f1karting

I agree with Wayne on the roof lip.. not sure on the effect of the rear spoiler. I also understand that the curved front undertray served as a sort of venturi producing lower pressures under the front. Make sense to me although I dont know if it is close enough to the ground to have any real effect. Rumour has it that the cars net aerodynamics was basically 0-100lbs of downforce at speed. Compare that to the Porsche 911 style body that has a rumoured 350# of front uplift and the lotus looks pretty good. J

Hi.. I have the early spring tensioner on my S3T and want to swap it out for the later eccentric bolt tensioner and bearing... are there any vendors that dont charge $250 for the set, as I have been quoted? Is there a crossover part available? thanks Jan

The Cold fire system is the best IMO.. build it into your prized car and hope you never have to use it: http://www.firefreeze.com/site/page2.cfm http://www.fm200.biz/cold_fire_systems.htm http://www.deist.com/Catalog.asp?category=410112051571298 It is a water borne product.. will not ruin parts sprayed with it, and it works!! Ive seen it in action... Its on my project list. J

When you consider how much oil is flug around and the air turbulence and pressure variances that can exist inside a crankcase.. its surprising that there isnt more oil in the airbox. It is possible, if the oiling is unusally high, that excess crankcase pressure, caused by combustion pressure bypassing the rings, is forcing excess oil mist/vapours thru the vent pipe.. a leakdown test may show the condition of your ring seal. In any case if the engine is tight, I would fit an oil/vapour catch tank in the line.. oil vapours in the intake charge promote detonation and alter fuel burn rates... .. hope this helps. Jan

Robin.. On my project, I am working on a plan to use the floor structure as a sort of composite tub to tie the front and rear portions of the chassis together.. then if I can get some drawings of the reinforcing brace that Lotus produced (superdave had a lead on that) I think I could compliment the work by making some useful improvements to the chassis rear section as well. If you look at the logical load path from the front clip to the firewall where rear chassis mounts you can see that load sharing can take place from the front shell/chassis mountings thru the wheel arch, sill box and into the firewall. Any flex in the wheel arch and bending at the arch/sill/firewall connections will reduce the load sharing capacity of the tub structure. My plans are to reinforce the inside from foot box, thru the inner wheel arch, the arch to sill connections, sill, and the sill to firewall connections using a build up of carbon/kevlar hybrid vacuum bonded to the existing FG body structure, laminating in some foam buildups and cormat trussing in the layup. I bet that will add some stiffness. Ill take pictures along the way for anyone interested. My other idea is to do the same carbon/kevlar/truss buildup on the backbone itself... focussing on the gear lever opening in particular. Stiffness could be added with very little weight gain!! The target weight for my car is about 2200# which will also reduce the load inputs. Just some ideas.. Jan

Hi Troy.. I produced a cad drawing of my turbo FW so I could get an alloy one built. If you need a copy of the dwg..just holler.. J

Rydning.. Mike Rodregues is busy installing an RBT ZF box in his S3T as we write. He has a Quaife 6-sp sequential box for sale.. but its not a road car friendly gearbox. Try checking these links: http://www.rbttrans.com/ http://www.fordracingparts.com/parts/part_...rtKeyField=8620 One question about your high HP project.. what are you planning to do about stiffening the chassis? I understand that the Esprit chassis is marginal at best for torsional stiffness, and that even at 450hp the chassis flex causes all sorts of issues with cracked bodywork, suspension tuning and handling... The F40 in NZ has been deisgned for 700hp, not the Esprit though, unfortunately Skol from a fellow Norske.. Jan

On the 83-84 Esprit, the vapor tube from the fuel filler pipe is connected to the catch tank, and the outlet tube from the catch tank is routed via the roll over valve to a connection tee on the charcoal canister. It seems that from there the air pump inhales the byproduct and runs it out thru the exhaust mfd. It looks like otherwise the vapours find their way to the plenum when the engine is off. The vapor recovery catch tank system collects vapor from the fuel tanks, the vapor is then condensed into liquid fuel and residual vapor. The catch tank inlet tube controls the maximum level of liquid fuel in the catch tank. Any increase in level above this tube allows fuel to be drawn back into the fuel tank. This tank could be nearly half full of fuel at any one time. The tubes leading to this catch tank also deteriorate, however the problem can be greater than just fuel vapor. A split or loose fitting tube on the catch tank will allow liquid fuel to leak out into the area surrounding the fuel tank, soaking the wood fuel tank cover piece. This can become a fire hazard as well as a nuisance. Once the lines are renewed, the fuel smell may take forever to clear as the fuel dampened areas air-out. It is worth pondering how important the catch tank is, considering the added fire risk it poses. A good replacement tubing to use on the fuel vent is clear urethane tubing. It is very tough, fuel proof, and durable. Here is a diagram of what I have managed to reduce the emssions system down to on the 83-84 federal cars. Maybe that will help you decide what route to go. Jan

Hi Lucas.. I yanked my assy out.. the bloody fuel vapour recovery tank is a fire hazard IMO

Hi Brian.. are there any support races at the ALMS race in July in Portland? Would you guys plan to run the car? Jan

Dave Bean had them 'in stock' last year.. I got mine from them. J

I have a mold for the undertray. I may be able to make one for you if you cant find one.. J

What is cool beside the segment, is that the show series is a canadian production.. ..what would be even more cool, is if someone in the US, where the cars are kept and restored could get a LEF exclusive photo story on the current owner and cars for us to enjoy..

Hi Db.. will do. I am body of chassis so no worries for me adding mounts..J

Anyone have available or knows where these brace assys can be located? labelled 20, 25 and 26 on the drawing thx Jan chassis brace pdf

Anyone have available or knows where these brace assys can be located? labelled 20, 25 and 26 on the drawing thx Jan chassis brace pdf

Have you checked if the TPS is set/calibrated properly? Do you get zero tps reading at zero throttle angle? J

Try here as well.. http://www.johnson-pump.com/JPMarine/default.htm Go to 'pump type' and then 'circulating DC' I understand that any MAT over 160F is NFG

14.7 lambda at 6000 with a high TPS/MAP reading is nasty!! Off throttle at 14.7 is possible though and if thats what the log shows you may be OK. It seems that readings about 12-10 lambda are typical for mid to high TPS and MAP ranges? The knock retard logs show a good intervention. 90C MAT is too high. You really do need to look at all the relationships to draw any real conclusions.. unless of course the engine bits are all over the track and thick smoke is following your car.. I know.. bad time for humour.. I hope you find all is OK. As a first measure I would do a leakdown test and scope the bores for scoring/ pistons crowns for pitting.. Also check to make sure your coolant is full and properly bled of air. Run distilled water and Redline Water Wetter... AND sort out your intercooler.. J ps ..could have happen to any car/engine

Jon.. I have a spare 2001 Pectel T6 and software for sale.. Its just been tested by Pectel and updated with the latest firmware.. Its a $4500 ECU.. its the full meal deal!! Full wide band compatible and many laps of datalog memory. Ill take US$2100 for it. Send me a PM if your interested.. J

How about this.. http://www.hrpworld.com/index.cfm?form_pro...&action=product

yeah it was a bit nerve racking.. $3200 down the pipe if my numbers were wrong.. like you, my numbers were good.. except for the small adjustments to the offset I would have preferred. Fikse allow 0.5 inch increments on the wheel halves and 0.25 on the center hub pad, so there are only 0.25 inch net adjustments, no finer. The profil10 has more frontspace because the hub pad has a deeper recess around the bolt holes.. it made it tough to get the rim exposure I wanted on the front without getting too wide of a look on the car. On my fronts the hub pad was machined as much as they would go..It gave me about 0.25 too much front space for my taste. The option was a narrower outer rim, but that looked worse. http://www.glcforum.com/esprit/forums/inde...20%20loud&st=15 Fikse only make 17 inch and larger which is a bit big for the front, but after looking at Wendlings car on the LEW owners page, figured 17 would be OK and went for it.

second attachment.. OE BBS wheel data Jan

Same here.. only the profil10 series. ..when did you get the Fikse? I got mine Feb 2005. I actually had to produce a build sheet for Fikse. Here is the info.. may have to be in two posts.. Now that they are fitted I would change the offset slightly by going minus 18 rear and plus 23 fronts. Jan