Widebody S4 Lotus Seven

[Paul Wilkinson]

.

[Steve Holmes]

Hi there Paul, yes this is definitely the right place to post your request. I'm sure someone on here will be able to help. Good luck with your search.

[105angria]

does Bob sell these 25 bhp stickers ? like to see a pic of this car

[aussiemonza]

Hi Paul,

I also have a wide body S4, the ex- Murray Bryden car that ran in the Australian Sports Car Championships (when it was for Production Sports Cars) in 1980 - 81. A mate has just finished a wide body conversion on a Norwich S4 and there is also the ex- Dick Smith S4 still running around out of Canberra.

My car ran 1840cc TC, injected and 5 speed Hollinger though laterly it ran with a Pinto 2 Litre and 4 speed. I will be putting it back to TC as time and funds allow.

Do you know if Steele Bros actually produced a wide body version or did Charlie produce a one-off?

I would be interesting to compare notes. I will scan some photo's.

CCR

[jim short]

Hi sounds like the rex nalder car he lives in tauranga ,,spent $$$ to make it fly;; jaimie worked on it in rotorua i have vidio competing against paton ,early 80s rex sold me his E type roadster in 81 for $20,000 then missed the fun and bought this strange 7 he raced at wigram83?? it blew up if i remember would rev to9000??

[jim short]

prety shure rex got it of steel bros, but looking back whaat seemed ages wasent that long maybe he only had it a yr.???

[S4seven]

PAul
The Black car was built as you have it at Steels. IF I can figure out how I'll post a picture of it at the factory then later.
Steels built 3 wide body cars with lotus twin cams, 1 red, 1 white and the black car. They also built a number of 907 powered cars that had wide bodies as well. The most well know is the Red car that appears in a number of Lotus 7 book. This car is now with a new owner who is to rebuild it in the US. There are a couple in Australia and the remains of 1 here. There is also at least 1 Escape with the second romored to be some where in the Wellington area

[bry3500]

S4 - to post a pic scroll down to the Go Advanced tab then click on the manage attachments

[S4seven]

I'll look the pictures out in the morning and post them. They arn't the best but maybe of some interest. I still have my first Seven which I've had since '77 and the remain of an others that we are in the process of rebuilding. All the sevens from Steels had L block motors, so I would think that it was swapped outat some stage at a rebuild? but apparently the black car had some head work done by PDL, before leaving the factory.
THe last time I saw your car the body was looking a bit tired and that was before Charlie put it away. It's been a long while since it was last running, possablily at the meeting at whenuapi

[jim short]

at one stage rex had the carbs on the exhaust side if my memory is workingan old trick

[Trevor Sheffield]

Attention S4seven,

Having owned an S4 Lotus Seven and after modifying it, I have always wondered how Chapman let the thing live with its frankly ridiculous rear suspension. First thing I modified for good reason. On top of that the steering rack mount was stupid having no lateral stiffness, and the pedal arrangement!

After attending to numerous cracks in the frame I became very apprehensive as to how well the thing would hold together and for this reason it was the only car I have owned which had me scared stiff when at its maximum straight line speed. However once I had it somewhat sorted, it was from a strictly tactile point of view, very enjoyable to drive. I went for it because I could not get a decent straight arm driving position in any other clubman type car. Even then, drastic mods were called for within the driving space.

Your comments would be appreciated.:)

Cheers, Trevor.

[S4seven]

Hi
I would be best to replace the missing cross member as the whole front tends to flex. These were usually removed to allow easy access to the the sump to check bearing. The sump can't be removed with this cross member in place. To have the carbs on the same side as the exhaust a pre cross flow engine (1500cc) would have had to be fitted. I can't ever remember seeing that done.

[jim short]

I seem to remember grant spraque pre 65 anglia trying it to get back to the front were he used to be before the mustang.no i think the carbs went down on an angle Bob will know

[jim short]

Actually thinking about it the old speedboats Carl Augusten in the 50s tried it ..he was a clever man ,in later life his passion was propellers{speedboats}he lived over Howick way on a steep street down a long drive ,on one visit he was quite shaken he had a kids trolly with a brigs and stratton mtr. bolted on the back to this he would try out these props {dozens of them in the shed} time himself down his drive.this day he got up early tried it down the street only to go through a hedge near the bottom of the hill he was in his 80s!!!

[S4seven]

Hi
When we raced them we made a few changes to stiffen things up a bit. We had a brace across the front to support the tops of the towers. the rear end was the one point that gave the most problems. the chassis when loader had a habit of breaking at the base of the roll bar mounting tube or where the top arm bolted to the very rear of the chassis where bolted to the body. The other problem was the big rubber bush the located the lower arm to the diff. We replaced these and made the rear end more placed and didn't move around as much, the bushes had so much movement in them it was almost impossable to control the rear end. If a bar is placed in the bottom of the boot and linked the body and the chassis, with the 2 top suspension arms together alot of the rear flex is also removed. All this flex contributed to the axle trmping that was common.

[S4seven]

Hi Trevor
What is the Chassis number of your 7. I have a list of most of the cars

[pallmall]

http://i633.photobucket.com/albums/uu55/prw007/Widebody%20Series%20Four%20Lotus%20Seven/Finished-Cropped.jpg

[pallmall]

The photos are fine, here is the other one. Just copy and post the IMG code.


http://i633.photobucket.com/albums/uu55/prw007/Widebody%20Series%20Four%20Lotus%20Seven/Construction-Cropped.jpg

[Trevor Sheffield]

A lot of bracing was aparently removed before production, eg the second diagonal behind the seats that would have made a cruciform and the tie between the rear suspension pickups (kind of replaced by Steel Brothers in the later cars), also the strut between the front 'towers', to name a few. I think that nearly all racers have had these missing bits 'replaced' as and when it was possible to do so. I think there was a resignation to the fact that you finished the development yourself with the sevens and that wasn't just the S4....


But how did the crazy absolutely roll resistant rear suspension get past Chapman. Two Watts links at the end of a solid axle, means in order to roll, the chassis must bend. This is kindergarten stuff. Was it intended that the purchaser should be resigned to putting right such stupidity? LOL

[Trevor Sheffield]

Hi
When we raced them we made a few changes to stiffen things up a bit. We had a brace across the front to support the tops of the towers. the rear end was the one point that gave the most problems. the chassis when loader had a habit of breaking at the base of the roll bar mounting tube or where the top arm bolted to the very rear of the chassis where bolted to the body. The other problem was the big rubber bush the located the lower arm to the diff. We replaced these and made the rear end more placed and didn't move around as much, the bushes had so much movement in them it was almost impossable to control the rear end. If a bar is placed in the bottom of the boot and linked the body and the chassis, with the 2 top suspension arms together alot of the rear flex is also removed. All this flex contributed to the axle trmping that was common.

The only way that the rear could roll was for the chassis to flex, or for the suspension points to yield. I scrapped the forward facing arms and fitted new trailing links, together with a Panhard rod. This with other corrections, turned it into a motor car. Just what was Chapman thinking about?:(

I do not think I have the chassis number recorded anywhere, but will be pleased to check for you. Last seen in was down in the Waikato somewhere.

[S4seven]

I would imagine thats why the stuck the big rubber bushes into the equation to allow for movement, which actually made things worse

[Trevor Sheffield]

S4sevenl,

Sorry but I do not have a chassis number for the S4 recorded. The reg. was GR 7169 and I have it down as a 1973. It was silver in colour late 1980's.

OK Paul,

Running the control arms forwards would surely have cost less than running them backwards, because this would have obviated any necessity to stiffen the rear of the chassis, as it would then have not been loaded by the suspension. Money was wasted rather than saved. No Kiwi special builder would make something so utterly stupid.

From what I have read, Chapman did not design the S4, which was the brainchild of his underlings and he was only called upon to take it for a quick test drive before giving it the OK. But why did he do so? At the time there were financial problems and Chapman must have had his mind on other things, including his creditors. The S4 was supposed to cover a more extensive market sector and was no doubt originated by those hopeful of saving their jobs.

[Rod Grimwood]

at one stage rex had the carbs on the exhaust side if my memory is workingan old trick

This was done on some engines back then to give better toque. Thinking back then was Longer manifold = torque. Did it with a 2Ltr Ford for speedway skidder way back and it did definately improve low down grunt. Run heat shield under carbs and big elongated u - shaped inlet pipes back over rocker cover, and boy racer bulge in bonnet to make room.

[Trevor Sheffield]

I'm not an engineer (I just play one on TV) but I think they were just trying to be clever, using an (in-effect) straight-line generator at each end of the axle. Either they realised they weren't as clever as they thought and had to bodge it rather then to admit to wasting a fair bit of time and money, or they weren't given the time/budget to develop it. Chapman, I think had moved on and just wanted the cashflow a new Seven would bring. He gave it to the underlings while he was off on other projects and just as many times he had benefited from the great things they did, this time they fell over.

To be fair though, I think if you had tested a new S4 within the parameters of it's intended use you would have experienced no adverse handling whatsoever. Remember they didn't really have any competition aspirations for it. Having said that, my old S4 could be bunged through the twisty stuff as quickly as my current Leitch by a try-hard such as myself, I imagine it would only be the real drivers who would find the shortcomings and they weren't the target market anyway. You are right though it is an arse of a design... :D


As a matter of serious interest, the idiocy of the S4 thing has plagued my mind for a long time. Please elaborate on “straight line generator at each end of the axle.” I guess you are indicating that it was intended that the axle should be accurately located perpendicular with the chassis centre line, i.e. and essential requirement.

I also am no qualified engineer but it is easy to understand that what amounts to a Watt’s linkage at each end of a solid axle, absolutely prevents any roll and which as a result can ONLY occur when and if the support points are stressed beyond their limits, i.e. by accident, surely not by design. The only logic which can be applied is that the designer did not realise/understand the effect imposed by the as used, stupid for and aft locating system.

I drove the thing under normal road conditions after purchasing it and took due note accordingly. The success of clubman type cars is due to the fact that they were/are marketed for real drivers, who appreciate tactile handling to the extent that they are willing to discount luxury in order to enjoy this aspect of motoring. The S4 was a flop cunningly off loaded. Having noted the wonderfully engineered steering and suspension set ups on Steel Bros. heavy multi wheeled truck trailers, it surprises me that they did not fix things. Mesmerised by the Lotus image I guess.

Yes, an arse of a design for sure! LOL. But the question lingers, there can be no excuses, just how did it see the light of day within such an illustrious environment??? The mind boggles!! :confused:

[Trevor Sheffield]

This was done on some engines back then to give better toque. Thinking back then was Longer manifold = torque. Did it with a 2Ltr Ford for speedway skidder way back and it did definately improve low down grunt. Run heat shield under carbs and big elongated u - shaped inlet pipes back over rocker cover, and boy racer bulge in bonnet to make room.

Yes Rod it sure did talk and ram the stuff in great guns and low down, grunt out loud. Raises the talking point of, pity the poor old Chrysler Corp. Ouch! :(

[S4seven]

Trevor
Just as a side note, you old car is alive and well, having had a rebuild in Christchurch. The interesting thing about this car was in the early seventies it was on wire wheels

[Trevor Sheffield]

Trevor
Just as a side note, you old car is alive and well, having had a rebuild in Christchurch. The interesting thing about this car was in the early seventies it was on wire wheels

S4seven or whoever,

Thanks for the info. Bolt on wire wheels? Are you certain?

The current owner should find that he has somewhere to put his left foot, he can operate the brake and clutch properly and heal and toe. The steering wheel is forwards for a straight arm position. It is not inclined to lift its inside rear wheel when cornering on the limit and it keeps its back feet on the ground. The steering rack is rigid and the mount is not cracked. Numerous persons have welded and brazed up the chassis frame at various points. The electrics should be much better than when new in various ways and the lights are lightweight and non standard. Much more, but it was a long time ago.

It was very sad when I got hold of it and I later learned that even then it had had a hard life, which included some racing. I am very surprised that it is still alive. Please advise the owner that I would very much like to make contact.

Trevor.

[S4seven]

Trevor
They were knock on's, the picture I have is to big to load, have you an email I can send it too

[Trevor Sheffield]

As I understand it (and my understanding is not great!) a Watts linkage, if restricted to a certain range of movement, generates a straight line i.e. the movement is straight up and down which is why they are preferred to a panhard-rod. The only reason I can think of for using the design as they did was that they were intending a design where the wheelbase would not alter throughout suspension travel. The S4 was rumoured to have originally been designed with either an independent or de-dion rear. I wonder if we have the beginning (or remnant) of a much more sophisticated (and expensive) design that was simply aborted part way through?

Kia ora Paul,

Mr Watt was a brilliant steam engine man and his idea was originally applied accordingly. He would be annoyed with Mr Chapman and rightly so.

Correctly used in the automotive world, a single Watt’s link can absolutely restrict the sideways movement of a rear suspension system and does so more accurately than a Panhard rod, which involves a radius of movement. Even so, the link does present problems in fixing the most desirable roll centre. There is no way the S4 set up, could have been satisfactorily used for front rear location in a more sophisticated system. More particularly in a de-dion rear end, where again a rigid connecting tube is involved thus coupling the links.

Sadly Mr, Chapman has no excuses in spite of the ongoing hype which follows him and you better believe it. LOL. ;)

Whatever, go here, click on “The Lycoming Special” and you will see how a real engineer goes about these things. :cool:


http://ralphwatson.scienceontheweb.net

P.S. Trying again for a hot result!

<http://ralphwatson.scienceontheweb.net/>

Cheers, Trevor.

[Trevor Sheffield]

Trevor
They were knock on's, the picture I have is to big to load, have you an email I can send it too

Thanks. trevshef@xtra.co.nz

Do you know what happened to the original knock on wheels and hubs?

[4dnut]

Hi,
I am new to this thread, congrats on buying the black car. A couple of things , when Aldas raced this car he engine was a trick unit from Randall, this is how Charlie aquired it. When Charlie sold the Brabham to the Wootons the engine out of the 7 was swapped. The engine out of the Brabham was rebuilt by Ian Chase if I recall and stuck back in the 7,this car always had wide 13 inch hotwires on it abd my friend Graeme Pearce sold Charlie the Simmons 15 inch wheels. I see a couple of points about the rear suspension on the 7,there are a couple of notes
A Watts link moves in a very shallow S pattern, that is why it is preferred over a panhards arc. On the 7 with a watts on each end of the diff moving in S shapes or only one side you would bind the diff if no movement in the bushes. If it had rod ends on everything you would either break the chassis mounts or twist the diff(i am sure the chassis would break).I am sure this was meant to be a zero steer rear end. The problem with a 4 link rear with very short links is roll steer and and also roll bind. Even a 4 link with long link will get roll bind at some point in its travel. This is compensated by either flexible bushes in one end of link or as a V8 suppercar does you use a plunger type rod with a small amount of movement and controll this with belvell washers. Whoops that was a bit long winded!! any way what I am trying to say everything is a comprimise be it a 4 link ,3 link or even the S4 7 rear. I race a BDA escort and have had alot of experience with a 4 link and there is comprimise. I have also had quite alot of experience with S4 7's. My father is Richard McCarthy and had campaigned a S4 7 for many years. This car became quite developed and is still probably the quickest S4. The rear chassis is heavily braced around rear chassis mounts, uses rod ends on both end of forward links and only on one end of rear link. It seams to work well, hooks up great of the start, doesnt seem to have strange roll oversteer. This car was written off last year when it was T boned by a cobra at Hampton, it is almost back together. When you see a S4 bare chassis it is quite frightening. I particularly like the steering column bolted to the GRP scuttle! When we first mucked around with my dad's car years ago, I remember unbolting the radiator and leavint the side plates on the chassis, it wouldn't come out. We jacked up the front on the car lifting the wheels off, radiator came loose. Result was bracing behind the radiator.Any way good luck Paul.

[kiwi285]

Paul (4dnut) I have sent you a PM

[jim short]

Hi just talking to rex nalder my prev.thread may be incorect he bought the black 7 off a soldier that had sat for some time in midle of the country,,,he maintains it was a special lotus ex eng,,after completly blowing original mtr at wigram 82 83?jamie fited a bda and modified it he cant remember who bought it,, of him and has no interest but i think it is the same car!!!

[jim short]

Hi Paul just rang jammie am now more confusedhe like me was shure it was a steel bro..never had a bda carbs never on exhaust!!sidethis was done on ford 10mtr in the50s manly speedboats,just the names mentioned seem to fit the nalder car???

[4dnut]

Hi Paul, I have sent you a PM, I have my dad's car at work if you want to look at the chassis mod we did for the dry sump pan

Paul

[Binzy1]

The only way that the rear could roll was for the chassis to flex, or for the suspension points to yield. I scrapped the forward facing arms and fitted new trailing links, together with a Panhard rod. This with other corrections, turned it into a motor car. Just what was Chapman thinking about?:(

I do not think I have the chassis number recorded anywhere, but will be pleased to check for you. Last seen in was down in the Waikato somewhere.

I have the Bainbridge Lotus 7 (907 engine) they built after ‘acquiring’ from Steeles. It has an S3 body but on what would seem to be S4 wider chassis and also the rear suspension as described in this thread.
On a winter rebuild of front suspension, although wasn’t done for racing, a mechanic friend (& racer/builder) suggested we look at rear set up while on stands….& he spent a fair bit of time shaking head as to design & associated risks of flex & damage....let alone handling deficiencies. His ideal option was rebuild, as described by Trevor, but for budget reasons opted to rose-joint key points to allow flex – and in particular to protect the chassis which seemed to be the biggest risk of damage should untoward occur.
Another option/thought to the mix I guess…..

[aussiemonza]

Hi Trevor
What is the Chassis number of your 7. I have a list of most of the cars

S4seven. where do the numbers "3060" and "3995" fit in?

[S4seven]

what info can you share on the two chassis numbers. 3060 is in the range for steel bro build cars, but 3995 doesn't in to the NZ or UK list of chassis numbers

[bry3500]

The value of having a good strong roll bar on a Seven..bit off topic, but some good footage here...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k0r-HNKfxVc&feature=related

[Trevor Sheffield]

Thanks. trevshef@xtra.co.nz

Do you know what happened to the original knock on wheels and hubs?
S4seven.

I am looking forward to receiving the photo you promised, as well as advice regarding the knock on wheels. To assist further, I repeat my e-mail address:-

trevshef@xtra.co.nz

Trevor.

[S4seven]

I sent it to your email last week, I'll send it again

[S4seven]

I sent it to your email last week, sent again at 9.30 this morning

[Trevor Sheffield]

I sent it to your email last week, sent again at 9.30 this morning

Special thanks as I did not receive the previous message.

When enlarged on my Mac. the photo you have kindly sent, shows a registration plate Q9169, as against my car GR7169. I do not see it as being the car I owned.

After purchasing the car, I talked to someone in the Auckland Lotus Club, who knew something of its previous club racing history, which as I understood it only involved North Island circuits. There was no suggestion of it ever having been fitted with wire wheels, with the main topic of the conversation covering a period of rather harsh treatment.

Whatever, thanks for your efforts to assist.

Trevor.

[S4seven]

Trevor. The picture I sent has GR7169 sitting next tp GR7171.
Gr7169 reregistered as NR8468 and now FLP100 The car is now white and living in Christchurch which I think it always has done?

[aussiemonza]

what info can you share on the two chassis numbers. 3060 is in the range for steel bro build cars, but 3995 doesn't in to the NZ or UK list of chassis numbers

The Chassis Numbers are listed in the CAMS Log Books for the two "wide body" (Australian version) cars that we have. The 3995 was logged in 1978 but the 3060 was logged in 1980. Both cars have documented ASCC history, the question we have is are they Steel Bros cars or Norwich cars?

Any hints as to where chassis numbers or ID can be found on the cars?

CCC

[S4seven]

Chassis 3060 if a Steel bros. car would have been built in '76 and sorry 3995 doesn't seem to fit, is this the black car with yellow strip for sale at the moment?. Only NZ built cars seem to come with a wide body.

[aussiemonza]

Chassis 3060 if a Steel bros. car would have been built in '76 and sorry 3995 doesn't seem to fit, is this the black car with yellow strip for sale at the moment?. Only NZ built cars seem to come with a wide body.

Both cars have widened bodies but I don't think were based on the Steel Bros wide body as being discussed here. I will attempt to post a photo of my car.

[Kghaas]

Hi Paul, and congratulations with Your S4. As it happends I just bought one myself here on the other side of the world :) It is just a normal S4, but I will somehow modify it along the way. I have to questions for you: is the track with up front the same as an S4 or is it wider? Secondly, do you have and pics of the rear setup?

If you are interested to see my car, I have started a thread on Pistonheads (http://pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&f=101&t=1058395&mid=0&nmt=Lotus+7+S4+1974%3A+light+restoration+and+modification):

http://i159.photobucket.com/albums/t134/kghaas/24092011265.jpg

[cossie]

Hello down under,

I found this thread the other day and have read it with great interest. I have done a lot of research on the Lotus 7 and the Lotus approved Seven derivatives. I take pride in getting the history as accurate as possible, because I believe that there are enough inaccurate books on the Seven already. I have during the past 20 years personally talked to many former Lotus employees involved in the Seven. Unfortunately there is only one remaining former Lotus executive left who I finally got to talk the other day. I am a Lotus owner myself. I have done some research on the "company X 7", but after reading this tread I believe that my research is far from over:) I am only interested in the Sevens manufactured by "Company X", not the Seven kits they imported from England. Here is what I am told so far:

“Company X" build Lotus 7 S4 in a "country close to Australia". Caterham and/or Lotus send a frame jig and a body mold to them. These Sevens were build from approx. 1973 to 1976 on a 3 year licenses issued by Caterham. They made 97 cars - 50 with the Lotus twin cam engine & 47 with the Lotus 907 engine. They used the Lotus name on their cars but that was never approved by Lotus. They even tried to get the 907 EPA/DOT approved for export to the US but that never happened.”

Please feel free to correct the above.

*It has been told that it was Lotus who licensed "Company X", but according to reliable source that is probably incorrect because Lotus reached a binding agreement with Caterham in July 1971. In that agreement Caterham took over the production rights of ALL Lotus 7 types and committed themselves to support existing Lotus Sevens. The agreement was however first finalized in May 1973.

*Does anybody have the VIN numbers for the "company X 7"? I have some.

*Is the 907 engine "company X 7" all widebody Super 907?

*Was the Super 907 ever approved for road use?

*Paul (Wilkinson) the VIN (chassis) no. 3094 you display – Is that the VIN for your widebody Seven?

I am looking forward to be hearing from you all.


Mike

[cossie]

Hi Paul,

Colin Chapman could be a devious so and so but I don’t believe that he would do anything in this case that could jeopardize the deal with Caterham. He absolutely wanted to get rid of the Seven and as fast as possible.

Colin Chapman had to protect the Lotus name for legal reasons (I have the full story about that) and therefore nobody (to my knowledge) have never been permitted to use the Lotus name on cars or kits not produced by Lotus England. Not even Caterham and they tried hard to keep the Lotus name on the Seven.

What I am told is that with the exception of Lotus & Caterham, 3 other manufactures have been allowed to manufacture the Seven under license. "Company X" was one of them.

So the displayed chassis number is for the red one you displayed (engine compartment)? What’s the chassis number on your “black monster”?

Where can I find a list of the "Company X 7" chassis numbers on this board as you wrote?

Cheers,

Mike

[cossie]

Hi Paul,

The 50 S4 kits (some say a lot more) were delivered to "Company X" from Lotus before "Company X" started their own Seven production. These cars are genuine Lotus Sevens. The Sevens produced by "Company X" from 1973 – 1976 ? were Sevens using the original Lotus jig and molds.

There are made approx. 2400 genuine Lotus Seven (all models) and out of them around 5000 have survived :) That’s the severity of the Seven forgeries. However I am not the person to judge what you call a Lotus not produced by Lotus. Graham Nearn called them Caterham.

Anyway I am very interested in more info. on the "Company X 7" regarding chassis numbers, production numbers, photos Etc.

Cheers,

Mike

[Trevor Sheffield]

Kia ora Mike,

With due respect, New Zealand does not harbour or condone fraud and corruption of any sort is exceedingly rare. Our laws support international branding and laws relative to copyright. Steele Bros (NZ) Ltd constitutes a well known legitimate substantial enterprise engaged in the heavy transport sector and as such would not have contemplated risking their substantial good will by illegally using the Lotus name.

Exactly from where are you compiling your alleged expert information? You may be 52 and be pretty sure, but I am 83 and well remember the advertising and sales promotion relative to the local building of the Lotus S4. At the time severe import restrictions were in place and only locally assembled cars were readily available. The possibility of local manufacture was very much in the news and Steele Bros activity was widely publicised. There were reports on how arrangements were made after personal visits to the Lotus organisation.

You are stating that Steel Bros were operating illegally. Provide proof or desist from distributing slander, you could be judged liable.

I drove a Lotus S4 constructed locally and it certainly was not imitation or bogus.

Cheers,

Trevor.

[cossie]

Hi Trevor,

I initially wrote to this thread in order find out more about the "Company X 7" (not the S4 kits imported from Lotus) and not to start a “war” on whether Lotus had aproved the use of their badge on it or not. I am absolutely not accusing anybody of anything but if you are so sure that Lotus had approved in writing that "other Seven manufactures" could use the Lotus badge on the cars they build entirely, then give me some proof instead of threatening me with liability issues. Put your word where your mouth is my friend, and if you are right and I am wrong – I will eat my words and write here that I was wrong.

Again I am interested in the "Company X"produced Sevens history and not in “mudslinging” as mentioned above.

If that’s not possible I am sorry that I spend my time writing to this thread and we might as well stop here. My spare time is too valuable for non constructive conversations.

Cheers,

Mike

[cossie]

Hi Paul & Trevor,

I fully agree with you Paul that I can be percived as a bit arrogant even though I am not. I am a no nonsense guy who absolutely hates politics and injustice. What I have to say, I say directly to people.

I have really researched the Lotus 7 and 7 licensed derivatives very thoroughly during many years. I have talked to almost all the Colin Chapman Lotus era top people involved with the Seven and sadly there are now only one left. I have spoken to key Lotus people no other authors of any Seven books have spoken to! Without sounding arrogant I don’t believe that anybody has researched as much as I have regarding the Lotus 7. Therefore it really pisses me off when somebody like you Trevor accuses me of: “Stating that "Company X" were operating illegally, distributing slander, so I could be judged liable” Etc. That very OTT and not called fore.

The following has been said by many of the ex. top Lotus people I have interviewed:
“When Caterham took over the Seven production they wanted very much to use the Lotus Name. Colin Chapman checked that possibility with his attorneys. However the problem was that Lotus could still be held liable for independent manufactures possible legal problems if they used the Lotus name on their cars and registrations. So that was declined.”

Knowing that it is not very likely that "other Seven manufactures" were given that permission – is it?

That does not make the "Company X 7" an inferior product and that is NOT what I am saying. In a matter of fact the car was probably better than the original Lotus 7 S4, especially the “wide body”. I wouldn’t mind having a Super 907 myself and that was the reason why I previously asked if that car was approved for road use. I know that you all are proud of the "Company X 7" and rightfully may I say and it has never been my intention to challenge that.

If there still are some key "Company X 7"people around, please give them my e-mail: agmni@aol.com. I would like to get their storeys.

Cheers,

Mike

[Trevor Sheffield]

Attention Mike,

You made this direct statement --- “They (Steel Bros.) used the Lotus name on their cars but that was never approved by Lotus.” What is more you included significant associated asides, all of which damages the goodwill of Steele Bros.

It is especially significant that you continue not to provide the factual evidence which I requested, i.e. “You are stating that Steel Bros. were operating illegally. Provide proof or desist from distributing slander, you could be judged liable.”

You have rudely posted, ----

” if you (Trevor) are so sure that Lotus had approved in writing that Steel Brothers could use the Lotus badge on the cars they build entirely, then give me some proof instead of threatening me with liability issues. Put your word where your mouth is my friend, and if you are right and I am wrong – I will eat my words and write here that I was wrong. I am waiting.”

I now “put my word where my mouth is” and again categorically state, what I have outlined is sound and logical fact. N.B. Steele Bros. would not have blatantly publicised a product, branded it and widely used the name “Lotus”, unless they were legally entitled to do so. This would have amounted to outright commercial stupidity, leaving the door open for litigation and costly damages.. I trust the intelligence of readers to carefully read your posts together with statements by Paul and myself and come to logical conclusions.

You now obtusely if not slyly, address me within your latest post --- “So this is not a matter of somebody has done something illegally Trevor, but again that is not the same as they were given a written permission to use the Lotus name is it?”

In answer I say, stop beating about the bush dodging the issue. You have here in print, made absolute and direct unproved derogatory statements relative to Steele Bros. What is more, you now claim authority in respect of making your allegations by stating, “Without sounding arrogant I don’t believe that anybody has researched as much as I have regarding the Lotus 7.”

At this point I restrain from more aptly worded comment. However I do call for an apology, particularly towards Steels Bros. and without attendant qualification and or sarcasm.

Without repent,

Trevor.

P.S. It is rather significant that I am called upon to defend myself against text from a dot in cyberspace, whereas by contrast I post in my true name, which appears with my address in the Auckland telephone directory, available on the internet.

[Jan]

Hi Trevor,

Why do you keep attacking Mike and create a bad environment here with all your threats about legal actions??

This is a CAR forum for exchanging information and should not be used as your personal platform for vendetta or boredom.

Apparently I have to choose my words carefully here or you will probably also threaten to sue me too.

Here is a Section from CAMS:

”Note: Only Lotus built cars or Lotus kits assembled by Steel Bros (NZ) are elgible for classification in this group. Later cars built by Steel Bros commonly known as “New Zealand 7” with altered mechnical and body specifications, are not elgible. Please refer to notes in addendum to this sheet.”

Question: Why are these Steel Bros Sevens not eligible if they are Lotuses as you claim?

Let’s close this discussion and move on.

Cheers,

John

[Oldfart]

Just a wee question for you from the sidelines.
When did CAMS, who has nothing whatever to do with NZ have the power to make a decision affecting NZ?
From the sidelines, it is not Trevor who has made the threats, it was Mike/Cossie who intimated that Steels had been acting illegally.
All Trevor (who I do not know) pointedout was that making these intimations could be libellous.
Jan, did you join the forum just to jump on this issue?
At the time of Steele Bros production we had numerous visits from Lotus staff, if the cars were illegal from a name point they could hardly have been unaware.
I have a vague memory of cars being displayed with race cars, but this could be a vague old memory and be incorrect

[Jan]

Hi all,

It’s getting late and I do not really want to get into this but I do see a pattern of a “lynching mob” from NZ and that is not right.

I am sorry but I do not see any threats from Mike. However I can associate with his frustration in trying to gather a historically correct Lotus 7 history and not getting any help.

I am aware of that CAMS has nothing to do with NZ! so what you are saying is that Steel Bros Sevens were only allowed to be called Lotuses in NZ. Is that correct understood? You are also saying that Australian CAMS (our national body) know absolutely nothing about the Steel Bros Seven! Isn’t that what Trevor calls slander?

As indicated I could care less here and I do not know Mike but after reading this thread again, I actually believe that it is Trevor who are threatening Mike.

Anyway I believe that Trevor has taken this thread way off topic and that we should get back on topic.

No this I by far my first contribution (if you must know!) but instead of changing my old profile which contains all my personal details such as e-mail address I have made a new one. I do not want persons like Trevor to have my e-mail address (for obvious reasons may I say).

Cheers,

John

[Neville Milne]

FWIW Steel Bros had been in the fabrication business for almost 100 years, before the Lotus venture. The quality of their fabrication(s) and their honesty in their dealings was, and is, unquestioned.
This was very far from a 'nickle and dime' outfit, trying to assemble kit cars in a back shed.
Steel Bros, was then and is to this day, a large, well respected business
I'm sure the Lotus venture was a minor diversion, possibly to keep employees occupied during inevitable 'slow times' that were endemic in those industries, at that time.
Also FWIW, they were probably far better capitalized than any other of Chapman's customers, possibly better than Lotus themselves and, in my direct experience, Steel Bros paid their bills...on time...a characteristic attractive to ANY supplier of theirs, including Lotus.
Neville Milne

[stirlingmac]

As a relative newbie here, I have been reading this thread with interest. I got the impression that any warnings were given in a friendly/advisory manner not as a threat of action to be taken by anyone here on the forum. Over the years I have read many books and articles about the S4 Sevens and all too few even acknowledge the NZ built cars, it therefore not surprising that there is little knowledge outside NZ about them. The CAMS reference is irrelevant in as much as we have no idea why NZ built cars were classified as they were in Australia. I doubt anyone involved in any licensing or business transactions with Lotus or Colin Chapman would be willing to have any documentation posted on the net. I only reponded due to my interest in these cars for many years and the desire to own one myself.

[Oldfart]

Hi all,


I am aware of that CAMS has nothing to do with NZ! so what you are saying is that Steel Bros Sevens were only allowed to be called Lotuses in NZ. Is that correct understood? You are also saying that Australian CAMS (our national body) know absolutely nothing about the Steel Bros Seven! Isn’t that what Trevor calls slander?

No this I by far my first contribution (if you must know!) but instead of changing my old profile which contains all my personal details such as e-mail address I have made a new one. I do not want persons like Trevor to have my e-mail address (for obvious reasons may I say).

Cheers,

John

John, it is not, nor was not, my intention to "slander CAMS". I was curious as to why CAMS would have any mention of the Steele cars in their rules at all. I don't even know if they were exported. (Nor do I care).
As for a "lynch mob"! We obviously have different slants to reading, I read it and still do that Mike had made comments re the rights which Steeles did, or did not have to call them Lotus. Trevor made a comment that I felt warned Mike about making such comments, no more. You interpret that differentlly.
I agree with all the parties who actually care, that someone needs to "put up or shut up". That can be either Mike with documents to show that Steeles were acting illegally, or someone in NZ showing that there was some agreement. Of course the chances of finding something at the UK end would be nigh on impossible, even if they did exist in the time. That means that the only option is at the NZ end, again if those records still exist, after all how many years ago was the operation closed down?
I re-iterate, AT THE TIME, NZ had numerous visits from Lotus staff, surely action would have been taken rather than the tacit support which was shown?

[zakspeed65]

Hi All,

I have been reading this thread with interest and a little disbelief!!

I am quite passionate about Lotus 7 cars, having restored a couple of Series 2 a Series 3 and a Series 4.

It is quite well known here in NZ that Steel Brothers did in fact build these cars, if the did or did not have the OK from Lotus (which I am quite sure they did) this many years on it will be very hard to get to the bottom of the real story.
Colin Chapman was great at doing deals, with many parties!! Talking to him to get the real answers is not going to happen.

The rest is as they say "IS HISTORY" Debate all you want, even say things you may regret, but the fact remains you will never know the true story. Well not 100%.


Cheers,

Gary.

[Rod Grimwood]

John, CAMS over the years have not recognized a number of vehicles from NZ, as is their right.
Cossie/Mike, The "Mother Land" (GB) is also not the only country to have produced or still have certain makes of cars. There is a bit more to NZ history than being discovered by a explorer as a "little island" in the Pacific (actually 2 little islands). Been there done that on another thread.
Being involved in a wee bit of documentation over the years, “They (Steel Bros.) used the Lotus name on their cars but that was never approved by Lotus.” is a statement.

A lot is answered by Neville Milne and Zakspeed65

[Trevor Sheffield]

As my input and the essence of my complaint is becoming somewhat buried, I again repeat:-

You (Mike --- ? ) made this direct statement --- “They (Steel Bros.) used the Lotus name on their cars but that was never approved by Lotus.” What is more you included significant associated asides, all of which damages the goodwill of Steele Bros.

I trust the intelligence of readers to carefully read your posts together with statements by Paul and myself and come to logical conclusions.

At this point I restrain from more aptly worded comment. However I do call for an apology, particularly towards Steels Bros. and without attendant qualification and or sarcasm.


Let it be clear that I have made no threats, but I certainly have made accusations which still stand and the name of Steele Bros remains maligned.

Sincerely, Trevor.

P.S. As I have stated, Steele Bros. would not publicise if they were not entitled to do so. Please go here and refer history, period 1970 - 1980 for the facts:-

http://www.steelbro.com/en/about-us/history.html

[markec]

Is the next thing to be discussed, that all the CKD's that were assembled in NZ, not genuine Fords, Humbers, Rovers or Vauxhalls.

[AMCO72]

I have been re-reading this thread from the start, as I was wondering why there was all this passion for such an ugly car. [your words Paul] Just to defuse things a bit here, could I ask someone what these things sold for when new? I remember when they appeared on the market, and wondering, who would willingly part with money to be seen in 'THAT'. Charlie Conway traded one on a Pantera....'a de-tomato-sauce' as we used to call them, and I'm not sure who got the better deal, but Charlie was a pretty shrewd character and knew his 'motors'. By all the comments I have been reading, the car was a complete dog, that required lots of mods from owners to get it right.....for track use anyway. Maybe Chapman and Co never intended it to be a race car, but should have guessed that it would be pressed into service. My knowledge of these things has taken a huge leap since Paul started this thread, so lets just move on, as we will NEVER know the true story, as dealing with the likes of Colin Chapman and Co, was as frustrating as duct-taping eels to a greasy pole.

[aussiemonza]

Hi Trevor,

Why do you keep attacking Mike and create a bad environment here with all your threats about legal actions??

This is a CAR forum for exchanging information and should not be used as your personal platform for vendetta or boredom.

Apparently I have to choose my words carefully here or you will probably also threaten to sue me too.

Here is a Section from CAMS:

”Note: Only Lotus built cars or Lotus kits assembled by Steel Bros (NZ) are elgible for classification in this group. Later cars built by Steel Bros commonly known as “New Zealand 7” with altered mechnical and body specifications, are not elgible. Please refer to notes in addendum to this sheet.”

Question: Why are these Steel Bros Sevens not eligible if they are Lotuses as you claim?

Let’s close this discussion and move on.

Cheers,

John

Hi John,

What is the context of the CAMS section? Is it to do with the eligibility of Steele Bros Lotus S4's for Group D Production Sports in the late 70's - early 80's?

CCC

[AMCO72]

Paul, your car doesn't look too bad. Maybe some seat covering and a bit of carpet, and she would be ready to shoot the breeze. What state is the engine in if it hasn't been run for a few years? I think I would be tempted to have some fun in it. Might be a long time before the house is paid off!!!!!!!

[Binzy1]

Hi John,

What is the context of the CAMS section? Is it to do with the eligibility of Steele Bros Lotus S4's for Group D Production Sports in the late 70's - early 80's?

CCC
It was probably because CAMS knew that the later Steele cars had the 907 engine, wasn't exactly the best design for a race engine, so made the rule to avoid oil spills and associated bits left lying on the track from them when went 'bang' from being thrashed.
I feel safe saying this as have read plenty about 907’s as have one in my Steeles/Bainbridge '7' (daren't try getting away with calling it a Lotus now given the discussion here - lol).
Lindsay

[Jan]

Hi All,

It looks to me that with the exception of Mike I am the only person in this forums thread who resides outside NZ. Therefore I am not wearing the same “rose tinted spectacles” as you are!

However click on the following link and you can see that not all your citizens agrees with your statements in this thread: http://www.lotus7.co.nz/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1537

I also believe that your conduct and behavior is appalling to somebody who just tries to piece the authentic Lotus 7 history together. Nobody has actually assisted him in his inquiry regarding Steel Bros Seven production numbers, chassis numbers, widebody models and so on.

It seems it is paramount to most of you to protect local interest instead of getting the authentic Steel Bros Lotus Seven history out whatever that may be. One thing is for sure threatening somebody with legal actions instead of helping them are not going to change anything.

I am not saying that Mike could not have worded his sentences differently here but then again so could Trevor. Also I do not know Mikes English language skills (no offence Mike) but this should be a forum that accepts anybody who makes a contribution as long as the tone is reasonably sober. The only treats I have seen here are the ones Trevor made.

I believe that this discussion is just going to continue in a non productive manner so I am retiring from this thread for good now. So “over and out”

Cheers,

John

[Oldfart]

John, thanks for that link.
I find it interesting that it mentions in a number of places the agreement with Lotus/Steeles as being legit. Certainly the later cars were a different kettle of fish, I don't think anyone has shown any issue with this, or perhaps I misread this. I guess we will never know.
As I previously said, proving this either way now, 35 years later would be nigh on impossible.
Without rancour, what was the CAMS issue?
Rose coloured specs, actually I have always abhorred the S4!

[Binzy1]

However click on the following link and you can see that not all your citizens agrees with your statements in this thread: http://www.lotus7.co.nz/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1537


Ha - history repeats!
That's Paul & I, from this Forum, having a discussion (debate?) on that Forum about bits & pieces of information that we had gleaned around the Lotus/Steeles etc history within NZ. We are a small & proud country and this was an interesting time in NZ motoring history and I guess keen to protect the reputation whilst glean more information as to our cars.
Lindsay

[cossie]

Hi All,

John, you have nailed this subject right on. I am glad that someone can see through what really is going on here. I do understand why you have elected to stop writing here; it is not worth the aggravation of being threatened to be sued. However I believe that you (in your haste?) generalized a little bit. Paul Wilkinson has been very helpful.

It is apparent that for some New Zealanders like the Trevors, it is more important to protect national interest than getting the actual documented facts (whatever they may be) out. However following is taken from Lotus Club NZ:

“they (Lotus) weren't thrilled that Steele’s had been using good old Kiwi ingenuity to keep building as ‘Lotus’ badge way beyond”

"The cars that are not strictly legit as far as I know are the ones where Steel Bros started arsing about with the body shape/dimensions and engines etc. They happily slapped Lotus chassis plates on them”

I HAVE NOT written the above mentioned Trevor, so no reason to bring the “artillery” out this time. However sometimes there is no smoke without fire. This doesn’t actually mean anything, ooh for heaven sake no:)

An overprotective mother who always claims that her teenage son is an angel even though the Police just took him stealing. I am not comparing anything here OOOH no:)

To Trevor the "self-proclaimed judge and executor" in this forum. I have now edited my contribution so it now has absolutely no meaning to anybody. A certain manufacture is now called “Company X”. A certain human interfaced device on wheels is now called “Company X 7”. A certain country of the Trevors is now called “A country close to Australia”. I sincerely hope that this cannot offend anyone now.

All I initially wanted was “a good yarn” about the “Company X 7”, especially how many made, VIN numbers, Super 907 Etc. It has never been my intention to offend, insult or slander anybody. I don’t even know “Company X” so I have no opinion about them. Somebody wrote that they paid their bills on time. That has absolutely nothing to do with this issue and honestly I politely don’t care.

Finally it was Trevor who started the threats against me as John so correctly has observed. I am sorry if some people from “A country close to Australia” can’t see that. Trevor how much research have you done on the Lotus 7? You are good at making treats (and demands) but apparently nothing else. I have no respect for people like you.

So have a nice life because I am also signing off now. I am doing this Lotus 7 research in my spare time and I have now wasted enough time on – actually almost nothing useful! Researching history supposes to be fun and entertaining, meeting nice people Etc. Not the harassment and aggravation I predominately got here. John and Paul, I did not mean you. You two guys have been helpful and constructive.

Somebody once said: “Why sore with turkeys when you can fly with eagles” so I will do just that.

This is the first time I have been threatened in a forum on the Internet.

John, by the way, what the heck is cams? Please drop me a PM.

Best Whishes,

Mike

[Neville Milne]

What an odd series of exchanges this has been.
In those days, many NZ based manufacturers had agreements with over-seas suppliers of technology or materials; the company I represented had such agreements with the Associated Engineering group, in the UK and the Cleveland Graphite Bronze Co, in the US., to name just two.
In neither case were 'letters' or correspondence retained after the period required by the Companies Office...7 years, as I recall.
At that time those letters had no special significance, certainly none that was historical and the space required to store company records, ad-infinitum, would have been considerable. I am sure there was a similar requirement in other countries, including the UK.
For those very practical and legitimate reasons, I would be VERY surprised if any commercial correspondence still existed between Chapman and Steel Brothers, or Chapman and anyone else for that matter........such correspondence would be a very odd exception to what was then, the way in which business was conducted.
Therefore one is left to consider each company and each company's commercial reputation, in it's entirety. Having had direct knowledge of Steel Bros, I CAN assert that they were solvent; adhered to whatever agreements were made with the company I was employed by; and had a reputation of producing well engineered and well made products. I have never had direct commercial dealings with Lotus, apart from having the misfortune to own an early Mk1 Lotus Cortina.
Neville Milne

[AMCO72]

Do you know that every time I sat down at my computer to check on the latest casualty from 'The Gun-fight at the Steelbros Corral', I fully expected our friend in the UK, New Zealand's foremost motoring historian no less, to wade in with the AK47, and blow everyone away. When the dust had settled, he would give his usual well measured, well researched reply, and the survivors of the shootout would emerge from behind water troughs and bars to fight another day. But sadly, no. I think I shall just retire to the bar myself and see if I can join a game of cards, with my back to the wall of course!!!!!

[Carlo]

Do you know that every time I sat down at my computer to check on the latest casualty from 'The Gun-fight at the Steelbros Corral', I fully expected our friend in the UK, New Zealand's foremost motoring historian no less, to wade in with the AK47, and blow everyone away. When the dust had settled, he would give his usual well measured, well researched reply, and the survivors of the shootout would emerge from behind water troughs and bars to fight another day. But sadly, no. I think I shall just retire to the bar myself and see if I can join a game of cards, with my back to the wall of course!!!!!

Care if I join you for a quiet Speights and a hand or two ?

[AMCO72]

Carlo....be my guest.

[Oldfart]

I just wish I had the sanity to not have posted what I thought was a reasoned, and intending to moderate reply! Don't like Speights, can I have a Beam?

[AMCO72]

Yep, drinks are on the house....Pauls new house. I think we all deserve one [or two] after that hammering. I was checking the site at 2am in the morning, to see the latest casualty, after I had pointed Percy at the Porcelain!!!!!!

[Trevor Sheffield]

Hi All,

John, you have nailed this subject right on. I am glad that someone can see through what really is going on here. I do understand why you have elected to stop writing here; it is not worth the aggravation of being threatened to be sued. However I believe that you (in your haste?) generalized a little bit. Paul Wilkinson has been very helpful.

It is apparent that for some New Zealanders like the Trevors, it is more important to protect national interest than getting the actual documented facts (whatever they may be) out. However following is taken from Lotus Club NZ:

“they (Lotus) weren't thrilled that Steele’s had been using good old Kiwi ingenuity to keep building as ‘Lotus’ badge way beyond”

"The cars that are not strictly legit as far as I know are the ones where Steel Bros started arsing about with the body shape/dimensions and engines etc. They happily slapped Lotus chassis plates on them”

I HAVE NOT written the above mentioned Trevor, so no reason to bring the “artillery” out this time. However sometimes there is no smoke without fire. This doesn’t actually mean anything, ooh for heaven sake no:)

An overprotective mother who always claims that her teenage son is an angel even though the Police just took him stealing. I am not comparing anything here OOOH no:)

To Trevor the "self-proclaimed judge and executor" in this forum. I have now edited my contribution so it now has absolutely no meaning to anybody. A certain manufacture is now called “Company X”. A certain human interfaced device on wheels is now called “Company X 7”. A certain country of the Trevors is now called “A country close to Australia”. I sincerely hope that this cannot offend anyone now.

All I initially wanted was “a good yarn” about the “Company X 7”, especially how many made, VIN numbers, Super 907 Etc. It has never been my intention to offend, insult or slander anybody. I don’t even know “Company X” so I have no opinion about them. Somebody wrote that they paid their bills on time. That has absolutely nothing to do with this issue and honestly I politely don’t care.

Finally it was Trevor who started the threats against me as John so correctly has observed. I am sorry if some people from “A country close to Australia” can’t see that. Trevor how much research have you done on the Lotus 7? You are good at making treats (and demands) but apparently nothing else. I have no respect for people like you.

So have a nice life because I am also signing off now. I am doing this Lotus 7 research in my spare time and I have now wasted enough time on – actually almost nothing useful! Researching history supposes to be fun and entertaining, meeting nice people Etc. Not the harassment and aggravation I predominately got here. John and Paul, I did not mean you. You two guys have been helpful and constructive.

Somebody once said: “Why sore with turkeys when you can fly with eagles” so I will do just that.

This is the first time I have been threatened in a forum on the Internet.

John, by the way, what the heck is cams? Please drop me a PM.

Best Whishes,

Mike

I apologise to those who by now must regard the points now being made as trivial, but as my name is being continually and repeatedly publicly denigrated by a hidden non identity, I must execute a right of reply.

(1) Yes, regardless of their nationality, I find it important to protect others and organisations against incorrect derogatory allegations.

(2) It was stated by way of an insult in post #74 ---”They (Steels Bros.) used the Lotus name on their cars but that was never approved by Lotus”, i.e. an absolute, unmitigated statement of fact without qualification and based on hearsay.

(3) I call on readers to please carefully examine my initial post #81 in full, whereby I was carefully courteous and did not in any way attack the tender footed “ ‘cossie’ Mike”, or threaten litigation as has been continually claimed. I posted as follows:-

“You are stating that Steel Bros. were operating illegally. Provide proof or desist from distributing slander, you could be judged liable.” i.e. I recorded no more than a robust clear statement and request, together with clear advice suggesting caution. N.B. I did not state “otherwise I will have you judged liable", or make any threatening inference as is here being continually, stupidly alleged.

(4) I also ask readers to note the incessant sarcasm and the tone of the replies directed towards me and in particular this gem. “Put your word where your mouth is my friend, and if you are right and I am wrong – I will eat my words and write here that I was wrong.” Please refer post #85, i.e. my tempered reply to this nastiness,

(5) Mike ---? has not desisted and continues to brow beat with concerted efforts, to prove that his statements which damage the good will of Steele Bros. remain accepted as correct. He obstinately continues with this diatribe, now quoting, presumably as absolute evidence, off the cuff comments by Lotus Club N.Z. stating. “They (Steele Bros.) happily slapped Lotus plates on them.”

(6) A direct and personal attack, again including ego driven ongoing sarcasm, has now been made against me as follows:-

”I HAVE NOT written the above mentioned Trevor, so no reason to bring the “artillery” out this time. However sometimes there is no smoke without fire. This doesn’t actually mean anything, ooh for heaven sake no :)

An overprotective mother who always claims that her teenage son is an angel even though the Police just took him stealing. I am not comparing anything here OOOH no :)

To Trevor the "self-proclaimed judge and executor" in this forum. I have now edited my contribution so it now has absolutely no meaning to anybody. A certain manufacture is now called “Company X”. A certain human interfaced device on wheels is now called “Company X 7”. A certain country of the Trevors is now called “A country close to Australia”. I sincerely hope that this cannot offend anyone now.”

(7) It is proclaimed that evidence has now cunningly been removed, notably without honestly completing the reasons why detail by way of disclosure. In spite of this, evidence remains clearly reproduced throughout the thread, whereby the name of Steele Bros. has been placed in jeopardy.

Obviously no apology is forthcoming. The required testicles and intestinal fortitude being sadly lacking. However let it be clear that, in spite of of a great deal of bovine manure excreted from a confirmed steer in hiding, Steele Bros. are reputable and remain innocent.

Sincerely, Trevor.

Sorely proclaimed, "Threatening, demanding, self-proclaimed judge and executor" but even so, is happy to soar with kiwi turkeys.

[Binzy1]

As was once proclaimed (although I'm substituting Weasels with Turkeys) - "Eagles may soar but Turkeys don't get sucked in to jet engines!!!!!!".........

[Jan]

“A certain human interfaced device on wheels is now called “Company X 7”. Ha-ha that’s a good one Mike.

Mike, I have worked for many years as a mechanical engineer in NZ and I have never experienced the low level of conduct from NZ citizens as you have experienced here. I don’t know if you have been to NZ but the majority of New Zealanders are actually well educated and very nice people. Most of them in this forum appear not to be in these categories.

Trevor, Neither you or anybody else in this thread have proved anything about your Seven, so why do you keep harassing Mike and threatening him? And the manure thing! You and your mob are the “big slingers” here! Immaturity I may say and how old are you?

Mike, Trevor just doesn’t get it. Apparently he is a man who has nothing better to do than harass people and currently you are his victim joined by some people who are not representing the educated New Zealanders I know.

“Oldfart”, Mike, C.A.M.S. stand for Confederation of Australian Motor Sport and it is very respected (also in NZ), but apparently not according to the “mob” here!! Click on this link for more info: http://www.cams.com.au/Sport/Historics/Logbooks_and_COD/Specification_Sheets/~/media/Files/Sport/Historics/Historics/Group%20S/Lotus%207%20%20Super%207%20%20S4%20%20Sc.ashx

Paul, Mike is right. I generalized here, and I apologize to you. I can see that you are one of few who actually has assisted Mike here.

AMCO72, you are absolutely right, you just got it the wrong way around. It is Mike (who I still don’t know!) and I who are in the bar when you “Kiwi mob” come in with your AK 47’s and start shooting in order to preserve national interest. That’s the key problem here. It is good to be country proud but when that comes in the way of exposing the correct history (whatever that is) it is wrong. Threatening Mike to silence just because he want to get the history correct in actual “blackmail” isn’t it Trevor?

Finally if anybody should give an apology here, it should be you Trevor. Read back to this “mother of all treads” and you will see Trevor that you actually started your treats in your #81. Before that there had been no treats about legal actions and slander. You started this and may I say, you have not contributed with one shred of evidence to justify harassing or threatening other people. Further you have never answered Mikes question: “Trevor how much research have you done on the Lotus 7?”

So Trevor when you immaturely wrote: “The required testicles and intestinal fortitude being sadly lacking. However let it be clear that, in spite of of a great deal of bovine manure excreted from a confirmed steer in hiding”, you are actually talking about yourself.

Mike, believe me, don’t get the wrong impression of New Zealand because the majority of New Zealanders are nice people, you were just very very unlucky here.

Mike, I have sent you a PM.

Cheers,

John

[Rod Grimwood]

First off I know bugger all about the Lotus Legacy (except if it was a Cortina give it to me) and a little F1/single seater history.

Mike, sorry but I do feel you started throwing it and as you should know by now, it can be thrown back. I also feel the first character assasination did not come from this side of the globe. And another point ! we may be close to Australia in your mind (do you think that was diplomatic, or outright shit stirring), but this country has supplied some of the best mechanics and designers in most motorsport catagories over the years world wide, and still do. It is a pity that this has turned personal, and I feel that the hatchet should be buried as things may be "said/written" that do not need to be.

I have heard of most names (NZ) mentioned in this thread over the years and hold them in regard as intelligent and knowledgable motorsport people.

Cheers

PS John, Must be something about Officialdom and Sports Sedans, as we all parked ours up back in mid 90s because "the brick wall"

[AMCO72]

It looks a wee bit like a Mini special, that was built and designed by that master of glass-fibre....Ferris deJoux.

[AMCO72]

No, and do you know what. You should take heed of the comment made when you traded the Leitch for the S4......'you have left a beautiful woman for her UGLY sister'. I predict that you will never be happy with that 'eyesore', and suggest that forthwith you trade the UGLY sister for a beautiful woman again. Even when she is giving you grief with another breakdown, she will still be gorgeous to look at when you lift the sheets!!!!!!!

[AMCO72]

I think that the S4 may be one of those cars that you need to see 'in the flesh' Some cars do not photograph well, and the lines are not truely appreciated until you actually see them. A bit like 'that other GTO'. In a lot of photos the car just looks gauky, but when you actually see the entire machine, it still looks a bit gawky, but much more pleasing to the eye than a picture. I'm not being rude to you about 'the love of your life' [well almost], it just doesn't 'do' anything for me, unlike the sweet little Leitch. To be honest, I haven't seen either of them in the flesh, so I'm talking through a hole in my hat!!!!!!

[Chris Kitzen]

Personally I quite like the look of the S4 although I am more than unlikely to ever own one as I have a sickness for Escorts, Mk1's in particular! I do remember being taken for a ride in a brand new S4 back in the 70s which as a young fella thought was pretty impressive. It went like a raped ape in comparrison to the 1100 big block Escort I was driving at the time :)

[Trevor Sheffield]

Nothing wrong with the appearance of the S4 or the body design, all of which should be considered on a strictly practical basis.

[AMCO72]

.........'all of which should be considered on a strickly practical basis'........not sure that I follow you Trevor. Please explain to a Philistine like me.

[Trevor Sheffield]

.........'all of which should be considered on a strickly practical basis'........not sure that I follow you Trevor. Please explain to a Philistine like me.

The body may not be an aesthetically pleasing work of sculptured art or cosmetically attractive, but it conforms with what is required in order to make it useful and practical. This in contrast to artistic rubbish, into which engineers are called upon to insert the required works. As a result practical soles like me judge it pleasing and certainly find nothing wrong with it. Howsat! LOL

[AMCO72]

mmmmmmmmm......there are a few words that I need to look up in the dictionary, but I sort of get your drift. I certainly dont study car design with any degree of professionalism; I just take a look....if I like it, thats good, if I don't..... well, mmmmm; I'm very prone to making instant decisions, which on reflection, don't always stand too much scrutiny.My decisions on the S4 have all been based on pictures, and as I said, I need to see the thing in the flesh. I'm wondering if you could give me an example of, in your opinion, artistic rubbish!! I could think of a few myself......I wonder if they match yours.

[Trevor Sheffield]

mmmmmmmm --- I could and would, but with due consideration consider it best not to take this thread way off topic.

[jim short]

I dont think i could fall in love with a car shaped like a brick!!

[Oldfart]

6861

One of these? Just take it as far as possible, yes I do know I should have shut the bonnet properly!

[Rod Grimwood]

Paul, maybe a different colour/paint scheme will change looks, look what a bit of make up does for Elton.

[Trevor Sheffield]

If and when driving an S4 for any length of time, just where and how do you guys rest your left foot?

[Kghaas]

Hi Paul,

Nice to see your thread back on track. :)
Any pics of the rear axle, suspension etc? Is it standard stuff or some trick stuff?

My restauration is going as plannede. Had the car for an MOT for the first time in 10 years! It fail!! On one point only: Hand brake to loose. I will se how i fix it since I have converted to disks...

Car at as it sits today:
http://i159.photobucket.com/albums/t134/kghaas/17032012542.jpg

[Graeme Farr]

I had a Super 907 frame a few years back - and an S4. The S4 had not been driven since 1978 - and when I picked it up was suprised it came with a spare TC engine.

Haven't read the earlier posts but I think the Steels bought the licence to make 50 cars - and bought 50 engines. Those were all Big Valve but the last 50 odd had the earlier small valve engine - they came from Australia unused from the Escort production. Because mine was a 'first 50' it was a "genuine Lotus" one. I think Steels just kept on making them after the 50 and I doubt either them or Lotus really cared.

Good luck with the new car - as your say very ugly! Aghhh..

The McGregor Seven guy from Chch had the moulds for the Super 907 I think.

[Steve Holmes]

OK, call me crazy, but I actually reckon these are good looking cars, and especially this one with the wheel combination it has. They're a fairly typical '70s design, and there was a lot of good stuff to come out of the '70s.


My First S4...

http://i633.photobucket.com/albums/uu55/prw007/Lotus%207%20S4/DSC03022-1.jpg


http://i633.photobucket.com/albums/uu55/prw007/Lotus%207%20S4/DSC03015-1.jpg


http://i633.photobucket.com/albums/uu55/prw007/Lotus%207%20S4/DSC03017-1.jpg

[Steve Holmes]

I think if it were mine, I'd have two bodies, and keep the black one with rear wing set aside for one day should you decide to sell it, or if you decide you do like it afterall, and want to fit it again. I guess thats part of the problem with owning a historical car, it might not be to your own tastes, but it is what it is, and to a certain degree, you're just a caretaker, preserving it for the next generation.

I guess I only say that because I also have an interest in pre-1960 historic hot rods and kustom cars, many of which were simply aweful. But they are also historical, and its nice to see them restored or preserved to how they once were.

[Steve Holmes]

Of course, having said that, I also have no idea whats involved in swapping bodies on a Lotus 7. it could well be too big of a job.

[Steve Holmes]

Its a curious design addition is that wing! I guess there was supposed to be some sort of tie in with the F1 cars? Do you know why it was created? I like that its been done, its different, and, like you say, is quite fitting of the time. Today they'd just add a wing mounted on a couple of alloy struts, but this is pure '70s excess, so its quite cool in its own way.

[BWilliams]

Hopefully all shall be revealed soon on your car Paul.

[nalracer]

Hey Paul, I came across this thread by accident, I am Rex Nalders son, The old man had this car when I was a teenager I am now late 40s. The car was purchased early 80s from a prison officer in Turangi, The old man did some research, and found out that the car was built as a factory show car by Steele bros, was approx 2in wider than stock and was plain black, only one of its kind. Car also handled like it was on rails, as he had suspension strapped down (literally with wide leather straps) he had all the rear spare wheel mount filled, no holes - was raced on wide 13in hotwire mags. Engine was a stock 1600 twin cam (mild work). He took it to wigram and was second fastest car (fastest, 930 turbo porsche) punched it off start, big oil surge, destroyed engine! Jamie aselby(rotorua) rebuilt engine, dry sump, 48 weber side draft carbs(not on exaust side),headers custom built through side of car 1pc, wild cam, built to run at 13:1 comp I think he was also running double valve springs combined with competition alpha romeo pistons .Car was later sold to some clown who was gonna "drag" it in Auckland - he would have owned car approx 3-5yrs and old man is a perfectionist,so car was mint, was also sold on a custom made single axle trailer in mint cond. He then purchased a 1970 Pontiac firebird 455 b/block. Repowered with a 454 LS7 nascar engine, spent a fortune on race specing car, I think he still holds “P” circuit lap record in Tauranga. That car went to Auckland too, and has since disappeared =cheers

[nalracer]

PS, does it still have the soft top with it??

[nalracer]

Hey Paul, yeah car was definitely road registered, dad has photos of it when he raced it at pukekohe hanging on his study wall, I will have to ask him. 1978 seems to ring a bell for year of manufacture?, from memory, the old fella always had trouble with traction with the car, as when he first got it racing it used to axle tramp horrifically leaving dotted lines down the track!! hence the strapping down, but I dont think he actually changed any of the factory running gear. I didnt have my drivers licence when he bought the car, so he must of purchased it 79-80? After the last radical engine build, the car became quite tempremental, and would constantly pop things, so dad got fed up with it, but when it went right was orsome. We got into competitive sailing, and car was left in garage until sold. If you can imagine putting a rubbish can on your head, getting someone to belt the hell out of it with a bat, that is about how loud that thing used to be when riding in it - the induction noise was like a commercial vacuum cleaner !! - cheers, Rob

[nalracer]

yes it used to corner really well, he had it strapped down so tight, the inside wheels would lift off the ground like the v8s today, thats why he went to quite wide rubber to compensate ha ha, are those wheel spacers on the drums, I think the old man got those made for it !

[Steve Holmes]

Hey Paul, I came across this thread by accident, I am Rex Nalders son, The old man had this car when I was a teenager I am now late 40s. The car was purchased early 80s from a prison officer in Turangi, The old man did some research, and found out that the car was built as a factory show car by Steele bros, was approx 2in wider than stock and was plain black, only one of its kind. Car also handled like it was on rails, as he had suspension strapped down (literally with wide leather straps) he had all the rear spare wheel mount filled, no holes - was raced on wide 13in hotwire mags. Engine was a stock 1600 twin cam (mild work). He took it to wigram and was second fastest car (fastest, 930 turbo porsche) punched it off start, big oil surge, destroyed engine! Jamie aselby(rotorua) rebuilt engine, dry sump, 48 weber side draft carbs(not on exaust side),headers custom built through side of car 1pc, wild cam, built to run at 13:1 comp I think he was also running double valve springs combined with competition alpha romeo pistons .Car was later sold to some clown who was gonna "drag" it in Auckland - he would have owned car approx 3-5yrs and old man is a perfectionist,so car was mint, was also sold on a custom made single axle trailer in mint cond. He then purchased a 1970 Pontiac firebird 455 b/block. Repowered with a 454 LS7 nascar engine, spent a fortune on race specing car, I think he still holds “P” circuit lap record in Tauranga. That car went to Auckland too, and has since disappeared =cheers

Hey welcome to the site, great info you've posted here. Re your dads old Firebird, I think Shane Johnson owns this now.

[nalracer]

Hey thanks for the welcome, I hope Mr Johnson appreciates that car, it was rebuilt from the ground up,and a LOT of cash went into it. 6-pots all around, imported nascar 454, I loved it !!!

[BWilliams]

Thanks, your Dad has been an absolute star! He has had quite a lot of interesting info for me and has also helped me out with information about getting the car back on the road. Thanks for putting me in touch with him.

No problem at all.

[markec]

8403

[AMCO72]

Is that a modified Marcos getting a biff from the S4?

[markec]

9040

[Patrick.Harlow]

Geetings all. I have been reading through this thread, fascinating. I thought that some may interested in this. Currently I am in the process of getting my book, currently called NZ Cars a Cottage industry, ready to publish. The book is about New Zealand Manufactured cars and have I done research on both the standard S4 and the Super 907. Below I have reproduced the chapter of the S4 that will be going in my book. I have also writen another chapter on the 907 and attached a picture of a relatively unknown "Lotus" Super 907 manufactured in New Zealand by Steel Bros yet still a genuine Lotus. Enjoy
9154

Lotus 7 Series 4 1973 to 1978
By Patrick Harlow

Although many people know that New Zealand was at one time the only producer of Lotus cars outside of England, only a few know that it came about through the passion of an accountant by the name of David Dixon.
David worked for Steel Bros in Christchurch as the company secretary from the 60s through to the 70s. Since the founding of Steel Bros in the early 1900s the company had produced transport equipment and tended to concentrate mainly on truck bodies and trailers as well as heavy transport based machinery. After building about 5,000 truck cabs and bodies the opportunity arose to build the Prince Gloria in early 1964. At this point Steel Motor Assemblies Ltd. was formed and became fully involved in serious car production, joining the huge number of car plants that had started up at that time. By 1967 they were building Toyota, Nissan and Mazda vehicles. They would go on to build tens of thousands of Toyota cars and trucks. By 1977 Steel Bros NZ Ltd. were only producing the Lotus 7 car. It is initially hard to understand how the little niche market car ever made it into production. I have included it’s story because despite being built by a major car producer, just over 100 cars were produced, mainly by hand in a similar manner to all the other cars in this book and through the enthusiasm of one individual.
In the late 60s it was virtually impossible to buy a new car in New Zealand unless you had overseas funds. The number of Hiab cranes that Steels were given a licence to import could be increased by the amount of New Zealand made content included in the cars and by the amount of overseas funds they were able to earn in exports. David Dixon believed that it would be possible to build a car with a fibreglass body and a separate steel chassis locally. The car he wanted was the Lotus Elan, as having done the maths he was certain that Steel Bros could build the car with a high New Zealand content. The car could be sold more cheaply than the MGB in Australia which at that time was the only volume sports car readily available. David was sure that they could increase the New Zealand content to almost 50% of the car which was twice the amount other manufactures were achieving. If it reached the target of 50% then it could be sold duty free to the Australian market
David contacted Colin Chapman, the CEO and founder of Lotus, who was positive about the idea and sent over his Pacific Sales manager Ron Richardson to discuss a deal in 1969. Not expecting such a quick response David quickly borrowed an Elan from an old school friend to evaluate how easy it would be to produce. The project was deemed to be feasible despite the complexity of the Elan. A deal was made and Steel started to consider how they were going to produce the car. Unfortunately due to liquidity problems in England, Lotus Cars had been forced to become a public company and because finances were tight it was deemed no longer possible for them to allocate resources to make Elan parts for New Zealand.
That was the bad news, the good news was that Colin Chapman had never liked the Lotus 7 and was looking for an opportunity to stop producing it. They offered the Series 4 Lotus 7 to New Zealand and Rod Steel of Steel Bros made the courageous decision to take it on. David Dixon again negotiated with Ron Richardson and in 1972 two cars were imported from the UK for a feasibility study. One car became the company car for David Dixon and was his daily runner until he accidentally wrote it off 25,000 kilometres later. The other car was stripped down to its component parts so that production decisions could be made. In mid 1973 Lotus announced that their production of the Lotus 7 would cease and they would sell all their remaining parts at discount. Caterham in the UK took some of these parts and the rights to continue Lotus 7 production in the UK but they were not allowed to use the Lotus name. Steel Bros purchased sufficient components, jigs and moulds to build 50 cars in New Zealand. They also had the rights to use the Lotus name and became the only Lotus manufacturer based outside the UK. They ultimately bought 100 twin cam engines and Ford 2000E gearboxes along with a healthy supply of Ford Escort differentials and steering racks. Triumph provided Herald steering columns and suspension uprights whilst Lucas supplied the instruments. The engines and gearboxes were purchased in two batches of 50 with the first batch being surplus from Elan production and the second 50 engines from the Europa production facility. Caterham would build only 37 Series 4 cars before reverting to the less complex Series 3 cars which they still build to this day.
In Christchurch production of the cars began in a sub-factory in Buchanans Road. The first few cars were built from component kits which gave Steel the opportunity to build a couple of chassis’ using the Lotus jigs, evaluate them and to make some improvements such as reinforcing the engine bay and making the front suspension towers from heavier gauge steel. The Christchurch boat makers CrestaCraft were subcontracted to produce the fibreglass components while all the steel fabrication work was done in house. The first cars were finished in December 1973 and received much acclaim from the local press. At $4,300 dollars each they were a similar price to the Holden HQ but with an acceleration time of 5.2 seconds from zero to 100 km/h (Holden HQ with 3.3ltr motor took 13.1 seconds 0 - 100km/h). Even with a 1600cc motor they were in a supercar league in both performance and handling.
Locally produced content of the car was 75% which made the government quite happy. In fact two prime ministers went for rides in the car; Bill Rowling in 1974 and Robert Muldoon in 1976. During it’s production run several other improvements were made to the car such as a detachable fibreglass roof. Items that would have represented ultimate luxury on its British equivalent were included in the New Zealand version, for example: a fully trimmed interior, elasticated pockets to store oddments, floor carpet and even a lockable boot lid.
In 1975 production was transferred to the main Steel Bros site at Treffers Road where the factory still exists today and where the company now trades under the name Steelbro. Fibreglass production shifted to Prebble Fibreglass and cars rolled out of the factory at a rate of two per month. The 70s oil crisis did not dent its popularity and it was not long before several of these cars were making their mark on race tracks around the country. It is believed that 98 cars were built at the Steel Bros plant before supply of the engines dried up. All were fully assembled and ready to drive. Of these 8 were sold in Australia. Steel Bros were faced with either stopping production entirely or using Toyota engines. David Dixon suggested using the new Lotus 2 ltr 16 valve motor. For David, continuing to use a Lotus motor ensured that they could keep putting the all important Lotus badge on the bonnet as this was the key to unlock overseas markets. The new engine would mean a major redesign of the car so work began on a version which would be produced as the Lotus Super 907.


Bibliography
Thanks to David Dixon, Allan Dick

[Patrick.Harlow]

Agree with everything you say Paul. However Lotus were happy to allow Steel Bros to market the Super 907 as a Lotus as long as it had a Lotus engine. When a 907 was sent to America for appraisal it was still called a Lotus and as far as Lotus UK were concerned it was Ok to call it a Lotus as long as it had a Lotus engine in it. This agreement below is a quote form the 907 chapter.

"David Dixon and Rod Steel (Managing Director of Steel Bros) travelled to England and then to America to investigate the possibility of an export market there. In England they approached Mike Kimberley of Lotus Cars who agreed to look at the possibility of providing the engines. Consequently a Lotus Elite and a Lotus Esprit were imported into New Zealand along with two engines, transmissions and a selection of parts that would allow development of the Super 907 to proceed."

You wouldn't happen to have an english version of the above would you? The car shown in your photos is the prototype mockup. The red car is the only mobile version of it at this stage although a second car, I am fairly sure, now resides in Wellington in pieces. One day he intends to assemble it. I live in hope.

[Binzy1]

Great reading Patrick - thanks for posting this.
Out of purely self-interest (as I own the sole completed Bainbridge 907 car) do you have any information on both the Bainbridge transaction / saga and cars??
I have pieced some things together from likes of old owners of it as wekll as via Paul (from the above thread) but the more info I can gather the better from a historical perspective.
Cheers...Lindsay

[Oldfart]

Please PLEASE can the old dramas not be dredged up again! (But this from Patrick seems to confirm some previous)

[Binzy1]

Please PLEASE can the old dramas not be dredged up again! (But this from Patrick seems to confirm some previous)
Old dramas????
You're not confusing interpretation of Lotus history (and NZ's part, or otherwise, in it) of the other posts versus the history of Steele Brothers and their place in NZ as an automotive manufacturer (as in Patricks post)are you ??

[Trevor Sheffield]

Please PLEASE can the old dramas not be dredged up again! (But this from Patrick seems to confirm some previous)

N.B. The Fact is that it has been confirmed that Steele Bros. at all times acted lawfully, contrary to what was originally and wrongly alleged. I make no apologies for my obstinate stance, whereby I defended Steele Bros.

Trevor.

[nalracer]

Looking at all the pics, seems like the wide 13" hotwire mags were the wheel of choice by Steelbro's for this limited run of cars

[Oldfart]

Trevor, PM sent

[Patrick.Harlow]

Below is all I know about the Bainbridge at this stage. I have a lot of other rumors and unconfirmed stories. It is an excerpt from the Auto Age magazine printed in 1985. A full reprint of the article has been uploaded to my thread "NZ Cars A cottage Industry as I did not think it appropriate to put it in this thread. The car shown as part of the article is an Everson Eagle not a Bainbridge.

Part 1
9264

Part 2
9265

9266

[Binzy1]

Patrick - thanks very much....all interesting to me (selfishly!) as when bought it I didn't really comprehend it's history and have subsequently enjoyed pulling together snippets of info.
Lindsay

[Patrick.Harlow]

Then perhaps Lindsay you can confirm that the car above is a Bainbridge and perhaps post some different pictures of it.

[Binzy1]

Patrick - I can't confirm if a Bainbridge or not but can confirm it's not mine as mine is a S4 widebody chassis from the Steele's jigs they bought and has the S3 'styled' body to fit over it. The one on the cover looks a bit too compact by comparison....and the dash is different. I believe they MAY have built a couple S3 chassis but unsure if ever finished them in to a working car.
Lindsay
92779278

[MikeP]

I heard Malcolm at Bygone Autos currently has the Black Widebody for sale in his workshop.

[jim short]

Hi Paul do you know what diff ratios Steel bros. offered for their cars?? did they ever get into the 3s??

[MikeP]

Not sure if Steel Bros were the same but the English service handbook I got for my car says 3.77:1

[jim short]

Thanks I got the last set they had in 1994?? for my SS and can not remember but it was the fastest they used?/

[jamie]

A MAZING I orignley built the car for SEXEY REXEY but the motor would not stand 9000rpm at Wigram all sorts of nasty things escaped from inside the block so i fitted A BDA bottom and dry sump it but with the TWIN CAM head but it was still not fast enuf for REX JAMIE A

[Nzwomble]

Paul, your car doesn't look too bad. Maybe some seat covering and a bit of carpet, and she would be ready to shoot the breeze. What state is the engine in if it hasn't been run for a few years? I think I would be tempted to have some fun in it. Might be a long time before the house is paid off!!!!!!!

Hi Paul. Saw this thread by accident and thought I should add to it. My father (Bob Harden) was the first owner of the white wide bodied 7 he drove it up from Christchurch new in November 1978 nego number JA7334. Your car was built at the same time. Car came with 7 inch hot wires and had the most ridiculous mud flaps under the front wings, that were discarded strait away. Car was wrecked by fire in 1990 I think and dad bought it off the insurance company. Was then sold to Harry Hawkins who was going to rebuild. Remember your car back in the day was very fast but unreliable as I remember.

[Nzwomble]

98939894

[Steve Holmes]

Agreed, looks great on those wheels!

[Chrionyx]

The other car wasn't bad either... This is another photo of the same Seven with a different line up... 11534

[Chrionyx]

Nice one of the front end... 11535

[Steve Holmes]

Fantastic photos!

[Chrionyx]

It was a fantastic car as womble will attest. I was more familiar with the back of the car or commonly known as the parcel shelf.. as a young kid womble and i would sit in there and be driven around... good fun.. (ah the good ol days)

[W154]

Hi Paul,

I also have a wide body S4, the ex- Murray Bryden car that ran in the Australian Sports Car Championships (when it was for Production Sports Cars) in 1980 - 81. A mate has just finished a wide body conversion on a Norwich S4 and there is also the ex- Dick Smith S4 still running around out of Canberra.

My car ran 1840cc TC, injected and 5 speed Hollinger though laterly it ran with a Pinto 2 Litre and 4 speed. I will be putting it back to TC as time and funds allow.

Do you know if Steele Bros actually produced a wide body version or did Charlie produce a one-off?

I would be interesting to compare notes. I will scan some photo's.

CCR

Aussiemonza
I have just found this site whilst browsing The Nostalgia Forum" on Autosport and came across this forum which I have a VERY personal interest in. I have read through all the comments and I think perhaps a few of them need to be discussed further.
In my opinion any resemblance between the MB car and a Lotus Super 7 Series 4 was purely coincidental. To this day I still don't know how it ever got a CAMS Group D log book. I did a hell of a lot of research on S4 sevens and went to Pomgolia to purchase the real thing after mant discussions with "the powers that be at CAMS". I got my log book only to find that MB then got a log book for what was basically a "hot rod". My memory was that it was powered by a full house Cosworth FVA or BDA can't remember which one and the chassis bore no resemblance to a S4 chassis. Any way that is all in the past, he got away with it so good luck to him. He certainly kept the 934's on their toes at the tight circuits!
As for my old car in Canberra. I converted my race car back to a road car( ie bolted on some road wheels and tyres) and sold it to a chap called Ian (?) McLaren. I was told on good authority that he was killed in the car when it took off on the Westgate Freeway in Melbourne and hit a road sign and burst into flames. If that is not the case I will be very happy to know that Ian and car are still OK.!! My car was a Lotus factory built 7 and had the chassis plate to prove it so if anybody has any info on "current" owner wouldn't mind contacting him/her as I live just down the road on Vic/NSW border.
Will post some more info to set the record straight about racing 7's and some photos of my car undergoing "wide body conversion" and build if any interest.
DS

[aussiemonza]

Aussiemonza
I have just found this site whilst browsing The Nostalgia Forum" on Autosport and came across this forum which I have a VERY personal interest in. I have read through all the comments and I think perhaps a few of them need to be discussed further.
In my opinion any resemblance between the MB car and a Lotus Super 7 Series 4 was purely coincidental. To this day I still don't know how it ever got a CAMS Group D log book. I did a hell of a lot of research on S4 sevens and went to Pomgolia to purchase the real thing after mant discussions with "the powers that be at CAMS". I got my log book only to find that MB then got a log book for what was basically a "hot rod". My memory was that it was powered by a full house Cosworth FVA or BDA can't remember which one and the chassis bore no resemblance to a S4 chassis. Any way that is all in the past, he got away with it so good luck to him. He certainly kept the 934's on their toes at the tight circuits!
As for my old car in Canberra. I converted my race car back to a road car( ie bolted on some road wheels and tyres) and sold it to a chap called Ian (?) McLaren. I was told on good authority that he was killed in the car when it took off on the Westgate Freeway in Melbourne and hit a road sign and burst into flames. If that is not the case I will be very happy to know that Ian and car are still OK.!! My car was a Lotus factory built 7 and had the chassis plate to prove it so if anybody has any info on "current" owner wouldn't mind contacting him/her as I live just down the road on Vic/NSW border.
Will post some more info to set the record straight about racing 7's and some photos of my car undergoing "wide body conversion" and build if any interest.
DS

W154, PM sent.

MB ended up running an all alloy 2lt Alloy Twin Cam on injection in 1981 (he tells me) but sold the car in 1982 to the Alan Jones Driving Centre/Jim Murcott without the Twin Cam, 5 speed g'box, and centre-lock wheels. Murcott put the Pinto in, 4 speed and Rebels. That's how I got it after being fire damaged.

CCR

[Steve Holmes]

Aussiemonza
I have just found this site whilst browsing The Nostalgia Forum" on Autosport and came across this forum which I have a VERY personal interest in. I have read through all the comments and I think perhaps a few of them need to be discussed further.
In my opinion any resemblance between the MB car and a Lotus Super 7 Series 4 was purely coincidental. To this day I still don't know how it ever got a CAMS Group D log book. I did a hell of a lot of research on S4 sevens and went to Pomgolia to purchase the real thing after mant discussions with "the powers that be at CAMS". I got my log book only to find that MB then got a log book for what was basically a "hot rod". My memory was that it was powered by a full house Cosworth FVA or BDA can't remember which one and the chassis bore no resemblance to a S4 chassis. Any way that is all in the past, he got away with it so good luck to him. He certainly kept the 934's on their toes at the tight circuits!
As for my old car in Canberra. I converted my race car back to a road car( ie bolted on some road wheels and tyres) and sold it to a chap called Ian (?) McLaren. I was told on good authority that he was killed in the car when it took off on the Westgate Freeway in Melbourne and hit a road sign and burst into flames. If that is not the case I will be very happy to know that Ian and car are still OK.!! My car was a Lotus factory built 7 and had the chassis plate to prove it so if anybody has any info on "current" owner wouldn't mind contacting him/her as I live just down the road on Vic/NSW border.
Will post some more info to set the record straight about racing 7's and some photos of my car undergoing "wide body conversion" and build if any interest.
DS

I too would love to see pics.

[aussiemonza]

I was hoping we would have heard from W154 by now!

[Davea79]

Aussiemonza
I have just found this site whilst browsing The Nostalgia Forum" on Autosport and came across this forum which I have a VERY personal interest in. I have read through all the comments and I think perhaps a few of them need to be discussed further.
In my opinion any resemblance between the MB car and a Lotus Super 7 Series 4 was purely coincidental. To this day I still don't know how it ever got a CAMS Group D log book. I did a hell of a lot of research on S4 sevens and went to Pomgolia to purchase the real thing after mant discussions with "the powers that be at CAMS". I got my log book only to find that MB then got a log book for what was basically a "hot rod". My memory was that it was powered by a full house Cosworth FVA or BDA can't remember which one and the chassis bore no resemblance to a S4 chassis. Any way that is all in the past, he got away with it so good luck to him. He certainly kept the 934's on their toes at the tight circuits!
As for my old car in Canberra. I converted my race car back to a road car( ie bolted on some road wheels and tyres) and sold it to a chap called Ian (?) McLaren. I was told on good authority that he was killed in the car when it took off on the Westgate Freeway in Melbourne and hit a road sign and burst into flames. If that is not the case I will be very happy to know that Ian and car are still OK.!! My car was a Lotus factory built 7 and had the chassis plate to prove it so if anybody has any info on "current" owner wouldn't mind contacting him/her as I live just down the road on Vic/NSW border.
Will post some more info to set the record straight about racing 7's and some photos of my car undergoing "wide body conversion" and build if any interest.
DS
As requested

[Davea79]

S4seven. where do the numbers "3060" and "3995" fit in?

The above photo will answer 1 of your questions.

DA

[aussiemonza]

Looking for advice on what the pedal bracket was on a SteeleBro S4? Was it a donor part (Triumph/Ford) or a Lotus/SteelBro fabricated part?

[aussiemonza]

Thanks Paul, I have that reference out of the Tony Weale book. Do you have any dimensions/plans or any idea who might have stock (long shot) or be able to manufacture from a sample? Mine was discarded for a pedal box, I want to put back to standard

[aussiemonza]

28995

[aussiemonza]

Here....28997

[aussiemonza]

28998

[aussiemonza]

28999

[aussiemonza]

29000

[aussiemonza]

These photo's were taken in 1988 after I re-built the car for then owner Jim Murcott.

[Tassie]

Aussiemonza,
All the best for the rebuild.
I purchased the Gary Angel car (ex Dick Smith, Gary Ryan, Jim Murcott) and it will be heading to Tassie shortly.
Any info people have on the early history of the car would be greatly appreciated. Best to send to my email.

[Graeme Farr]

Just spotted this thread. Some years back I had a Steel Bros frame for a wide frame 907 engined car. I did a bit of research and found there were four modified versions made of the S4.

1) The wide body which was just the std TC S4 with wider and more bulbous guards. Pauls one-off one had the odd looking rear spoiler.
2) The 907 engined car with the same widebody guards but longer than the std S4 (the front guards were longer) - there was a yellow one and a red one from memory.
3) The wide framed 907 engined car which was the same length as 2) but wider - there was at least one complete (white) car built and also my frame. This model had a wider nose and cockpit
4) The Escape - which had the different body with the 907 engine. There was the red one in this thread and one owned in Wellington I have seen - it was never quite completed. There was a long article about the Escape in Car Styling magazine-book from Japan.

There were also some 907 engined cars built after production finished by ex Steel Bros staff - one had Viva front suspension.

I was lucky enough to get a tour around the factory in 74 - by David Dixon too! Great guy! Outside he had a red factory demonstrator which he said had won the South Island production sports car championship. That car was sent to Robin Curtis who was the semi-official Wellington agent for them - he did a hand drawn picture of it which was on the Motoraction editorial page for several years. A friend later owned that car in the early 80's - we had great fun in it. (I think Robin briefly had a dark green wide body one as well)

I later had an early S4 7 with the Big Valve engine. My understanding was the first 50 cars came with the BV engine in the package deal from Lotus - and the second 50 had earlier type engines sourced from unused Australia Escort Twin Cam production. In an earlier post Patrick Harlow said the second 50 came from UK Lotus Europa unused engines. This may be right but at that time the Europa would have been using the BV engine and the later Steel Bros car I have seen have all have the pre BV engine with the smooth cam covers.

Bainbridges bought chassis jigs and body moulds and some 907 engines and gearboxes. Steels had bought a large number of 2 litre 907 engines when the UK factory changed to 2.2. There are still some unused ones kicking around in NZ. I vaguely remember hearing the Bainbridge deal was not straightforward and there may have been some dispute - not sure what that was about - perhaps the use of shape as they went on to make the more period looking version.

There are some great photos around of the 907 cars - including some being built inside the factory.

Graeme Farr

Wellington

[Paul Kirk]

Hi Guys,
If you want to ad further interest to this Lotus 7 thread you might research the left hand drive 907 engined one off car Steels were developing with the idea of producing a series of them for export to USA. It had a very nice looking Lotus 4 speed gearbox housing which used Morris Marina internals that kept stripping teeth off the gears! The chassis was a widened 7 unit. The vehicle was purchased from Steeles by a gent from Ashburton when Steeles abandoned the project due to the amount of red tape involved.
and was used for racing ocaisionally at events like the "Country Gents" at Wigram and he probably ran it at Levels in Timaru and maybe Ruapuna.
If anybody is interested there are some other details relating to this vehicle which could be interesting.
PK.

[Milan Fistonic]

I was lucky enough to get a tour around the factory in 74 - by David Dixon too! Great guy! Outside he had a red factory demonstrator which he said had won the South Island production sports car championship. That car was sent to Robin Curtis who was the semi-official Wellington agent for them - he did a hand drawn picture of it which was on the Motoraction editorial page for several years. A friend later owned that car in the early 80's - we had great fun in it. (I think Robin briefly had a dark green wide body one as well)

40045

[AvantiDMC]

I am in the USA and have acquired some documents from the old DeLorean Motor Company. Among them was a June 1979 letter from A.L. Harrison (Arthur, I believe) of Steel Bros in regards to what I believe is the Escape.

It included a styling drawing of this car and references a J.D Power & Associates Market Survey for the car in regards to potential sales in the USA.

The styling drawing has a logo in the upper left which looks like a stylized "BS" or possibly "AS". I lean towards to the latter as it there is some fine handwriting that says "Studio Aguila" and is dated "May 1979". The logo/badge on the front and rear of the sketch appears to be similar to the Steel Bros logo on the letterhead.

My interest in purely academic at this point, and I'm just curious to find more details on this car and share what I have with others who may be interested. If this might be you, great! Or if you know others who might be, please let me know.

Kind regards,

James Espey
Houston, Texas USA

http://www.delorean.net/SteelBrosFiles/Studio_Aguila_Sketch.jpg

http://www.delorean.net/SteelBrosFiles/SteelBrosLetter1.jpg

http://www.delorean.net/SteelBrosFiles/SteelBrosLetter2.jpg

[AvantiDMC]

I forgot I found one other reference to Studio Aguila online, and it may well be referencing this same design.

https://www.nhtsa.gov/interpretations/nht79-25

James Espey
Houston, Texas USA

[Paul Wilkinson]

https://i.imgur.com/6siINril.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/gJp3BPrl.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/ugN03LVl.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/maq8Spjl.jpg

[Paul Wilkinson]

https://i.imgur.com/B9qL53Bl.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/rnUxsdgl.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/6SdqeSUl.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/jWXDH6ml.jpg

[Paul Wilkinson]

https://i.imgur.com/u4McEy8l.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/jYUkd43l.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/VFBEg9cl.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/rZtZN2jl.jpg

[Paul Wilkinson]

https://i.imgur.com/t3fEMCwl.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/9cLt7cfl.jpg

https://www.lotus7.co.nz/viewtopic.php?f=71&t=2055