Resurrecting a 1970 Europa S in Atlantic Canada

[Bullnose]

I'm an 84 year old retired mechanical engineer who was looking for a new car project. If I'd wanted a Lotus Europa, I would have bought one. Instead, I found the remains of a 1970 S2 that had been taken apart in 1994, a few provinces away from where I found it. No engine. No transaxle. No radiator. Lots of pieces in eight Rubbermaid tubs. A body that had seen better days, and a frame that had been sandblasted and painted with some restoration work completed to the front cross member.  After moving this pile of stuff to my garage, the fun begins. FYI my user name is Bullnose because one of my previous cars was a 1920 Morris Bullnose.

Through good luck and good hunting online I located a 807-13 engine with Weber carburetors in Ontario and a 336 transaxle here in Nova Scotia. They're all in the garage and they actually fit together. Serial: 54/1087

My first question (of I'm sure many!) concerns the relationship of the engine and the transaxle to the chassis. Fortunately the engine has the correct hole pattern for the motor mounts built in, but in the current configuration the engine and transaxle lean significantly to one side, measured carefully at the stub axles there is almost a 2 cm difference from one side to the other. To my eye there is no obvious reason for this discrepancy. I think it should be equal, otherwise the suspension would be compromised. All comments welcome.

[bjthomp]

You are correct, the transaxle should sit level. But, one can't offer assistance to your problem without seeing the engine mounts. A photo or two from the rear of the car, showing the engine mounts is necessary. Good luck with your project.

[Kendo]

Two potential issues with motor mounts might apply here. 1) the mounts sag over time, so you might need new ones. 2) different versions of the Europa use different mounts. So yo might have gotten the wrong ones in the bins-o-parts you got.

Of course, through door #3 could be anything else.

[Bainford]

Welcome to the forum, Bullnose. 
This looks like enough of a project to keep you busy for a while. It's great to see yet another Europa coming back to life in the Maritimes. Where abouts are you located in NS? Are you a member of BATANS?

[BDA]

  Bullnose!!! I can't help you with your questions but I'm hoping you'll keep us up to date on your project!

[Gary t]

Welcome bullnose
I'm in Alberta and driving 54/1173 It's worth the effort
There is a huge amount of knowledge in the group just ask away. My search indicated my car was built in early 1969 but registered as a 1970.
Gary

[Bullnose]

Thanks for the positive responses.I am in Annapolis Royal and occasional member of BATANS.
I will get some photos tomorrow in the garage.
I have both old and new rubber mounts - not much difference.
I have the original engine block and possibly the head. Quick measurements could not find any difference between the mount locations on the two engine blocks.

Interesting re manufacture dates of a later number car. I have some details of the S1 - no dash binnacle so suspect its a transition unit. I do have the electric windows in the doors.
Grant

[TurboFource]

 

[Bullnose]

Here's some close ups of the existing engine mounts.
The engine sits level in the fore and aft direction but tilts to the right hand side.
I know that the RHS mount will need some welding and the extra hole was drilled to see if I could make things level.
Thanks for the input

[GavinT]

Going by your last pic, the engine mounts seem to be for a TC.
The S1 / S2 engine mounts (RHS of pic) set the engine a little lower.

The tilt is puzzling.
The front RHS of the engine does sit quite close to the chassis leg but yours appears a tad closer than I remember.
While your chassis looks pretty schmick, I'd treat it as an unknown and use / fabricobble a set of long trammel bars so as to measure where everything is located. I see this is a judicious precaution because half the rear suspension hangs off the gearbox and relies on proper placement of the engine/transmission for correct thrust angle among other things.

[Thijs]

Welcome here, looks like a great project! I'll surely be following this! 

[Bryan Boyle]

Going by your last pic, the engine mounts seem to be for a TC.
The S1 / S2 engine mounts (RHS of pic) set the engine a little lower.

The tilt is puzzling.
The front RHS of the engine does sit quite close to the chassis leg but yours appears a tad closer than I remember.
While your chassis looks pretty schmick, I'd treat it as an unknown and use / fabricobble a set of long trammel bars so as to measure where everything is located. I see this is a judicious precaution because half the rear suspension hangs off the gearbox and relies on proper placement of the engine/transmission for correct thrust angle among other things.

I'm going to take a wild shot that there are 2 different engine mounts installed; there should be no reason to honk out holes larger on the engine mounting brackets to get the engine set in the frame properly.  Set the frame level side to side on sawhorses or the like.  Measure from the point where the frame transitions from the Y to the back arms down to the floor (assuming the floor is level).  They should be equal.  Measure from that same point on the top of the frame diagonally back to the end.  You should be equal +/-.  Measure from the end of the frame to the flat floor.  Same?  Yes?  You don't have any twist. 

So now it becomes a question: are the two mounts the same?  Take the engine out (if not already done...at this point, should be a 30 minute job...).  Examine the mounts.  Are they the same?  Are they collapsed (i.e. are the vertical metal plates sagging down and not as they appear in the photos?) For the Europa S1 and S2, on both sides, the mount P/N was originally listed as 054E6000.  Early cars originally used 026E0374 (which is the Elan part # based on the 26 prefix) but this was changed by Lotus as a running change, and all cars were to be retrofitted with the upgraded Elan 026E6011 mount.  (First photo).  In any case, it's false economy, at this point, to reuse what may be 50+ years old rubber mounts.

If you have a mount that looks like the second photo, someone somewhere along the line used a later TC mount (074 prefix) on one side.  They are different from the 026 mounts above.  The shape of the base will tell you whether you have the right mount. 

If all the measurements are within specs, then using the proper mount(s) will get the engine set in the frame the way it's supposed to be without having to enlarge holes or some other bodge to get it to work.

   

[GavinT]

I'm going to take a wild shot that there are 2 different engine mounts installed;

I reckon you're right, Bryan.
On looking at the second last pic again, I think I can make out the curved waist section of the rubber mount base - an S2 mount.
If that's the case, installing a correct S2 mount on the left hand side should restore the engine to level and also move it away from the chassis a tad on the forward RHS.

[Bryan Boyle]

I'm going to take a wild shot that there are 2 different engine mounts installed;

I reckon you're right, Bryan.
On looking at the second last pic again, I think I can make out the curved waist section of the rubber mount base - an S2 mount.
If that's the case, installing a correct S2 mount on the left hand side should restore the engine to level and also move it away from the chassis a tad on the forward RHS.

If you compare the photos the OP provided, the left hand mount looks like a TC and the right side looks like (though, without seeing what the base looks like, hard to tell) an S2.  That would account for the difference in mounting locations; a half inch off higher on one side would translate, at the distance to the right top of the engine, of that clearance issue.  Use the right part, and I'm thinking the issue is solved without getting into fabricobbling a solution.

[dakazman]

Going by your last pic, the engine mounts seem to be for a TC.
The S1 / S2 engine mounts (RHS of pic) set the engine a little lower.

The tilt is puzzling.
The front RHS of the engine does sit quite close to the chassis leg but yours appears a tad closer than I remember.
While your chassis looks pretty schmick, I'd treat it as an unknown and use / fabricobble a set of long trammel bars so as to measure where everything is located. I see this is a judicious precaution because half the rear suspension hangs off the gearbox and relies on proper placement of the engine/transmission for correct thrust angle among other things.

  I agree with Gavin . the right hand mount to frame is upside down.  Both of mine sit 3/8' off frame, they are in my s2 with the same block.
Dakazman