520R SV build has commenced

[KnifeySpoony]

Yep- nosecone on before bonnet. It holds it up quite a lot. Test again and you may clear just fine.

[Bartman]

Not sure if it's relevant for you, but I had clearance issues when installing my Zetec with the Raceline BDA style cam covers, the Oil filler cap which from raceline is a standard ford plastic job with a fancy aluminum cover stuck to it was too proud and the hood rested on it. I resolved it by making a replacement filler cap that is very low profile indeed and gave me back 5-6mm.

 

Bart.

[Bartman]

Not sure if it's relevant for you, but I had clearance issues when installing my Zetec with the Raceline BDA style cam covers, the Oil filler cap which from raceline is a standard ford plastic job with a fancy aluminum cover stuck to it was too proud and the hood rested on it. I resolved it by making a replacement filler cap that is very low profile indeed and gave me back 5-6mm.

 

Bart.

[JohnCh]

Thanks @Bartman, that's along the lines of what I'm planning.  Looking at the Ford factory oil filler cap yesterday, I saw some ways to modify it so that it only extends about 1-2mm over the lip, which will give me more than enough clearance.

 

-John

[ashyers]

John,

The original cap on my car used to rub the bonnet a bit. I picked up a factory plastic cap and faced the top surface down and it works fine. There's plenty of meat and once faced off the cap looks fine, except there's no lettering :). That car of yours is going to be BIG fun!!!

 

Andy

[Bartman]

Hi John,

 

Nott sure if you have seen the one made by Westermann for the Duratec? Mine is a different thread but I believe the Duratec is this type.

 

https://westermann-motorsport.com/en/produkte/duratec-23-24-25-filler-cap

 

[JohnCh]

Thanks Bartman, I hadn't seen the Westermann cap before, but it's similar to what I'll attempt later.  The key difference is that rather than have the cap fully below the lip and requiring a tool to open, I think there is enough room to place a thin aluminum lid ~1-2mm thick on top of the cap, then bend the sides of the aluminum downward to give something for fingers to grab when opening.  

 

Thanks,

John

[papak]

Contact Tom Carlin, our Birkin guru. He had a batch of low profile cam covers done for the Duratec. I had the same issue as I installed a 2.3l in mine. The 2.3 and 2.5 are about an inch taller than the 2.0. The fill plug (14mm Allen) is beautifully machined and sits below the cam gear bump. Great piece!

 

[JohnCh]

Thanks @papak, I contacted Tom over the weekend, who confirmed he still has those on hand.  Although that remains an option, it looks like a modified oil filler cap will be all that's required.  

[windsurfer]

Following this tread with great interest! Thanks for sharing all this!

[JohnCh]

I've been remiss in updating this thread.  Rather than one really long post, I'll break this up into a couple.  

 

First, the rear suspension.  Part of it is in place, but I need to sort out the reluctor rings for the traction control before the halfshafts can go in, which in turn are holding up the De Dion ears, hubs, and brakes installation.  To make this a one-person job, I threw together a wooden cradle for my floor jack.  Very stable and made that part of the job uneventful. 

 

 

A big discover during this stage of the build was the inaccuracy of the current Ikea manual.  In their effort to make the manual better for visual learners, they opted to drop a lot of important text from the previous manuals.  Apparently, Caterham thinks reading is hard.  Consequently, things like mentioning the diff should be centered in the chassis based on measurements from specific spots which will likely result in different number of washers on either side of the diff, are no longer mentioned.  Instead, the Ikea manual shows equal number of washers on either side implying better-than-actual chassis accuracy.  There are a number of other times where the older manual comes through with important information, so my advice is to use both.

 

Lining up the holes was fairly easy on the two bottom bolts, but the long top bolt was too misaligned to thread in with pressure.  

 

I really, really hate bashing a threaded fastener into place, but there was no other choice, so I pulled out the BFH and beat the bolt into submission.  The De Dion, A-frame, shocks, and ARB were straightforward. 

 

 

I'm sure some of you are looking at the photo above and thinking to yourself "Nooo! You put the rear shocks in before the rollover bar!"  That was intentional.  Bruce Beachman is of the belief that the rollover bar should be the last thing to go in and since I may need to remove the fuel tank, which requires rollover bar removal, I opted to follow his advice.  That means the rear shocks will come out at some point in the future.

 

-John

[JohnCh]

I've reached a point in the build where I need to get off my butt and start thinking through the fuel, dash, electrical, and wiring changes I'm making.  Towards that end, I pulled the honeycomb to access the fuel tank area and also removed the in-tank pump.  The original plan was to go with the combination of an external pump, Holley Hydramat, and capacitance fuel sender with low fuel warning light.  I don't want to use the factory's returnless style system with ECU controlled fuel pump, as I prefer the tuning and troubleshooting simplicity of a return style system with adjustable pressure regulator.  However, I may now opt to keep the factory in-tank pump, remove the PWM controller and run it flat out, then add the return run and regulator.  I do want a low fuel warning light, since that has always come in handy on the Westfield, but I should be able to configure something based on the factory fuel sensor output to the AiM display.  

 

 

Looking at the available space for a cold air box, it was apparent that curved air horns would make better use of available space and enable longer inlet tract length.

 

 

 I fabbed up this curved extender that adds about 35mm of effective length and points the opening towards the horizon rather than the sky.  I may tweak the design a bit before printing up a set, but it seems close.

 

 

 

 

 

With the flywheel, clutch and pressure plate installed on the Esslinger, I decided to compare weights of the 2.4L to the 2.0L.  Over the years, I've read weight differences between the 2.0L and 2.3L that ranged from 5-7kg.  With both engines similarly dressed -- no alternator or starter -- but with the different intake systems, the delta was 5.0 kg.  To verify scale accuracy, I weighed an object at 1.3 kg on my small scale then added that to the engine.  The weight increased by 1.3 kg telling me that 5.0 kg difference is pretty accurate.  One unknown in the weight comparison is how the 2.3L forged crank in the Esslinger differs in weight from the stock 2.3L crank.  Not sure if it's lighter or heavier, and if it's just a kg or 2 different or if it's more dramatic.  

 

-John

[JohnCh]

I dug into the fueling a little more yesterday.  Removing the fuel line was maddening until I figured out that the three little tabs of the quick connector which hold it in place must be lifted away from a hidden ring around the outside of the fuel line and not pushed towards it as I had initially assumed.  With that removed, the fuel pump assembly (FPA) was lifted out of the way for closer examination.  

 

 

 

Based on various measurements, it's pretty clear why so many people complain about the factory fuel level sensor accuracy and the actual tank capacity.  The bottom of the tank slopes forward at about a 23 deg angle.  The FPA mounting is also tilted forward but only about 8 deg.  Because the bottom of the FPA must be in contact with the fuel for the pump to retrieve it, and because the tank floor slopes away so severely, there is about 0.9 gallons of fuel that it cannot touch.  The fuel level sensor float -- or at least my float -- is set so that it's about 6mm below the bottom of the FPA when fully extended, meaning it's reading that some fuel is still in the tank when the fuel pump can no longer reach that available fuel.

 

 

My current plans are to either modify the FPA so it will work with the Hydramat -- which will allow the pump to reach all available fuel -- and a capacitance sender or throw it away and start from scratch.  I'm leaning towards the latter, as ultimately, I think it will be less frustrating and work better but need to do a little more research.

 

-John

[JohnCh]

I've finalized V1 of the fuel system.  If it all fits together and I didn't make any mistakes, there won't be a V2...but we all know that's not gonna happen.  Fingers crossed anyway.  It seemed easier to start from scratch which resulted in the following design.  Most of the parts are either already here or in transit.  I should have a better sense over the next few days if V2 will be necessary.

 

 

One open question is the lid for the fuel pump assembly.  The stock part is 1/8" thick plastic with moldings on the surface for the various fittings.  The replacement piece will either be cut from flat 1/8" Acetal sheet or 3D printed from Nylon.  The material difference is down to availability.  Acetal is the best gasoline and ethanol compatible option from the company that water jet cuts from a supplied file (Sendcutsend.com), whereas Nylon is the best if I 3D print it.  Although my current printer can't handle that material, the new one arriving tomorrow is set up for it.  Nylon is reputedly very tricky to print, but if I can make it work, it's preferred as I can redesign the lid a bit and improve some aspects.   

 

The Hydramat ensures the pump can access every last drop of fuel in the tank and acts as a pre-pump filter.  Unlike Caterham, I'm also adding a post-pump filter that will mount in front of the tank and is accessible for maintenance via the plywood boot panel.  For a fuel sensor, I'm using the same unit I have in the Westfield.  It's a Centroid capacitance sensor with low fuel warning light output.  I decided to splurge on the regulator and purchased the regulator-damper combo from Radium.  Actual mounting location will likely be just in front of the pedal box or on top.  I need to work out where the airbox will sit before making that decision.  AN-6 line is used throughout, with the pump rated at 255 LPH.  That means plenty of headroom should I later decide to add a lot more power so I can spin more often when attempting to drive in a straight line.

 

-John

 

 

[sf4018]

You have more patience than I did trying to get the OEM supply hose off the tank, congrats. I wish I had your knowledge level when I replaced my fuel system! I would say if you're going to run a return line to the rail you might as well replace the original supply line too, it's a crappy semi hard plastic, the diameter is quite small too and hard to work with. You can then put on your own fittings on the ends. I ended up with 5/16" stainless braided hose with connector...

Dorman 800-081 Dorman Fuel Line Connectors | Summit Racing

Spectre Performance SPE-29310 Spectre Performance SSteel-Flex Fuel Lines | Summit Racing

 

[JohnCh]

I'm tossing the factory line and replacing with AN -6 Goodridge 910 hose for both feed and return.  The 910 is a smooth bore PTFE with an Aramid braid cover.  It's lightweight and flexible.  

 

-John

[MV8]

I noticed the diagram shows a "Regulator - Damper". They are often identical. The purpose of a vacuum port on a damper is to pull fuel into the engine if the damper leaks. Dampers don't regulate. I guess you are going to add a traditional FPR near the damper since this probably has an electric FRP to feedback to the PCM if the pump speed is correct.

[JohnCh]

The regulator-damper is an uncommon part made by Radium Engineering here in the PNW.  My fuel rail does not have a damper, and while not strictly necessary, I view it as a nice to have.  This part combines the adjustable regulator -- which I need as I'm eschewing ECU control of the pump -- and the damper into a single component that simplifies the plumbing.  Overkill?  More than likely, but so are most of the other things I'm doing to this car  

 

http://www.radiumauto.com/FPR-D-Fuel-Pressure-Regulator-Damper-P1716.aspx

 

-John

[Rosteri]

Hi John, why do you need an adjustable regulator? Touch it after tune and you run into trouble, a fixed pressure regulator is much safer in this respect. I recommend at least drilling the Radius adjustment screw and safety wiring it. That is some really nice PTFE hose! 

[JohnCh]

I don't need one, but I like them and have always had them in my cars.  Given I have no idea where I'll take this engine in the future, I like maintaining that flexibility.   I've never had trouble with a one drifting but will keep the safety wire in mind if I do.  The dial gauge that screws into the NPT port makes it easy to monitor.