I'm still considering building my car using a donor MX5 so I have started on my research. It appears that I need to use a +442 plan for the chassis. I had a look at the American sites for inspiration but quite frankly the cars built to that spec look weird, very homemade. Now this might be down to the builders of these cars having no class (being American ) but I want to be sure that it isn't the extra few inches making things look weird so, does anybody have pics of completed British cars to the +442 spec for comparison?

Thanks

(PS no offense intended to the Yanks, we are all different )

Unless you're seriously massive, I'd stick to standard Locost sizes.

I built my car a fair bit bigger (like a 442) and it does just look a bit weird.

If you get the Keith Tanner book (whihc is MX5 based) and combine it with the normal book (or even the new Roadster) you should be able to do it!

HTH,
James

The Tanner book uses a book version frame from CMC in the States, I have the same frame, holds me at 6'1", original Lotus 7 built for 5'7" Colin Chapman. The book version is larger than the Lotus Cateringvan to start with.

MNR use the MX5 for the Vortx. Plenty room and in good proportion.

keith tanners book is well worth a read

I have Tanners book, I believe that's where I got the idea I needed to use a +442, either there or following one of the links from his site.

I suppose one way to do it would be to build a chassis to the 'normal' plans and see if the motor etc will shoehorn in - if not bung it on ebay and start afresh with a bit more knowledge.

BTW - I exclude Canada from the comments about the Yanks naturally - Commonwealth ties mean you have good taste like us Brits - Eh!?

[Edited on 24/3/10 by Airhead]

I used an mx5 donor and went with a +442 as it looked the best way to keep the mx5 track width.

I never finished my project because i got transferred back to the UK. I got most of the frame and all the front suspension done though including custom front control arms to keep mx5 track width and gain a better castor angle.

Doesn't really answer you question though, sorry.

See pics

linky to archive


top control arm

[Edited on 24/3/10 by liam.mccaffrey]

I'd also suggest sticking to a standard chassis though it depends where the problem is... Length can be accomodated but it's girth that causes the problem (as the proctologist once said....) ....

I've got a standard STM chassis and can fit 6ft4 in due to a thin ali racing seat and no runners.

Mines a 442 matey, pictures below.

Rich

google bob carter locost for some mx5 running gear gen. Beyond that, the rear diff is a pain in the arse, otherwise the engine and gearbox are are pretty generic size wise and should go in a book chassis, although I would build the tunnel around the box.

This is basically an MK chassis, with an extra top rail for strength. Book dimensions overall.

Mine looks a bit odd because some is paint, and some is vinyl wrap. I'm getting it professionally wrapped soon!

mat....why do you have to allways be so different

Thanks for all the input chaps.

Mr Canada - when you say it is based on a book chassis you mean the dimensions?

I was looking at Mark Riveras car and the engine mounting, if that is a std chassis then it looks doable but he mentions using a +4 nosecone...