Ian7

kiwi: please send PM re: demand for x-flow's; I have one, and I'm thinking of upgrading as well... thx

I'll reaffirm a few of the points above: - if you can't afford a really good detector, save your money for the tickets you will get anyway :-) - instant on is pretty much unavoidable, unless as someone else said above, there is traffic ahead of you; I gave the NY Troopers over a $grand in one month alone :-( oh, and for you guys in the areas where detectors are still illegal (Canada, Virginia?, and ??) I can confirm that those mythical "radar detector detectors" the cops were rumored to have DO exist, and DO work. I had mine confiscated, smashed, and fined, and he showed me how they work as a final insult :-)

Wider wheels and tires can look really cool, but if you change front offset too much, the corner weight jacking when the steering wheel is turned will work againsy any advantage you get from more rubber on the road, ditto caster effects will change the contact patch shape alarmingly. Then there's the question of tire temps - - too big a tire will not heat up sufficiently with our lightweight cars. Its been shown numerous times that max grip is achieved with sensibly-sized, good quality tires....

Its not uncommon for tires to bleed air through porosity in the sidewalls that wont show in a dunk tank; more common on lightweight race tires, but may be the case here....

I have to say I'm a bit concerned that you are choosing wheels on the basis of whatever free tires you can find. Please don't disregard issues like offset, wheel bearing loading, etc to save a few bucks on tires. While I'm in 'nagging grandmother' mode, there's a reason those tires were in the recycle area. Most of us racers use our tires one session too many as it is .......

Shame that anything over a flight idle throttle setting is probably suicidal... imagine the sound if he could run down the road with decent revs :-)

My '07 Hyundai Accent grocery-getter is super reliable and super economical in the first 40,000 miles.... if only I could drive the Caterham more than a few blocks at a time :-(

Curious how you judged this. If you didn't need a hydraulic press to put ALL the studs in, then they are ALL too loose :-)

We rarely run an open wheel race car with less than 1/8 toe out, but you do NOT want this on the street, way too squirrely. I suggest an 1/8 in (total) at each end as a start; if you have huge torque, add a little more rear toe in at first until you get used to the car. Half degree negative camber in the rear, nearly a full degree in the front. Harder driving on stickier tires will tolerate bigger negative camber, but will wear quicker in a straight line and won't stop as well.

Looseness will allow unplanned bending loads in the studs, urge you to replace them with ones that have the proper interference fit in the hub.

Without going in to the price aspect, Ted Wenz makes some of the finest race engines on the east coast, but I'm not sure its the smartest thing to put in a street seven, unless you're prepared to maintain it as frequently as it needs and deserves. I'd bet the only way they got 166hp at (only) 7000 rpm is with 45dcoe webers, so it probably doesn't run well at low revs, and wont idle below 3000 :-) bet its a blast once its going though....

No advice regarding the material, but what I did for the snap buttons was to weld the punch and the anvil pieces of the "crimping tool" to the working faces of a 6" C-clamp. That way you can clamp this new tool upright in a bench vice, then align the snaps in the material while a helper gradually turns the crank on the C-clamp. Takes all the variability out of bashing the bits with a hammer.

I'm about to go looking as well, what I will offer is that the stock Caterham electric sender/gauge is not worthy....

"I doubt the existing stock cloth seat and brackets weighs much more, its basically a structured throw pillow" agreed, I have these "throw pillows"; wet kleenex weighs more... besides, there are NUMEROUS better ways to spend that much money to make your car perform better, rather than to save a couple pounds on seats....

we're stealthy !!

http://www.carandclassic.co.uk/car/C85730/ brutally expensive, but desirable if you have the means.... :-)

Hmmm... $8200 with a $1200 "canopy delete" = $7000 ?!?! Urge you to check out what Featherlite or Trailex sells as an all-alloy open trailer for WAY under 7 grand. You might make your own version of this for considerably less.

Hi You might also try http://www.simplesevens.org for authentic 7's good luck

like the other guy said... .... not just for the Seven :-)

I have to back out, racing at Watkins Glen. You guys have great fun, Barber is awesome, don't you dare miss the museum. Post lotsa pictures please.

Sorry, but I'm with "SPAZ"... weight is the enemy... unsprung weight is worse... excess rotating mass is, well, unspeakable ! :-)

adding to Hank's comment, if you look under decent FWD cars, you'll see the unequal length half-shafts are usually different diameters (both outside diameter and inside bore diameter) in an effort to try to equalize windup under torque. having said that, this is a 7 site, and the term FWD should be verbotten anyway :-)

to avoid pathetic numbers, I choose metric :-) around 6 kg/Kw

Without knowing the cost or installation trade-offs of your particular situation, from an engineering point of view, equal length axles will send equal torque to both rear wheels (equal twist under load).

Cool photo .... !! but given the drop-offs at PP, that roll-over bar looks.... insufficient ? :-)