Bruce K

Nice research, Croc and S1Steve! Sounds like the required suspension work was completed, and the body panels are easy-to-replace standard Caterham - that DSK at $18K or less could be a great buy! I believe Caterham's Arch chassis were much improved in later years - stronger, stiffer - does anyone know when those improvements were implemented?

One of the owners may have been unusually tall. If you notice, the bar was built with robust adjustable hinges for the rear supports, so shortening the bar should not be a huge job. The exhaust terminus is nearly even with the back of the spare tire rack, and most of its final length appears to be a silencer, perhaps a SuperTrapp, which should be easy to remove for a shorter overall dimension. The appearance of the car is tasty, but it's what's under the crust that counts. The rotary motor would be hoot - I had one in a last gen RX-7. and what a screamer! But how dialed in is this suspension? Did DSK support a program of racing or time trials? That would be the way to finesse a theoretical suspension, just like Caterham, Westfield, Brunton, WCM and more. If suspension development is up to the purchaser, that is a big task and my advice is caveat emptor. If not, the owner seems flexible at $18K, and it might be a good deal.

Yes, and we have been ruthless in our commentary. However, in my foolish youth, I built a sand rail out of a V8 Chevy sedan, by removing most of the body and shortening the frame rails. All my welds were gas, as I didn't have access to an arc welder. The symmetry of the frame was assured via various measurements with strings. Roll over protection was, I guess, my head. About halfway through the project, I consulted my cousin, who was in training for a career in automotive engineering. I asked his opinion. He gave it in two words: "Death trap". After I prised all the reasons from him, I quickly cut the car up into many tiny, harmless pieces. From that experience, I learned that needs cannot be properly requited without a functional plan, and if you fail to plan, plan on failing. The failure of our little AIV is all in the planning, and not at all in the execution, which was craftsmanlike and clever - in some instances, even comely. And I am certain the enterprise provided lots of fun and father/son togetherness - both of which are priceless and worth all the project's effort. But those benefits don't make the resulting "sports car" worth a damn to anyone else.

Seriously, the craftsmanship looks excellent, and I believe the claim of thousands of build hours But, as with many highly-individualized custom projects, engineering and design choices are controversial. Beginning with that aluminum diamond plate body - looks so sturdy, could serve as a jack stand for construction equipment or Brobdingnagian doorstop. And how about the sweet song of that 2-liter diesel winding all the way out to 3,900 rpm? Can you imagine the swelling in your heart as you profile lungo la strada in this mini-Abrams? What? You say you were vaccinated, and the swelling is myocarditis? My apologies, but those svelte Diamond-Reo-Red wheels should alleviate your symptoms!

Should be lively with that boat-anchor diesel! And intensive use of aluminum or stainless steel diamond plate in the body - just like a Peterbilt! I wonder if it has a trailer hitch?

My Lord - this car should no longer be nominated a Caterham. How about McClareham? Caterrari? Caterghini? It is every bit as exotic, and much rarer than the marques which inspired my suggestions. And - I bet it will be faster on any short, and many medium length, tracks - maybe better than that! My 935 Tribute is one of fewer than 2,000 in the world, and I thought that was rare. In terms of uniqueness, my car is peanut butter compared to this CSR's beluga caviar. Croc - I wonder if the extreme custom nature of this car will prevent you from extracting the full 10/10th's of available performance. I didn't intend it, but that's happened to me with the 935, and is the reason I bought my R400/500 Cat.

Croc responds: "Bit harsh. You drop me out of a plane I am aerodynamically good for 140mph. Caterhams are no faster." Bruce's rejoinder: "Human terminal velocity (without a speedsuit) is actually 120 mph, while many brick-like Cats can hit 140 or more. And I did not mean to disparage your sleek proportions - it's just that my sense of manlihood prevents me from commenting favorably upon the vision of an unclothed Croc flying through the air with his stick shift flailing."

Well, there's my answers. I raised the subject because of comments I read in articles about the CSR, including comments on the aero-shaped wishbones. I love the CSR concept - it's a Brunton without the weight incumbent to an LS motor (heavier motor, twice the exhaust system, more weight in the chassis). The CSR still handles like a lightweight, but with the handling improvements of F1-style inboard suspension, stiffer chassis, fully-independent suspension, wider rubber and more.

Agreed - neither a pretty picture, nor a slippery shape. But still, the CSR changes were adopted (in part) for the purpose of improving the brick's efficiency in the air. My question was: Have you noticed an improvement? From your response, I presume the negative. Perhaps it is too soon to conclude, as you have not had much opportunity to drive your CSR. If so, let us know after you get it on the track (what a day that will be - I am happy for you in advance!)

Au contraire, my friend. Caterham's F1 experience taught them that inboard coilovers created less drag, and that flattened-profile front wishbones further enhance the effect. Less drag should mean faster top end. In my comment, I was inquiring as to whether these CSR enhancements actually improve the top speed. I agree - a lead foot is essential to the final result. Truly, the CSR is a brilliant car - so many pluses with only a small weight negative - 100% stiffer chassis, fully independent rear suspension, SV-style interior room, improved accommodations, wider rubber, better ride quality. If the wait was not semi-eternal, I would have ordered one.

Fabulous work, Croc. You are setting the standard for custom Caterhams. I look forward to seeing images of the completed car. Plus, my car is an S3, and yours is a CSR - I envy the extra space for feet and hips. Toward that end, I am installing lowered floorboards and possibly a seat adjuster deletion this winter. Still won't have your snazzy F1-style inboard suspension - I wonder how much better your top end will be because of that?

Thanks for the compliment, but the praise resides rightly with former owner Miles Jackson, and the owner of Time Machines. The Time Machines Caterham dealer gave the car a great original spec, and Miles treated it like his personal masterpiece. No upgrade was too expensive or time-consuming for Miles. Every driven Seven that I have ever encountered is nicked with stone chips and track rash, but Miles somehow kept his car perfect. Part of me will feel like a felon giving it the initial blemishes.

Voychandr - We have similar tastes, and utilize similar solutions. My car wears it's windscreen at all times because the aero screen is too much like continuous punches in the face at xway speeds. Then, for fall, I will install the doors, and the tonneau over the passenger side, and, with the heater on, nestle in that "chimney effect" at all speeds. I also like Tbone1209's solution - I happen to own a First Gear leather jacket, so I will inquire about a heated liner - great idea that I never thought of! BTW, what is a "Book Built" Seven? Can't find reference to this marque anywhere.

If aesthetics is your motivation, I can see your point, though I've owned both and personally prefer the cycle fenders. Anyway, I'm sure the car will finish out beautifully - just be sure to post lots of progress and completion images. This winter with my S3. I'm having lowered floorboards and a heater installed, and buying some mohair doors for those cool days. I will also add a sequential shift light indicator and HID headlights, and that will be it for a while.

I ordered lowered floorboards, mohair doors (doors were missing in what otherwise was a spectacularly outfitted car) and a heater, so I can enjoy the car in our crisp springs and falls. The parts should be arriving stateside soon. I'm going to add a sequential shift light indicator and HID headlights, and that should do it for a while. I intend to run with the 13" wheels, rather than the supplied 15"s.

Clamshells? That's like asking an MMA middleweight to party down in grandpa pants (high waist, high cuffs, suspenders), or a ballerina to dance in galoshes. More weight and even less aero. Next you'll be advising us to drive with the top up!

Be sure to share lots of photos here, of both the process and the finished product. If you're going to make it look like my car, you're going to perform a lot of race-only de-contenting. Mine has only an FIA rollbar and fire extinguisher for mishap protection. But, with all it's carbon fiber, Black Pack and gorgeous Daytona blue paint, it is a positive work of mechanical art. I can take no credit for the result. The owner of Time Machines created the original spec, and then the previous owner defied all economic logic to put the car over the top.

Well, that's appropriate training for the track - bless 'im!

Just came across this post - what happened? This post was like reading a novella, only to discover that the last 3 pages were missing.

Not only a great example of a Super Seven, the Mitsuoka is well-built and superbly engineered, with an affordable and dependable Mazda drivetrain. However, parts availability and support are likely to be real problems. Those are the reasons I never considered purchase of a Mitsuoka Seven.

Exactly correct. Hot rods are fun to drive - conspicuous conversation starters, great 0 to 30 and 0 to 60 - but they are straight-line and cruising cars, not sporters like any true Sevenesque vehicle. I loved your joke: Like the bests comic lines, it's based in truth.

What a gorgeous Cat! Tires look wider than my S3, too. I just didn't want to wait two or more years . . .

Croc - I have not abandoned my comments. In totality, I stand behind them. I agreed from the outset that the builder was quite skilled (presuming he did the work himself). And I, like John, believe that a diversity of opinion is both permitted and welcome on this site. But that particular car was so far afield from our lightweight sportscar ethos, I truly did suspect you submitted it in jest. if you were serious, so be it. That was a hard charge, Croc. I'm going to start calling you Saltie!

Lucky Dawg: Have you considered adding a nosecone like mine, with the air-relief vent just over the radiator? At speed, as the car divides the air, that area should be low-pressure, which would draw air from the engine compartment, and concomitantly from under the car. An additional benefit will be improved engine cooling. If you use a windshield, that area should be subject to even lower air pressure.

Not sure what you mean, John - relative to the purposes of this thread, how can discussion centered on a custom Sevenesque vehicle, that is offered for sale, be off-topic? Dan, this in not Facebook or Twitter - the moderators will not suppress free, appropriate speech. Also, John captured my opinion exactly - though the rod was well-executed, I directed criticisms toward "design choices, not the seller's budget or skill set". Actually, the builder's skill set appears substantial. However, this site is dedicated to extremely lightweight sports cars, and the subject vehicle is a middleweight hot-rod. Why do I suspect Croc started all this as a joke!