Page 10 of 12 FirstFirst ... 89101112 LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 111

Thread: New Build

  1. #91
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Location
    SE NC
    Posts
    45

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by panamericano View Post
    Wow. Heat insulation. That must be nice.

    (86-89 Birkin)
    I had the same thought!
    Henry
    1965 Seven S2
    1969 Elan S4

  2. #92
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Wellsboro, PA
    Posts
    76

    Default

    Looking good Greg! Keep it up and you'll be grinning from ear to ear in no time!

  3. #93
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    4,773

    Default

    Duratecs just radiate so much heat compared to earlier engines - heat insulation is really needed.

    Great progress being made!
    Mike
    2010 Caterham CSR with Cosworth 2.3 Duratec
    2018 Caterham 420R with 2L Duratec 210hp at Donington UK
    1975 BMW CSL Group 4 (restoration - engine and dry sump install time)
    1977 Holden Torana "A9X" (awaiting restoration)
    1985 Holden Commodore SS Group A
    1985 Holden Commodore Group A
    1982 Ferrari 400i
    1965 Ford Mustang Fastback "Holman Moody"
    1992 Ford Escort RS Cosworth WRC (fettling after long period of storage)
    1990 Range Rover 2 door Classic
    and another project car coming....

  4. #94
    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    Posts
    43

    Default

    Question for you all. The transmission touches a chassis diagonal in the tunnel. I've tried everything I can think of, including loosening the motor and transmission mounts, taking the pressure off with a crane and then prying, but unless I'm putting pressure on my lever there is simply no gap. The contact area is driver side, just in front of the neutral sensor. I've found a post in Lotus7.club (https://www.lotus7.club/forum/techtalk/gearbox-7) describing the same situation with two different builds. In both cases Caterham told the builders that it wasn't an issue. Seems odd to me, anyone hear anything about this situation?

    Name:  IMG_3420.jpg
Views: 108
Size:  32.3 KB
    Last edited by Pokey; 03-28-2020 at 08:08 PM.
    Greg

  5. #95
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    South Lyon Michigan
    Posts
    209

    Default Trans contacting frame tube

    Unless this a strictly racing build, the vibration is going to drive you crazy! Have you looked at adding a spacer(s) under one or both engine mounts? You have to be careful not to pre-load the engine mount(s) or trans mount. If that is not an option it's time for some heat and a ballpeen hammer. Dave W
    Last edited by Dave W; 03-29-2020 at 06:27 AM.

  6. #96
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Wellsboro, PA
    Posts
    76

    Default

    I'll have to look at mine. But mine has the Sigma engine. Yours is the 2.0 Duratec correct? There may be a difference in the mounting.

  7. #97
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Seattle-ish
    Posts
    1,273

    Default

    Greg, based on that BlatChat post, it sounds like like Caterham previously used slotted trans mount. Would that solution give you enough room, or would there still be an issue based on the location of the engine mounts?

    -John
    '95 Westfield SEiW w/2.0L Duratec
    '68 Lotus Elan FHC
    '91 Miata w/Flyin Miata suspension & brakes
    '95 Porsche 993 C2
    '86 Porsche 944 turbo (neglected project car)
    Throttle Steer

  8. #98
    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    Posts
    43

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lucky-7 View Post
    I'll have to look at mine. But mine has the Sigma engine. Yours is the 2.0 Duratec correct? There may be a difference in the mounting.
    Yes, the Duratec with the 5-speed (Mazda).
    Greg

  9. #99
    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    Posts
    43

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JohnCh View Post
    Greg, based on that BlatChat post, it sounds like like Caterham previously used slotted trans mount. Would that solution give you enough room, or would there still be an issue based on the location of the engine mounts?

    -John
    Yah, the mount for the 6-speed was (or may still be) slotted for side-to-side movement. The mount with the 5-speed that I have allows for movement front-to-back only. I need to gain a minimum of 1/8", maybe 3/16" to have any air gap. I could easily modify the mount to allow for lateral movement, but that then would presumably mean the transmission would be out of alignment with the propeller shaft. And if I make that modification there is now the possibility that the transmission might move under load banging into that spot it currently touches.

    The "fix" is to make the transmission smaller (grind the casing) or the chassis wider (can't see how to do that without damage). I really don't want to pull the engine to get to the transmission to grind, and I really don't want to grind, so... here I ponder.
    Last edited by Pokey; 03-29-2020 at 03:41 PM.
    Greg

  10. #100
    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    Posts
    43

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dave W View Post
    Unless this a strictly racing build, the vibration is going to drive you crazy! Have you looked at adding a spacer(s) under one or both engine mounts? You have to be careful not to pre-load the engine mount(s) or trans mount. If that is not an option it's time for some heat and a ballpeen hammer. Dave W

    The engine mounts don't seem to play into this since the transmission mount is fixed with no lateral freedom. I thought perhaps I could somehow eek out a little movement so loosened all mounts, took weight off with the crane, then pried and banged a little with absolutely no movement other than that made possible by the rubber in the transmission's mount.
    Greg

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •