The Visioneering Car

[Reaper1]

I think the camber differences between the front and rear on the car pictures is due to an optical illusion. The car is on a hill and articulation of the suspension will also cause a camber change.

Also of note, from what I know of DMC history, the height of the front suspension WAS supposed to be lower than what you see on stock production cars. It was raised to meet "upcoming" safety standards that never went into effect.

[content22207]

Also of note, from what I know of DMC history, the height of the front suspension WAS supposed to be lower than what you see on stock production cars. It was raised to meet "upcoming" safety standards that never went into effect.

Nonsense. The 1982 bumper changes (passenger cars only) dealt with impact resistance (they lowered impact resistance from 5 MPH to 2.5 MPH). That standard has not changed since. Look it up.

Federal front passenger car bumper heights were established in 1972, and have never changed since: 16-20 inches. Look it up. Lotus drawings in the Workshop Manual show the front bumper slightly more than 19" above the pavement -- clearly within federal requirements.

I think the front suspension height change is just more DMC mythology, like the sunshade and gas flap hood, that is only recently being challenged and proven incorrect.

My theory is that the front end was raised to facilitate distribution of the cars on American autoracks. If you've ever watched an autorack loaded/unloaded, that makes more sense than blaming it on federal requirements that did not exist then, and have never existed since.

Bill Robertson
#5939

[louielouie2000]

My theory is that the front end was raised to facilitate distribution of the cars on American autoracks. If you've ever watched an autorack loaded/unloaded, that makes more sense than blaming it on federal requirements that did not exist then, and have never existed since.

Bill Robertson
#5939

You're probably right. Most automotive production changes are to facilitate easier/cheaper production & delivery of vehicles. This is why some cars are so tough to work on in regards to access: cars are designed to be easy to assemble... not necessarily easy to repair afterwards. If you watch the youtube videos of the first DeLorean shipment, they have to put boards down to keep even the nose-high production DeLoreans from scraping their front spoilers on the loading ramps for the semi carriers:



We may have finally found the reason why production DeLoreans are so much more nose high than their prototype & preproduction counterparts!

[content22207]

Those British autoracks are *SO* different from American autoracks. Loading and unloading an American autorack is very different:



Remember also that no other cars in this country had plastic front ends in 1981 -- metal front bumpers were still the industry standard. If you accidentally impact a metal bumper you aren't going to destroy the radiator, or even worse damage the underbody itself.

At some point in its early life #2508 was transported on a sling lift wrecker (that's all we had in the early 80's). The rock screen and radiator shroud were totally destroyed in the process (I found their remains under the hood). I suspect that also was the occasion for its metal channel radiator upgrade.

I grow wearing of the "bumper height" dogma being endlessly repeated as gospel, especially since a simple online search of the federal code itself reveals it to be false. Hopefully Nick Sutton, or someone else who was actually there, can give a definitive answer, as was recently done with the gas flap hoods. I will ask the POG's at DCS'12.

Bill Robertson
#5939

In another thread the possibility of headlight height was offered as a reason to raise the front end. This also does not stand up to online research. According the the NHTSA, "... the range of headlamp mounting height has been relatively consistent for decades. In adopting the industry consensus standard, NHTSA set the initial mounting height as required to be within the range of 24 to 54 inches measured to the center of the headlamp...." (http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/rules/rulings/glare.html). Dimensional drawing on Page A:04:01 of the Workshop Manual shows the original Lotus headlight centerline height to be 24.5".

Bill Robertson
#5939

Federal front passenger car bumper heights were established in 1972, and have never changed since: 16-20 inches. Look it up. Lotus drawings in the Workshop Manual show the front bumper slightly more than 19" above the pavement -- clearly within federal requirements.

I incorrectly remembered 19" from an earlier measurement -- apologies.

I just enlarged the dimensional drawing on Page A:04:01 of the workshop manual 400%: lowest edge of the front bumper measures 16.75" above the lowest edge of the tires, which have flat spots drawn on them from the pavement -- still above NHTSA minimum.

Bill Robertson
#5939

[delornut]

Nonsense. The 1982 bumper changes (passenger cars only) dealt with impact resistance (they lowered impact resistance from 5 MPH to 2.5 MPH). That standard has not changed since. Look it up.

Federal front passenger car bumper heights were established in 1972, and have never changed since: 16-20 inches. Look it up. Lotus drawings in the Workshop Manual show the front bumper slightly more than 19" above the pavement -- clearly within federal requirements.

I think the front suspension height change is just more DMC mythology, like the sunshade and gas flap hood, that is only recently being challenged and proven incorrect.

My theory is that the front end was raised to facilitate distribution of the cars on American autoracks. If you've ever watched an autorack loaded/unloaded, that makes more sense than blaming it on federal requirements that did not exist then, and have never existed since.

Bill Robertson
#5939

You're right regarding the change from 5mph bumpers to 2.5 mph bumpers but this change took place for model year 1983 which was after DeLorean production ended. The 5 mph rule emcompassed more than just the bumper. It included reducing to minimal any damage to headlights, radiator and suspension in a 5mph frontal impact as well as 3mph corner impact. Simply saying as long as the bumper is between 16 and 20 inches in height the rule was met is naive. To say they raised the front suspension and disrupted the styling and handling of the car simply to make loading onto car carriers easier is also a bit naive. If the door handles came too close to the sides of the carrier do you think they'd have moved them to the roof? It's been 30 years and I wasn't involved in the government regulations affecting our Ford assembly plant but I remember that in the late 1970's we installed a couple of perfectly level floor areas where a percentage of our production was measured for bumper and headlight heights prior to shipment. It was a short lived thing but it took place around the time DeLoreans were being produced and about the time British Leyland raised the front suspension on the MG.

Bruce Benson

[content22207]

The original design height satisfied all regulations in effect, not only in 1981, but also in 1983 (and to the present day -- current headlight minimum is 22 inches to the centerline).

With all due respect, my theory has more merit than yours.

DeLorean owners cling hard to their dogma (witness the hue and cry when the ornamental origin of the louvers was finally verified), but there is absolutely no evidence to support raising the front end to satisfy regulatory minimums.

NHTSA links that disprove your theory:
http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/problems/s...per/Index.html
http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/rules/rulings/glare.html

Bill Robertson
#5939

[Ron]

It may be worth considering if State regulations came into play.
Ohio's regulations call for a 22 inch MAXIMUM bumper height (measured from the ground to bottom of bumper) for passenger cars.

[content22207]

Dimensional drawings on Page A:04:01 of the Workshop Manual put the top of the front bumper just under 21 inches.

Try again.

Bill Robertson
#5939

[Reaper1]

Good gracious! No need to flip a lid over this! The information I gained was from around 2001 or so when I first really started doing research online. There was a spring set being sold at that time to lower the front of the car and the whole regulation thing was their explanation as to why it was so high from the factory.

As far as no car having a plastic nose at that time...Corvette did! The Plymouth Turismo TC3 also did. I'm sure there were a few others.

I can also tell you for fact that there were several other Dodge products in the 80's that were shipped without the ground effects and such installed due to shipping hazards.

The shipping thing may have something to do with the stance, but I think in the end it might be several things that conspired to lift the front.

Now, can't we all just get along and love D's!?

[content22207]

I'm just waiting for someone to produce evidence of regulatory height minimums supposedly violated by the original design. Every regulation proffered thus far was satisfied by Lotus' original design height.

Raising the front end was detrimental to both handling and suspension wear. Obviously something went terribly wrong with initial distribution in the American market for the factory to do it.

Bill Robertson
#5939

Has Houston found anything in its archives to shed light on the reason for the increase?

Bill Robertson
#5939