free hit
counters
hilly's Content - Page 3 - The Lotus Forums - Lotus Community Partner #ForTheOwners Jump to content


hilly

Basic Account
  • Posts

    1,098
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by hilly

  1. Indeed it is the vacuum reservoir for the cabin heating flap control. Hilly
  2. With the right exhaust a cross plane crank does sound good Good work on the project, wish I had a garage like yours to tinker about in, I'll be keeping a close eye on this one....... Hilly
  3. Is this the pictures you were thinking of ??? As it happens when you get into it you can remove some of the duplications in the connectors (to reduce the pin count) and then re-fit them in the pod. I used these connectors as they are cheap, polarised, 15A rating per contact and come in a number of ways. http://uk.rs-online.com/web/search/searchBrowseAction.html?method=getProduct&R=848-874 One thing I would recommend is that you drill out the bolts welded into the pod brackets on the dash and permanently fit bolts onto the pod instead, this way you can just bolt the pod straight onto the dash. Otherwise you will need to remove all the instruments from the pod to get to the nuts to then remove the pod which is a pain. When I fit the alphanumeric display onto the Mutant in the next few weeks this is exactly what I will be doing. Hilly
  4. Wayne Even on top it going to be a challenge as I assume you are going to be buying pre-fabricated manifolds which won't sweep up enough to clear the chassis rail. This leave making up your own and as I mentioned before, the fab work required to fit the wheazy old RV8 lump with a respectable output is making other engine choices a far better bet. The other thing to bare in mind is what is directly the other side of the chassis rails, not sure I would want to a red hot turbo above both each fuel tank and next to all the associated filler necks and vent hoses. The 912 twin carbs are bad enough at generating engine fires, this is just asking for trouble....... Trying to not be too negative here, but the only things the RV8 has got going for it is that it is cheap (and that is less so once you have done all the mods to it make it fit and slap a pair of turbos on) and you have already got one........ Hilly
  5. Wayne As I have said to you already the RV8 won't go down well here as an engine choice as it has been done a few time already in Esprits, hardly pushing the envelope, but then again I am biased..... Anyho..........I have already been in conversation with you about your project, so a bunch of stuff has already been covered (you have a PM by the way), but your proposed layout drawing won't work. There just isn't room between the chassis rail to get the turbos and pipework where you have drawn them. Look at how the V8s have got the turbo placement and you'll see what I mean. Hilly
  6. The bell housing pattern is the same for the Lotus UN1 and the SM gearboxes. However the bell housing on the UN1 is a Lotus specific item, so just any old UN1 won't bolt on. As mentioned the rear brake position between the two is an issue, if you get a UN1 for your car you will require a whole bunch of hardware to sort that out, at which point you are not just limited to the UN1 as gearbox choice. The whole point of using the SM box is that you won't need to re-engineer the rear suspension/brakes. Hilly
  7. Blimey, how spooky....... I haven't done anything on this for months and the day I start getting everything ready to get a PCB made someone asks about it ! I have just got the PCB fab started and it will be 3 weeks before the bare boards come back, I then need to assemble and test it so you are looking at 4 weeks before I know if it works OK, not that I foresee any issues as the prototype works fine. The bare PCBs are
  8. I personally think you have got enough of a challenge getting a car that has stood for 17 years going without all the added work of putting in a different drive train. An engine swap is A LOT OF WORK to get it going even half right, trust me. As someone who has been down this route, I would recommend that you work on the bits to get the car roadworthy, just take a quick looky at the engine you have to try and get it running (cam belt etc, don't spend big money on it) and get it MOTed. You can then iron out all the inevitable bits generated by standing for 17 years and then you will have a better idea of where you want to go with the car re- "huge amounts more power" as this will require mods to brakes, cooling, suspension, exhaust, engine control etc. Hilly
  9. Just look in your local yellow pages (if you can still lay your hands on one) or Yell.com for radiator repair. I just went to my local place, waved the old rad at them and they said no problem. All they do is order in a core of the right length and width and weld/solder it to the old end caps. It was them that originally suggested I could have a triple core to replace the old double core. Hilly
  10. If you put an RV8 in it you may as well of bought Nick's blue one .........
  11. You can get your old radiator rebuilt to the same length with a new triple core for about
  12. There are better power plant options than the Cosworth 2.9 24v V6. The power output is OK, but hardly spectacular and you could get your 912 to beat that with a few mods and considerably less effort. The 2 biggest issues are :- 1) Weight As the engine has a cast iron block it is going to weight a shed load. The bare engine is 200kg before adding ancillaries such as starter motor, alternator, manifolds etc, by the time that lot is added you are close to 250kg which is nearly double the 912 (at 150kg) 2) Being a 60 degree V6, balancing is a pain. Due the inherent dynamic imbalance the OEM flywheel/flex plate is balanced as part of the engine, removing it (which you will have to as the 24v V6 was auto only so will come with a flex plate) means you will have to get the engine internals re-balanced with the new flywheel. All of that effort and for not a lot of power gain/weight increase doesn't make it a particularly good choice. Hilly
  13. Without serious chassis mods it won't fit. The width between the chassis rails is about 600mm, I would imagine that the length of the Toyota engine is about the same, but time you have added the gearbox you are well past the available width. Remember the fuel tanks sit just the other side of the engine bay chassis rails, so they would need re-locating, same as the top links on the rear suspension etc. Not saying it is impossible, but it is a lot of work......... Hilly
  14. Nope, V5 changed to Bronze..... No SORN for it either so the DVLA may come knocking for that as well ! The vehicle details for A389 DPC are: Date of Liability 01 05 2008 Date of First Registration 19 08 1983 Year of Manufacture 1983 Cylinder Capacity (cc) 2174CC CO2 Emissions Not Available Fuel Type Petrol Export Marker Not Applicable Vehicle Status Unlicensed Vehicle Colour BRONZE
  15. The Audi 2wd gearboxes (forget about Quattro boxes) bolt straight on with no adaptor plate needed, you do need to get a flywheel as all 4.2 A8s come with auto gearboxes (in the UK anyway) but they are available. All of the above will still need doing with the Audi engine irrespective of what gearbox you use as it is a chassis width restriction. The SM box will cause any engine to sit further forward (due to drive shaft output flange position) so will probably mean the above mods are more likely. Whatever engine you could go for would mean a fair bit of work, engine swaps always are. It will always be miles easier to just rebuild the Lotus engine. The loom can be re-used (I would actually recommend that) but the the ECU I am afraid not unless you get it modified and that is expensive The engine ECU needs the dash clocks for the specific car as the immobiliser is in there and won't start if missing. It also talks to the auto gearbox ECU, without that it goes into limp home mode, not much use either. DON'T underestimate the cost and complexity of engine management required for any of these late generation engines. It is not like the RV8 as you can't just bung on a dizzy and carb and it will fire up. Best choice engine wise is to keep the lotus 912, especially if you want to keep the SM gearbox as it will be CONSIDERABLY less work and be on the road much quicker. If you are settled on swapping the engine then look at it as at least a 2 year project by the time you have done the hardware and resto work. The Audi with full engine/gearbox route is proven and kinda documented, but is a fair bit of work as you need to work on rear brakes, gear linkage etc. The BMW route will need an adaptor plate as there isn't a bolt on solution, so could be a bit easier as you have the option of retaining the SM box and hence inboard brakes. Now whether that is a good idea or not is open to debate as the early S3's brakes are only just up to the job and doubling the power with a V8 will make that worse. If you don't keep the SM box then you may as well go for Audi as you will then be back to the required rear brake and gear linkage mods. Not sure about engine size (my guess is it will be more difficult than the Audi due to length), not seen the sump layout so can't comment on that and the ECU may also be a pain. Another option of course is the Lexus v8, but this is defo longer then the Audi so pretty similar to the BMW with the work involved. Hilly
  16. The fans are mounted behind the radiator and hence pull air through it. The theory is that pulling air through is more efficient as the vacuum created between the rad and the fan blades aids cooling. If the other way round (ie pushing the air through) the air is slightly compressed as it is forced through the rad, and compressing air heats it up so reducing the rads efficiency, but we are talking small amounts here........ Hilly
  17. Blimey those tanks are bad, worst I have seen posted........ I had a feeling you would change plans with your car and contemplate fitting a different engine It is a lot of work trust me........... If that was your route then I have to say Nick's blue car would probably been a better bet, still no going back now. I never looked at BMW V8 when doing the Mutant as the Audi engine made much more sense as it bolts straight onto a transaxle, but the first thing I would look at is engine length. The BMW V8s are designed for front engine/rear drive applications and so length is not normally a problem for them, but in an Esprit it is. If you intend to keep the SM gearbox, then if the engine is much longer than the Lotus 912 it is going to replace then you will have a problem with other drive shaft angle as mentioned above or you will need to chop the chassis about to fit. Remember you are going to have added length due to the required adaptor plate. The drive shaft angle on mine is because the drive train in too far forward (the Audi V8 is MUCH shorter than the 912, hence had room up front to spare and I went a bit too far) and I'll be fixing that by moving it back a bit. As for gearbox strength, I think the fragility of the Citroen SM unit is much exaggerated, there have been next to no posts on here about exploding gearboxes, admittedly this is on standard cars. If the boxes were weak then we would of had plently of posts about it here on LEF by now. Upping the torque to V8 levels puts you in slightly unknown territory, so be gentle with the clutch if you do the swap. I swapped mine out as the Audi box bolts straight on and the TDi ratios suit a V8 better, however the swap generated a lot of extra work. Hilly
  18. The big hammer works every time I would defo advise you replace the spigot bearing while it is in bits, but also don't forget the Nylotron washer, it is only a tenner, but a disaster if it falls to bits as you'll destroy your crank. I have got a nearly new (<5K miles) clutch kit (Pressure plate, friction plate and release bearing) left over from the conversion on the mutant, bung me a PM if you are interested in it for your gold car. Hilly
  19. Ohhhhh, that doesn't look good That is bad luck Bibs. Hilly
  20. Look near the bottom of the page ...... http://www.lotusespritworld.co.uk/EModels/TurboE.html
  21. S J sells them complete for the S3 as mine was missing and all that held up the bottom of the radiator was 2 bent bits of copper pipe, no wonder the PO overheated it and blew the head gasket. Hilly
×
×
  • Create New...