Steve in Lititz PA

7Westfield, thanks for your response as long as the shifter doesn't move forward, or aft more than one or two inches, I'll be happy. Regarding having to cut away some of the left side starter mount, so much of re-engineering something is to discover what you got, when you get there. A variation in one company, eg, Lotus, Caterham, Birken, Westfield may change what one needs to do with a major change like engine/gearbox, etc, in fact almost anything 7 related because of the tight packaging. But that also applies to all of our "smaller" cars from the past, and looking at the packaging of engine bays in newer cars, it's only gotten tighter. Roger about the driveshaft, too, that change is already in the conceptual area, and proves that a change in one thing, eg gearbox, affects other parts of the package. Which is one reson why I commented in an earlier post that I would be delighted if the shift lever didn't move at all. steve rineer

Hello, Scottius, and thanks for your very comprehensive reply! One reason for the T2 to T9 swap is that the original owner requested Caterham to convert from a cable clutch to hydraulic; but there isn’t really a suitable place to attach the hydraulic slave cylinder, and I’ve gone through four of them in my limited ownership; it leaks, I believe, because of mis-alignment. I don’t think my clutch problem was completely hydraulic related, I think it was also clutch fork to release bearing related, but regardless, the lump was coming out to fix it, and I had a previously acquired T9 in storage. I figured I may as well use it. I asked Burton Power for their advice, and they gave me a list of everything needed for the swap; were I to do the research and assemble the requirements myself, it would likely be Christmas…next year. And since all the clutch hardware was already set up for a hydraulic clutch, I figured running a hydraulic line is easier than running cable (I may be wrong about this), and now the slave cylinder will be on the same side of the bell housing as the clutch master cylinder, as opposed to now, where the master cylinder is naturally on the left driver side, and the slave cylinder was located on the right side. I do think that the original build sheet should have retained the cable clutch, but that’s water over the dam. I’ll spend the next few days comparing your parts list to Burton’s…the clutch disk I am using is Burton’s C784AF, 190 mm, 1x23 splines, and Burton mentioned that the bearing carrier must be bored out about 0.010 to fit the larger nose….also, since my T9 apparently came out of a V6 donor, about 10mm must be ground off from the input shaft, and I need Burton’s 1” spacer, BH3-28. Presumably, this will move the shifter aft 1”, that’s tolerable, maybe even better; we’ll see. Burton suggested their BH11 aluminum bell housing, you know add lightness. You mentioned gear kits, I computed overall ratios of my existing T2 vs my T9 and found that 1st gear is essentially identical for both…and 2nd & 3rd gears in the T9 is slightly taller than the T2, with 4th being the same. So with 5th gear being about 580 rpm lower than 4th at 60 mph I think I’ll be pleased with the way it compares with the T2. Could you provide a link to the build manual for xflow T9, I haven’t run across that, and I’m sure it would be helpful. Your response was WAY more than I could have dreamed, thanks very much. Steve Rineer Lititz, PA

Hello, Charlie, and thanks for your reply. I guess I'll be using my existing T2 mount since you pointed out the T9 mount is too wide, and thanks for the "heads up" about repositioning the frame plate; forewarned is fore-armed Yes, it's a Ford crossflow, started life as a 1600, but ended up a 1700; Burton advised the BH11 bellhousing; my T9's donor was apparantly the V6 Essex/Cologne, with the longer input shaft. About 10 mm, per Burton, must be ground off, and I need to add Burton's BH3-28 1" spacer plate I would be delighted if the shifter came up in the old location! I will be using same hydraulic clutch arrangement as in a Lotus Elan, I am somewhat familiar with it, and when I confessed my ignorance to the Burton folks, that's what they suggested. I did a "speeds in gears" comparison between the existing T2 vs T9, 1st is almost identical, there's a slightly bigger drop in 2nd & 3rd, but really not too bad, 4th is the same for both, and 5th gear drops almost 600 rpm from 4th...for the few times it's on a highway type of road, it should be less buzzy. Thanks again for your reply, your informaton was very helpful.

Hello all, this is my first time posting so I beg your indulgence; perhaps this question has been answered and I missed it. I have a 1985 Caterham Sprint, third owner, and the car appears to be generally unnmolested from the original build by Marcos Cars. It has a Ford four-speed T2 gearbox with integral bell housing. For several reasons I am converting to a T9 gearbox and am assembling the various grubbins to do it, and am wondering what, if any, modifications must be made to the chassis. I was wondering: 1. Will the existing gearbox mount location remain where it is, or must it be repositioned? 2. will the existing T2 gearbox mount "bolt right up" to the T9, ie, do I need a different type mount? Since there are several in the forum who have done the switch, I don't think I am breaking new ground, and none of the tech discussion I've read mentioned it. So I'm hoping there was no reason to mention it. Thanks in advance, happy motoring! Steve Rineer Lititz, PA

Hello, Bart, Appears that two of us are interested in the T-9 gearbox. Can you advise me of the status and location. Thanks in advance, steve r

Thanks, Dan Your memory is correct...45 cycles per minute, and since the Caterham was originally equipped with two, I'm getting two from Speedway Motors, as others have suggested. I don't want to give the inspector the opportunity to fail me a second time, although it's not strictly a fail, he said he'd charge me 1/2 the regular fee, and when I return with working wipers he'll sign off, and I pay him the 2/2. After it passes (and the inspector said the wipers are the only issue), then the wipers will be removed and I'll toss them in a box. Having said that, if any owner has unneeded LHD Caterham (and probably original Lotus) windshield wipers, ie, motor, drive cable, tubes, arms & blades, contact me off list, I'd rather have original as a spare than the "universal" variety cobbled together.

Thanks to those who have pointed me to a solution. I am the third owner, and owner #1 told me he removed the windshield wiper stuff (actually he removed the windshield too) since he only used the car for autocross. He further told me he gave all the removed stuff to owner #2, so perhaps #2 still has it. If so, I could solve this with paying the shipping cost, and a to-be-determined time spent upside down in the footwell. At least the mounting hardware should match up. My plan B is to go the Speedway Motors route, thanks again for pointing me in that direction.

Hello all, I am a newbie, I recently purchased a 1985 Caterham and because it has a "rebuilt" Tennessee title as a kit car, it is subject to PA's Enhanced Vehicle Inspection to receive a specially constructed title. I have no issue with that. The car does not have windshield wipers...no motor, no wiper arms or blades, but it does have rubber plugs for the wheelboxes, and it does have a dash rocker switch for it (that's what tipped off the inspector). He says to pass inspection it must have windshield wipers. Does anyone have advice with regard to whether wipers are required or an option, and also if they are required, where to get the motor, actuating arms, wheelboxes, arms and blades. Thanks in advance, Steve Rineer Lititz, PA