Picked up a Lotus recently as a small project. I believe it's an '83 Legend. There ain't much info out there on Lotus bikes but I guess there's more than there used to be. According to vintagelotusbicycles.com, the Legend was at the top of Lotus' sport line and for a few years during the mid-80s it was made with Columbus SL/SP tubing. Here are a few other interesting things about this frame:

--Somewhat unusual geometry (I think): 54.5cm seat tube (c-c) with 57cm top tube, not sure of the angles
--Suntour rear dropouts, Tange fronts - Was it common to combine Japanese and Italian frame materials?
--Slim brake bridge and fork clearance - only enough for 25mm tires, odd for a sport-touring kind of bike
--Pretty fancy-looking fork crown





I'm pretty sure the only original things on the bike are the shifters and the headset, maybe the seatpost too. Everything else was replaced with a hodgepodge parts, some of which are pretty good parts even if they no longer look their best. Paint's obviously seen better days. The PO sanded and clear-coated the spots where the paint had chipped to prevent rust. I wish he had gone with touch-up paint, but oh well.

Oh man that's nice. Are you sure that's a 54.5 seat tube? Looks like a lot of parts were switched out, but nice nonetheless.

It wasn't very common for most, but it was quite common for lotus. I've seen a legend with campagnolo and many (most) higher end lotus bikes were using Columbus tubing. My odyssey was SL.

Measured it again. I get somewhere between 54.5 and 55cm. The PO received it as a frameset and built it up from there with spare parts. As a result there are some oddball things going on (bladed spokes, painted white Nitto stem), but for the most part the component replacements are practically minded (sealed cartridge BB, freehub, dual-pivot brakes). I'm not complaining, although for aesthetic reasons I'm changing a few things around.

So you mean, Campy dropouts with Columbus tubing? That's more of what I'd expect. But I get the feeling Lotus had more of a practical mix-and-match to get the job done kind of philosophy (a la Bridgestone circa Grant Peterson).

Just wanted to share some of what I've done so far with the Legend. Following a procedure outlined in another thread by fellow BFer TheJapino, I tried my hand at "saddle recovery". I used some dark brown leather from a donor jacket, bought at a local thrift store and I had so much fun doing it, I wrapped another saddle and then I went further and stitched together a few strips of the same leather and wrapped the handlebars on the Legend to match the newly recovered saddle.

Wow, that's pretty cool. It sure does look like a larger frame than 54.5~55, though. Long top tube cetainly would agree with my long torso'd anatomy!

Is the cable housing guide on the top tube (the one closest to the head tube) rusted, or busted?

Neither, but the paint's stripped from it, which is what you're seeing.

A word about frame size: I also thought this frame looked bigger from the photos than it actually measures. My theory is that this is owing to the relatively high bottom bracket, which effectively shortens the seat tube. To confuse things more, the previous owner had listed it on CL as a 53.5cm, center-to-top. I knew that just couldn't be right so I emailed him, asking whether he hadn't mistakenly measured vertically, rather than along the seat tube. He emailed me back, saying that the "true measurement" was vertical. On what planet that's true, I'm not sure, but at that point I just decided to trust my eye, which told me I was looking at a 56-58cm frame. Turns out, like the rest of you, I overestimated. Which brings me to my point: how do you all estimate frame size from photos? As for me, I always focus on the headtube, as seen in profile. I try to imagine my hand gripping it, with my fingers on the inside of the "triangle". If I think my four fingers will just fit in there, I'm 90% certain the frame is my size, 56cm (c-c). Are there any other tricks? (I know it's always best to actually measure, but sometimes this isn't possible and sometimes the owner of the bike is clueless as to how to measure or can't explain their methodology clearly.)

I'm the same as you. I look at the length of the head tube to make estimations.

"TRUE" measurement is vertical? LOL. I've never heard that before!

Yes, it does appear to be circa 1983. What's the serial number? The Legend was full SL, so to be sure you can check inside the bottom of the steerer tube for Columbus' five helical ridges, As for the dropouts, it was standard practive to match the dropouts to the derailleur. Since the 1983 Legend was spec'd with SunTour Cyclone Mk II, I'm not at all suprised by the SunTour dropouts.

Since I had to get rid of the silly bladed-spoke front wheel, I went a-wheel hunting yesterday and snagged a good deal on a gray-rimmed "set". Technically they're not a set--one is a 36H Shimano 600 laced to a Mavic MA40, the other a 32H Sansin laced to Matrix Titan--but they're a lot closer in appearance than what I had on this bike, plus they're traditionally spoked, which is what I wanted. I'm going to ditch the old front wheel but I'm considering keeping the rear, a modern Tiagra freehub on what seems to be a rather fancy Araya rim (RC-540). The rim has a nice polished and anodized top surface which I really dig the look of. Anyone familiar with it?

With the "new" wheels:

Serial is EY04260. There are some subtle thin ridges inside the steering tube, running the length of the tube. Is this what you mean, T-Mar? I tried to photograph them but they didn't come out well.

I also have a 1983 59cm Lotus Legend Compe in what was called Oxide Green. Columbus SL tubing with Suntour dropouts on the rear and Tange on the front. The clearances are very tight. Its maxed out with Continental 24's.
Mine was received as a gift from a friend and was almost completely original with the exception of silly upright bars. I changed a few things around, switched the crankset from a Sugino 144 bcd crank to a Suntour Superbe Pro crankset and switched out the wheelset.
It's my favorite bike by far.

The ridges shouldn't run the length of the tube. They run the length of the butted section, which only extends 2-3" up from the bottom. Sometimes they're shorter, if the head tube is very short and the manufacturer has to trim from the bottom of the steerer in order to get sufficient stem insertion.

jar351, I have the sister to your Legend. A 1983 56cm model, serial number EY04293. Oddly enough, my 58 cm 1983 Legend Compe has serial number EY04307. That makes the three bikes fall within 47 numbers of each other. Interesting.

That's either a heck of a coincidence, or (as I suspect), they didn't make many of the 1983 versons of the Legend. From my observations, it seems the similar 1984 model is much more common.



I was lucky to find my Legend in mostly original condition. Except for the saddle, one tube, and missing gum hoods, it still has all the original parts including the tires, bar tape (?), water bottle and cage.

We've collected some serial numbers from 1983 Lotus bikes and they share the "EY" prefix. Does anyone see how that could be a logical code for '83, or is it proprietary? We have over 100 Lotus serial numbers on the site and still can't figure out the sequence. T-Mar, do you have any ideas?

just picked up an 83 Lotus Classique all original except for the back wheel but it had me fooled