Mike Causer wrote:
> "A. Sta. Maria" wrote:
> >
> > A year ago Rod and I corresponded on the origin of the name "Lotus" -- a
> > topic that apparently recurs at least once a year. I hope that means there
> > are always new enthusiasts in the fold.
>
> > >From: rebean@CCGATE.HAC.COM [SMTP:rebean@CCGATE.HAC.COM]
>
> > >
> > >Ah yes, Andres, I'd much rather believe this one (but can't help thinking
> > > that, had it been true, it wouldn't have remained so mysterious all
> > > these years).
>
> Chapman himself wrote in 1954:
>
> The first car was basically an Austin 7 chassis and engine, it was
> called a Lotus too but I am not going to tell you why. I have been
> asked many times the origin of the name of my cars but that cannot
> be divulged for several years. It is one of those things, rather
> like the chap who will never tell you why his friends call him
> "Stinker".
>
> This is from a 4 part article entitled "The Lotus story", published in
> the magazine Motor Racing from Nov 1954 to Feb 1955.
>
> OK, so we know from this that it's something embarrassing to Chapman,
> but not so bad that he was never going to reveal it. One possibility
> is the theory that I don't think made the Lotus FAQ, and that is that
> one of Chunky's favourite phrases was "Us lot", and that this was
> reversed to make the name of the car.
>
> One day maybe someone will fill Hazel with gin and find out.....
>
> Mike
Regarding that Motor Racing article, is there a scanned copy on a website
anywhere? That would make a nice addition to the collection even being
pre-Elan. I have (packed away) most of the year 1955 Autocar (to which I
subscribed before I had a driver's license) and one of them has a nice article
about driving a Mark IX up to northern England on the road.... great stuff.
Rod
|