Gridgway

the caterham remote sender kit worked fine for me. No probs at all after that. graham

GPR gone belly-up. Graham

I was rather hoping for a more detailed understanding of why it's stable in those circumstances! I'll try to find time to phone Stu to understand in more detail. Graham

I think it looks an interesting system. I'd like to look at getting one. But I was with Stephen on the question of the stability of beams on axle stands. So for example if you had a 7 up(!) on the beams with the wheels off torquing up the rear hubs, how stable would it be? Is that within its design parameters? Graham

Thanks Roger. Graham

Looks an interesting system to get cars in the air easily. I'd want beams to be able to get all 4 wheels off at once. That sounds a bit fiddly with a beam and two bottle jacks. Are there any blatchatters who have one around? Graham

Just out of interest, why use velcro? Do you take the plate off a lot? Graham

the halfrauds double sided tape works fine. Clean both surfaces well first. Never had one fall off. Graham

on ebay here Start price £3500, no reserve! Graham

yep, ok, (I've moved on the the Genepi now...) The plot is torque only, i have steered clear of the power plot as being meaningless! Graham

but...(my bottle is pretty much finished!)... It measures torque in ftlb up the rev (of the RR machine) range as well as transmission losses in ftlb down the way. It adds the two together and produces a graph of torque up the side against a linear scale along the bottom. That produces the shape and magnitude of the graph. The operator just adjusts the scale along the x-axis to suit the car. Graham PS I can't wait to get it back on a RR observed by me!

And going for the record number of posts on one's own thread... I have effectively moved the plot of the rr run down by 1000 revs (as that was easiest) and posted the pic in the album. Now to me that makes a lot more sense. A curve which kind of follows the characteristics of the engine but just "not up to it" is a better result. The cause could then be something like the wrong fuelling across the range. Of course, it could just be straws desperately being clutched at whilst I wait for the result of the expert's ministrations! Graham

Ian, just a re-track...the RR measures torque, so if it gets the engine revs wrong, the torque curve will move left/right but will not change in magnitude. So in this case where the RR shows the peak torque at revs which are actually too high for the engine, if we move it down to 5100, we get 162bhp! Now that feels much more like what it does! Graham

Thanks for the thoughts. To respond: Danny: The reason I think there is a torque hole is by comparing the actual with the expected in the excel plot. This also matches observed behavior - lean running, running like sh!te in the mid range and generally less than impressive "go".The ambient temp on the RR was set to 32 degrees C, when I expect it was actually more like 15. What effect would that have? Cause the RR to over-read (be generous) or under-read (be conservative)? Lambda was not being measured in any way as far as I know. It is having specialist care, I have the plot so thought I would try to match observed behaviour with the plot and maybe have fun fitting causes to the observations in the plot (effect). Ian: It could well be that the set up of the RR caused the peak torque to occur too high in the rev range and the magnitude of the torque to be too low as you say. It'll get an RR run as soon as we have finished our remedial activities to see where we have got. Graham

Thanks all. It's a 2.7l engine (not in a caterham!) which is currently running lean (no idea what it was doing at the time of the RR plot, but possibly the same). It's running mechanical fuel injection and throttle bodies. It looks like the known fuelling problem (ie it's know from exhaust analysis to be weak) is causing the torque hole. Or could there be other things that might be wrong? Cams and timing, valves, rings? The plot is smooth as I just mocked it up in excel. The real one is quite jittery. I'll scan it and post it later. Graham

So if you had an actual rolling road power run plotted against what the engine should be doing, what would you conclude? here or this might be better here The headline in bhp terms is peak 206 bhp versus the 210 it should be. I think the torque tells a very different story. ETA: I have now uploaded a scan of the actual plot. It looks a little different to my excel rendering as I have cut off at 7k rpm. Also: what effect does the ambient temperature that you enter into the RR? I assume it's a correcting factor. How much difference does it make? I presume only a few percentage points? Graham Edited by - gridgway on 2 Feb 2009 20:12:35

A bit OT, but I have bought from John before. Highly recommended. Graham

I'll pass too on the RAM front. Thanks Graham

I'm also interested in the lappy. Can I ask how old it is and what condition that battery is in? Thanks Graham

I have sold a pair of wheels to a relly nice guy in Shrewsbury. Anyone going that way? Thanks Graham

I don't think any of the standard supersports had mechanical tappets. Only special builds. Graham

I doubt you'll get to 150 with a decat zorst. That must mean something on the induction side as well. Graham

I have decided that I cocked up on my Yeti. I need an S frame rather than an M. So I am going to rebuild the bike on a new frame, leaving the current one for sale. It was new in august and hasn't exactly seen heavy use...about 6 outings. So it is in as new condition. I am looking for £1200. Current retail 1599. Graham Edited by - gridgway on 14 Jan 2009 21:17:37

fantastic, if only I had the space (and not quite as many cars)! I wonder if I could swap out one of the other cars...Mind you , means getting an 18yr old and a 20 yr old insured on it. That's not gonna work :-( Graham Edited by - Gridgway on 10 Jan 2009 23:17:48

Interesting, I wonder if Caterham have any accident stats of different types of Caterham configuration? - not that they'd probably tell us! ETA: I mean injuries per type Grahm Edited by - Gridgway on 5 Jan 2009 16:19:51