SENC

One other thought - if you're having them put track on the floor, get them to put some (horizontally) around the walls, too - makes a good place to store straps and also gives a way to strap other things (furniture, etc.) you may periodically use the trailer to haul.

Excellent, you'll enjoy the head room walking in it and using it for other purposes - the only real downside is fuel mileage. The axles in that trailer pic are well back, maybe a touch more than my 14' trailer, and the weight in our cars is well forward of the rear axle (much of it in the engine and forward half of the gearbox), so your experience of it needing to be fairly far back in the trailer isn't surprising to me. What I'd worry about is that you'll likely want to use the front of the trailer (and/or truck bed) for tools/spares/gas tanks, etc. - which will add to your starting tongue weight. Be sure to check your truck and hitch ratings - there should be a published maximum tongue weight in lbs. I once used my trailer to tow a Mercedes 560SL home - it just barely fit and I was right at the max capacity of my Land Rover, but I had to go a little below 10% tongue weight target in order to get tongue weight below the 750lb max rating of my factory hitch (a non-factory hitch would have lowered my rating to the 600lb range). Backing the Seven into the trailer may give you more flexibility in positioning (the engine should be closer to the trailer axles in that orientation, I think). I have similar straps (without the yellow chucks) - I don't think there is a hold-down problem using as you describe, BUT our cars are so low to the ground I'm not sure you'll have the clearance to work the ratchet anywhere but in front of and behind the vehicle.

Funny, I've always thought the S2 must have been built for a range between Jim Clark-sized (I think he was in the 5'7" range, if I recall) and 5'11"ish. I'm between 6' and 6'1 and my legs just barely fit under the steering wheel with the seat bottom thin and on the deck and back flat against the frame. If the car weren't so much fun to drive, it would get real uncomfortable, real quick - but the fun factor makes 2-3 hours go by quickly. Ultimately I suspect its less about height and more about where you get your height - if your build is in the length of your legs you'll struggle, if your height comes more from your torso, probably good above 6'1".

Height is simple - you want the trailer to be level. Once you have a trailer, you just adjust the tongue jack until the trailer is level, then measure tongue height from the ground and compare with trailer receiver height. From that you can accurately calculate needed drop (or rise) in the hitch bar. There are a number of websites with pictures if you want to look up specific measurement points. You can get an adjustable hitch bar if you want or if you plan to use multiple trailers or multiple vehicles for towing. I have one in case I need to use my wife's SUV or tow a rental trailer, but 99% of the time use a simple bar with the right drop for my main vehicle and primary trailer. Tongue weight has nothing to do with height. You have a bit more margin of error if you go with a double axle trailer, but either way the general idea is to get the center of loaded mass ahead of the axle. How much ahead determines the tongue weight. The longer the trailer, the more ability you have to get it just right... if your vehicle just fits in/on the trailer you become more limited. If you have a tractor trailer weight station nearby (Google CAT scales and I'll bet you'll find one), I think the easiest way to get it right is to load the trailer getting the loaded vehicle weigh just ahead of the axle (ensure it isn't behind) as an initial approximation, then drive slowly and carefully to the weigh station. First you'll unhook the trailer and weigh just your tow vehicle (front axle on pad 1, rear axle on pad 2) - then hook the trailer back up and weigh again (front and rear axles as before... trailer on pad 3). You'll get valuable information to confirm you're under gvwr, and tongue weight is the difference between the two readings for your vehicle rear axle. Target tongue weight is 10-15% of total trailer weight, as long as that does not exceed the hitch or vehicle ratings for tongue weight. Assuming you're off, just move the loaded vehicle in the trailer to increase (or decrease) tongue weight and weigh again. You'll have it after a reiteration or two, then you can just mark the trailer floor to identify where wheels and tie-downs should be. If you're going to carry tools, spares, heavy items routinely - go ahead and get them in the trailer (or, preferably pickup bed) for the above procedure.

Nice truck, I think you'll be very happy you picked up a truck with a towing capacity around 7k rather than the Maverick - will give you a lot more flexibility in what you tow (and comfort in towing enclosed/bigger trailers). Personally, I'd probably hold off on the weight-distributing until you make a trailer decision. Maybe even rent and or borrow some trailers to see how things feel on the standard hookup. In my experience, assuming you can get the weight within the trailer distributed well and not exceed the upper weight limit on the hitch itself), you may not need a weight distributing hitch until you get closer to your tow rating.

I am contemplating selling this 1965 S2, and interested in any suggestions and recommendations fellow forum members may have. The short version is that I'm just not driving it enough - a combination of where I live (limited roadways suited for it) and personal priorities (it isn't exactly suited for toting my 2y-o lab retriever, who is with me nearly all the time now that I'm retired). I'd hoped/planned to make trips to the mountains or other suitable places once or twice a year, but despite having a suitable trailer haven't done it. As much as I hate the idea of selling it, I don't see my priorities changing in the next few years and this car needs to be used, not just stored. We're entering much better driving weather in my part of the world, so I plan to put some miles on it the next few weeks/months and confirm my intentions, but want to get some planning underway. I'm leaning towards BAT, but have never bought/sold on BAT so will be gathering information over the next few weeks to better understand that process. I'd appreciate any insights/experience you have - and also any alternate suggestions. Thanks in advance, Henry

Crazy how different it can be, presumably based on location/state rates? In NC, I pay less than $1k/year (and complain about that!) to Hagerty to cover 3 classic cars, combined agreed value of about $75k.

I think those resources are here in the library. If you can't find what you need there I'll look through my files.

I have a hard time wrapping my head around "exact ballpark". But I'd start by calling my agent and asking if SF offers an agreed value policy or even a stated value policy (and, if so, an explanation of how SF's defines the two and implications for settlement). You can also ask the agent if they can help determine approximate value under your current policy, but as that value is based not just on "value" but also depreciation (which is often subject to appraiser evaluation after an incident), I'd bet even if they could give you a ballpark it wouldnt be as exact as you want. Avoiding this ambiguity is the purpose of agreed value and stated value policies, which many insurers offer - I'd bet SF does, too.

The value is fluid, unless you select an "agreed value" type of policy where that value is set annually. The Hagerty policies I have on my 2 Lotus are agreed value, which amounts are stated in the policy documents. I also have elected their "cherished salvage", which gives me the guaranteed right to the vehicle should they deem it totalled.

Perpetuating the "all kit cars are dune buggies" myth?

Just looked at that and remember the discussion. At the end, they're both conjecturing that the relieving may have been for a later model Escort that had a different sized ring gear. Also note that 2cams says the machining he's seen appears factory-done. Bottom line... 105e, 109e, and 120e will fit the gearbox and block... but of the 3, only the 105e can fit a clutch larger than 7.5".

As for sources for the shifter, the best bets are probably Dave Bean (they may not have one, but Gary may have a lead for you) or checking with the Golden Gate Lotus Club and seeing if someone can ask if Mike Ostrov (Elite guru who also had a long history with Sevens) may have one. Or possible find a Cortina lever and cut it down.

William - the 105e is the one that has capacity for the larger 8" Twin Cam clutch. The 109e is the one typically found on early Sevens, and it has smaller internal dimensions (ribs are on the inside) and may need machining to handle a larger clutch than 7.5". I do know that some Elan owners have installed 8.5" clutch discs, even with the original Elan pressure plate. Whether a full 8.5" setup would fit in a 105e without modification, I do not know. I grabbed pictures of 105e and 109e bellhousings from the web for visual reference of each.

To Joe's point, we're probably all chasing without knowing HealeyRacer's intent. Specifically to the question of what is the right bellhousing (assuming it is for an Elan gearbox to twink)... the 105e bellhousing. Multiple others will fit the box, and multiple others will fit the engine block. But only the 105e (to my knowledge) will fit the larger Elan clutch and have the clutch slave carrier. As I stated earlier, a 109e bellhousing would work if a 7.25" or 7.5" clutch is in the cards. I probably got off track trying to answer his "guess" that it came from an Elan by digging deeper to suggest that, since it apparently is not, determing what it is and what gear ratios it has may impact whether the gearbox (as-is) is appropriate for his intent (which I assume is a Seven).

It 100% did not come out of an Elan... unless someone later changed the tailhousing. That notwithstanding, the bits within the gearbox changed even during the life of the Elan, requiring different baulk rings/blocker bars, different bushings and bearings, etc. There weren't a lot of changes, but the wearable parts are not necessarily interchangeable across the transitions. If the innards are in good shape and not too worn and if the gearing will meet your needs and all you plan to do give it a clean, then the above doesn't matter. But if it needs some work, as most of these now 50-60+ y-o boxes do, you'll want to avoid the hassle of wrong parts. EDIT - as I noted in an earlier post, the reason I'm confident this didn't come from an Elan is the shifter turret location (green). Elans did not have the tailhousing with that "port" - I'll grab a picture of one and post it, too. Elans had the shifter turret where the red arrow points. Older Sevens, like mine, that use (essentially) the same gearbox and tailhousing as the Elan required an add-on remote shifter. It bolted to the tailhousing where the red arrow it but moved the shifter back to the equivalent of the turret in your picture. Then, Ford made the tailhousing with the remote turret built-in and Lotus didn't need to the add-on. My recollection (but I havent looked this up in a while and could be mistaken) is that Ford made the tailhousing with remote built-in for the Escort. Lotus definitely used it in some Sevens. I don't have an Elan+2 so perhaps someone can chime in if that car used the remote shifter location, but the Elan did not. EDIT2 - additional picture - the middle tailhousing is the style used in Elans. The right has the built-in remote, like yours.. the left (I think) is for the Anglia.

Another clue to what the gearbox came from would be the gear ratios, which you probably want to know anyway before deciding whether to use it. Easiest way is probably to count the teeth on each gear. Also, both the gearbox casing and tailhousing should have stamped date codes (though internals could have certainly been rebuilt to other than original specs). There were multiple variants in the 2821 series, so get a good idea of what you actually have before ordering any bits if you are planning a rebuild.

Given the shifter turret in the back of the tail housing, this gearbox is not from an Elan. Post pictures of the various cast numbers on both the box and tails housing and we may be able to help identify it. Re: the bellhousing... a 105e or 109e bellhousing will fit to the pre-crossflow and twink engines (from a bolt-hole layout perspective). But which you need depends on the overall setup, including clutch). 105e belhousings (identifiable with external ribs) were used on the Elans as they provided more clearance for larger clutches. My S2 Seven has the 109e bellhousing (smooth exterior), which works just fine with the smaller 7.25" and 7.5" clutches. I'd recommend lotuselan.net for further research - there are lots of posts and pictures on gearboxes and bellhousings from folks with lots of experience with them. Pay particular attention to any post from "promotr", a long time rebuilder of EnFo gearboxes.

Nice work William! I have one recommendation for making it more valuable - add descriptions (and, ideally, pictures) of locations of the frame numbers across the manufacturers/series/dates. This question comes up here and on other forums from time-to-time and I think would benefit anyone attempting validate a car being sold. I fully understand John's position on sharing frame numbers, but general identification assistance would be valuable. Henry

And the clutch matrix from the same resource... If you don't have a copy, it is worth getting - I think Dave Bean still offers copies. If not and you want one, I think I may have a 2nd copy somewhere.

The Dave Bean catalogues also have a good bit of information. When I'm at the shop later this morning I'll see if I can grab a few pics from the English Racing Fords manual, my recollection is that it includes a detailed section on the various gearbox iterations.

No, mine is a 1500 Cosworth. No idea if the one I replaced was original, but it very well could have been. From the history I have on the car, I'm pretty confident it wasn't replaced post early 80s. Here is a pic just out of the car.

Found the purchases on Ebay history, but not much detail there. These had the same 7-1/4" clutch as the Anglia and Mk1 Cortina, as I recall. Borg & Beck/AP. Will keep looking and post if I find anything useful.

Mine was a 3-finger, and I found a NOS replacement (probably on ebay, but don't remember for sure). Pictures follow. I'll see if I have anything on my phone with detail/part numbers... if not will see what I have in my files next time I'm in my shop.