocating the battery?
2 - I’ve seen engine hoists with a horizontal bar where you move the attachment point of the hoist along the bar to change the balance of the engine. Could you rig something like that so you can change the balance of the TCS body as needed without exactly knowing the CG of the body?
-
Doesn’t the battery go a bit further aft where the triangular brace is on the frame?
-
Yes, and that pipe ends right there, on top of the rail where the battery goes
-
So Dilkris is in good shape?
-
Thanks BDA again and now Kendo.
Now you understand why I want to trial fit the body. :FUNNY:
-
On the subject of brake lines, mine didn't go like that, they were all inside the chassis sections even when the servo was installed. Two lines were inside the central spine and the multi union/servo lines/etc went on the internal Y sections. At the rear there's holes & grommets for the hard lines to pass through the "Y" & connect to the rear flexi hoses.
I've no idea if that's OEM but it's a one owner car and been like that since I got it mid 80s, I just copied the way the lines ran when I replaced them in Kunifer.. A very poor photo scanned from a 35mm camera from when I was putting it back gives a better idea of how the lines run than I can describe. You'll see there's nothing close to the battery mount although at a guess I'd think you'll be ok on the lines, I'm not sure about the multi-union position though.
Brian
-
Mine was one owner and I ran the lines outside the chassis as they originally were :confused:
-
This is interesting EuropaTC and TurboFource - brake lines inside or outside the chassis. :confused:
I followed what I felt to be correct - from what was left on the original chassis, (see photo - please zoom in) and I also thoroughly photographed a car being rebuilt by Spyder Cars some years back, (also see photo). I have attached the multi point union as per where it was on my chassis originally. (Looking at the photo of the chassis as it was some years back sort of cheers me up.... )
I do recall reading threads on this forum some years back whereby members routed brake lines through the chassis, and also within the interior of the rear Y section, (for the rear brakes) - I am not aware that it was ever standard from the factory. (At face value it would appear to make sense although I'd question how you would support them within the backbone. )
-
This was pulling the body off … you can see them outside the chassis … you can see the little tabs in the second upside down pic that Lotus welded to the chassis to hold the brake lines.
-
It seems highly unlikely that a PO would go to or need to go to the trouble of rerouting his brake lines when the car wasn't much over 10 years old but I have never seen brake lines run down the backbone. I'm the original owner and I know mine were run under the backbone (I ran them on the side when I rebuilt my car) as Turbo shows.
EuropaTC, how were they tied down in the backbone? Did they run through grommets to come out in the engine compartment? It seems like a lot more trouble to do it that way!
-
It seems highly unlikely that a PO would go to or need to go to the trouble of rerouting his brake lines when the car wasn't much over 10 years old but I have never seen brake lines run down the backbone. I'm the original owner and I know mine were run under the backbone (I ran them on the side when I rebuilt my car) as Turbo shows.
EuropaTC, how were they tied down in the backbone? Did they run through grommets to come out in the engine compartment? It seems like a lot more trouble to do it that way!
I don't think they were clipped in the spine, it's a long time now but I think they just ran through grommets. I'm struggling for photos because looking back it was '93 when I had the body off and like most others I was with 35mm cameras back then. I have found a later shot of the front crossmember from the time I experimented with residual pressure valves and that shows the two grommets in the front crossmember where the feed/return for the servo originally went. The front plate is removed for access and only one line now because there's no servo.
Is it original ? I have no idea and until I saw the photo with the multi union and realised mine was different, I've never given it any thought. All I know is that's how I found it and just followed the same route when the body was off to replace steel lines with Kunifer. I've replaced the F/R line since I dropped the RP valves and wanting to have the minimum number of joints.
Looking at the evidence from others & yourself I'm starting to think it was an original owner mod. Could be, the guy was a keen mechanic
I bought the '72 car in the mid 80s and from the notebook I got with it there's a comment about the chassis being replaced at 29,450 miles in 1978. No body damage (I've done a bare shell respray) so it was always a mystery. The trailing arms were also replaced a couple of years later at 37,700 with a comment about rusting so I've assumed it failed an MoT chassis rust because unless the complete shell was replaced & not documented, there's no indications of major damage.
Brian