No info on my 7, can you help?

[super7guy]

I have a correction to make regarding the interpretation of the chassis tag. The correction is related to the "VC" proportion of the tag. I think that the "VC" stands for Vegantune Components. At the time, there was only the "VTA" engine. As shown later, Caterham also put a version of the "BD" range of motors, one of them being the 16V version. Again, there were street versions, BDR, (i.e. head and pistons, etc) that had the appearance of BD, but still a redline of 7200 rpm since the stock bottom end was not changed. Caterham was working with Vegantune (for the VTA replacement) and the Vegantune version of the BDA was in the works at the same time.

 

There was also the race version with redline 9500 rpm using a steel crank and rods. I have all the components for that version (crank, rods, pistons, etc) and ancillaries including dry sump pump, dry sump pan, dry sump oil tank, sand-cast headers, motor mounts, etc).

 

While the modified 2L Zetec was better suited to soloII, it can not compare to the thrill of a 9K motor with the power boost coming in at 5K and climbing at the way to redline.

 

I have found more information on Vegantune on-line which I can share. Vegantune closed in 2012, so not able to find anyone that worked there, again also online.

 

Wayne

[EdWills]

On 1/14/2025 at 3:38 PM, IamScotticus said:

Early 80s would be Escort axle.  The Itals weren't used until the long cockpit, being an 83, its too early for those.  But being 3.75, you probably got an Ital/Marina anyway.

 

Hi Scott.  According to Tony Weale in his book "Lotus Seven". the first Marina/Ital axle. (81 spec.) was fitted to chassis 4002 TC R M in 1980.  The first Mk 1 RS1600 axle was fitted in 1977 to 3601 TC R S, and the first Mk. 2  RS 1600 axle also in 1977.  Weale adds the info in the indices section on page 236.  Author Chris Rees also confirms 1980 for the Marina/Ital but has different dates for the Escort series (1975 and 1978). First long cockpit Weale advises 1981, Rees advises 1982.  The V.I.N/serial numbers on the cars correspond with both authors, but the dates are off.  Cheers,  W.  

[EdWills]

On 1/14/2025 at 10:05 AM, wdb said:

 

My car is a '95 and still has the Ital axle, so that may have been what was in the car originally. OP does mention "Ford 9 inch", which if so does lend itself to the car having been given a HP upgrade. Agreed that pics would help. (If it really is a Ford 9 inch rear, I am dying to find out how those wheels were fitted...) Snap some pics of the transmission while you're under there!

I realize that the "Ford 9 inch" diff/axle assembly is a strong and robust unit used in Mustangs and the like, but coincidentally the final batches of rear axles that Caterham sourced from the Ford Mk. 2 RS2000 Escort series of rear wheel drive cars had 9 inch diameter rear brakes as opposed to the 8 inch (by 1-1/2" wide) on the original Escort  axles that Lotus used on the few 2-1/2s and all of the Series 3 cars (the Series 4 also had 9 inch rear drum brakes).  The 4-1/4 pitch for the wheel studs stayed the same as previous, but the Caterham cars now had 9 inch front discs and 9 inch rear drums.  

[7Westfield]

"Ford 9 inch" is a reference to the ring gear diameter

WAY too much iron for a 7

[TN_Scooter]

Agree with 7Weatfield, the Ford 9" rear axle is very strong but very heavy, Not suitable for a 7. These are used by a lot of the NASCAR teams as they are almost indestructible. Average NASCAR racer is 3200 lbs, about three times the Caterham. Just my 2 cents.

[EdWills]

I only mentioned the possibility that the "9 inch" referred to the size of the rear brakes, as I never considered that someone would attempt to fit a very wide rear end to a Lotus or Caterham Seven.  On so many occasions (including by my better half), there is always someone to prove me wrong!  The Ford 9 inch rear axle is apparently up there in quality, build and desirability.  It was used from 1957 to 1986 on Ford passenger cars and trucks.  Jegs.com notes that it is 57.25 inches to 68 inches wide (doesn't mention if this is from flange to flange?), and only a few axles in the range could be shortened (these were mostly early 1970s axles as many later axle shafts had tapered ends). 1973 and later had 5 on 5 bolt circle (which the car pictured at the beginning of this post doesn't have).  

I found the attached photo in the Chris Rees book "Caterham Sevens" showing how wrong I can be.

Graham Arnold, who was Sales Manager of Lotus, also published a book on the Lotus range of cars.  In a similar vein, he published a photo of a Lotus Elan sporting very wide rear wheel arches and wide rear track, noting on the caption for the photo - "Please Don't".  

 

Edited 2 hours ago by EdWills

[TN_Scooter]

Is that "simplify and add wideness?"