Vovchandr

Metal is discolored. Wasn't able to wipe anything off. Hard to distinguish what is junk and what isn't now-a-days. I just assume that unless I'm paying an extreme premium for misc random items, it all comes from the same place with different labels. https://www.amazon.com/All-Industrial-Tool-Supply-TR72020/dp/B002YPHT76/ref=sr_1_5?dchild=1&keywords=tdc+dial+gauge&qid=1626559515&s=industrial&sr=1-5 ?

The dark black marks? Thats burnished? (whatever that means). oil is light brown film you can see in areas. Working on getting a dial indicator as we speak. Deciding between digital and mechanical. I'll keep the bolts in mind

Hi. Thanks for the manual. I have the tool already, just didn't expect my motor to be more complicated than just putting both cams aligned with the tool. Since they are misaligned now I'll have to recreate that after the swap over

Thanks for tuning in! Small update. Appears the broken ear isn't very uncommon. Was likely done while manually maneuvering it during install back in the day. The strange lobe cutaway is also par for the course and was done on purpose during engineering and balancing. Pending a consult with the WebCamshaft company when they are open Monday. Regardless general course of action at this time will be to Zero out on the exhaust with the metal locking tool, measure the degree of difference from that on the intake, assemble everything at 0 on the notch on both cams, then dial in the measured angle. This should also account for the 5 degree advance noted in the tune for both intake and exhaust.

The muted logo on the intake cam Should this be a concern on the intake cam? Sort of looks like a piece is missing Also the lobe on cylinder 2 is strange? Every other lobe has an even piece cut out on the back side of it. This one the cut out is "interrupted" where it goes back to being normal lobe and then finishes where it's supposed to when. Lobe next to it is a good comparison another angle

This got more complicated than expected pretty quick Intake cam says "260 e" on the end and I don't see any other useful identifiers on it. There looks to be a vague "Ford" oval cast on it as well. According to the build log it has a "Fast road cam" for $425, which I assume is the intake cam. Amusingly the engine builder billed for 2 headgaskets during the build. Also there is an old note in the build sheet about "Install, shim, degree and Dyno 3 cam combinations. Map ECU for 3 Cam combinations". Not exactly sure what that means in the real world but I only see one map/profile on the ECU. Regardless of what cam is in there, without adjustable cam gears shouldn't both cams be matched and even in the rear end and any timing adjustments would be done in the ECU instead of mechanically? I think you're spot on. Stock exhaust and new "Fast road" cam which appears could have been made by a few manufacturers. 260 degree according to the 260 stamped on the back of it. Only other numbers on the cam I see all seem generic "L193B" (on both) and YSAA on the back of it & "1 0 H 9" in circles across the whole thing. The car should have only had one original tune that you see from the original build or soon after it. From the history I know and from the 2002 time stamp on the tune, nobody else has messed with it. Not releasing the belt yet as you advice. More digging and tooling to do prior to that. Honestly at this point I didn't expect to be doing more research and dial/lobe etc measurements. I expected this to be more straight forward.

Started the tear down today. First time lifting a head by myself. Ran into a few small bumps. 1) I rarely run into this problem but I apparently dont own enough tools. Didn't expert Ford to use inverse torx head shaped bolts. 2) From what I've researched my cams would need to be lined up at the end of this jobs and I bought the simple tool for it. However my cams aren't lined up to begin with? Do I try to replicate that or do I zero them out and make them match? I dont have stock cams Here is the cam timing comment on the ECU I should also mention that I'm swapping over to adjustable cam gears I've purchased during all this per Toms @1turbofocus advice 3) found a minor defect in the head. Tiny collapse of a mold. Not sure if always there or not. Not too concerned but found it interesting. I think the crank nut is going to be a challenge without having air tools on hand. I've heard of people using a starter but I'm reactant to do that. vs

For the record let me amend my statement. When I say "what I have" I meant, what I came across online from somebody else. I actually haven't done my alignment yet but I would have followed the two references I gave you myself. I have those printed as my guide myself.

@CarlBWas going to reply to this earlier but forgot Here is what I have " Core components Year 2002 imperial chassis with widetrack and K Series (140-145hp estimated), 6 speed box, 3.92 ZF LSD Powerflex polyurethane bushes everywhere Nitron dampers by Meteor Motorsport, re-valved early 2016, with Eibach springs Setup Weight (without driver): 520kg with approx. 20 litres of fuel, two thirds of a tank Total weight: 580kg (yes I need to eat more pies) Corner weights are set to equal diagonals which I prefer over equal fronts. Front left: 128kg Front right: 136kg Rear left: 154kg Rear right: 162kg Ride heights (probably not a lot of value since I'm not sure where they're measured from) Front left: 118mm Front right: 118mm Rear left: 134mm Rear right: 132mm Average rake: 15mm Geometry Caster: 7.2-7.4 (full forward on wishbones) Front camber: -2.7 (I might increase this for track - one turn of the ball joint should be worth approx. 0.3 degrees) Rear camber: -1.4 Front toe: 2mm in each side (this is for road only, I change to 2-3mm toe-out for track) Rear toe: 2mm in each side All of the above was with virtually new Avon ZZR tyres (185/55/13 front, 215/55/13 rear) set to 17.5psi Tyre pressures: 20psi starting/cold pressure (all round) Front roll bar: blue (9/16") Rear roll bar: +2 (0 being disconnected, 4 being stiffest) Radius arms set to lower position Front springs: 225lb/in Rear springs: 150lb/in (plus 4lb/in helper springs) Front dampers: -8 from full hard Rear dampers: -6 from full hard" And this from the assembly manual

Thank you for the measurement. That confirms that my fenders are simply too narrow. That would have been me! He's interested when I emailed him but he doesn't like to travel for reviews since he moved to CA unless its for something extreme (IE the Triple F collection) However since he started the new site he does go out of his way if he can kill two birds with one stone from what I've observed and does occasionally travel. Can't be certain if he's too big or not. Likely feet would be too large even if he fits length wise.

@Lucky-7 You don't happen to denote the offset on these wheels? If you have an opportunity in the future could you take note of what yours are? I assume they are ET13 like mine. It says it right on the spoke and you can read it without taking the wheel off as long as the rotation doesn't hide it under the fender (I just checked) Thanks!

Oh I'm convinced I got problems alright. The cat is pending an operation of non destructive strategic removal in the future. I'm not actively trying to destroy it but I'm also not overly concerned. On this recent test I was watching the cylinders with a thermal gun. As I recall #2 was lagging a little compared to the rest before the gun maxed out. As far as your simile, isn't part of the strategy denial despite evidence and continuing to plow forward? My phone has conveniently brought up memory videos of "on this day last year" when I was recording doing coolant flush/purge of brownish coolant and non stop air was coming up during. I'm fairly certain the car had these problems during my entire ownership experience which would explain a lot.

I also have a wild card alternative if you're even considering an auction site like BaT. You can reach out to Doug Demuro @ Cars&Bids and there is a good chance he would do a custom review for your 7 auction. He hasn't reviewed a 7 yet for his channel and he seems to be willing to travel to do reviews for cars that will be listed on Cars&Bids as it kills two birds with one stone. There has not been a Caterham listed on his website yet. You'd be the first. He likes minty stock cars of highest trim. Since 620R is hard to come by and the rest of trims are very similar with few options, it could come to fruition. If he does such a review, your listing would be timed with the release of your video and get the most views on it. Here is an example (time stamped to announcement of listing) One caveat even IF this whole thing would come together is that it would likely be at least a month + out to fit into his video release rotation. If you're looking for something quicker regular auctions and listings would work.

Appears I wasn’t crazy that my cat converter was running hotter than normal looks to me like a permanent discoloration right around it. Surprisingly to me my plugs on vacuum runners on cyl #1 and #2 got blown off my backfire from the cylinder head. One while driving. Second once parked and troubleshooting. It was a very unsettling noise coming from the car when the first one blew off and caused an open lean condition. finally ran the system with the pressurized cap in place and watched for air. There appears to be a constant steam of very small bubbles going through the system at any point in time. A little hard to see but you can see them at around 45 seconds in the video, 1:17 and other times

Not an expert here but to my eye I think this is a mid 40's car in todays market. Might not sell immediately but it should sell well on a long time table. Between the world going electric and demand for anything enthusiast like already on the up and up, as well as the back order build dates for Caterhams being about a year out this nicely equipped modern Duratec model is well positioned. There was a Zetec that recently sold on BAT in the 40's. BAT is a good option to consider as it reaches the widest audience with seemingly deepest pockets but obviously this site has been used with success by many. Just recently there was a member bumping threads with hope of finding something available. One thing thats expected by any modern seller is pictures and lots of them. They don't have to be professional but that surely helps and usually pays for itself even if you have to hire somebody. Plus you get to keep the pictures to look back on fondly after that experience. With you being in TX there likely will be lots of CA residents interested but they are going through the whole SB100 registration issues which you can't really help them with. Many other buyers will be interested in how it's titled due to complications of owning it in their states after. I assume it's registered as a 2013 in Texas. Ideally if it's titled as a 1965 replica or similar that's most desired at it opens up most possibilities for use in other states without issues. Unfortunately the mods will not typically help the resale. If you're looking to get most back out of the sale you're likely better of selling doors and half hood separately here. They will likely sell very quick and add more value than being part of the sale overall. Edit: Could you do me a small favor and measure your front fender width in the center > edge to edge? You have the same wheels I have and I'm troubleshooting my fitment issues in a different thread and looking for more data points.

That extra half inch is likely the culprit.

Yes. That was a mockup fit to see how they are. These are primary my backup track wheels as I like my 13's more but don't want to waste a day on the track if I have a blowout. Mine should be identical to yours and came off pretty much the same spec model car, but there is one wild card caveat. It's highly unlikely that this is the reason here but when I looked into it more CSR Caterham had same style wheel but they have different offset, which would explain my problems but I again highly don't think that this is the situation. I believe offsets are printed on the back side of the wheel and I double checked to make sure my were right last time I did this. Your fit looks great! So variables for me are as follows *Wheels (offset, should be identical, so unlikely) *Cycle wings *Fender stays themselves (I have a new replacement on there now, can try to test fit again, maybe old one was bent?) I just measured my cycle wing and it's 8 inches wide edge to edge. When you have a chance can you take a tape measure to yours?

I appreciate the pictures and will get some measurements to compare. I was quite perplexed when I found out that they stick out. OEM's sit flush so Im not sure where the delta is. As far as speedometer, unfortunately I have different unit where I can easily calibrate ratios in the unit.

That's a clever piece of kit. Seems too pricy for the casual user who would want a tuner to do the tuning part while on the dyno, but very useful for anybody who would tune their own car.

That's a lovely story. I'm trying to do napkin math here. Are you ~80? if so, thats doubly impressive. I like the look of the 7. How come no custom plate??? Does NH even need a front plate at all? NY mandates it, but there is 0 chance I'm putting it on.

Hi Kenny, I might pick your brain a little. You should have the same set of wheels as me. Square setup, 6in wide 195 Cr500'S. However your fit is quite different than mine.

https://www.autoweek.com/news/a2062611/seven-caterhams-iconic-bare-bones-sports-car-gets-stiffer-and-quicker/ To find a vehicle more minimalist than a Caterham you would have to look at something like a skateboard. But it would have to be a rocket-powered skateboard, like an Ariel Atom. After the Atom and maybe that rocket sled the Air Force used in the 1950s out at Edwards Air Force Base, the next thing in line as far as power-to-weight and screaming fun is a Caterham. Caterham is about the barest of the bare-bones sports cars. Originally designed and built by the master of minimalism, Colin Chapman, in 1957, the basic car hasn’t changed much in the half century since. Chapman built it up until 1973, when he sold the rights to car dealer Graham Nearn, who renamed the car the Caterham Super Seven and cranked it out, largely unchanged, until last year (okay, they did go from live axle to de Dion axles and a few other things, but it’s not like comparing a 1957 Corvette to a 2006 Z06). Last year three guys from Lotus, backed by venture capitalists, bought Caterham. At the time the Super Seven was in the midst of a redesign, which was finished under the new owners and is what you see here—the first real new Seven ever. Looks the same, you say? Well, it is and it isn’t. It’s still a crazy-light, boxy-snouted road-squealer that seats two and has absolutely no room for luggage. So don’t worry that it has gone all Grand Touring on you with statistics about how many golf bags fit into some huge new trunk. It’s still insanely fast and completely uncomfortable. So relax, purists. Indeed, rejoice! The mild steel tubular space- frame chassis is new, up 100 percent in torsional stiffness thanks mostly to improvements around the central transmission tunnel. If the old one was stiff, then this new C’ham is stiff, stiff, stiff. To that stiff structure is bolted a new suspension system with inboard-pivot-activated coil springs controlling double wishbones up front and a fully independent rear suspension replacing the live and de Dion axles that floated and crashed around back there for decades. Aerodynamically speaking, the car is significantly improved. You might have noticed a little front-end lift at 100 mph in the old Seven. Officially the car had 100 pounds of lift at 100 mph. Depending on what you were doing at the time, that lift could be felt as increased understeer or as scary wandering around. So one of the design goals for the new car was to reduce that lift. Look closely and you’ll see little trailing edges at the rear of the front fenders, which took out about 10 or 15 pounds of lift. Moving the coil springs inboard, race car-style, took out another 10 or 15 pounds. And channeling the engine-cooling airflow up and out the top of the hood took out a whopping 40 or 50 pounds of lift. So while this may not be a Bonneville streamliner, it at least won’t fly as easily as before. It is also new under the hood. While this may be a kit car into which you can stuff anything you want—and about 10 percent of buyers do—the semi-official engine is a 2.3-liter four-cylinder Ford, developed by Cosworth. Yes, you can buy a Cosworth-powered car once again. All is right with the world. The four-cylinder aluminum block and 16-valve aluminum head is about 20 pounds lighter than the old ZTEC four and puts out 200 hp or 260 hp, depending on which setup you choose. Both are 2.3-liters. Our test car, the 260, comes with cast crank, forged rods, forged Cosworth pistons, Cosworth camshafts and really cool roller-barrel port throttles that operate like a flute rotating along the head to open and close the four throttle valves. Cosworth developed the intake manifold and exhaust manifold as well as the dry-sump lubrication system. Engine management ECU is calibrated by Cosworth. Power is way up from the last pair of engine choices, the 1600-cc 147-hp or 1700-cc 202-hp ZTEC. We actually preferred the 2.0-liter 204-hp ZTEC we drove a few years back in the Superlight R (“Caterham Seventh Heaven,” Feb. 17, 2003), but that might just have been that car’s 1080-pound curb weight. This new car weighs 1315 pounds “with gas, oil and no funny business,” according to Jonathan Nelson, CEO of Caterham USA. All in all, we might favor waiting for a Superlight R, should Caterham decide to make one, but that could be a long wait. Nonetheless this one is still quite a thrill. It rides on Avon 195/45 fronts and 245/40 rears mounted on “Formula Three engineered 15-inch tires.” Given the choice of drive locations, and it being midweek in Los Angeles, we met up with Nelson at the base of California Highway 2 in La Canada, the goal being lunch at Newcomb’s Ranch Inn. Between La Canada and the Ranch are hundreds of third-gear twists running over pavement that is less than a decade old. This road is suicide-crowded on weekends, with every contraption known to man lumbering over the double-yellow line willy-nilly. During the week it was just us and a handful of superbikers. Nelson said this first car is still being calibrated. In fact he asked us afterward how we thought the suspension should be set up. As it was, our version was track-day stiff. And even with the relatively new pavement (thanks, Caltrans), there were many bumps. For this drive we would have softened up the front end a little, allowing the springs, shocks and links to do their job. The car reminded us of an open-wheeled race car with a little bit of the bang-crash feeling over bumps and divots. But reminding the driver of a race car is a good thing for Seven buyers, since most look at it as a race car. “The market has really changed,” said Nelson, who remembers when a stouthearted enthusiast might drive a Seven every day the sun shone. “Now it’s all track-day guys who just want a real fast car.” Those guys will not be disappointed in the Seven. The balance is good, 48/52 front/rear. Had we been going all the way to the Willow Springs track out in the desert, the CSR would have shone when we got there. This being a kit car, you can set up your own suspension how ever you like it, even changing it up, down and all over the place every weekend, depending on your itinerary. Still, the overriding emotion from the day’s drive is fun. How often do you get to toss all compromise out the window and drive a car made solely to take you and maybe a small whimpering passenger directly to an apex? The CSR turns in fairly quickly and hangs on through whatever line we set. Steering is so responsive we had to recalibrate our internal steering clock. While your garden-variety car muffles most of the feel through the wheel, this unmuffled Caterham takes some getting used to. There is a small amount of bump steer, but it isn’t unmanageable. Again, probably just right for track day. Power is good, and with the six-speed manual we never had trouble accessing it. A couple of times we ran it out to the soft redline of 7500 rpm, never hitting the hard line at 8000. We stopped to take pictures and swap drivers and found the ingress and egress is as much fun as ever. We also drove without shoes, as seems prudent in this traditional British sports car with its tiny foot box—wouldn’t want to let a foot slip and make tomorrow’s newspaper. Track day calls for Puma Speed Cats, if not real racing shoes. “Our advantage is that we don’t make any pretense of practicality,” said Nelson. Caterham’s pretense, if you could call it that, is fast track times, and on that it does deliver. Since the car is aimed at an infinitesimally small sliver of the American buying public, maybe 30 to 50 a year, Caterham can afford to avoid compromise. The CSR should arrive at the 10 U.S. Caterham dealers in April (see uscaterham.com). The dealers sell the cars as kits, remember, minus the engines and transmissions. A base kit should run about $44,000. The engine and six-speed manual should cost another $20,000. If you get somebody else to put those two together it will cost $2,500 to $4,000, depending on who you get. Your dealer can tell you. So you’re looking at as much as $68,000 for a car with no cupholders. Which is exactly how those 30 to 50 drivers will want it.

https://www.autoweek.com/news/a2094221/2003-caterham-seven-superlight-r-caterham-seventh-heaven-what-colin-chapman-meant/ 2003 Caterham Seven Superlight R: Caterham Seventh Heaven: What Colin Chapman meant when he said 'add lightness' IF THERE IS A STREET car lower and lighter than a Caterham Seven, we haven’t driven it. Strapped into the driver’s seat you can set your hand palm-first on the ground. The ride height is just over three inches, lower than most speed bumps. The overall height is less than three feet, lower than most parking lot arms. And at 1080 pounds and 204 hp, the power-to-weight ratio (1 hp: 5.3 pounds) of this Superlight R model beats every production street car sold in America. It’s as terrific on the road as it sounds on paper. No doubt that’s just how Colin Chapman wanted it when he unveiled the Lotus Seven at the 1957 London Motor Show. The Caterham Seven can trace its roots (not very far back) to the cars Chapman built in his girlfriend’s garage in North London in 1948. It’s like a time machine, though better engineered. Chapman built the Lotus Seven until 1973, when production was turned over to Caterham, which has been making it in England ever since. Caterham USA now sells the kits over here. Through it all, the engineering has not lagged one whit. The Superlight R model we drove was as tightly screwed together as any full-scale production car, better than many. Tolerances were exact, nothing squeaked, nothing rattled. In proportion, it was like sitting at the back of a long, low go-kart with a big snout. Ours had no real windshield to speak of, just two little flaps that suggested the breeze go north. It didn’t. So the Caterham guys included goggles. Underhood, our test car had a normally aspirated, 2.0-liter longitudinal Ford Zetec four loaded with Stage II cams, programmable engine management, custom heads and aluminum flywheel. It was attached to a Caterham six-speed manual transmission, limited-slip differential and de Dion rear suspension. Adjustable double wishbones kept the front wheels straight. The Superlight R body gets bigger brakes, suspension upgrades, Avon R500 tires, composite race seats, four-point belts and carbon fiber fenders, nose cone and dash. On the road? Pip, pip, cheerio! It drove like a 204-hp skateboard. The engine is remarkable for a four-cylinder. Stomping on the gas blurred everything in the periphery. Caterham claims 0 to 60 mph in 3.8 seconds. And it’s just as impressive in a corner. Of course, so little suspension travel means your body absorbs what the swing arms don’t. Stones flung up by traffic aim for your head. And if the driver of that huge SUV isn’t paying attention, you’re road pizza. Such is the price of a no-compromise design. The other price is not as high. The engine- and transmission-less Superlight R kit lists for $29,950. Our test car totaled $44,550 for everything except engine installation and import duty. That’s also the best dollar-per-giggle ratio we’ve tested.