Vovchandr

https://www.motorbiscuit.com/lotus-caterham-seven/ From Lotus to Caterham: Why the Seven Is One of the Best Driver’s Cars Ever by James Derek Sapienza on December 4, 2016 2016 Caterham 7 Lineup | Caterham Cars Today, we have a small but vital segment of open air, semi-open wheel, hell for leather sports cars. These models gleefully occupy the space between motorcycles and cars, often drawing the ire of safety groups and government regulators, and undying love from drivers. They’re not high-displacement bruisers like Shelby Cobra continuation roadsters, or powerful science experiments for the ultra-wealthy like the Bugatti Chiron, but they’re about as close as you can get to Hunter S. Thompson’s description of “the edge” without being on a bike. These cars eschew everything that isn’t essential — including things like airbags, traction control, and even bodies in the pursuit of speed. So what you’re left with is a flyweight machine that’s able to go as fast as its driver’s skill can handle. This rarefied bunch includes the Ariel Atom, Polaris Slingshot trike, Morgan Three-Wheeler, and the grandaddy of them all, the Caterham 7. Caterham 7 | Caterham When we’re talking lightness in the pursuit of speed, British sports car builder Lotus is almost always involved, and it’s no different here. Because while Caterham has been building the 7 since 1973, for 15 years before that, it was designed and built by Lotus, and sold as the Seven. So for nearly 60 years, whether assembled in Hethel, Crawley, or in garages around the world as a kit car, the 7 has been in continuous production — an astonishing feat for any automaker. And today, it’s just as vital as its ever been. 1962 Lotus Seven S2 | Caterham Cars The roots of the Seven actually predate Lotus. In 1948, Colin Chapman graduated from engineering school and built his first car, a wood and aluminum trials racer based on an old Austin Seven, the affordable compact that served as the Model T of England. Trialing, a type of off-road uphill racing, was reaching the height of its popularity, and Chapman’s car made something of a splash. A second Austin-based car followed suit in 1949, and by 1952, Lotus Cars, Ltd. was in business. But while the company quickly turned its attention to formula one and grand prix cars, Chapman never quite forgot his trialing roots. The Lotus Mk. IV through Mk. VI were improvements on the first few cars, only now, they incorporated more of Lotus’s proprietary engineering. Throughout the mid ’50s, Chapman kept tinkering with a spare Mk. VI chassis until he believed he found the perfect expression of the Lotus philosophy. Lotus Seven S2 | Caterham Cars Thanks to its work focusing on racing, Lotus began to develop an outlook that set it apart from other manufacturers. At a time when raw power was thought of as a solution to most problems, Chapman wisely understood that tiny Lotus didn’t have the resources to design big, advanced straight-sixes like Jaguar or Mercedes-Benz. Instead, it relied on cutting-edge engineering to keep its cars as nimble and focused as possible. “Simplify, then add lightness” became Chapman’s mantra to his engineers, and they followed it almost fanatically. In 1957, it reached its ultimate expression in a new car, the Mark VII, or Lotus Seven. But there’s another wrinkle to the Seven’s story: Britain was still emerging from postwar austerity, and luxuries like new cars came with a 25% tax, something that hurt the sales of small automakers like Lotus. So Chapman felt that if he sold the Seven as a kit car, it would circumvent the tax laws. It worked, and within a few years, Lotus became a presence at races all over the world. Lotus Seven S4 | Caterham Cars The Seven had a lot in common with a trials car — long, narrow hood, tucked-in tail, bicycle-style fenders, two seats, and absurdly light weight — but it was built for the road. The thin, angular aluminum bodywork covered a rigid tubular space frame. Power came from a Ford inline-four that only made 40 horsepower, but thanks to its astonishingly low center of gravity (top of the windshield was only 3 feet of the ground), near 50/50 center of gravity, and wheels on all four corners, it could out-handle just about anything else on the road. The S2 car appeared in 1960 with a simplified frame, and the even more performance-oriented Super Seven appeared with its Cosworth-tuned Ford four in ’61. In 1968, the more powerful S3 bowed with a larger Ford mill, but it was quickly replaced with the S4 in early 1970. That car was larger with a bigger engine and fiberglass body parts to supplement the costlier aluminum panels. Caterham 7 | Caterham Cars By 1973, Lotus had sold over 2,500 Sevens around the world, and they were raced, hot rodded, and driven in anger all around the world. But Chapman wanted the company to shift away from kit cars and move upmarket to focus on exclusive sports cars and racing. What’s more, England’s entry into the EEC, the closing of the kit car tax loophole, and the institution of the VAT, all pointed to the end of the Seven. Luckily, it quickly found a savior. Caterham 7 | Caterham Cars Since the 1960s, Caterham Cars had been a major Lotus dealer, and it didn’t want to lose business once the affordable Seven disappeared. So it bought the rights to build the car, and in 1973 began selling S4 cars. But these larger, fiberglass heavy cars weren’t as popular as earlier aluminum-based models, so in 1974, it launched an updated S3 model, and it’s been the basis of virtually every 7 since. Over the past 43 years, Caterham followed in Lotus’s footsteps by largely using Ford four-cylinder engines. But as engines have become more powerful, it’s begun to diversify. The early 1990s saw the use of engines from MG Rover, GM/Vauxhall, and today, even Suzuki. Most engines, however still come from The Blue Oval. 2016 Caterham 7 | Caterham Cars Today, the Seven still lacks even the most basic creature comforts, and you can have performance as close to Chapman’s ’50s design or a modern supercar as you’d like. The base 160 model uses a 660cc Suzuki turbo three for a top speed of around 100, and a zero to 60 time of just under seven seconds. The top dog 620R doesn’t look all that different, but it will rocket you from zero to 60 in 2.9 seconds and top out at 155 miles per hour, thanks to a supercharged Ford Duratec four. Curb weight: 1,200 pounds. In the automotive world, it’s virtually impossible to achieve perfection, but for thousands of drivers around the world, the Seven is, was, and always will be as good as it gets. Its ’50s-era design (itself a throwback to 1930s trial cars), lack of creature comforts, and otherworldly handling combine to deliver one of the greatest driving experiences in the world. Seven decades of automotive evolution have done a lot for us, but at the end of the day, Chapman’s basic principles have kept the Seven a vibrant driver’s car, and it’s still inspiring groups of true believers to build cars that follow in its footsteps.

Bump Time to earmark more hours on the car in the following weeks

My 7 is all apart I should be enjoying the bikes in this weather but they need new batteries and I've been dropping the ball on getting a new one. One of the bikes actually had it's battery stolen to power the 7... Again I might be corrected on Duratecs as I'm not familiar with them at all but I have ran into pretty major issues with OBD2 and NY on my 2001 Zetec that's titled as such. There is pretty much no reasonable way for me to ever pass a regular inspection with all the emissions in place. It would require a new harness, stock ECU (Pectel in mine right now), EVAP container in place (had it in the car, not hooked up, took it out), downstream o2 sensor hooked up, etc. Most of OBD2 systems are really emissions systems and Caterhams don't typically have these units in cars. My only NY plan is to apply for an exception which is on a back burner at this moment. I have seen other NY registered Caterhams so maybe Duratecs have some kind of better system in place. Not sure how they get around it. There is one for sale right now on the forum. @WinstonS has a specialty registration exception it seems With that said, I haven't been bothered by police in regards to my inspections. Only battle has been DMV registrations so far.

I might be corrected on this but my understanding is that no Caterham have an OBD2 inspection passing type setup. Some (with stock ECU) might communicate with the ECU but will still likely fail due to not having all the emissions systems in place. Anything with the aftermarket ECU will still have the OBD2 and will have a CAN communization option but I don't believe that communicates with the OBD2 interfaces. This is why my older Zetec will never pass regular NY inspections.

Not quite there yet. Still slight reluctance to commit and checking on availability of parts along with other weekend plans. Borrowed a compressor yesterday to help with the crank nut. Still fighting a few header studs and otherwise crossing T's and dotting I's.

Thought about it. Not something I want to get into quite yet and add more variables to troubleshoot. Also most installation pictures don't seem to be using a heater when having the water rail. Not sure if it's compatible.

I have not. Too spoiled by Amazon and eBay buy it now buttons. Might have to *gasp* actually call around

2021 Caterham 420R Review - an every day track hero?

Anybody know where I can source a replacement for this?

Building a Caterham 7.. in 7 minutes!

Delivering Curries in a Caterham 310R! | Ben and Jon Do Cars

Thats a good article and a clever comparison. Unlike most of the other cars as they to through their generation evolution they see many changes across the board. Size/styling/suspension/features and of course more power (#1 more desired aspect). It's hard to objectively compare new model vs the old because they are entirely different cars and typically more modern features and more power tends to favor the new generation as "improvement", even it it comes at a sacrifice of more weight and possibly worse handling. With Caterhams other than the 90's changes they stayed mostly the same and to this day you have a selection of power without many feature changes which allows a subjective comparison of whether the new high power motors in the same vehicle are actually better. This comparison is often found in the discussion forums where people actually debate whether 620R/S is too much power and the happy medium is 360/420 or older R500. This is similar to a debate that people have in the motorcycle world where for all intents and purposes all bikes are pretty similar, especially without the same brand and the two power options are either super fast and hardly usable (1000cc = 620R) or the more reasonable but still stilly fast 600's (420R for example). High power output is addictive but it is really on usable when we are talking about using it on streets where your average speed is 45mph on the average. Which is why a lot of people are drawn to slower machines with more character (Vtwins in general or Ducati's etc) There are some upgrades that are pretty universally regarded as better. Solid rear < dedion < IRS (arguably) Since our cars aren't much fun at high speeds and are aerodynamically l think we can all agree that the sweet spot is somewhere between 200-300hp

I've put Neoprene in my rear wings and haven't gotten around to doing it on the front wings yet. To me seemed like an easy/cheap/effective option. Granted I have carbon wings so spider cracks are less of a concern but the rock noise made me feel uneasy in general and this cuts down on that noise quite a bit Edit: that doesn't help with outside. PPF is about the only thing that can help there.

http://www.kitcardirect.co.uk/caterham.html ?

It appears this thing exist which I did not realize. Going on my shopping list $20 Will certainly be a nice compromise for how few I do but still better than doing it by hand https://www.ebay.com/itm/283114523865?epid=713051944&_trkparms=ispr%3D1&hash=item41eaf0ccd9:g:oLoAAOSw22FgG5Mc&amdata=enc%3AAQAGAAACkPYe5NmHp%2B2JMhMi7yxGiTJkPrKr5t53CooMSQt2orsSwcmzw5CLtzTE60FqHcnq2L7R8ANKa4o%2Fynd8VLOW22TGwIgXovCrJQflrU%2BWh87IqilSErZ7bglxb29BFsuqC589Yuhy1J0JMxqhQzI2Pj24wOPqE7lquEPX4%2FZFFR9LQ%2FEFoS7oioNj2o6lGiYB5dLtjgAym5XWfEG4GFfpvp49P%2BE5qFvfp5SShyiAh14hzdWM4MJG%2FVvIX13QNGfEYSq0R0qzAZodmsT6BTK3uyQHtazLowbJo3L6ZI8fXgGJb%2F7YJHNnGAQwS73DCyzWb9eVHGTCLP7cXw3%2FQCSOxFBuJZRqAGJhoP1ojL%2FOKrivxC0dwn7TZUUi9Dm%2BKI7FAtNR23Nvm5XHMKng5Ey3c9Ro0Vesln5kQooFooal%2FVwUcwGD4%2B8N6GRt46IfSx0NHmWIjJV2T2tRye3JuurwEAbjetBV6%2FhQSeVurt6HMCcGrHUXhsESnWDuJ0qdtmoW5Lf5lhRZfzq39vwbNsqLQP1LNQ60Xkn%2BFPPfdd4I6Epv6HpvlsM2sUratTtiA%2Fjdp78N3HkDLZ5Zv%2B9xGXSQHXrUlKfacjGbekkYrCMBdDW5B6ysh42Y3qJSPxx43PvFfkNuTSXn9tyT0u9P0AN6SOrKW7fPhY1M60wASsyt8s7X47uXyzIi4KDR9yCR4snMVYBic6I1YCy9Gc8f%2Bpm9p2eahiOZBb0A7VAexQfrhRXG4purgoMJo9%2Bc%2Bu3LDQpUYOhDiBCZVDCE%2BgnbGDfcQ%2B%2FhZZpzcoc%2BNvQH4GBTmMjP1OsprovchifTjk8QHdjF9qsRiLVQPNOqmUbmaHXQMHDEIK7Zqcijt9V3qG4rQCcb|ampid%3APL_CLK|clp%3A2334524

I'm not sure how many rivets you'll need to put in during the build but if the number is more than 5 I'd buy an electric rivet tool in a heart beat (Milwakee makes an 18v one). It will pay for itself many times over. Quick. Easy. No kickback. Perfect every time.

That's a very good question. I'd be curious to the answer myself. I think the Zetec "200hp" setup is very good but I wished they used SVT motors as base. It would be much more true to the spirit even if numbers werent too far apart. Also according to CC, most came with 5 speeds unless 6 speeds were specified. Mine actually came with a 5 speed that I still have and 6spd was swapped in from a donor track 7 that owner also had. If we had to throw a number at it, what do we think? 30 or less SLRs?

You messed up the quote a little However this is straight from CC horses mouth "I have records of plaques numbers for 127 SLRs. These do not include any USA SLRs, and in fact only 3 of the cars are RHD models: one each to Belgium, Jordan & Venezuela. The last issue is actually #129, as there is no record of issuance of numbers 7 or 52. Of the 127, 60 were supplied as complete kits and 67 were factory built. The kits had chassis numbers ending 2****, whilst the factory built examples had chassis numbers ending 3****." Looks like my memory was off and some were supplied as kits after all. Are you mixing up Superlight and SLR? #123 SLR is orange and RHD?

That's really cool! Somebody actually reads my threads hah. Love the Plaque. My original owner decided against having it on the car. Fun fact, American SLR's don't have a # assigned as they aren't a "true" SLR but rather an official replica. All SLR's were built in a pretty specific manner and assembled in the factory in UK as I recall and thats why they had a # assigned.

Only thing lost so far is my 620R intercooler from Norway. Been a month out, and 20 days coming from Chicago with no updates...

Small update. Posted on the Focus forums to see if they had any advice. One resonated with me, that potentially VCT on the exhaust cam which is suppositively defeated/deleted is what's throwing the cam alignment off. Didn't seem likely as the cam rear mark lined up with TDC but seemed plausible. Advice was to lock the cam and turn the gear to see if it rotates. I did that and after a little bit of pressure the cam gear started free spinning and the cam stayed in place. After freaking out that I broke something I saw that the bolt was lose and I was able to spin it out by hand. Cam gears aren't keyed on? Just held on by friction? Either way, I didnt resolve whether VCT is a factor bit I did completely throw off the position where the cam used to be. Intake is still uneffected but considering exhaust spun completely out of previous setup i'd have to recreate TDC setup and realign the exhaust to that in order to recreate the previous location of the offset intake cam. Small theory is that the exhaust cam vs intake is due to the bolt being somewhat lose to begin with? Maybe that caused a slip in timing. Might have even caused a head gasket fail. More parts on order and on the way, getting ready to commit over to getting the head off this weekend. Do not have a crank/cam timing wheel as I don't think I need it in the end. Plan is to reassemble everything, 0 the cams out and hopefully the car starts. If it runs half decent, try to get it down to a tuner before track day and get things straightened out. If need be, stuff can be adjusted with new adj cam gears.

I see the logic behind there being an unresolved temperature problem. True history of the car use prior to my ownership is unknown and if the headgasket was blown before my ownership it's not out of the realm of possibility that it saw high temperature events prior. At the time of purchase the car had no radiator fan wiring hooked up at all and would over heat very quickly if started. Not sure what capacity previous owner used it like that and for how long. My best guess at this point is get the head cleaned, get rid of most marks possible, reassemble and check in the future if new ones are forming. If there is any other advice as to what to look into in the meantime with head being off, I can look into that too.

Great shot! No cycle wings adds to the drama