DSK

I don't recall selling anyone the parts for 4-link unless they bought our chassis too. Our chassis had an integral rollover bar to protect the passenger compartment. It went all the way down to the floorpan. The rear suspension pickup points were welded into that rollbar inside the rear fender area. Since Lotus Sevens had a different chassis, they could not fit our 4-link without reworking the chassis quite extensively. I don't know of anyone who took that on. That said, it's not impossible that some clever (and skilled) fabricator could duplicate our 4-link, or something quite like it, to fit a Caterham, especially if the Brits finally upgraded that flimsy chassis they used to sell.

We wrote technical bulletins on a wide variety of subjects. Most pertained to Lotus Sevens, a number were specific to dsk cars modified components.

Hi Ed, Thanks for all the kind words and for setting a few things straight. I was fortunate to work with Carroll Smith on the 1970 Dodge Trans Am team. He was team manager for the Autodynamics crew and I wrenched for him. We became friends and so years later I asked him to come back to Marblehead and help me build the prototype DSK TurboSeven. The rest of that story is here https://www.simplesevens.org/dsk/history/dsk12.htm He did all the technical drawings for the TurboSeven and our chassis components. He screwed the 1dt car together and also helped shepard that car through the Car & Driver road test with us, snatching our bacon out of the fire a couple of times. We stayed in touch for years, in large part because he loved Patty's cooking. We were US distributors for Caterham for years along with Dave Bean Engineering. It was an odd relationship and Graham Nearne always seemed a tad paranoid. Realistically, we were far too small to have much impact on their US sales. At times, they bought some of our improved components and eventually upgraded some of their own following our designs. It was a point of pride and I never griped. Those parts made Sevens safer. Better for everyone. Once again, thanks for kind comments.

Happy IS rich

I consult to startup companies, primarily those with engineered products such as medical devices. Many of my clients hire me for strategic advice and/or to conceive and write a business plan. I delivered newspapers from a magazine shop in the 1950s and devoured every hot rod and sports car magazine in the store. Reading about the Seven led to drawing souped-up versions in study hall. A friend ordered a 100E Seven as a complete car, but it arrived as a kit. I ended up screwing it together for him, and he let me use a lot. I had a Lotus Seven shop for a while. Great fun!

That was the actual deal. We discounted parts to him in exchange for using his name in promotions. Yes, it's marketing. Not sure why that is anything but routine USA capitalism. DSK Cars was a business after all. Tom used more of DSK parts than we used parts of his.

Better take the material in that link with a grain of salt. We actually made only one, or maybe two, suspension parts whose design came from Tom Robertson's car. They were racing parts only, not suited for street use, so we sold two or maybe three of them over the next several years. Look, Tom did a terrific job building, innovating and driving his Lotus Seven racers. He won a lot of races and earned champion status. My hat is off to all that. But Tom makes far too much of his imagined grievances and supposed DSK Cars gains at his expense. Th fact is, we made pocket change and gave Tom a similar pittance. It is much ado about nothing. As I read Tom's gripe, I think of a mosquito floating on his back down the Mississippi with an erection frantically yelling "Raise the drawbridge, raise the drawbridge!" Pat Prince's friendship and loyalty to Tom is admirable, but Pat was not around when DSK Cars and Tom Robertson did our paltry little deal. Tom never complained at the time, so his griping years later came as a surprise to me. Somebody please tell Tom that nobody wants or ever wanted his autograph. My word, what a bunch of BS!

Sorry for the delay in answering. I am all too easily distracted. DSK Cars and Dave Bean Engineering had no official connection, except perhaps that we were the two Caterham dealers in the US back them. We did cooperate with one another and pick each others brains, I bought some engine parts from Dave and he bought some chassis and suspension components from us. I admired his expertise and enjoyed his friendliness.

Great news JohnD! If people wish to ask questions about any of those Tech Bulletins, I'll try to answer. Please do bear in mind, however, that I wrote them decades ago and may be a little rusty,

Hey GregM. I confirmed that the chassis was constructed by Pat Prince. I have no idea who your Seven was "put together under." This is the second time you have attributed to me an erroneous assertion about your Lotus. Please extend the courtesy of taking greater care in using me for a reference without my permission.

Send me copies so I can get some background

My business partner at dsk cars, Clayton, flew a Cessna. When we bought used Sevens around the US, he'd fly me to the airport nearest the car with a dealer plate and a tool box. After a thorough inspection, I'd drive those flimsy beaters back to our shop in Marblehead MA. Lots of adventures repairing on the side of the road.

Sevens are quite amenable to personalization. They're mechanically simple, relatively economical, and pay big rewards in performance and pride. You should enjoy ample opportunity to make this car the GregM Seven with or without other credentials or inspiration from dsk, Arch, Caterham, Dave Beane or any others of the scores of suppliers and enthusiasts smitten by Chapman's minimalist ultralight.

I founded a company called RaceWare with Norman Marx. We sold Formula Ford and other racing car parts, I suggested that we also sell Seven parts to help fill in sales during the off season. Norm agreed, but later we split up and I took the Lotus Seven parts business with me, along with a prototype chassis I had begun on my own. DSK Cars never built any chasses that "were (more or less) indistinguishable from a genuine Lotus chassis (as built by Arch Motor, Universal Radiator, or one other company back in the day!)" We only ever built chassis of our own, very different and upgraded design. We did buy chassis from Caterham and sell them. We were one of two US Caterham Dealers. As to "these frames were accepted by the SCCA as 'replacement parts' for genuine Lotus Sevens." The SCCA actually accepted the DSK Chassis - a heavily modified redesign to replace stock chasses on Lotus Seven racecars. Why, you ask? BECAUSE the stock Lotus chassis was frail to begin with, not designed for the loads that racing slicks put on them, had no internal rust protection and broke without warning, and failed during too many race events I got interested in building my own DSK Chassis before I even started selling Lotus parts. Our own redesign is what started DSK Cars from Day 1. DSK Cars built a number of DSK Sevens while I was still at the company, the subsequent owner Clayton Seitz built several more, and the ditz who he sold the tooling to built others. More "kits" were sold than whole cars. The total was around 40 DSKs, last time I had an estimate that I thought reliable. But way lots more than three. Yes, Caterham Cars was a tad paranoid that DSK would take some of their market share, but that was silly. We were a tiny shop and never had aspirations to compete with Caterham. We built DSK Sevens largely because I wanted to build one. We thought they were better, stronger, safer, and faster and so did a few other people who bought them. My personal goal was to have a road test of the DSK TurboSeven design published in a major sportscar magazine. After that test was completed, I sold the company. Car & Driver finally published the article in May 1982. John Donahue's SimpleSevens website does have quite a comprehensive story about DSK Cars. John does a fabulous service to Lotus Seven enthusiasts by maintaining the site. It's a lot of work. I do caution readers of the DSK history on that site that some of the later commentors added ridiculous misinformation and mere rumors. Especially Pat Prince.

Hi GregM and others, David Kaplan here. Back at DSK Cars, we: 1. Sold Lotus Seven replacement parts 2. Designed and built DSK upgraded parts that fit Lotus Sevens 3. Designed and built DSK Seven and TurboSeven models of our own 4. Restored Sevens (our Magnificent Sevens program) 5. Built SCCA production and vintage Sevens I mention these various products and services to avoid confusion when talking about your particular car. Here's why: Not sure what you meant by "I just purchased the DSK that was on sale in Arizona" Back in the day, we only refer to a car as a "DSK" if it was built on a DSK chassis So I don't think that your Seven is a DSK Seven in that sense It could be a Seven that passed through DSK Cars for service - or one that we built from Lotus Seven parts Is that what you mean by "I just purchased the DSK ...?" I saw something in the string about an Arch Motors chassis So could be that it was a wrecked Lotus Seven that needed a new chassis where either DSK Cars or a customer did the work Does it have a Lotus Chassis plate? Any chassis plate? My guess, based on the scant information and the pictures: We sold someone an Arch Motors chassis and they built this car, not DSK Cars It just doesn't look like the parts and fabrication work are typical of a DSK build It is definitely not Lemonade! Lemonade had an original Lotus chassis plate and was a fully race-prepped car when we bought it We rebuilt it and made it suitable for street use, retaining much of its race performance I have a large color picture of Lemonade in my office - I am looking at it as I write this I cannot see how your car could be the same car I'd be pleased to discuss any or all of these thoughts with you. Can discuss any of this on this forum, or by phone dsk, dsk744@gmail.com