free hit
calvan's Content - The Lotus Forums - Official Lotus Community Partner Jump to content


Basic Account
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by calvan

  1. 7 hours ago, bogle said:

    Oh my V8 Esprit needs fiberglass repair on the front passenger side wheel arch.  Could you tell me what they charged you on the wheel arch?  It's probably being billed to the "lady".  I know they need to prep and paint.  Is it a front or rear wheel arch?

    The damage on my V8 is to the left rear wheel arch extension. A woman backed an Audi Q5 into it in a parking lot and hit the arch extension absolutely square on, which in a way was fortunate. The main bodywork was untouched and when the arch extension was stressed the urethane adhesive holding the mounting bolts to the extension let go and didn't pull the fasteners out through the bodywork.

    I sourced a replacement wheel arch extension from Dave Bean Engineering. They have (or had in July) a right rear extension in stock and managed to find the left side in the UK. It should arrive at their place today and will cost me US$550 plus shipping to me from California. 

    SJ Sportscars didn't have the extension I wanted in stock but can make them. As I recall the cost of the part was similar but I didn't check shipping from the UK to the west coast.

    I checked with JAE but didn't hear back so I don't know what availability is like from them. In fairness, I made the mistake of using the "contact us" feature on their website instead of a direct call and I'm never confident that those enquiries get through.

    I didn't ask about front arch extensions but Dave Bean, SJ and JAE will be the usual suspects to check with.

  2. Thanks, Bill.

    This seems to be the summer of the invisible Lotus. Back in July a woman in an SUV "didn't see" my Esprit in a parking lot and backed into it. The ironic part is that when I took my phone out this evening to take pictures of the damage to the Elise I saw that I had an email saying that a replacement wheel arch for the Esprit has just arrived at Dave Bean. It will need to be prepped and painted so maybe I can ask for a two-for-one deal on fibreglass work.

  3. Now I'm unhappy myself.

    About half an hour after making the previous post, my wife and I got in the Elise and drove down to the beachfront for fish & chips. I parked on the street, leaving at least 3 feet between us and the pickup truck already parked in front of us. We got out of the car and had walked about 20 feet when we heard a "crunch". The driver of the pickup had decided to back up before leaving his space and put his trailer hitch into the nose of the Elise. He apparently didn't see it because it is too low.

    Mow I have the joys of dealing with insurance and arranging the repair.

    • Sad 4
  4. 4 hours ago, Alfa2Evora said:


    Bill, if they're able to prove 'beyond all reasonable doubt' that the X5 driver was responsible then, yes, their insurance is liable for all the costs and it's their legal responsibility .....

    It might be worthwhile to spend a few pounds and consult with a solicitor to clarify just what your legal position is as against the X5 driver.  I know that Scots law has its own idiosyncrasies and won't presume to say what your situation there is. But in other jurisdictions there is a significant difference in the degree of proof that the police would need to proceed with charges and what you would need in a civil action to recover damages from the X5 driver.

    Yes, the police will need to be able to establish fault "beyond a reasonable doubt" in order to make charges stick. That can be a tall order. But in many other jurisdictions you would only have to establish the X5 driver's fault on a "balance of probabilities", i.e more likely than not, in order to claim financial recovery for the damages caused. In an extreme position, you might be able to drop your insurance claim, pay for the costs out of pocket and then claim the money back from Mr. (or Ms.) X5.

    I'm not recommending that, of course, but I think you will be in a better position to decide on a course of action if you get professional confirmation of your legal rights and the required standard of proof where you are.  

  5. 49 minutes ago, comem47 said:

    I think I had my cataract surgey over 10 yrs ago. It corrected a lifetime of wearing glasses. Nice to go in the water and see people on the shore clearly and no more fogging glasses in winter or rain.  Amazing stuff these days !!!

    I haven't had lens replacement for cataracts but I did have Lasik vision correction back in '99, when I was 45. Prior to the surgery the correction factor for my "better" eye was -12.5 but the laser magic brought me to uncorrected vision. I still don't need glasses today, other than some mild reading glasses when looking at a computer screen. Technology can be great!

  6. This is just my opportunity to vent a bit over a real First World problem for which I have noone to blame but myself.

    Went out this morning for the second of my twice-weekly hockey games. All went well until I had to really hustle back to cover on defence, got my skates tangled up, took a fall and bounced my fool head on the ice. Even with a helmet on, four inches of ice on a concrete base is an unforgiving surface to smack one's head on so I now have some concussion symptoms. That is bad enough but I did the same thing in January so two concussions (albeit mild) in a little over two months is something to think about. And I know that I won't get far in this world if I have to rely on my looks or athletic prowess.

    My plan has been to keep playing where I am for a couple of more years until I hit 70 and then evaluate whether to quit playing or look for a slower league to play in. Now I'm pissed that I might have put myself in that situation ahead of schedule.

    Like I said, just venting.  

  7. 21 hours ago, DanR said:

    Wonder how much his cronies would want to turn him in?

    Restoration of seized or frozen assets would be nice, but I suspect that throwing in immunity from prosecution would seal the deal if it comes to that point.

  8. 39 minutes ago, yeller77 said:

    Yup. The old joke about why does a dog lick himself?





    Because he can...

    The mods might consider moving this to the "Fuel Prices" thread. It often seems to be the main reason why the oil companies jack up fuel prices. DBE 101 - Dog Balls Economics

  9. Starting? 😜

    I think the issue is more that the rest of us are trying to figure out how someone with the apparent common sense of a sea urchin could manage to paddle a kayak in the first place. Or is it possible that he tried to start a fire onboard to keep warm and discovered the truth in the old adage that you can't have your kayak and heat it too.

    • Haha 1
  10. The 340R was not certified for road use in Canada although it can be brought into the country now. Our equivalent of the US rule is more liberal as cars can be freely imported once they are 15 years old. After that it is a matter of getting the car compliant with provincial requirements to pass an inspection in order to be approved for road use. So it should be possible to bring a 340R in now.

    Having said that, I am aware that Bell & Covill has a 340R listed for sale now. It looks good on the website and the price is quite reasonable by the standards of the current market in Canada. When concerted to CDN$ the price is not much more than what a couple of Vancouver dealers have listed Elise for in the past few months. Transport, duties and taxes would probably increase the landed cost by 30% or so but still within the realm of reasonable.

    The problem I have with it is the hidden cost - if another Lotus follows me home now I really should factor in the cost of the divorce. 

    • Like 1
  • Create New...