Christopher smith

For sure I would use them only for mid-longer term reliability. I guess I missed some of the Toyota issues but was never in the market for one anyway. And maybe from now on I will only note models that look really bad and avoid them. But as a guide on reliability in the past, my experience found them useful.

For sure it is tricky to get long term reliability based on single inputs. That is why I have found the April Consumer Reports used car survey so useful. They survey actual a large amount of owners of each model and year of quite a few vehicles and run the statistics on around about 10 different reliability areas such as engine, brakes, transmission etc.. That is where I see a huge history of doing it right for virtually all Toyota models and a few others that do not seem to get anything right.

I am sold as well. I snatched the last Forester stick shift made as a special order 6-speed from Japan. Now they all have an automatic with variable ratios that nobody likes. I think some of their other models are still available in stick shift however. The Impreza a 2018 is a little more fun to drive then the Forester but it is a five-speed so I have to be careful not shifting it into sixth which is actually reverse. That could get pretty noisy. But an awful lot of people have grown up now with really lame handling front-wheel drive cars so it is no wonder that there are less enthusiasts around anymore. I'll stick to my seven for fun. But I do like the idea of the BRZ so if the Impreza ever has to go I might get one of those

I am going to risk a strong opinions minefield here- But searching for fun to drive vs. longer term reliability has been tricky. I have experienced some extremes here as almost all of us 7 guys have. First crack could be looking at the used car reliability ratings in both new and old April issues of Consumer Reports. You will notice some usually boring brands like Honda and Toyota who almost always get the reliability right but turn out mostly (not always) pretty boring models. At the other extreme are brands like Land Rover and Jeep who are pretty consistently unreliable (and recently Mercedes seems to have worked their way to the bottom-not sure why). From the more reliable models you might then pick something that suites your practical needs and keep your extreme fun factor with your 7. In the past, this approach might have had someone abandon a Europa to get an MR2 or get a Miata to relive just a bit of that old feeling they had with an Elan. Not sure what to get now however. I have experienced cars that Consumer Reports said were crap, and they were, and a couple that they rated reliable- and they were, but I would not rely on their picks for fun. My extreme example was being stranded for a few hours near the Kenya -Tanzania border in an open Land Rover surrounded by Cape Buffalo and Lions. Exciting for sure, but I would not recommend Land Rover. I am now thinking a Subaru BRZ might be fun.

The "Bondo", either the actual brand products made just outside Atlanta or their competitors' body filler products are all thermoset polyester/styrene monomer based loaded with talc and other fillers. Styrene monomer is the smell you will notice using body filler or making fiberglass parts. The styrene is not a solvent but rather an integral component when cured with peroxide paste or liquid hardener( common in a few countries) and these are much more resistant to attack by solvents than the older paints and primers. I would be concerned if a product called spot putty or lacquer putty was used on top of any patches of "bondo" prior to paint application to cover very minor defects. It is a composition quite like paint but with much lower thinner % and the acrylic or nitrocellulose polymer would be attacked by solvents in the paint stripper. If spot putty is removed by stripper or sanding you will see pinholes or minute scratches that must be covered again when refinishing to get that ultra smooth glossy finish you will want. So several layers of primer (with intermittent sanding) could be needed. Sorry to be so lengthy but all this was critical for a top quality final finish as I worked closely with the chemists in virtually all major body filler companies around the world 1975 to 2005.

Just a tech note of caution---- A real gel coat applied over mold release on the fiberglass mold at the original factory is a thermosetting polyester, so generally more resistant to chemical strippers than most paints . 2 part paints are also thermosets as are the peroxide initiated polyesters used to build fiberglass parts and autobody fillers (2 part putties). However, be aware that thermoset polyesters do not resist strong alkaline conditions that have been used in hot tank strippers and also strippers ( the old toxic really effective paint strippers) that contain methylene chloride must be used with caution- read the label. Anyone using a stripper on an old fiberglass part may want to try just a little first on a less obvious part if there is one. If anyone has to remove paint that is of the newer 2 part ones ( the kind professionally applied with great caution to breathing hazard) good luck- not sure how that may be done.

I am not so sure about heavier, mass produced cars having better designed ,stronger parts and some of the failed Lotus parts may have come from cars weighing 50-90% higher. Some engineers at the big operations are restrained by cost considerations and therefore look at the parts bins from existing models when designing a new car (just like Lotus did). Having owned many, worked on friend's street driven cars and moderate budget race teams, I have observed quite a few unusually worn or outright broken parts. For the race driven cars I am only referring to parts that are not particularly stressed by the forces imparted by racing as it is unfair to fault unusually stressed parts that were designed for road use. I am however referring to Jaguar, Lancia, Mercedes, MG, Triumph, AH, Sunbeam, Chrysler, Ford ( USA, UK and Germany) and others. What I do fault is the idea that factory replacement parts should be installed, failure after failure. At a minimum, highly stressed parts should be crack tested and carefully installed but perhaps redesigned or substituted with better materials or only subjected to light loads with relatively conservative driving. Speed with reliability should not be seen as inexpensive or easy.

I had what was probably a series 2 nose in less than perfect condition but I gave it away a couple of years ago. It came with my series 1 back in 1980s when I imported it from UK. I purchesed a new nose from Caterham back then and they said it would fit my series 1 . It did with a bit of coaxing and a fabricated bracket so maybe they are not so different after all. I wish good luck in any case.

I always liked the look of Lotus clamshells as they were required by USA law early on as in the series 2. My series 1 was equipped with clamshells by a previous owner in the UK so I stuck with them. I used to race a Sunbeam Alpine against the 7 America model in SCCA F Production ( the one with the AH Sprite motor , the super 7 was in D back then) and admired that look.

That sounds long enough for many of us who might have put off hardened valve seats and alcohol resistant parts to get them in place.

did a quick look using perplexity search for history of octane improvement and chemicals in lead substitutes. The latter looks a bit like alchemy with magnesium complexes so it looked a bit shaky. Not sure I would fully trust the info sources fully since a lot of the test data was probably proprietary. But it did sort of confirm the idea that aromatics ( benzene, toluene etc.) are common now with only a few unmodified vintage motors asking for lead. Way back (1960s) Amoco premium used to claim lead free way before Federal mandates but I recall very poor spark plug life with my 340 Barracuda. Adding benzene on purpose rather than just as a trace from refining, seems very irresponsible but I suppose they like the evaporation characteristics ( low boiling point) perhaps for colder climates in winter. Somewhere I heard that unhardened valve seats could benefit from lead early in life but once the seats were lubricated that lead was not critical. Probably no way to confirm that so might be risky.

Just a reminder on safety. Boosting octane without lead may mean adding organic ( chemist definition) compounds like toluene and xylene. So please be careful to avoid significant skin contact and breathing since there may be some residual benzene content and that is super bad. Not that lead is great, but aromatic hydrocarbons may cause issues years after contact. So I am a bit wary of very high octane no lead fuels. Sorry for organic chem 101-- I know almost everyone hated it.

I am thinking (hoping) that the 100LL might be around for a while for vintage aircraft such as the B17, B24 and Mustang I saw at a show in New Jersey. I suppose they follow some rules about complete overhaul every X number of hours. But better parts may not be available? It is not like those of us with old British cars stuck on the side of a road when an engine dies.

I understand that Avgas 100LL (as in low lead) does not contain alcohol and Sunoco and VP have a variety of grades that may be ok. Extra octane beyond what is needed should be ok. They are expensive of course. All seem to work in a 1500 pre-crossflow with 10.2 to 1